US Department of Transportation
FHWA PlanWorks: Better Planning, Better Projects
US Department of Transportation
FHWA Planworks: Better Planning, Better Projects
ENV-1: Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Review
Environmental Review/NEPA Merged with Permitting
Description:
The scoping Key Decision is a crucial first step of the environmental review phase. Consensus is reached on the data, decisions and relationships that need to be considered, acquired or made throughout environmental review. The scope is informed by the adopted long range transportation plan and corridor plans as well as current information being developed from plans in process.Relationships with planning partners are formed during scoping. PlanWorks primarily addresses the role of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) as the agency responsible for issuing permits under the Clean Water Act. However, relationships should be formed with all agencies who will be responsible for issuing permits for the proposed action at the federal and state levels or who have some degree of authority over the NEPA process. For example, if listed species are present in the vicinity of the project, informal consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) should be initiated. Under Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reviews all actions requiring an environmental impact statement. The relationship with EPA within the NEPA process is also initiated at this Key Decision.
In addition to relationships, scoping is a time to begin identifying the process and methods that will be used for the environmental review.
There is information developed in Long Range Planning and Corridor Planning that informs this step.
Basics:
The first table describes the purpose and anticipated outcome of a Key Decision. If the decision is federally mandated, the purpose and outcome will relate to the legal intent.
The second table describes roles for key partners with legal decision making authority in the transportation process. The roles indicate the influence a partner can have on a decision, and show each partner where their input is most needed. For a full understanding of roles see the Partner Portal.
Purpose
To meet the federal regulations for conducting scoping.
Outcome
Information to create the notice of intent.
Agreements between partners on participation.
Partner | Role Type | Description |
---|---|---|
MPO | Advisor | Provides support as needed for project scoping in the urban area based on regional information from the LRTP and the TIP. |
FHWA/FTA | Decision Maker | Ensures that the environmental review process is inclusive, considers a wide range of options, and meets federal requirements. |
State DOT | Decision Maker | Ensures the project scope is comprehensive and inclusive of all interested parties. |
Resource Agency | Decision Maker |
The USACE is a decision maker, reaching consensus on a scope that is built on planning in the LRTP/corridor process, environmental planning, and sufficiently broad to consider all options. Identify and support the use of an ecological planning region, ecological goals and conservation priorities to the extent possible. Agree to work with transportation partners in a process that is streamlined by earlier agreements and actions. The US EPA is an Advisor to this Key Decision. Pursuant to Section 309 of the Clean Air Act, the USEPA is required to review and comment in writing on all actions requiring an environmental impact statement. |
Public Transportation Operator(s) | Advisor | Provides support as needed for project scoping. |
Links to Decisions
This table identifies the connection to other Key Decisions. The linkages highlight the importance of collaboration across transportation phases. Practitioners are encouraged to document the basis of the decision and consider information from previous Key Decisions.
Transportation Phases | Key Decision | What is Linked? | Purpose of Linkage |
---|---|---|---|
From Long Range Transportation Planning | LRP-1 - Approve Scope of LRTP Process | Relevant information in the long range plan scope; including potential stakeholders, available tools and data sources, known human and natural environmental considerations, and others | To inform the scope of the environmental review and permitting process |
LRP-2 - Approve Vision and Goals | The vision and goals of the LRTP | To inform the scope of the environmental review and permitting process | |
LRP-6 - Approve Strategies | The approved range of strategies | To provide a regional context of the range of strategies to inform the environmental review/ permitting phase | |
LRP-10 - Adopt LRTP by MPO | Relevant information from the adopted long range plan, including strategies and scenarios that were evaluated and eliminated | To inform the scope of the environmental review and permitting process | |
From Programming | PRO-4 - Approve Project Prioritization | Detailed information that informed the prioritization of this project, for example local support, project readiness, and cost sharing. | To inform the establishment of logical termini with respect to the approach, scope, and timeframe. |
