Report1_NEPA.pdf

NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24 Page 1 of 3

Categorical Exclusion Form Natchez Trace Parkway

Madison County, Mississippi

Project Number: NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24 Date: June 4, 2018; Revised August 13, 2018 Project Name: Parkway Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation from Mile Post 102.42 to Mile Post 110.00

Project Description:

The National Park Service (NPS), in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), proposes to rehabilitate approximately 7.58 miles of the Natchez Trace Parkway motor road from Mile Post (MP) 102.42 to 110.00. This repaving project includes entrance and exit ramps, access roads, and parking and interpretive pull-out areas. In addition, eight bridges will be milled and resurfaced. Work includes asphalt pavement milling, roadway widening, crack cleaning and sealing, shoulder reconditioning, asphalt concrete pavement overlay, and other miscellaneous work.

Mitigation Measures:

No mitigation measures were identified in the NPS Categorical Exclusion Form.

The area of potential effect extends from MP 102.42 to 110.00 in Madison County. Historic properties within the area includes the Parkway’s designed historic landscape. The parking area at Boyd Mound site will be resurfaced but no activity will take place beyond the existing paved area. The park 106 coordinator requested review by the park’s cultural resource specialist/advisors. The advisor, archaeologist, and historical architect’s assessments found no adverse effects and recommended a streamlined review for activities surrounding the repair/resurfacing/removal of existing roads, trails, and parking areas. There were no reviews from the curator, historian, other advisor, anthropologist, or historical landscape architect. Per the NPS Categorical Exclusion Form, the action meets all conditions for a streamlined review under Section III of the 2008 Servicewide Programmatic Agreement for Section 106 compliance.

The following stipulations and conditions are necessary, per the NPS Categorical Exclusion Form, to ensure that the assessment of effect is consistent with 36 CFR Part 800 criteria of effect or to avoid or reduce potential adverse effects:

- When the contract is awarded, all staging areas need to be reviewed by the Parkway’s cultural resource specialist to ensure no cultural resources are present. Special care should be given at Boyd Mount site to ensure contractors are aware of the site’s sensitivity.

- Where new handicap signs are proposed, the plans do call for the removal of the old signs.

Signs should be kept at a minimum to lessen the visual intrusion.

- Accessible upright signs need to be lowered to the minimum height necessary to lessen the visual effect at the interpretive areas.

NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24 Page 2 of 3

- Handicap pavement striping and signage should not be adjacent to or in front of the Parkway’s routed interpretive signs. The routed signs are part of the Parkway’s identity and are contributing small scale features to the designed landscape. Cluttered signage and striping are visually intrusive. Either move the handicap striping and signage away from the sign or move the interpretive sign away from the proposed striping.

Category Used to Exclude the Action from Further NEPA Analysis:

23 CFR § 771.117(c)(22) Projects, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, that would take place entirely within the existing operational right-of-way. Existing operational right-of-way refers to right-of-way that has been disturbed for an existing transportation facility or is maintained for a transportation purpose. This area includes the features associated with the physical footprint of the transportation facility (including the roadway, bridges, interchanges, culverts, drainage, fixed guideways, mitigation areas, etc.) and other areas maintained for transportation purposes such as clear zone, traffic control signage, landscaping, any rest areas with direct access to a controlled access highway, areas maintained for safety and security of a transportation facility, parking facilities with direct access to an existing transportation facility, transit power substations, transit venting structures, and transit maintenance facilities. Portions of the right-of-way that have not been disturbed or that are not maintained for transportation purposes are not in the existing operational right-of-way.

NPS categorically excluded the project as documented in the May 22, 2018 U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) National Park Service Categorical Exclusion Form per DOI 516 Departmental Manual (DM) 12.5(C)(9): Repair, resurfacing, striping, installation of traffic control devices, repair/replacement of guardrails, etc. on existing roads. NPS determined that the action fits within the categorical exclusion 516 DM 12.5(C)(9), as no extraordinary circumstances apply, and the project was categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis on May 23, 2018.

Agency Coordination:

Agency coordination in regards to 23 CFR 771 is complete.

FHWA reviewed species using the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) project planning tool on June 4, 2018. A U.S. Department of Interior FWS letter dated June 4, 2018 identified four threatened species that may occur within the boundary of the proposed project and/or may be affected by the proposed project. FHWA made the determination of no effect on four species, including the Northern Long-eared Bat.

