(a) Proposal Record. Upon determining NEPA applies and an environmental document must be developed, USDA subcomponents should begin compiling the proposal record early in the process. The proposal record should be maintained throughout the NEPA process to ensure the responsible official has all necessary information available on which they base iterative decisions during the NEPA process, required findings and determinations (to include those required for other applicable laws or regulations), and approval of the action. The proposal record should include the following:

(1) Internal communications that contain substantive information demonstrating why the responsible official proceeded the way it did, to include briefing papers, presentations, emails, or other documented communications that capture rationale and decisions made at key points in the NEPA process;

(2) Necessary documentation generated by applicants or contractors, where documentation is determined not to be a potentially privileged information (see paragraph (c) of this section);

(3) Technical information, to include sampling results, survey information, engineering reports, applicable resource and program assessments, maps, etc.;

(4) Cost-benefit analysis if completed, as well as any technical or feasibility studies completed to inform development of the proposed action or action alternatives;

(5) External communications that contain substantive information about the proposal, to include a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement and other such documents that invite feedback from the public or other external parties, and consultation communications with regulatory agencies and tribes (where information is not determined to be a potential withholding or privileged, as specified in paragraph (c) of this section);

(6) Comments or other submissions received from external parties or the public, as well as documentation, if any, of how substantive issues raised and/or recommendations made were considered and the action taken;

(7) Draft versions of any documents circulated externally for comment or review;

(8) Documents containing guidance or information that the USDA subcomponent relied on when developing the proposed action (or action alternatives) or conducting analysis, to include literature and scientific papers;

(9) Environmental documents, to include updated or supplemental versions when applicable, as specified in paragraph (r) of this section;

(10) Finding and determination documents, as well as decision documents; and

(11) Any other information deemed applicable by the responsible official.

(b) Freedom of Information Act requests. USDA subcomponents shall make documents associated with the NEPA review and integrated environmental review, comments received, and any other underlying documents available pursuant to the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552), and in accordance with the subcomponent's statutory authority for protecting certain information.

(c) Potential withholdings and privileges. USDA subcomponents shall identify data or information with potential withholdings or privileges—such as potentially sensitive information about threatened or endangered species locations, cultural or heritage sites when certain conditions are met, third-party proprietary information, or personally identifiable information—and mark it as such in the proposal record to ensure it is properly reviewed prior to responding to Freedom of Information Act requests or other such requests for documentation regarding the NEPA process and other environmental analysis, consultation, or compliance efforts occurring commensurate with the NEPA process.

(d) Classified information. To the extent practicable, USDA subcomponents shall segregate any information that has been classified pursuant to Executive order or statute. Subcomponents shall maintain the confidentiality of such information in a manner required for the information involved. Such information may not be included in any publicly disclosed documents. If such material cannot be reasonably segregated, or if segregation would leave essentially meaningless material, the subcomponent must withhold the entire analysis document from the public; however, the subcomponent shall otherwise prepare the analysis documentation in accord with applicable regulations.

(e) Reducing paperwork. USDA subcomponents should avoid excessive paperwork and shall ensure environmental assessments and environmental impact statements meet specified page limits established by NEPA section 107(e), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(e). Recommended best practices for reducing paperwork include, but are not limited to:

(1) Preparing analytic and concise environmental documents by using web-based collaboration and document management platforms that allow for interdisciplinary review and analysis to occur in a centralized document that reduces redundant and contradictory discussions that can occur when analysis is documented in a partitioned and individualized manner;

(2) Compiling and maintaining the proposal record throughout the NEPA process so information can be efficiently incorporated by reference when it is appropriate to do so and meets the requirements specified in paragraph (c)(7) of this section;

(3) Discussing only briefly issues that are not identified as substantive issues and eliminating from further study non-substantive issues;

(4) Writing environmental documents and associated analyses in plain language;

(5) Following a clear format for environmental documents and associated decision documents that is tailored to address only the minimum requirements outlined in NEPA and this part;

(6) Integrating NEPA requirements with other environmental review and consultation requirements, and where appropriate to do so relying on analyses done to demonstrate compliance with other laws and regulations to inform findings and determinations made for NEPA;

(7) Incorporating (by reference), into an environmental document, any applicable material—such as planning studies, analyses, or other relevant information—developed specifically to support that environmental document or associated decision document when the effect will be to cut down on bulk without impeding other agency and public review of the action; and

(i) USDA subcomponents shall cite the incorporated material in the document in a manner that identifies the content it contains.

