District Engineers will determine that NEPA does not apply to a proposed agency permitting action when:

(a) The activities or decision do not result in final agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 704, or any other relevant statute that includes a finality requirement;

(b) The proposed activity or decision is exempted from NEPA by law;

(c) Compliance with NEPA would clearly and fundamentally conflict with the requirements of another provision of law;

(d) In circumstances where Congress by statute has prescribed decisional criteria with sufficient completeness and precision such that the Corps retains no residual discretion to alter its action based on the consideration of environmental factors, then that function of the Corps is nondiscretionary within the meaning of NEPA section 106(a)(4) and/or section 111(10)(B)(vii) (42 U.S.C. 4336(a)(4) and 4336e(10)(B)(vii), respectively), and NEPA does not apply to the action in question;

(e) The proposed action is an action for which another statute's requirements serve the function of agency compliance with the Act; or

(f) The proposed action is not a “major Federal action,” which is defined at 42 U.S.C. 4336e(10). Additionally, the terms “major” and “Federal action” each have independent force. NEPA applies only when both of these two criteria are met. Such a determination is specific to the facts and circumstances of each individual situation and is reserved to the judgment of the District Engineer in each instance. In addition to the illustrative general categories in NEPA section 111(10), 42 U.S.C. 4336e(10), the Corps has determined that the following non-exhaustive list of Corps activities related to the Regulatory Program and 33 U.S.C. 408 are presumptively not subject to NEPA as not meeting the definition of a major Federal action:

(1) Preliminary Jurisdictional Determinations;

(2) Approved Jurisdictional Determinations;

(3) Determination of whether an activity requires a Corps permit or permission;

(4) Aquatic resource delineation concurrence or non-concurrence determinations; or

(5) Determination that the modification of unimproved real estate of a project would not affect the function and usefulness of the project.

(g) NEPA does not apply to “non-Federal actions.” Therefore, under the terms of the statute, NEPA does not apply to actions with no or minimal Federal funding, or with no or minimal Federal involvement where a Federal agency cannot control the outcome of the project. NEPA § 111(10)(B)(i), 42 U.S.C. 4336e(10)(B)(i). A but-for causal relationship is insufficient to make the Corps responsible for a particular action under NEPA.

(h) The issuance or update of the Corps' NEPA procedures is not subject to NEPA review.

(i) In determining whether NEPA applies to a proposed action, the Corps will consider only the project at hand.

(a) If the District Engineer determines under § 333.11 that NEPA applies to a proposed activity or decision, the District Engineer will then determine the appropriate level of NEPA review in the following sequence and manner. At all steps in the following process, the Corps will consider the proposed activity and its effects.

(1) If the Corps has established, or adopted pursuant to NEPA section 109, 42 U.S.C. 4336c, a categorical exclusion that covers the proposed activity, the District Engineer will analyze whether to apply the categorical exclusion to the proposed activity and apply the categorical exclusion, if appropriate, pursuant to § 333.14(e).

(2) If another agency has already established a categorical exclusion that covers the proposed activity, the District Engineer will consider whether to recommend that the Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers adopt that exclusion pursuant to § 333.14(c) so that it can be applied to the proposed activity at issue, and so that Headquarters may consider applying to future activities of that type.

(3) If the proposed activity warrants the establishment of a new categorical exclusion, or the revision of an existing categorical exclusion, pursuant to § 333.14(b), the Chief of Engineers will consider whether to so establish or revise, and then apply the categorical exclusion to the proposed action pursuant to § 333.14(e).

(4) If the District Engineer cannot apply a categorical exclusion to the proposed activity consistent with paragraphs (a)(1)-(3), the District Engineer will determine the appropriate level of review, i.e., whether the proposed activity warrants preparation of an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. Most activities requiring a Corps permit that are not otherwise covered by a categorical exclusion normally require only an environmental assessment. In determining the level of review, the District Engineer will consider the proposed action's reasonably foreseeable effects consistent with paragraph (b), and then will:

(i) develop an environmental assessment, as described in § 333.15, if the proposed activity is not likely to have reasonably foreseeable significant effects or the significance of the effects is unknown; or

(ii) develop an environmental impact statement, as described in § 333.21, if the proposed activity is likely to have reasonably foreseeable significant effects.