The proposed project may rely on the revised February 5, 2018 FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the Range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat (PBO) to satisfy requirements under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, per a USFWS consistency letter dated June 4, 2018.

Environmental Screening Form NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24 Page 1 of 2

Appendix A: Environmental Screening Form

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

Impacts to Waters of the US: ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, approval anticipated:

☐Nationwide Permit ☐Regional General Permit ☐Individual Permit

• Section 401 of the Clean Water Act ☐NWP certified by State ☐Individual Certification

• Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Disturbance Threshold Exceeded, Permit Required?

☐Yes ☒ No Is Stormwater Management Review/Approval anticipated?

☐Yes ☒No

• ☒Project is consistent with Executive Order 11900, Protection of Wetlands Floodplains:

• ☒ Project is consistent with Executive Order 119888, Floodplain Management Proposed project actions have the potential to occur in FEMA Flood Zones A, AE, and X

Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act:

• Meets Section 4(f) exemption for Federal lands transportation facilities under Section

1119(c)(2) of MAP-21, U.S.C. 138(a)?

☒Yes ☐No

• Is there a Section 4(f) property in the study area?

☐Yes ☒No If Yes, continue:

De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ _______________________________ Individual 4(f): ☐

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

• Was the property purchased with grant funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund?

☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, was documentation of approval from National Park Service Director received for the conversion or replacement of 6(f) property? ☐Yes ☐No Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

• Not in Coastal Zone ☒

• Concurrence with Federal Consistency Determination ☐

Right of Way:

• Project is completely within Federal right-of-way ☒

• Project involves relocations or easements ☐

Number of Easements________ Number of Relocations________

Environmental Screening Form NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24 Page 2 of 2

Hazardous Waste and Materials:

• Area hazardous materials or contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds (as set by U.S.

EPA, County Environmental Health, etc.) present? ☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, is the nature and extent of the hazardous materials or contamination fully known?☐ If No, briefly discuss the plan for securing information:

FHWA secures any appropriate documentation, approvals, or disapprovals for applicable hazardous materials or contamination regulations and maintains oversight to ensure thresholds are not exceeded.

Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act:

• Are there Wild and Scenic Rivers? ☐Yes ☒No

If Yes, review by river-administering agency is required.

Clean Air Act:

• Is the project in a non-attainment area? ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, is the project on the TIP/SIP? ☐ Yes ☐No

Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Regulations:

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type I project (highway on a new location, substantial horizontal or vertical alteration, new through or auxiliary lanes). Noise analysis is required.

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type II project (retrofit for noise abatement).

• ☒ The proposed project is a Type III project (noise analysis not required).

Environmental Justice and Title IV Act:

• Is an Environmental Justice population, as identified in Executive Order 12898, present?

☐Yes ☒No If Yes, briefly explain:

• Will the project induce disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority, low income or special groups? ☐Yes ☒No If Yes, briefly explain:

Farmland Protection Policy Act for Highway Projects:

• Does the project displace, require acquisition of, or require an easement from farmland?

☐Yes ☒No

Does the project affect any additional resources? If Yes, explain below:

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 1 of 4

NP-NATR 3O19, 3P24

Appendix B: 23 CFR 771.117 FHWA Categorical Exclusions

(c) The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and §771.117(a) and normally do not require any further NEPA approvals by the FHWA:

☐ (1) Activities which do not involve or lead directly to construction, such as planning and research activities; grants for training; engineering to define the elements of a proposed action or alternatives so that social, economic, and environmental effects can be assessed; and Federal-aid system revisions which establish classes of highways on the Federal-aid highway system.

☐ (2) Approval of utility installations along or across a transportation facility.

☐ (3) Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities.

☐ (4) Activities included in the State's highway safety plan under 23 U.S.C. 402.

☐ (5) Transfer of Federal lands pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 107(d) and/or 23 U.S.C. 317 when the land transfer is in support of an action that is not otherwise subject to FHWA review under NEPA.

☐ (6) The installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings to provide for noise reduction.

☐ (7) Landscaping.

☐ (8) Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur.