(ii) Subcomponents may not incorporate material by reference unless it is reasonably available for inspection by potentially interested persons within the time allowed for comment, when an opportunity for comment is provided.

(iii) Subcomponents should not incorporate by reference material with potential withholdings or privileges or that is classified (see paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section) as such material is not available for review and comment.

(8) Relying on an existing environmental assessment (EA), environmental impact statement (EIS), finding of no significant impact (FONSI), record of decision (ROD), documentation of a finding of applicability and no extraordinary circumstance (FANEC), or a portion thereof—to include supporting analysis documentation not included in an EA, EIS, FONSI, ROD or FANEC documentation itself—provided that the assessment, statement, finding, decision, analyses, or portion thereof provides the information necessary to inform the required findings or conclusions required for the level of NEPA being completed. USDA subcomponents may rely on previous analysis completed by the subcomponent or analysis completed by any other Federal agency where it makes sense to do so given the nature of the proposal, the potentially affected environment, and the anticipated effects.

(i) Environmental impact statements and environmental assessments. When relying on a previous environmental impact statement or environmental assessment in full, if the actions covered by the original document and anticipated effects are substantially the same for the current proposal being considered, the USDA subcomponent relying on the previously completed document shall specify the reliance in the applicable finding or decision document and provide explanation of how the actions were determined similar and the effects determined adequate (both quantitatively and qualitatively). For an environmental impact statement, the document need not be refiled with the Environmental Protection Agency but shall be published, with the new record of decision, on a USDA website and included in the proposal record. For an environmental assessment, the document shall be published, with the new finding of no significant impact, on a USDA website and included in the proposal record.

(ii) Categorical exclusions. Refer to § 1b.3(h).

(iii) Other analysis or portions of environmental documents. USDA subcomponents may also rely on other analysis or portions of environmental documents when these contain information that supports necessary NEPA or other environmental law conclusions or determinations required by provisions of environmental law other than NEPA's procedural requirements (e.g., those required by Endangered Species Act, National Historic Preservation Act, Clean Water Act, etc.). The analysis or environmental document(s) relied upon shall be included in the proposal record.

(iv) Adequacy of analysis and inclusion in the proposal record. A brief description shall be provided in the environmental document being completed as to how the effects analysis being relied on is adequate (both quantitatively and qualitatively) given the actions being proposed. The other analysis or environmental documents being relied on shall be included in the proposal record (as outlined in paragraph (a) of this section).

(v) Programmatic documents. Refer to paragraph (q) of this section for discussion on relying on programmatic environmental documents.

(vi) Identification of certain circumstances. When relying on another environmental document, other analysis, or portion thereof, USDA subcomponents shall specify if the subcomponent is relying on an environmental document, other analysis, or portion thereof that is:

(A) Not final within the agency that prepared it;

(B) The subject of an adequacy referral to the Council on Environmental Quality for NEPA or a referral to the applicable regulatory agency for other laws (e.g., U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for Endangered Species Act compliance); or

(C) The subject of a judicial action that is not final.