(b) When considering whether the reasonably foreseeable effects of the proposed activity are significant, the District Engineer will analyze the potentially affected environment and degree of the effects of the activity within their jurisdiction or control. The District Engineer may use any reliable data source, but will not undertake new research of any type unless it is essential to evaluating alternatives and the cost and time of obtaining it are not unreasonable. District Engineers should not determine that a proposed activity is significant based solely on public interest or opposition.

(1) In considering the potentially affected environment, the District Engineer may consider, as appropriate to the specific activity, the affected area (national, regional, or local) and its resources. The District Engineer may, as appropriate, consider the regulated activity's effect on factors such as conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shore erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people.

(2) In considering the degree of the effects, the District Engineer may consider the following, as appropriate to the specific action:

(i) Both short- and long-term effects.

(ii) Both beneficial and adverse effects.

(iii) Effects on public health and safety.

(iv) Economic effects.

(a) Process. The District Engineer will consider input received in response to the public notice, where public notice is required by the legal authority governing the proposed activity for which authorization is sought, advising interested parties of the proposed activity for which authorization is sought when determining the environmental effects that should be considered in the NEPA analysis. District Engineers will promote efficiency through the adoption or incorporation of existing applicable EAs and EISs and other relevant environmental analysis to the extent practicable. Information developed through the NEPA process will inform the District Engineer's decision on the permit application or request for permission.

(b) Limitations on actions during the NEPA process. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, until the Corps issues a record of decision or a finding of no significant impact, or makes a categorical exclusion determination, as applicable, the permit applicant should take no action concerning their application that would:

(1) have an adverse environmental effect within an area under the jurisdiction of the Corps; or

(2) limit the choice of reasonable alternatives.

(c) If the Corps is considering an application from a non-Federal entity and becomes aware that the applicant is about to take an action within the Corps' jurisdiction that would meet either of the criteria in § 333.13(b), the Corps will promptly notify the applicant that the Corps will take appropriate action to ensure that the objectives and procedures of NEPA are achieved.

(d) Coordination with the Applicant.

(1) The District Engineer will:

(i) Coordinate at the earliest reasonable time in the application review process to inform the applicant what information the District Engineer might need to comply with NEPA and, if the lead agency, establish a schedule for completing steps in the NEPA review process, consistent with NEPA's statutory deadlines and any internal agency NEPA schedule requirements; and

(ii) Begin the NEPA process by determining whether NEPA applies, as described in § 333.11, and if it does, determine the appropriate level of NEPA review, as described in § 333.12, as soon as practicable after receiving the complete application

(2) The District Engineer may require the applicant to furnish appropriate information that the District Engineer considers necessary for the preparation of an EA or EIS. An applicant or a contractor hired by the applicant may prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement under the District Engineer's supervision. The Corps procedures for applicant-prepared environmental assessments and environmental impact statement are included in § 333.51 of this part.

(a) Generally. This section describes the process the Corps uses for establishing and revising categorical exclusions, for adopting other agencies' categorical exclusions, and for applying categorical exclusions to a proposed agency action. The Corps categorical exclusions, including Corps categorical exclusions specifically applicable to evaluating applications from other entities for authorization by the Corps established consistent with its NEPA procedures, any legislative categorical exclusions, and categorical exclusions adopted from other agencies, are listed in paragraph (g) in this section.

(b) Establishing and revising categorical exclusions. To establish or revise a categorical exclusion, the Chief of Engineers will determine that the category of actions normally does not significantly affect the quality of the human environment. In making this determination, the Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will:

(1) Develop a written record containing information to substantiate its determination;

(2) Consult with CEQ on its proposed categorical exclusion, including the written record, for a period not to exceed 30 days prior to providing public notice as described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section;

(3) Provide public notice in the Federal Register of the Corps' establishment or revisions of the categorical exclusion and where the record is available; and

(4) Document the establishment or revision of the categorical exclusion in the Corps' implementing procedures at § 333.14(g).

