Where there is a violation of an EPA policy declaration Where the federal agency violates its own substantive environmental requirements that relate to EPA's areas of jurisdiction or expertise Where an action might violate or be inconsistent with achievement or maintenance of a national environmental standard The basis for environmental Objections can include situations: Corrective measures may require substantial changes to the preferred alternative or consideration of some other project alternative (including the no action alternative or a new alternative). The review has identified significant environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to adequately protect the environment. Corrective measures may require changes to the preferred alternative or application of mitigation measures that can reduce the environmental impact. The review has identified environmental impacts that should be avoided in order to fully protect the environment. The review may have disclosed opportunities for application of mitigation measures that could be accomplished with no more than minor changes to the proposed action. The review has not identified any potential environmental impacts requiring substantive changes to the preferred alternative. Rating the Environmental Impact of the Action The rating of the draft EIS consists of one of the category combinations shown below: The numerical categories listed below signify an evaluation of the adequacy of the draft EIS: The alphabetical categories listed below signify EPA's evaluation of the environmental impacts of the proposal: In general, the rating is based on the lead agency's preferred alternative. The rating system provides a basis upon which EPA makes recommendations to the lead agency for improving the draft EIS. EPA rates the draft EIS on an alpha-numeric system and includes the designated rating in EPA's comment letter. EPA has developed a set of criteria for rating a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
0 kommentar(er)