(f) Reducing delay. USDA subcomponents should reduce delay in the environmental review process. For environmental assessments and environmental impact statements, subcomponents shall ensure documents are completed within the deadlines specified in NEPA section 107(g), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(g). Recommended best practices for reducing delay include, but are not limited to:

(1) Establishing (§ 1b.3(b)), adopting (§ 1b.3(c)), and applying (§ 1b.3(e)) categorical exclusions for categories of actions that normally do not have a significant effect on the human environment and therefore do not require preparation of an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement;

(2) Completing an environmental assessment when an action, which is not otherwise categorically excluded, is not anticipated to have a significant effect on the human environment and therefore is not expected to require preparation of an environmental impact statement;

(3) Integrating considerations of the applicable NEPA process early in proposed action development;

(4) Integrating NEPA requirements with other environmental review and consultation requirements;

(5) Designating a person to manage and expedite the NEPA and overall environmental review process, such as a project manager or an individual with adequate NEPA and environmental review experience;

(6) Engaging in interagency cooperation before or as the environmental impact statement is prepared, rather than awaiting submission of comments;

(7) Identifying and eliminating from detailed study the issues that are not substantive or have been covered by prior environmental review(s), and narrowing the discussion of these issues in the effects analysis to a brief presentation of why they are not of a substantive nature;

(8) Ensuring swift and fair resolution of lead agency disputes;

(9) Requiring comments received during in response to publication of a notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement, or other opportunities for comment, to be as specific as possible and, if documenting how substantive comments were considered, focusing on documenting the action taken in response to the substantive issues raised and/or recommendations made; and

(10) Eliminating duplication with State, Tribal, and local procedures by providing for joint preparation of environmental documents where practicable (see paragraph (l) of this section), and with other Federal procedures, by providing that a USDA subcomponent may rely on appropriate environmental documents or analysis prepared by another agency (see paragraph (e)(8) of this section).

(g) Interdisciplinary preparation. As required in NEPA section 102(2)(A), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(A), USDA subcomponents shall prepare environmental documents using an interdisciplinary approach that will ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts. The disciplines of the preparers should be appropriate to the scope and issues identified at the sole discretion of the responsible official.

(h) Methodology. As required by NEPA section 102(2)(D), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(D), USDA subcomponents:

(1) Shall ensure the professional integrity, including scientific integrity, of the discussions and analyses in environmental documents;

(2) May make use of any reliable data sources, such as remotely gathered information or statistical models;

(3) Should identify any methodologies used and make explicit reference to the scientific and other sources relied upon for conclusions in the environmental document; and

(4) May place discussion of methodology used or list references cited in the proposal record or include these as an appendix in an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

(i) Scientific accuracy. USDA subcomponents should make use of existing credible and reliable scientific resources, data, and evidence that is relevant to evaluating the reasonably foreseeable impacts on the human environment. Subcomponents should not undertake new scientific and technical research to inform its analyses unless it is essential to a reasoned choice among alternatives and the overall costs and time frame of such undertaking are not unreasonable.

(j) Information availability. When a USDA subcomponent is evaluating a proposed action's reasonably foreseeable impacts on the human environment, and there is incomplete or unavailable information that cannot be obtained at a reasonable cost or the means to obtain it are unknown, the subcomponent should make clear in the relevant environmental document that such information is lacking.

(k) Public involvement. USDA subcomponents may host or sponsor public hearings, public meetings, or other opportunities for public involvement as deemed necessary by the responsible official to inform the decision-making process or in accordance with statutory requirements applicable to the subcomponent. Subcomponents may conduct public hearings and public meetings by means of electronic communication except where another format is required by law. When selecting appropriate methods for public involvement, subcomponents should consider the ability of affected entities to access the methods used. USDA subcomponents:

(1) Should announce opportunities for public involvement on USDA websites where environmental documents are published.

(2) May provide additional guidance as needed to ensure interested persons can get information or status reports on environmental documents and other elements of the NEPA process.

(3) Should establish online platforms or systems that facilitate the sharing of environmental documents and other information pertinent to the management of environmental reviews conducted in conjunction with the applicable level of NEPA.

