Project Links

Big Cypress National Preserve » Loop Road Rehabilitation and Repair » Document List » Document Contents

Environmental Assessment of Loop Road Improvements


Environmental Assessment of Loop Road Improvements at the Big Cypress National Preserve, Florida
 
Comment Period: Closed        Sep 21, 2010 - Oct 22, 2010
Topic Questions Instructions:
Comments are generally considered substantive if the commenter raises an issue or question (with reasonable basis) regarding new information, suggests feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, or provides important new information related to:

• A law or regulation
• Agency procedure or performance
• Compliance with stated objectives
• Validity and adequacy of impact (environmental) analysis
• Matters of practical or procedural importance

Non-substantive comments include:

• Factual information with no bearing on determination of significant impact
• Information not related to the issues or impact analysis
• Corrections that have no bearing on the analysis
• Editorial changes; format suggestions
• Information outside the scope of the document (i.e. criticism on existing policies, laws, guidelines outside the scope of the plan)
• Information on other projects not related to the document
• Opinions, personal judgments, grievances, complaints about the project or other projects
• Support or lack of support for a project; votes (for or against the project)

While both substantive and non-substantive comments are considered in the review of the EA and the preparation of the decision document, generally substantive comments are more helpful to decision makers.
Topic Questions:
1. Ideally, comments on an environment assessment assess the adequacy of the document in disclosing and evaluating a project's effect on the environment. Comments are most useful if they are as specific as possible and do the following:

• Discuss a particular plan element or alternative
• Identify incomplete or incorrect information
• Offer reasons why a particular alternative or plan element would or would not work
• Offer a reasonable, new plan element or completely new alternative that could help accomplish the stated goals
• Point out discrepancies between legal mandates and proposals
• Highlight deficiencies in the analysis of environmental consequences
• Provide information on how you use the park and how particular proposals in the planning document would affect that use
Document Content:
Disclaimer: Links within the above document(s) were valid as of the date published.
Note: Some of the files may be in PDF format and can be viewed using the Adobe Acrobat Reader software. You may download a free copy of from Adobe Systems.