PRO-7 - Approve TIP by Governor and Incorporate into Draft STIP | Funding and schedule provided by the adopted TIP | To make a comparison between the TIP schedule and the estimated timeframe within the environmental review and permitting process. TIP project cost as a context to carry forward through environmental review and permitting. | |
From Corridor Planning | COR-1 - Approve Scope of Corridor Planning Process | Relevant information in the corridor plan scope; including potential stakeholders, available tools and data sources, known human and natural environmental considerations, and others | To inform the scope of the environmental review and permitting process |
COR-3 - Approve Goals for the Corridor | The goals of the corridor plan | To inform the scope of the environmental review and permitting process | |
COR-4 - Reach Consensus on Scope of Environmental Analysis | Agreement between the partners as to the scope of environmental review and analysis to support the corridor planning process. | To provide an understanding of the requirements and perspectives of the environmental planning partners | |
COR-8 - Approve Implementation Criteria for Prioritizing Projects | Priorities for implementation of the individual solutions contained in the preferred solution set | To inform identification of logical termini, study area boundaries and potential sequencing of related projects. |
Questions to Consider
Questions are a way to gather input from partners and stakeholders that can be used to inform the decision. Decision makers can discuss the questions provided to ensure a broad array of interests are considered to support a collaborative process. Questions also allow staff to collect stakeholder interests, ensure these are included in the decision, and provide a response based on the decision outcome. Although Public Transportation is not represented by a PlanWorks Application, the information provided may be useful in a collaborative transportation process.
Category | Questions to Consider |
---|---|
Long Range Planning |
|
Programming |
|
Corridor Planning |
|
Environmental Review |
|
Bicycles and Pedestrians |
|
Capital Improvement |
|
Economic Development |
|
Freight |
|
Greenhouse Gas Emissions |
|
Health in Transportation |
|
Human Environment and Communities |
|
Land Use |
|
Linking Planning and Operations |
|
Natural Environment and Implementing Eco Logical |
|
Performance Measures |
|
Planning and Environment Linkages |
|
Public Private Partnerships |
|
Public Transportation |
|
Safety |
|
Stakeholder Collaboration |
|
Transportation Conformity |
|
Visioning and Transportation |
|
Data
The following list of data may be needed to support the Key Decision. Practitioners collect this information for decision makers to consider. Although Public Transportation is not represented by a PlanWorks Application, the information provided may be useful in a collaborative transportation process.
Category | Data to Consider |
---|---|
Long Range Planning |
|
Programming |
|
Corridor Planning |
|
Environmental Review |
|
Bicycles and Pedestrians |
|
Capital Improvement |
|
Economic Development |
|
Freight |
|
Greenhouse Gas Emissions |
|
Health in Transportation |
|
Human Environment and Communities |
|
Land Use |
|
Linking Planning and Operations |
|
Natural Environment and Implementing Eco Logical |
|
Performance Measures |
|
Planning and Environment Linkages |
|
Public Private Partnerships |
|
Public Transportation |
|
Safety |
|
Stakeholder Collaboration |
|
Transportation Conformity |
|
Visioning and Transportation |
|
Links to Applications
The interaction between transportation decision making and other planning processes will ensure that important values and goals outside the transportation process are recognized and considered. Although Public Transportation is not represented by a PlanWorks Application, the information provided may be useful in a collaborative transportation process.
Application | Description |
---|---|
Bicycles and Pedestrians |
|
Capital Improvement |
|
Economic Development |
|
Freight |
|
Greenhouse Gas Emissions |
|
Health in Transportation |
|
Human Environment and Communities |
|
Land Use |
|
Linking Planning and Operations |
|
Natural Environment and Implementing Eco Logical |
|
Performance Measures |
|
Planning and Environment Linkages |
|
Public Private Partnerships |
|
Public Transportation |
|
Safety |
|
Stakeholder Collaboration |
|
Transportation Conformity |
|
Visioning and Transportation |
|
Examples
In - depth case studies of successful practices in
collaborative decision making were used to develop the Decision Guide.Links in this
table point to a specific paragraph or section of a case study that supports a Key Decision.
It is not necessary to read through an entire case study to find the example; however,
full versions are available in the Library. p >
PlanWorks Case Study Examples: |
---|
Regional TIP Policy Framework and Vision 2040 for Puget Sound Regional Council env-1 |
Other Examples: |
---|
None. |