(c) Adopting categorical exclusions from other Federal agencies. (1) Consistent with NEPA section 109, 42 U.S.C. 4336c, the Corps may adopt a categorical exclusion listed in another agency's NEPA procedures. When adopting a categorical exclusion, the Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in coordination with any recommending Districts, will:

(i) Identify the categorical exclusion listed in another agency's NEPA procedures that covers its category of proposed or related actions;

(ii) Consult with the agency that established the categorical exclusion to ensure that the proposed adoption of the categorical exclusion is appropriate;

(iii) Provide public notification of the categorical exclusion that the Corps is adopting, including a brief description of the proposed action or category of proposed actions to which the Corps intends to apply the adopted categorical exclusion; and

(iv) Document the adoption of the categorical exclusion in the Corps' implementing procedures at § 333.14(g).

(2) The Corps may rely on another agency's determination that a categorical exclusion applies to a specific proposed activity if the specific activity covered by the original categorical exclusion determination and the Corps' proposed regulatory activity are substantially the same. For the Corps, actions occurring at essentially the same time and place are considered substantially the same when a proposed action would result in a categorical exclusion determination by one agency and an environmental assessment and a finding of no significant impact by another agency. For example, this would be the case when another agency's action may be a funding decision for a proposed project covered by a categorical exclusion established by the funding agency, and the Corps' proposed regulatory action is to consider a permit for construction activities with less than significant adverse environmental effects for that same project. When relying on another agency's determination that a categorical exclusion applies to a specific proposed Corps regulatory activity, the District Engineer will document the reliance on the agency's categorical exclusion determination in the administrative record for the proposal under Corps review.

(d) Removal of categorical exclusions. The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works must approve the removal of a categorical exclusion from § 333.14(g) and, in coordination with the Corps, will:

(1) Develop a written justification for the removal;

(2) Consult with CEQ on its proposed removal of the categorical exclusion, including a description of the rationale for the removal, for a period not to exceed 30 days prior to providing public notice as described in paragraph (d)(3) of this section;

(3) Provide public notice of the Corps' removal of the categorical exclusion and a summary of the justification in the Federal Register; and

(4) Document the removal of the categorical exclusion in the Corps' implementing procedures at § 333.14(g).

(e) Applying categorical exclusions. (1) If the District Engineer determines that a categorical exclusion covers a proposed agency action, they should evaluate the presence of extraordinary circumstances where normally excluded actions could have reasonably foreseeable significant environmental effects. If an extraordinary circumstance is not present, the District Engineer will determine that the categorical exclusion applies to the proposed agency action and conclude review.

(2) If an extraordinary circumstance is present, the District Engineer will determine that the categorical exclusion applies to the proposed agency action and conclude review if the permit applicant modifies the proposed agency action to avoid those effects or if the District Engineer determines that, notwithstanding the extraordinary circumstance, the proposed action is not likely to result in reasonably foreseeable significant effects. If the District Engineer determines that they cannot apply the categorical exclusion to the proposed action, the District Engineer will prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, as appropriate.

(3) In cases where a single action's constituent parts are covered by multiple categorical exclusions, the District Engineer may conclude the entire action is categorically excluded when there are no extraordinary circumstances present that are likely to result in reasonably foreseeable significant effects, or there are extraordinary circumstances present, but the District Engineer determines that applying a categorical exclusion is appropriate consistent with paragraph (e)(2) of this section.

(4) Documentation of categorical exclusion determinations. The District Engineer will document its evaluation of the applicability of a categorical exclusion in the statement of findings supporting the permit or permission decision.

(5) The documentation of evaluation of the applicability of a categorical exclusion does not have a prescribed format but should briefly address consideration of any potential extraordinary circumstances and any mitigation measures that reduce the level of impact. The level of analysis should reflect the sensitivity of the resources being impacted and the scale of the activity.