(l) Elimination of duplication with State, Tribal, and local procedures. USDA subcomponents may cooperate with State, Tribal, and local agencies that are responsible for preparing environmental documents, including those prepared pursuant to NEPA section 102(2)(G), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(G). To the fullest extent practicable, unless specifically prohibited by law, USDA subcomponents will cooperate with State, Tribal, and local agencies to reduce duplication between NEPA and State, Tribal, and local requirements, including through use of studies, analysis, and decisions developed by State, Tribal, or local agencies. Such cooperation may include:

(1) Joint planning processes;

(2) Joint environmental research and studies;

(3) Joint public hearings (except where otherwise provided by statute); or

(4) Joint environmental documents.

(m) Timely and unified Federal reviews. In many instances, a proposal or decision is undertaken in the context which entails activities or decisions undertaken by other Federal agencies (for example, where multiple Federal authorizations or analyses are required with respect to a proposal sponsor's overall purpose and goal). These activities and decisions are “related actions,” in that they are each the responsibility of a particular agency but they are all related in a matter relevant to NEPA by their relationship with one overarching proposal. 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). When serving as the lead agency, a USDA subcomponent is ultimately responsible for completing the NEPA process. When a joint lead relationship is established pursuant to NEPA section 107(a)(1)(B), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(B), a USDA subcomponent and the other joint lead agency or agencies are collectively responsible for completing the NEPA process.

(1) Lead agency. If a USDA subcomponent is participating in developing a proposal and there are two or more participating Federal agencies, the lead agency shall be determined in accordance with NEPA section 107(a)(1)(A), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(A). A lead agency shall fill the role described in NEPA section 107(a)(1)(B)(2), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(B)(2).

(i) Any Federal, State, Tribal, or local agency or person that is substantially affected by the lack of a designation of a lead agency with respect to a proposal, as described in paragraph (m) of this section, may submit a written request for such a designation to a participating Federal agency. An agency that receives a request under this paragraph shall transmit such request to each participating Federal agency and to the Council on Environmental Quality, in accordance with NEPA section 107(a)(4), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(4).

(ii) When serving as the lead agency, the USDA subcomponent will determine the scope of the analysis for the proposal in accordance with §§ 1b.5(b) and 1b.7(g) and document the scope of the project at hand.

(2) Joint lead agencies. In making a determination under paragraph (m) of this section, the participating Federal agencies may appoint such State, Tribal, or local agencies as joint lead agencies as the involved Federal agencies shall determine appropriate. Joint lead agencies shall jointly fulfill the role described in NEPA section 107(a)(1)(B)(2), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(1)(B)(2).

(3) Cooperating agencies. In accordance with NEPA section 107(a)(3), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(a)(3), the lead agency may, with respect to a proposal, designate any Federal, State, Tribal, or local agency that has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposal to serve as a cooperating agency. A cooperating agency may, not later than a date specified in the schedule established by the lead agency, submit comments to the lead agency.

(n) Unified documentation. If a USDA subcomponent proposal will require action by more than one Federal agency and the lead agency, as described in NEPA section 107(A), 42 U.S.C. 4336a(A), has determined that it requires preparation of an environmental document, the lead and cooperating agencies should evaluate the proposed action (and any action alternatives) in a single environmental document. If a USDA subcomponent is not the lead agency and the lead agency's NEPA implementing procedures specify:

(1) Format requirements for documenting categorical exclusion considerations, environmental assessments, or environmental impact statements, the USDA subcomponent should follow the formatting requirements for the lead agency.

(2) Format and signature requirements for findings of no significant impact or records of decision (and for categorical exclusion NEPA documentation if required), the USDA subcomponent should follow the format and signature requirements for the lead agency's finding or decision document. If more than one responsible official needs to sign a document, multiple signature blocks should be added to the one document created by the lead agency. When multiple signature blocks are included, the document shall specify what each signing responsible official is approving given the nature of the actions proposed and the responsible official's statutory authority.