☐ (9) The following actions for transportation facilities damaged by an incident resulting in an emergency declared by the Governor of the State and concurred in by the Secretary, or a disaster or emergency declared by the President pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Act (42 U.S.C. 5121):

(i) Emergency repairs under 23 U.S.C. 125; and

(ii) The repair, reconstruction, restoration, retrofitting, or replacement of any road, highway, bridge, tunnel, or transit facility (such as a ferry dock or bus transfer station), including ancillary transportation facilities (such as pedestrian/bicycle paths and bike lanes), that is in operation or under construction when damaged and the action:

(A) Occurs within the existing right-of-way and in a manner that substantially conforms to the preexisting design, function, and location as the original (which may include upgrades to meet existing codes and standards as well as upgrades warranted to address conditions that have changed since the original construction); and

(B) Is commenced within a 2-year period beginning on the date of the declaration.

☐ (10) Acquisition of scenic easements.

☐ (11) Determination of payback under 23 U.S.C. 156 for property previously acquired with Federal-aid participation.

☐ (12) Improvements to existing rest areas and truck weigh stations.

☐ (13) Ridesharing activities.

☐ (14) Bus and rail car rehabilitation.

☐ (15) Alterations to facilities or vehicles in order to make them accessible for elderly and handicapped persons.

☐ (16) Program administration, technical assistance activities, and operating assistance to transit authorities to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine changes in demand.

☐ (17) The purchase of vehicles by the applicant where the use of these vehicles can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a CE.

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 2 of 4

☐ (18) Track and railbed maintenance and improvements when carried out within the existing right-of-way.

☐ (19) Purchase and installation of operating or maintenance equipment to be located within the transit facility and with no significant impacts off the site.

☐ (20) Promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives.

☐ (21) Deployment of electronics, photonics, communications, or information processing used singly or in combination, or as components of a fully integrated system, to improve the efficiency or safety of a surface transportation system or to enhance security or passenger convenience.

Examples include, but are not limited to, traffic control and detector devices, lane management systems, electronic payment equipment, automatic vehicle locaters, automated passenger counters, computer-aided dispatching systems, radio communications systems, dynamic message signs, and security equipment including surveillance and detection cameras on roadways and in transit facilities and on buses.

☒ (22) Projects, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 101, that would take place entirely within the existing operational right-of-way. Existing operational right-of-way refers to right-of-way that has been disturbed for an existing transportation facility or is maintained for a transportation purpose. This area includes the features associated with the physical footprint of the transportation facility (including the roadway, bridges, interchanges, culverts, drainage, fixed guideways, mitigation areas, etc.) and other areas maintained for transportation purposes such as clear zone, traffic control signage, landscaping, any rest areas with direct access to a controlled access highway, areas maintained for safety and security of a transportation facility, parking facilities with direct access to an existing transportation facility, transit power substations, transit venting structures, and transit maintenance facilities. Portions of the right-of-way that have not been disturbed or that are not maintained for transportation purposes are not in the existing operational right-of-way.

☐ (23) Federally-funded projects:

(i) That receive less than $5,000,000 of Federal funds; or

(ii) With a total estimated cost of not more than $30,000,000 and Federal funds comprising less than 15 percent of the total estimated project cost.

☐ (24) Localized geotechnical and other investigation to provide information for preliminary design and for environmental analyses and permitting purposes, such as drilling test bores for soil sampling; archeological investigations for archeology resources assessment or similar survey; and wetland surveys.

☐ (25) Environmental restoration and pollution abatement actions to minimize or mitigate the impacts of any existing transportation facility (including retrofitting and construction of stormwater treatment systems to meet Federal and State requirements under sections 401 and 402 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1341; 1342)) carried out to address water pollution or environmental degradation.

☐ (26) Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (including parking, weaving, turning, and climbing lanes), if the action meets the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

☐ (27) Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects, including the installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting, if the project meets the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 3 of 4

☐ (28) Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings, if the actions meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

☐ (29) Purchase, construction, replacement, or rehabilitation of ferry vessels (including improvements to ferry vessel safety, navigation, and security systems) that would not require a change in the function of the ferry terminals and can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a CE.

☐ (30) Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing ferry facilities that occupy substantially the same geographic footprint, do not result in a change in their functional use, and do not result in a substantial increase in the existing facility's capacity. Example actions include work on pedestrian and vehicle transfer structures and associated utilities, buildings, and terminals.

