To provide model forms that may be used to conduct environmental assessments under the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
Substance of final rule:
The environmental assessment forms (“EAF”) are model forms promulgated by the Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) and appended to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”) regulations as required by the SEQR (see ECL § 8-0113). The EAFs are used by agencies and boards involved in the SEQR process to assess the environmental significance of actions they may be undertaking, funding or approving. The “Full EAF” has not been substantially revised since 1978 while its sister form, the “Short EAF,” was last substantially revised in 1987. In the years since the EAFs were first created, DEC and other SEQR practitioners have gathered a great deal of experience with environmental analyses under SEQR. DEC has brought this experience to bear by preparing modern Full and Short EAFs. The forms, which replace the existing ones set out at 6 NYCRR 617.20, appendices A, B, and C, now include consideration of emerging environmental issues such as climate change. The revised EAFs have been changed to better address planning, policy and local legislative actions, which can have greater impacts on the environment than individual physical changes.
In addition to these substantive changes, the structure of the forms has been updated, to make them more straightforward to use. DEC has merged the substance of the Visual EAF Addendum (6 NYCRR 617.20, former Appendix B) into the Full EAF and then eliminated the Visual EAF Addendum. This will help reduce the multiplicity of forms. The determination of significance has been merged into Part 3 of the forms. Part 2 of the Short Form has been conformed to the structure of Part 2 of the Full EAF.
Both forms have been reworked and modified in response to public comment. The forms as adopted are available on the DEC’s website at the following address: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/6061.html. The effective date of the new forms is October 1, 2012.
Final rule as compared with last published rule:
Nonsubstantive changes were made in section 617.20.
Revised rule making(s) were previously published in the State Register on
November 24, 2010.
Text of rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from:
Robert Ewing, Department of Environmental Conservation, DEP, 625 Broadway, Albany, New York 12233, (518) 402-9167, email: depprmt@gw.dec.state.ny.us
Revised Regulatory Impact Statement, Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
Revised regulatory impact and flexibility analyses are required when a rule as adopted includes a substantial change from the rule as proposed and the change requires modification of the statements. A revised regulatory impact statement and flexibility analyses are not required here as the information presented in the previously filed statements are adequate and complete as to the environmental assessment forms as revised through the public comment process. The forms do not contain any substantial revisions and the revisions do not necessitate that such statement be modified. Revisions to the forms were made based on public comments. The changes substantially reduced the length and complexity of completing the forms.
The changes reduced rather than increased any regulatory burden as follows:
DEC reduced the length of Part I of the Full EAF by, among other ways, eliminating DEC centric and redundant questions (except where they are fundamental to environmental analysis).
DEC reduced the complexity of questions that would require even a more sophisticated applicant to hire a consultant to answer the question such as on traffic impacts.
Under the revised forms, lead agencies will not have to discuss small impacts in Part 3 (which was not the intent) by reinserting an improved table into Part 2 of the Full EAF that allows the project sponsor to categorize impacts as “no, or small impact” or “moderate to large impact.” If an impact is judged to be not present or small, no further analysis is required. If the lead agency determines that an impact may be moderate to large, then it must explain the impact as being not significant or significant in Part 3. The new table strikes a balance that allows lead agencies to dismiss small impacts and ones that should require a more detailed explanation as to why they are or are not significant. The Short EAF has been conformed to the Full EAF so both forms have the same method of analysis.
Revised Job Impact Statement
No change is made to the following statement that appeared in the State Register on November 24, 2010, in connection with the revised environmental assessment forms. The updating of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) environmental assessment forms (EAF) should have no impact on existing or future jobs and employment opportunities. EAFs are expected to be completed in part by project sponsors and ultimately by lead agencies to determine whether a particular action may have a potentially significant, adverse impact on the environment. If the lead agency answers in the affirmative, then it must prepare or cause to be prepared an environmental impact statement the purpose of which is to evaluate the identified impacts and how to avoid or mitigate them. Local governments using EAFs or businesses who may fill in portions of the forms would be required to continue to do this, whether DEC revises the forms or continues to use the existing forms. While there may be a small increase in time to complete the new EAFs, this time should be offset by the decrease in time that is now spent in back-and-forth discussions or correspondence between project sponsors and governmental agencies to answer additional questions and clarify points that a new, more comprehensive EAF would include from the beginning. DEC also expects to make greater use of electronic information technologies with the new forms which may help to hasten the information gathering process, which is the object of the forms. DEC proposes to merge the substance of the Visual EAF Addendum (6 NYCRR 617.20, Appendix B) into the full EAF (6 NYCRR 617.20, Appendix A), and then eliminate the Visual EAF form. This will help reduce the multiplicity of forms.
A Job Impact Statement is not submitted with this rulemaking proposal because the proposal will not have a “substantial adverse impact on jobs or employment opportunities,” which is defined in the State Administrative Procedure Act Section 201-a to mean “a decrease of more than one hundred full-time annual jobs and employment opportunities, including opportunities for self-employment, in the state, or the equivalent in part-time or seasonal employment, which would be otherwise available to the residents of the state in the two-year period commencing on the date the rule takes effect.” The proposed changes to the EAFs are not expected to have any such effect and most likely will have no impact on jobs or employment opportunities.
Assessment of Public Comment
(Full responsiveness documents documents will be posted on the Department of Environmental Conservation's website at the following address: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/70293.html.
The Department (DEC) received about 70 comments on the forms - many of which were highly detailed. Comments were both favorable and unfavorable. Criticism centered on 1) the length of the Full EAF, 2) that some of the questions were too DEC centric (too parochial to DEC's jurisdictions), 3) that in some cases the DEC was asking for a too detailed level of analysis and information at the point in the project review process when EAFs are normally completed, 4) the elimination of the table in Part 2 of the Full EAF that enabled the lead agency to categorize impacts according to whether they are small to moderate, potentially large, or can be mitigated by project changes, and 5) the information needed to answers the questions would be difficult for project sponsors and municipalities to find without the use of consulting services. In response to these criticisms, DEC made the following changes to the EAFs:
DEC reduced the length of Part I of the Full EAF by, among other ways, eliminating DEC centric and redundant questions.
DEC responded to the criticism that it was seeking a too detailed level of analysis at the EAF stage by eliminating questions that would require even a more sophisticated applicant to hire a consultant to answer the questions. Lead agencies still have the flexibility to seek more information where traffic may be a significant issue.
DEC reinserted an improved table into Part 2 of the Full EAF that allows the project sponsor to categorize impacts as "no, or small impact" or "moderate to large impact." If an impact is judged to be not present or small, no further analysis is required. If the lead agency determines that an impact may be moderate to large, then it must explain the impact as being not significant or significant in Part 3. The new table strikes a balance that allows lead agencies to dismiss impacts that are small and ones that should require a more detailed explanation as to why they are or are not significant. The Short EAF has been conformed to the Full EAF so both forms have the same method of analysis.
DEC has prepared a summary of public comments and responses to comments, which is available on its website at the following address: http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/6061.html.
