of the assessment system. It is devised more for typical onshore 

 project review than for the specialized reviews involved with offshore 

 leasing and recovery operations. (See Volume IV of this series for a 

 discussion of FWS's role in OCS leasing.) 



2.3.1 Analyze Proposed Work Plan (Step 1 ) 



Whether it is a permit application or an EIS, the basic document 

 along with its attachments must contain sufficient information for the 

 assessor to determine the exact nature of the work, the stages by which 

 it would be accomplished, and the specific activities that would be 

 conducted. The activities are the key element in the impact cycle. 

 They cause disturbances which trigger the sequence of ecological effects 

 which lead to an impact . The activity is also the point of control for 

 ecological protection measures and the point of opportunity for permit 

 conditions and for mitigation recommendations. 



In the process of analyzing the workplan for OCS-related development, 

 the assessor first determines from the sponsor's proposal whether the 

 project has more than one component. If so, the assessor then identifies 

 each subproject and the activities involved in its implementation, setting 

 the stage for the disturbance identification to follow. 



2.3.2 Select Activities with Potential for Significant Disturbance (Step 2) 



In this step, the assessor makes trial assumptions of disturbance 

 impact, and tests these against his or her knowledge and experience, or that 

 of colleagues or outside experts. The purpose is to winnow down the activi- 

 ties (or whole subprojects if possible) to those that have a reasonable 

 probability of causing significant disturbance . Since those activities 

 selected will receive detailed review in step 3, efficiency dictates that 

 they be no more numerous than necessary. 



For example, the assessor may be reviewing a permit for a pipecoating 

 yard and find that a bulkhead subproject is involved. Further checking may 

 show that the bulkhead as planned will preempt valuable wetlands through 

 dredging activities in front of the bulkhead and filling activities behind 

 the bulkhead but that other related activities, such as pile driving, have 

 limited disturbance potential in this case. Therefore, under the bulkhead 

 subproject in step 3, the assessor might select for detailed review as con- 

 struction activities the dredging in front and the filling behind the bulkhead. 



2.3.3 Analyze Potential Disturbance (Step 3 ) 



The activities selected in step 2 are here subjected to detailed exami- 

 nation to determine probable effects and impacts . This analytical process is 

 difficult to describe. In it, the assessor uses his own knowledge of the 

 severity of effects resulting from particular disturbances . The assessor may 

 also consult with others having special knowledge, or may refer to the litera- 

 ture. Often the findings of well-known experiments or general ecological 

 theory can be applied successfully to the specific case. 



Often, an experienced assessor can make reliable judgments of final 

 impact simply by knowing the extent of the anticipated disturbance from identi- 

 fied activities . This is possible because experience shows that many disturb- 

 ances have such predictable effects leading to such predictable impacts that 



n 