(f) Reliance on categorical exclusion determinations of other agencies. The District Engineer may also rely on another agency's determination that a categorical exclusion applies to a particular proposed activity if the agency action covered by that determination and the proposed activity are substantially the same. The District Engineer will document its reliance on another agency's categorical exclusion determination in the statement of findings supporting the permit or permission decision.

(g) List of categorical exclusions. The following activities normally do not significantly affect the quality of the human environment t and are therefore categorically excluded from NEPA documentation:

(1) For permit applications for Clean Water Act, Section 404, River and Harbors Act of 1899, Section 10, and Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, section 103:

(i) Fixed or floating small private piers, small docks, boat hoists and boathouses.

(ii) Minor utility distribution and collection lines including irrigation;

(iii) Minor maintenance dredging using existing disposal sites;

(iv) Boat launching ramps;

(v) All applications which qualify as letters of permission (as described at 33 CFR 325.5(b)(2)).

(2) In addition to those listed for other permit applications in this section, the District Engineer can rely on the categorical exclusions at 33 CFR 230.9 for requests for permission under 33 U.S.C. 408.

(a) Generally. If an activity is subject to NEPA, as determined following the procedures in § 333.11, and unless the District Engineer finds that the proposed activity is excluded from having to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement pursuant to a categorical exclusion as determined following the procedures in § 333.14, or by another provision of law, the District Engineer will prepare an environmental assessment with respect to the proposed activity that does not have a reasonably foreseeable significant effect on the quality of the human environment, or if the significance of such effect is unknown. District Engineers must follow Congress' direction that environmental assessments are to be “concise.” NEPA section 106(b)(2); 42 U.S.C. 4336(b)(2). The environmental assessment should normally be combined with any other required documents including Clean Water Act, section 404(b)(1) guidelines documentation, any applicable public interest review, any statement of findings, a finding of no significant impact or a determination that an environmental impact statement is required. Environmental assessment as used throughout this part normally refers to this combined document. When the environmental assessment is a separate document, it must be completed prior to completion of the statement of finding. The District Engineer may delegate the signing of the NEPA document. Should the environmental assessment demonstrate that an environmental impact statement is necessary, the District Engineer shall follow the procedures outlined in subpart C of this part. In those cases where an environmental impact statement is required, an environmental assessment is not required. However, the District Engineer must document their reasons for requiring an environmental impact statement.

(b) Elements. For the purpose of providing evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact, environmental assessments will:

(1) Briefly discuss the:

(i) Purpose and need for the proposed activity based on the Corps' statutory authority. The purpose and need for the proposed activity will also be informed by the applicant's goals (See 33 CFR 333.22 for considerations in developing purpose and need);

(ii) Alternatives to the extent required by NEPA section 102(2)(H), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(H).

(A) If the EA confirms that the impact of the applicant's proposal is not significant and there are no unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources, and, for activities evaluated under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the proposed activity is a “water dependent” activity as defined in 40 CFR 230.10(a)(3), the EA need not include a discussion on alternatives.

(B) In all other cases where the district engineer determines that there are unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources, the EA shall include a discussion of the reasonable alternatives which are to be considered. The decision options available to the Corps, which embrace all of the applicant's alternatives, are issue the permit, issue with modifications, or deny the permit. Modifications are limited to those project modifications within the scope of established permit conditioning policy (see 33 CFR 325.4) or within the scope of authority under Section 408. The decision option to deny the permit results in the “no action” alternative (i.e. no activity requiring a Corps permit).

(iii) The reasonably foreseeable effects of the proposed activity and the alternatives considered.

(iv) The combined document shall conclude with a finding of no significant impact or a determination that an environmental impact statement is required.

(c) Agency actions normally requiring an environmental assessment. Most permits or permissions under the authorities identified in § 333.1(b) normally require environmental assessments, but likely do not require an environmental impact statement.

(d) Page limits. (1) The text of an environmental assessment is strictly prohibited from exceeding 75 pages, not including citations or appendices.

(2) Appendices are to be used for voluminous materials, such as scientific tables, collections of data, statistical calculations, and the like, which substantiate the analysis provided in the environmental assessment. Appendices are not to be used to provide additional substantive analysis, because that would circumvent the Congressionally mandated page limits.

