9629

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9629
• Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
• Title: Selected NEPA Documents.
• USFW Year: 1993.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

79
Interagencv Activitie
Chanter 3 Review of
3.1 Duty to Comment.
A. The Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) regulations (40_ CFR 1503.2) require Federal agencies to
review and comment on environmental impact statements (EIS) for proposed
actions within their expertise or jurisdiction. Throughout another
agency's NEPA process, Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) review
activities should focus on clear, meaningful analysis of significant
environmental issues. The Service should assist a lead agency in making a
reasoned decision consistent with the purpose, objectives, and goal of
NEPA. Better EISs, in and of themselves, are not the goal of NEPA nor of
Service involvement in the NEPA process. The goal of NEPA is better
environmental decisions.
B. Other Federal agencies should provide the Department of the Interior's
(DOI) Office of Environmental Poi icy and Compliance (OEPC) with sufficient
copies of environmental and other project review documents to allow
distribution of the documents to the Service and other DOI bureaus being
requested to participate in the review. When necessary, Service reviewing
offices may remind other Federal agencies or State offices which prepare
and distribute environmental documents to provide appropriate copies to
OEPC. Normally, other Federal agencies should provide the following number
of copies to OEPC.
(1) Twelve copies of a draft and six copies of a final document for
projects in the Eastern United States, including Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri,
Arkansas, and Louisiana. The same number of copies should be provided far
projects in Amercian Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin
Islands.
(2) Eighteen copies of a draft and nine copies of a final document for
projects in the Western United States westward of the westward boundaries
of Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas, and Louisiana.
(3) Eighteen copies of a draft and nine copies of a final document for
review requests which are national in scope, such as agency regulations,
scientific reports, special reports, program plans, and other interagency
documents.
(4) Sixteen copies of a draft and eight copies of a final document for
projects in Alaska.
C. When Service field offices receive other agency environmental documents
directly from that agency instead of through transmittal from OEPC, they
should advise the Service's Division of Habitat Conservation (DHC)
(Attention: Environmental Review Technician) and OEA staff to ensure the
document will be distributed by the Department for formal review. Service
field offices should reply, in most cases, through formal Departmental
review channels and not directly to the other agency.