ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE (EAP) STEP-BY-STEP SUMMARY 1. Typically, the JIA Director of Conservation (DOC) will identify that a proposed project calls for EAP review and communicates this to the JIA Executive Director. (Anyone may petition either the JIA Executive Director or DOC for an EAP review of a proposed project). 2. The JIA Executive Director approves the DOC to proceed with carrying out an EAP, and the JIA website is updated to specify that an EAP review is in progress along with a summary of the subject matter under review. 3. The DOC, in consultation with the Executive Director, identifies the specific individuals who will be assigned (internal) or invited (external) to serve as EAP participants. 4. An EAP meeting is scheduled and advance materials pertaining to the project under consideration are shared with EAP participants.
• For projects necessitating creation of a new lease agreement or requiring re-negotiation of lease terms on an existing lease, EAP review will commence prior to the concept approval phase of the design review process. • For projects that are conceptually compatible within the terms of an existing lease agreement as stated, EAP Review will commence at the design development phase of the design review process. • For projects that do not involve lease agreements, and for those projects for which the scope falls outside the design review process, the EAP review will commence at the concept phase of project development.
5. At least one meeting of EAP participants is held • The need for multiple meetings is determined by the DOC in consultation with the Executive Director based on project complexity or changes in concept/scope following the first meeting. 6. EAP participants collaboratively determine if the group will deem the proposed project to be compatible with the Jekyll Island Conservation Plan, conditionally compatible, or inherently incompatible.
• EAP participants do not vote on a determination of compatibility. If the group fails to reach a consensus determination, this will be recorded in the resulting EAP report and divergent positions will be described. • Determinations of compatibility must consider the relationship of the project to Conservation Priority Areas (CPAs) along with any landscape-scale impacts and local, site-scale impacts, as defined in this chapter.
7. The JIA Conservation staff, led by the DOC, prepares a draft EAP report summarizing the deliberations of EAP participants and the conclusions of their meeting(s), including any required conditions of a favorable EAP determination along with recommendations to further improve environmental outcomes. 8. The draft EAP report is distributed to EAP participants for review and comment. 9. The DOC reconciles input received from EAP participants on the content of the draft report. 10. The draft EAP report is posted to the JIA website and public comment on the draft is accepted via online submission for 10 business days. 11. The DOC reconciles input received from the public on the content of the draft report. 12. The DOC transmits the updated draft EAP report to the Executive Director, along with any input from EAP participants or the public in response to the draft. 13. The Executive Director and DOC discuss the report and the Executive Director may propose modifications pertaining to how the content of the report is communicated and presented or how stakeholder input was addressed.
• If the Executive Director objects to the determination of compatibility, or required conditions of a favorable assessment, he/she must call for additional EAP deliberations to attempt to reconcile these matters.
14. With the approval of the Executive Director, the EAP report is finalized, and posted to the JIA website. 15. The guidance provided in the EAP report is communicated, via the design review process or official memorandum, to those parties responsible for implementing it. 16. JIA staff monitor approved projects and can intervene through appropriate channels, up to and including legal remedy, should the required conditions of favorable EAP review fail to be properly implemented.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 88