(3) Environmental assessments will be formatted for an 8.5”x11” page with one-inch margins using a word processor with 12-point proportionally spaced font, single spaced. Footnotes may be in 10-point font. Such size restrictions do not apply to explanatory maps, diagrams, graphs, tables, and other means of graphically displaying quantitative or geospatial information, although pages containing such material do count towards the page limit. When an item of graphical material is larger than 8.5”x11”, each such item will count as one page.

(4) Certification related to page limits. The breadth and depth of analysis in an environmental assessment will be tailored to ensure that the environmental analysis does not exceed this page limit. As part of the finalization of the environmental assessment, the District Engineer will certify (and the certification will be incorporated into the environmental assessment) that the District Engineer has considered the factors mandated by NEPA; that the environmental assessment represents the Corps' good-faith effort to prioritize documentation of the most important considerations required by the statute within the congressionally mandated page limits; that this prioritization reflects the District Engineer's expert judgment; and that any considerations addressed briefly or left unaddressed were, in the District Engineer's judgment, comparatively not of a substantive nature that meaningfully informed the consideration of environmental effects and the resulting decision on how to proceed.

(e) Deadlines. (1) NEPA is governed by a rule of reason. Congress supplied the measure of that reason in the 2003 revision of NEPA by setting the deadlines in NEPA 107(g), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(g). These deadlines indicate Congress's determination that an agency has presumptively spent a reasonable amount of time on analysis and the document should issue, absent very unusual circumstances. In such circumstances, an extension will be given only for such time as is necessary to complete the analysis. Thus, unless otherwise specified in statute, the District Engineer will complete the environmental assessment not later than the date that is one year after the date on which they determine the preparation of an environmental assessment for the proposed activity is required. The District Engineer will typically make this decision at the start of the comment period for the public notice of the permit application, request for permission, or proposed general permit.

(2) The end date is either:

(i)When the District Engineer reaches a permit decision and initially proffers the permit to the applicant or provides permission to the requestor under 33 U.S.C. 408;

(ii) When the District Engineer denies the permit or denies permission under 33 U.S.C. 408 with or without prejudice; or

(iii) When the District Engineer publishes a general permit or categorical permission; or

(iv) When the District Engineer reaches a decision on the mitigation instrument and provides the bank or in-lieu fee program sponsor with an instrument signed by the Corps.

(3) The District Engineer may publish notification of the environmental assessment (unless the deadline is extended pursuant to the provision below), within a reasonable time after the deadline elapses or the completion of the document, whichever comes first.

(4) Deadline extensions. If the District Engineer determines they are not able to meet the deadline prescribed by NEPA section 107(g)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(g)(1)(B), they must consult with the applicant pursuant to NEPA section 107(g)(2), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(g)(2). After such consultation, if needed, and for cause stated, the District Engineer may establish a new deadline. Cause for establishing a new deadline is only established if the environmental assessment is so incomplete, at the time at which the District Engineer determines it is not able to meet the statutory deadline, that issuance pursuant to § 333.15(e)(3) above would, in the Corps' view, result in an inadequate analysis. Such new deadline must provide only so much additional time as is necessary to complete such environmental assessment. The District Engineer will document in the administrative record for the proposed action the new deadline the reason why the environmental assessment was not able to be completed under the statutory deadline and whether the applicant consented to the new deadline.

(5) Certification related to deadline. When the environmental assessment is complete, the District Engineer will certify (and the certification will be incorporated into the environmental assessment) that the resulting environmental assessment represents the Corps' good-faith effort to fulfill NEPA's requirements within the Congressional timeline; that such effort is substantially complete; that, in the District Engineer's expert opinion, they have thoroughly considered the factors mandated by NEPA; and that, in the District Engineer's judgment, the analysis contained therein is adequate to inform and reasonably explain the District Engineer's final decision regarding the proposed Federal activity.