(d) Additional actions which meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and paragraph (a) of this section may be designated as CEs only after Administration approval unless otherwise authorized under an executed agreement pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section. The applicant shall submit documentation which demonstrates that the specific conditions or criteria for these CEs are satisfied and that significant environmental effects will not result. Examples of such actions include but are not limited to:

☐ (1)-(3) [Reserved] ☐ (4) Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.

☐ (5) Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.

☐ (6) Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse impacts.

☐ (7) Approvals for changes in access control.

☐ (8) Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic.

☐ (9) Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.

☐ (10) Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.

☐ (11) Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise impact on the surrounding community.

☐ (12) Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes. Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types of land acquisition qualify for a CE only where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.

(i) Hardship acquisition is early acquisition of property by the applicant at the property owner's request to alleviate particular hardship to the owner, in contrast to others, because of an inability

Categorical Exclusion Category Page 4 of 4 to sell his property. This is justified when the property owner can document on the basis of health, safety or financial reasons that remaining in the property poses an undue hardship compared to others.

(ii) Protective acquisition is done to prevent imminent development of a parcel which may be needed for a proposed transportation corridor or site. Documentation must clearly demonstrate that development of the land would preclude future transportation use and that such development is imminent. Advance acquisition is not permitted for the sole purpose of reducing the cost of property for a proposed project.

☐ (13) Actions described in paragraphs (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section that do not meet the constraints in paragraph (e) of this section.

(e) Actions described in (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section may not be processed as CEs under paragraph (c) if they involve:

(1) An acquisition of more than a minor amount of right-of-way or that would result in any residential or non-residential displacements.

Yes ☐ No ☐

(2) An action that needs a bridge permit from the U.S. Coast Guard, or an action that does not meet the terms and conditions of a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers nationwide or general permit under section 404 of the Clean Water Act and/or section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.

Yes ☐ No ☐

(3) A finding of “adverse effect” to historic properties under the National Historic Preservation Act, the use of a resource protected under 23 U.S.C. 138 or 49 U.S.C. 303 (section 4(f)) except for actions resulting in de minimis impacts, or a finding of “may affect, likely to adversely affect” threatened or endangered species or critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act.

Yes ☐ No☐

(4) Construction of temporary access, or the closure of existing road, bridge, or ramps, that would result in major traffic disruptions.

Yes ☐ No☐

(5) Changes in access control.

Yes ☐ No☐

(6) A floodplain encroachment other than functionally dependent uses (e.g., bridges, wetlands) or actions that facilitate open space use (e.g., recreational trails, bicycle and pedestrian paths); or construction activities in, across or adjacent to a river component designated or proposed for inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

Yes ☐ No☐

United States Department of the Interior

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

Mississippi Ecological Services Field Office

6578 Dogwood View Parkway, Suite A

Jackson, MS 39213-7856

Phone: (601) 965-4900 Fax: (601) 965-4340 http://www.fws.gov/mississippiES/endsp.html

IPaC Record Locator: 101-12754331

Subject: Consistency letter for the 'NATR 3O19, 3P24' project (TAILS 04EM1000-2018-

R-0611) under the revised February 5, 2018, FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic

Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the Range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat.

To whom it may concern:

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has received your request dated to verify that the

NATR 3O19, 3P24 (Proposed Action) may rely on the revised February 5, 2018, FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the Range of the

Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat (PBO) to satisfy requirements under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat.884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Based on the information you provided (Project Description shown below), you have determined that the Proposed Action will have no effect on the endangered Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis) or the threatened Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). If the Proposed Action is not modified, no consultation is required for these two species.

For Proposed Actions that include bridge/structure removal, replacement, and/or maintenance activities: If your initial bridge/structure assessments failed to detect Indiana bats, but you later detect bats during construction, please submit the Post Assessment Discovery of

Bats at Bridge/Structure Form (User Guide Appendix E) to this Service Office. In these instances, potential incidental take of Indiana bats may be exempted provided that the take is reported to the Service.

If the Proposed Action may affect any other federally-listed or proposed species and/or designated critical habitat, additional consultation between the lead Federal action agency and this Service Office is required. If the proposed action has the potential to take bald or golden eagles, additional coordination with the Service under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act may also be required. In either of these circumstances, please advise the lead Federal action agency for the Proposed Action accordingly.