(o) Disagreement concerning proposed major Federal actions. In the event there are interagency disagreements concerning designation of a lead or joint agency or disagreements over proposed major Federal actions that might cause significant environmental effects, these matters shall be referred to the USDA Senior Agency Official for determination on whether the disagreement needs elevated to the Council on Environmental Quality. The USDA Senior Agency Official may delegate this authority to the applicable mission-area Undersecretary or other USDA official for a subcomponent with NEPA responsibilities, per § 1b.2(b)(2)(ix)).

(p) Programmatic actions. Environmental impact statements and environmental assessments may be prepared for programmatic Federal actions. When USDA subcomponents prepare such statements, they should be relevant to the program decision and timed to coincide with meaningful points in subcomponent planning and decision-making. When preparing statements on programmatic actions (including proposed actions by more than one agency), USDA subcomponents may find it useful to evaluate the proposed actions in one of the following ways:

(1) Geographically, including actions occurring in the same general location, such as body of water, region, or metropolitan area;

(2) Generically, including actions that have relevant similarities, such as common timing, impacts, alternatives, methods of implementation, media, or subject matter; or

(3) By stage of technological development including Federal or federally assisted research, development or demonstration programs for new technologies that, if applied, could significantly affect the quality of the human environment. Statements on such programs should be available before the program has reached a stage of investment or commitment to implementation likely to determine subsequent development or restrict later alternatives.

(q) Relying on programmatic documents. Consistent with NEPA section 108, 42 U.S.C. 4336b, and paragraph (e)(8) of this section, after completing a programmatic environmental assessment or environmental impact statement, USDA subcomponents may rely on that document for 5 years if there are not substantial new circumstances or information about the significance of adverse impacts that bear on the analysis. After 5 years, as long as the subcomponent reevaluates the analysis (see paragraph (r) of this section regarding reevaluation of environmental documents) in the programmatic environmental document and any underlying assumption to ensure reliance on the analysis remains valid and briefly documents its reevaluation and explains why the analysis remains valid considering any new and substantial information or circumstances, the subcomponent may continue to rely on the document. Determinations of whether the analysis in the programmatic document and reliance on any underlying assumptions remains valid may be made on a case-by-case or programmatic basis and record keeping of the justifications for these determinations is advisable.

(r) Reevaluation of environmental documents. USDA subcomponents shall reevaluate, and if necessary, correct, revise, or supplement (hereinafter update) environmental documents, if a major Federal action or portion thereof remains to occur, and:

(1) The subcomponent makes changes to the proposed action, or selected alternative, that have the potential to change the anticipated degree of effect; or

(2) There are new circumstances or information with relevance to the proposal and these have bearing on the proposed action (or selected alternative) or potential to change the anticipated degree of effect.

(s) Proposals for rules or regulations. Where the proposal is the promulgation of a rule or regulation, procedures and documentation pursuant to other statutory or Executive order requirements may satisfy one or more requirements of this part. When a procedure or document satisfies one or more requirements of this part, a USDA subcomponent may substitute it for the corresponding requirements in this part and need not carry out duplicative procedures or documentation. Subcomponents will identify which corresponding requirements in this part are satisfied and consult with CEQ to confirm such determinations. For informal rulemaking conducted pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553, the environmental document will normally accompany the proposed rule.

(t) Proposals for legislation. When developing legislation, USDA subcomponents shall integrate the NEPA process for proposals for legislation significantly affecting the quality of the human environment with the legislative process of the Congress. Technical drafting assistance does not by itself constitute a legislative proposal. Only the Federal agency that has primary responsibility for the subject matter involved will prepare a legislative environmental impact statement.

(1) A legislative environmental impact statement is the detailed statement required by law to be included in a Federal agency's recommendation or report on a legislative proposal to Congress. A legislative environmental impact statement shall be considered part of the formal transmittal of a legislative proposal to Congress; however, it may be transmitted to Congress up to 30 days later in order to allow time for completion of an accurate statement that can serve as the basis for public and Congressional debate. The statement must be available in time for Congressional hearings and deliberations.