(a) The District Engineer will prepare a finding of no significant impact if the District Engineer determines, based on the environmental assessment, not to prepare an environmental impact statement because the proposed activity will not have significant effects. The finding of no significant impact will:

(1) Be included in the environmental assessment;

(2) Document the reasons why the District Engineer has determined that the selected alternative will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment;

(3) If the District Engineer finds no significant effects based on mitigation, the mitigated finding of no significant impact will state any mitigation requirements enforceable by the agency or voluntary mitigation commitments that will be undertaken by the applicant to avoid significant effects;

(4) Identify any other documents related to the finding of no significant impact; and

(5) State that the District Engineer will not prepare an environmental impact statement, concluding the NEPA process for that permit application, request for permission, or mitigation instrument.

(b) The District Engineer may publish notification of the environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact on a public website.

(a) Corps as lead agency. In many instances, a proposed activity or decision is undertaken in the context which entails activities or decisions undertaken by other Federal agencies (e.g., where multiple Federal authorizations are required with respect to a project sponsor's overall purpose and goal). These activities and decisions may be “related actions,” in that they are each the responsibility of a particular agency and they may be all related in a matter relevant to NEPA, e.g., by their relationship with one overarching project. In such instances, Congress has provided that the multiple agencies involved shall determine which of them will be the lead agency pursuant to the criteria identified in NEPA section 107(a)(1)(A), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(A), or any other applicable statute. When serving as the lead agency, the Corps is responsible for managing the NEPA process, including those portions of a non-Federal applicant's proposed project which come under the jurisdiction of other Federal agencies. When serving as the lead agency, the Corps will also determine and document the scope of analysis. When a joint lead relationship is established pursuant to NEPA section 107(a)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(B), the Corps and the other joint lead agency or agencies are collectively responsible for completing the NEPA process. The Corps may reimburse, under agreement, staff support from other Federal agencies beyond the immediate jurisdiction of those agencies.

(b) Corps as cooperating agency. As a cooperating agency the Corps will be responsible to the lead agency for providing environmental information which is directly related to the regulatory matter involved and which is required for the preparation of the NEPA documentation. This in no way shall be construed as lessening the District Engineer's ability to request the applicant to furnish appropriate information as discussed in § 333.51 of this part. The District Engineer will identify to the lead agency the information and analysis that is required to be included in the resulting NEPA documentation so that it can be relied on by the Corps for purposes of exercising its permitting authority. When the Corps is a cooperating agency because of a regulatory responsibility, the district engineer should make available staff support at the lead agency's request to enhance the latter's interdisciplinary capability provided the request pertains to the Corps regulatory action covered by the NEPA document, to the extent this is practicable. Beyond this, Corps staff support will generally be made available to the lead agency to the extent practicable within its own responsibility and available resources. Any assistance to a lead agency beyond this will normally be by written agreement with the lead agency providing for the Corps expenses on a cost reimbursable basis. If the District Engineer believes a public hearing should be held and another agency is lead agency, the District Engineer should request such a hearing and provide their reasoning for the request. The District Engineer should suggest a joint hearing and offer to take an active part in the hearing and ensure coverage of the Corps concerns. When the applicant's proposed activities qualify for an existing general permit or categorical permission, the Corps' obligations under NEPA were satisfied when the Corps issued the general permit or categorical permission. On this basis, Corps contributions as a cooperating agency on an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment should be limited to assisting the lead agency with accurate information pertaining to the proposed impacts under Corps authorities.

(a) Notice of intent. As soon as practicable after determining that a proposed activity for which Corps authorization is sought is sufficiently developed to allow for meaningful public comment and requires an environmental impact statement, the District Engineer will publish a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

(1) The notice of intent for an environmental impact statement will include a request for public comment on alternatives or effects and on relevant information, studies, or analyses with respect to the proposed agency action.

