This decision is usually made as a case-by-case basis. The Navy can prepare an
Environmental Assessment (EA) to assist it in making the impact significance
determination. An EA should include a brief discussion of the need for the proposed
project, project alternatives, the environmental impacts of the proposed projects and
its alternatives, and a listing of agencies and persons consulted during preparation of
126.96.36.199 Environmental Impact Statements. If the EA's conclusion is that the proposed
project would not significantly affect the human environment, the agency will issue a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) and no EIS is necessary. If the EA concludes
that the proposed project will significantly affect the human environment, the agency
will proceed to prepare an EIS.
188.8.131.52 Federal Register. If the Navy commits itself to prepare an EIS, it must
publish a notice of such intent in the Federal Register describing the proposed action,
possible alternatives, and the scoping process. The notice should include whether,
when, and where any scoping meeting will be held, and state the name and address of a
person within the agency who can answer any questions concerning the action.
184.108.40.206 Format. The CEQ regulations specify the following format and general
information categories to be contained in an EIS.
a) Cover Sheet - This single page must include a list of all Federal
agencies involved in the EIS preparation; the title of the proposed action; the name,
address, and telephone number of the person to con tact for more information; a
designator of whether the EIS is a draft, final, or draft/final supplement; a one
paragraph abstract; and the date by which comments must be received.
b) Summary - This section must accurately and adequately summarize the EIS
and must stress the major conclusions and any remaining issues to be resolved.
c) Purpose and Need - This section must briefly specify the underlying
purpose and need for the project.
d) Alternatives - This section should compare the environmental impacts of
the proposal and the alternatives. All reasonable alternatives must be rigorously
explored and objectively evaluated. The reasons behind the elimination of any
alternative must be disclosed. These alternatives must include the alternative of no
action and all reasonable alternatives not within the jurisdiction of the Navy. Each
remaining alternative must be considered and discussed in depth. The preferred
alternative must be identified. Appropriate mitigation measures must be included.