Anonymous public comment

EPA should add to the list in 6.204(a)(2) of categorical exclusions not needing documentation, any projects specifically identified by congress to be appropriated funding. These are projects specifically identified in law that require EPA to provide assistance and should not be conditioned based on EPA's subjective opinion that they need a NEPA review. By including these projects in law, Congress is directing EPA to fund them, thus they are considered non-discretionary according to the new section 6.101(b)(2)(D). EPA also does not have authority to take environmental factors into consideration because Congres itself has not specifically required a NEPA review when identifying these projects in appropriation acts. Therefore, EPA should add these types of congressionally directed projects to the list of categorically excluded project for which documentation is not needed. This will also greatly speed up implementation and funding of these projects. If EPA does not agree to add these projects to the list of items NOT needing documentation, then EPA should instead add them to 6.204(a)(1) as presumptively categorically excluded but needing documentation. Again, since all of these projects are specifically identified by congress as needing to be funded, then EPA should not require additional NEPA review beyond what is required for a categorical exclusion. Congressionally passed laws cannot be trumped by EPA bureaucrats subjectively requiring unnecessary reviews. EPA should do everything in its power to implement these projects and move the economy forward, not stand in the way doing unnecessary NEPA reviews for projects being performed in previously disturbed areas! Make them all CATEXs, and even better make them all undocumented CATEXs!