(2) Preparation of a legislative environmental impact statement shall conform to the requirements of the regulations in this subchapter, except there need not be a scoping process.

(u) Unique identification numbers. For environmental assessments and environmental impacts statements, USDA subcomponents will provide a unique identification number for tracking purposes, which the subcomponent will reference on other documents associated with the proposal and in any database or tracking system for such documents. A subcomponent may provide a unique identification number on documentation for a finding of applicability and no extraordinary circumstances where useful to do so. The unique identification number may be a number generated by a USDA subcomponent system used to track environmental reviews or an identification numbering process specified by the USDA Senior Agency Official or the Council on Environmental Quality.

(v) Emergencies—Immediate actions. If emergency circumstances exist that make it necessary to take action to mitigate harm to life, property, or important natural, cultural, or historic resources, the responsible official may take such actions without preparing an environmental analysis or environmental document. When taking such actions, the responsible official shall take into account the probable environmental consequences of the emergency action and mitigate foreseeable adverse environmental effects to the extent practical.

(w) Emergencies—Urgent but not immediate actions. If emergency circumstances exist that make it necessary to take urgently needed actions before the NEPA process can be completed, the responsible official shall proceed as follows:

(1) When urgent actions are not likely to have a reasonably foreseeable significant environmental impacts, but an emergency exists that makes it necessary to take urgently needed actions before preparing documentation associated with a categorical exclusion, environmental assessment, or finding of no significant impact, USDA subcomponents may authorize alternative arrangements for environmental compliance so long as the alternative arrangements are limited to actions necessary to address the emergency circumstance. Alternative arrangements will, to the extent practicable, attempt to achieve the substantive requirements of this part for the level of NEPA being completed. USDA subcomponents should proceed as follows:

(i) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services. The responsible official shall consult with the APHIS official who is delegated the authority to oversee NEPA compliance for the environmental unit. The APHIS official who is delegated the authority may authorize emergency alternative arrangements for completing the required NEPA compliance documentation.

(ii) Farm Service Agency. The responsible official shall consult the National Environmental Compliance Manager (or designee) who, with direction from the FSA Administrator (or designee), will identify alternative arrangements for compliance with this part with the appropriate subcomponents.

(iii) Rural Development. (Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Housing Service, and Rural Utilities Service.) The responsible official shall consult the National Director for Environmental and Historic Preservation (or designee) who, in coordination with the Administrator (or designee) and appropriate subcomponents, will identify alternative arrangements for compliance with this part.

(iv) U.S. Forest Service. The responsible official shall consult with the national headquarters office about alternative arrangements. Consultation with national headquarters shall be coordinated through the applicable regional (or equivalent) office. The Chief or Associate Chief of the Forest Service may grant emergency alternative arrangements under NEPA for categorical exclusions, environmental assessments, and associated findings.

(v) All other USDA subcomponents. The responsible official shall consult with the national program manager for environmental review, NEPA compliance, or other equivalent program to determine the appropriate mission area official who can authorize alternative arrangements for categorical exclusions, environmental assessments, and findings of no significant impact. When the national program manager is unsure how to proceed, they should consult the USDA Senior Agency Official (or their designee).

(2) When urgent actions are likely to have significant environmental impacts, but an emergency exists that makes it necessary to take urgently needed actions before preparing an environmental impact statement or record of decision, the responsible official taking the action shall request consultation with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) about alternative arrangements for compliance with NEPA section 102(2)(C), 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C). Consultation with CEQ shall be requested through the USDA Senior Agency Official (Undersecretary of Natural Resources and Environment). The USDA Senior Agency Official will coordinate with the applicable USDA mission area when arranging consultation with CEQ. The USDA Senior Agency Official and CEQ will limit such arrangements to urgent actions necessary to address the emergency circumstance prior to preparing the environmental impact statement.