a 5S. 3 7 Statements which Cover More than One Action. Related to the above problem, is the problemof determining the proper scope of an environ- ~ mental..impact statement in connection with Federal.programs that may involve a multi--~ plicity.of individual "actions." Section 10(a) of the CEQ Guidelines makes reference to the need for such "program" statements in certain a cases, and this topic was explored in some detail at our agency review sessions in In part, the problem requires December. careful agency attention to the definition of the "action" that the agency is undertaking. If the definition is too broad and the program too far removed from actual implementation, the et | resulting analysis is likely to be too general ee ‘to prove useful:. On the other hand, -. an excessively = >. narrow. definition-is:likély toresaltin- -impact. on EES = “statements: that-ignéré=the:ceuhuiative-¢ffeets—of- “=—@ number oF-Snafviduatiy*smalt-actions; *o¥ that.ESae come so late in the process that basic program —~ decisions are no longer open for review. - Individual actions that are related either geographically or as logical parts in a chain -O£f contemplated-_actions may be more appropriately 7 -evaluated-in a single»programstatement. --Such - --<_ a statement also appears appropriate in cdénnection with the issuance of rules, regulations, or other general criteria to govern the conduct of a continuing program, or in the development of a new program that contemplates a number of subsequent actions. Examples of such program statements include the Interior Department's statements on its oil shale program and on its exploitation of geothermal steam under the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970. In all of these cases, the program statement has a number of advantages. It provides an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be ~