(2) In addition to a request for comment required for notices of intent for environmental impact statements, notice of intent for any environmental document may include:

(i) The purpose and need for the proposed action;

(ii) A preliminary description of the proposed action and alternatives the environmental impact statement will consider;

(iii) A brief summary of expected effects;

(iv) Anticipated permits and other authorizations (i.e., anticipated related actions);

(v) A schedule for the decision-making process;

(vi) A description of the public scoping process, including any scoping meeting(s);

(vii) Contact information for the project manager handling the permit application, who can answer questions about the proposed action and the environmental impact statement; and

(viii) Identification of any cooperating and participating agencies (i.e., agencies responsible for related actions), and any information that such agencies require in the notice to facilitate their decisions or authorizations

(b) Scoping. In addition to the notice of intent process described above, the District Engineer may also use other early and open processes to determine the scope of issues for analysis in an environmental document, including substantive issues that meaningfully inform the consideration of environmental effects and the resulting decision on how to proceed, eliminating from further study non-substantive issues, and determining whether connected actions should be addressed in the same environmental document. Scoping may begin as soon as practicable after the proposal for action is sufficiently developed for consideration. Scoping may include appropriate pre-application procedures, public meetings, or work conducted prior to publication of the notice of intent.

(c) Scope of analysis. It is the exclusive responsibility of the District Engineer to determine the appropriate scope of analysis for the applicant's proposed activity based on the Corps' legal authority over the activity and whether the Corps has sufficient control and responsibility over any aspect of the applicant's proposed activity beyond the Corps' limited statutory authorities. When determining the scope of an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement, the District Engineer must consider the following:

(1) In some situations, a permit applicant may propose to conduct a specific activity requiring a Department of the Army (DA) permit (e.g., construction of a pier in a navigable water of the United States), which is merely one component of a larger project (e.g., construction of an oil refinery on an upland area). The district engineer should establish the scope of the Corps' NEPA review to address the impacts of the specific activity requiring a DA permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission and those portions of the entire project over which the district engineer has sufficient control, responsibility, and legal authority to warrant Federal review.

(2) The District Engineer is considered to have control, responsibility, and legal authority for portions of the project beyond the limits of Corps jurisdiction where the Federal involvement is sufficient to turn an essentially private action into a Federal action, consistent with Congress's exclusions from the definition of “major Federal action” at NEPA Section 111(10) and the Supreme Court's holding in Seven County that NEPA does not require an agency to analyze effects from actions beyond the action the agency itself is taking or authorizing.. These are cases where the environmental consequences of the larger project are essentially products of the Corps permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission action. Typical factors to be considered in determining whether sufficient control, responsibility, and legal authority exist to turn an essentially private action occurring outside of Corps jurisdiction into a Federal action include:

(i) Whether or not the regulated activity comprises merely a link in a corridor type project (e.g., a transportation or utility transmission project).

(ii) Whether there are aspects of the upland facility in the immediate vicinity of the regulated activity which affect the location and configuration of the regulated activity.

(iii) The extent to which the entire project will be within Corps jurisdiction.

(iv) The extent of cumulative Federal control, responsibility, and legal authority.

(A) Federal control, responsibility, and legal authority will include the portions of the project beyond the limits of Corps jurisdiction where the cumulative Federal involvement of the Corps and other Federal agencies is sufficient to grant legal control over such additional portions of the project. These are cases where the environmental consequences of the additional portions of the projects are essentially products of Federal financing, assistance, direction, regulation, or approval (not including funding assistance solely in the form of general revenue sharing funds, with no Federal agency control over the subsequent use of such funds, and not including judicial or administrative civil or criminal enforcement actions).

(B) In determining whether sufficient cumulative Federal involvement exists to expand the scope of Federal action the district engineer should consider whether other Federal agencies are required to take Federal action under their statutory authorities, and/or other environmental review laws and executive orders.

(C) The District Engineer should also refer to § 333.17 of this part for guidance on determining whether the Corps should be the lead or a cooperating agency in these situations.

(3) Examples:

(i) If a non-Federal oil refinery, electric generating plant, or industrial facility is proposed to be built on an upland site and the only DA permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission requirement relates to a connecting pipeline, supply loading terminal, or fill road, that pipeline, terminal or fill road permit, in and of itself, normally would not constitute sufficient overall Federal involvement with the project to justify expanding the scope of a Corps NEPA document to cover upland portions of the facility beyond the structures in the immediate vicinity of the regulated activity that would affect the location and configuration of the regulated activity.