June 04, 2018 http://www.fws.gov/mississippiES/endsp.html

06/04/2018 IPaC Record Locator: 101-12754331 2

The following species may occur in your project area and are not covered by this determination:

▪ Atlantic Sturgeon (gulf Subspecies), Acipenser oxyrinchus (=oxyrhynchus) desotoi

(Threatened)

▪ Ringed Map Turtle, Graptemys oculifera (Threatened)

▪ Wood Stork, Mycteria americana (Threatened)

06/04/2018 IPaC Record Locator: 101-12754331 3

Project Description The following project name and description was collected in IPaC as part of the endangered species review process.

Name

NATR 3O19, 3P24

Description

Natchez Trace Parkway Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation from Mile Post 102.42 to

Mile Post 109.10

06/04/2018 IPaC Record Locator: 101-12754331 4

Determination Key Result Based on the information you provided, you have determined that the Proposed Action will have no effect on the endangered Indiana bat and/or the threatened Northern long-eared bat. Therefore, no consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to Section 7(a)(2) of the

Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat. 884, as amended 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is required for these two species.

Qualification Interview

1. Is the project within the range of the Indiana bat ?

[1] See Indiana bat species profile

Automatically answered

No

2. Is the project within the range of the Northern long-eared bat ?

[1] See Northern long-eared bat species profile

Automatically answered

Yes

3. Which Federal Agency is the lead for the action?

A) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

4. Are all project activities limited to non-construction activities only? (examples of non-construction activities include: bridge/abandoned structure assessments, surveys, planning and technical studies, property inspections, and property sales)

[1] Construction refers to activities involving ground disturbance, percussive noise, and/or lighting.

Yes

[1]

[1]

[1] http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?spcode=A000 http://ecos.fws.gov/ecp0/profile/speciesProfile?spcode=A0JE

06/04/2018 IPaC Record Locator: 101-12754331 5

Determination Key Description: FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Consultation For Transportation Projects Affecting NLEB Or Indiana Bat This key was last updated in IPaC on March 16, 2018. Keys are subject to periodic revision.

This decision key is intended for projects/activities funded or authorized by the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA), Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), and/or Federal Transit

Administration (FTA), which require consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

(Service) under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the endangered Indiana bat

(Myotis sodalis) and the threatened Northern long-eared bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis).

This decision key should only be used to verify project applicability with the Service’s February

5, 2018, FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects. The programmatic biological opinion covers limited transportation activities that may affect either bat species, and addresses situations that are both likely and not likely to adversely affect either bat species. This decision key will assist in identifying the effect of a specific project/activity and applicability of the programmatic consultation. The programmatic biological opinion is not intended to cover all types of transportation actions. Activities outside the scope of the programmatic biological opinion, or that may affect ESA-listed species other than the Indiana bat or NLEB, or any designated critical habitat, may require additional ESA Section 7 consultation.

https://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/fhwa/index.html https://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/fhwa/index.html

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

Natchez Trace Parkway Date: 07/13/2018

Letter of Compliance Completion Memorandum

To: Ramnik Satasiya, Federal Highways Design Project Manager

From: Deanna Boensch, Natural Resource Specialist, Natchez Trace Parkway

Subject: NEPA and NHPA Clearance: Parkway Pavement Resurfacing and Rehabilitation From MP 102.42 to 110.0 (81095)

The Natchez Trace Parkway Superintendent and Resource Management staff has reviewed the proposed project/action and completed its environmental assessment documentation, and we have determined that there:

• Will not be any effect on threatened, endangered, or rare species and/or their critical habitat.

• Will not be any effect on historical, cultural, or archeological resources.

• Will not be serious or long-term undesirable environmental or visual effects.

The subject proposed project/action(s), therefore, is/are now cleared for all NEPA and NHPA compliance requirements as presented above. Project plans and specifications are approved and construction and/or project implementation can commence.

For the proposed project actions to be within compliance requirements during construction and/or project implementation, the following mitigations must be adhered to:

• No mitigations identified.

Recommendations for Conditions or Stipulations:

None

For complete compliance information see PEPC Project 81095.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Page 1 of 1Letter of Compliance Completion

8/13/2018file:///C:/Users/Ramaniklal.Satasiya/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20I...