Similarly, if an applicant seeks a DA permit to fill waters or wetlands or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission to alter a covered project on which other construction or work is proposed, the control, responsibility, and legal authority of the Corps, as well as its overall Federal involvement, would extend to the portions of the project to be located on the permitted fill or within the boundary of the project covered by 33 U.S.C. 408. However, the NEPA review would be extended to the entire project, including portions outside waters of the United States or the project area covered by 33 U.S.C. 408, only if sufficient Federal control, responsibility, and legal authority over the entire project is determined to exist; that is, if the regulated activities, and those activities involving regulation, funding, etc., by other Federal agencies, comprise a substantial portion of the overall project. In any case, once the scope of analysis has been defined, the NEPA analysis for that action should include the effects or impacts from the proposed action or alternatives on all Federal interests within the purview of the NEPA statute. The District Engineer should, whenever practicable, incorporate by reference and rely upon the reviews of other Federal, State, Tribal, and local agencies.

(ii) For those regulated activities that comprise merely a link in a transportation or utility transmission project, the scope of analysis should address the Federal action, i.e., the specific activity requiring a DA permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission and any other portion of the project that is within the control, responsibility, and legal authority of the Corps of Engineers (or other Federal agencies).

For example, a 50-mile electrical transmission cable crossing a 1 1/4 mile-wide river that is a navigable water of the United States requires a DA permit. Neither the origin nor the destination of the cable, nor its route to and from the navigable water, except as the route applies to the location and configuration of the crossing, are within the control, responsibility, or legal authority of the Corps. Those matters would not be included in the Corps' scope of analysis which, in this case, would address the impacts of the specific cable crossing.

As another example, the same 50-mile electrical transmission cable crossing a Corps civil works project requires a 33 U.S.C. 408 permission. As with the previous example, neither the origin nor the destination of the cable, nor its route to and from the civil works project, except as the route applies to the location and configuration of the crossing within the civil works project, are within the control, responsibility, or legal authority of the Corps. Those matters would not be included in the Corps' scope of analysis which, in this case, would address the impacts of the specific cable crossing on the Corps civil works project.

Conversely, for those activities that require a DA permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission for a major portion of a transportation or utility transmission project, such that the Corps permit or 33 U.S.C. 408 permission bears upon the origin and destination as well as the route of the project outside the Corps regulatory boundaries (including those covered by 33 U.S.C. 408), the scope of analysis should include those portions of the project outside the boundaries of the Corps jurisdiction. To use the same example, if 30 miles of the 50-mile transmission line would cross jurisdictional wetlands, other “waters of the United States,” or Corps civil works boundaries covered by 33 U.S.C. 408, the scope of analysis should reflect impacts of the whole 50-mile transmission line.

(iii) For those activities that require a DA permit for a major portion of a shoreside facility, the scope of analysis should extend to upland portions of the facility. For example, a shipping terminal normally requires dredging, wharves, bulkheads, berthing areas, and disposal of dredged material in order to function. Permits for such activities are normally considered sufficient Federal control, responsibility, and legal authority to warrant extending the scope of analysis to include the upland portions of the facility.

(4) In all cases, the scope of analysis used for analyzing both impacts and alternatives should be the same scope of analysis used for analyzing the benefits of a proposal.

(5) In preparing the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, the District Engineer will focus its analysis on whether the environmental effects of the regulated activity are significant.

(i) Similarly, the District Engineer will document in the environmental assessment or environmental impact statement where and how it drew a reasonable and manageable line relating to its consideration of any environmental effects from the regulated activity that extend outside the geographical territory of the project or might materialize later in time.

(ii) To the extent it assists in reasoned decision-making, the District Engineer may, but is not required to by NEPA, analyze environmental effects from other projects separate in time, or separate in place, or that fall outside of the Corps' regulatory authority, or that would have to be initiated by a third party. If the District Engineer determines that such analysis would assist it in reasoned decisionmaking, it will document this determination in the environmental assessment and explain where it drew a reasonable and manageable line relating to the consideration of such effects from such separate projects.