Attachment Q NEPA CATEX Document updated.pdf

Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Decision Support System

Rehabilitate Waterfront, Station Cleveland Harbor - Project Approved

Status In Preparation (12/13/2022) Environmental Review (03/09/2023) Senior Environmental Review (03/09/2023) Proponent Review (03/13/2023) Project Approved (03/13/2023)

Project Information General

Name: Rehabilitate Waterfront, Station Cleveland Harbor

DSS ID: DSS-USCG-2022-15056

Security: Unclassified Description: This project is the final phase of a multi-phase development at Base Cleveland Harbor. The waterfront work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of approximately 750 feet of steel sheet pile bulkhead with associated tieback and fender systems, construction of a new concrete cap at the MORRO BAY and NEAH BAY moorings as well as adjacent to the southern property line, upgrade existing floating dock to include worn hardware and components and installation of new electrical shore ties and convenience outlets, upgrade of the existing waterfront light fixtures to illuminate both the landside and waterside operations, installation of new conduits and RB-S shore ties, and dredging to support new pile installation. The shore side work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of the parking barriers and protective fence rail at the bulkhead;

repair and repaving of parking areas disturbed by construction, replacement and slope correction of the existing sanitary sewer lines and shore ties that serve the NEAH BAY and MORRO BAY, relocation of waterfront and vessel storage building electrical service to the base primary electrical distribution system, and demolition of the electrical distribution building. The fuel farm will be removed and a new fuel farm will be constructed with the same size tanks.

Funded through the IIJA?: No Critical Infrastructure?: No Adopting Another Agency Catex Determination?: No Project Types:

· Construction, Installation, and Demolition Activities - Coast Guard new construction upon, or improvement of, land where all of the following conditions are met:

(a) The structure and proposed use are substantially in compliance with prevailing local planning and zoning standards.

(b) The site is on heavily developed property and/or located on a previously disturbed site in a developed area.

Rehabilitate Waterfront, Station Cleveland Harbor (Unclassified)

Page 1 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

(c) The proposed use will not substantially increase the number of motor vehicles at the facility.

(d) The site and scale of construction are consistent with those of existing, adjacent, or nearby buildings. (CATEX *L14)

· Construction, Installation, and Demolition Activities - Demolition of buildings, structures, or fixtures and disposal of subsequent building, structure, or fixture waste materials. (CATEX *L21)

Existing EA/EIS?: No Requires EA/EIS?: No Project Priority: Normal Federal Assistance: No Type of Permit: N/A Estimated Project Cost: $9,000,000

Component Component: USCG - U.S. Coast Guard Region/Area/Unit: USCG Facilities Design & Construction Center - Norfolk Va Tracking Number: SFRL 09-5092184

Dates FY Funding: 2021 Proposed Project Start: 03/01/2023 Proposed Project End: 03/01/2025 Review Start: 07/11/2022

Project Location Site Specific: 1055 E 9th St, Cleveland, Ohio, 44144

Team Document Preparer, Jessica Parks, jessica.e.parks@uscg.mil Collaborator-Document Preparation, Michael West (Level II), Mike.West@uscg.mil Environmental Reviewer, Richard Hylton (Level II), rick.d.hylton@uscg.mil Senior Environmental Reviewer, Richard Hylton (Level II), rick.d.hylton@uscg.mil Proponent, John Berry, john.d.berry@uscg.mil

Categorical Exclusions L14* - Coast Guard new construction upon, or improvement of, land where all of the following conditions are met:

(a) The structure and proposed use are substantially in compliance with prevailing local planning and zoning standards.

(b) The site is on heavily developed property and/or located on a previously disturbed site in a developed area.

Page 2 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

(c) The proposed use will not substantially increase the number of motor vehicles at the facility.

(d) The site and scale of construction are consistent with those of existing, adjacent, or nearby buildings.

L21* - Demolition of buildings, structures, or fixtures and disposal of subsequent building, structure, or fixture waste materials.

L29 - Routine repair and maintenance to waterfront facilities, including mooring piles, fixed floating piers, existing piers, and unburied power cables.

Required Conditions If active bird nests (e.g. nests containing eggs or chicks) are observed in the project area, USCG Environmental Program Manager shall be contacted and the location of the nests may need to be avoided.

All microwave communication equipment will be hung greater than the minimum safe distance from ground level and out of reach from the public. All radio frequency (RF) transmitting/radiating equipment shall comply with health and safety standards and all RF hazards shall be marked accordingly.

This review addresses NEPA and other EPHP requirements as described in DHS Directive 023-01 Rev. 01 and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. This review may identify the need for additional federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc. required for the Proposed Action.

However, this review may not satisfy those requirements and the Proponent is responsible for ensuring all other appropriate federal, state, and/or local permits, approval, etc. have been obtained.

Greenhouse gas emissions and energy reduction/conservation will be given appropriate consideration in equipment and material selection.

In an event of a spill of petroleum, oils, or lubricants, measures to contain and clean up the spill will follow the procedures outlines in the USCG Spill Response Plan. Drip pans will be placed under all equipment and vehicles remaining onsite overnight or for an extended time period.

All contractors and onsite personnel shall comply with and strictly adhere to applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards and common-sense practices, including OSHAs Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, 29 C.F.R. 1926, and General Industry, 29 C.F.R.

1910. Additionally, the contractor shall also abide to any applicable State and local safety/health/sanitation/construction codes and standards. If OSHA regulations conflict with other State or local standards, the more stringent standard will govern.

All applicable permits, permissions, and authorizations from applicable landowners and Federal, state, and local regulatory authorities shall be obtained prior to initiating the Proposed Action.

All used oil will be recycled if practicable. All non-recyclable hazardous and regulated materials and wastes will be collected, characterized, labeled, stored, transported, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including proper waste

Page 3 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

9.

10.

11.

12.

manifesting procedures.

Any change to the Proposed Action that may cause a physical interaction with the human environment will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other EPHP requirements before the action can proceed.

Work zones shall be clearly demarcated. Danger or caution signs will be posted as applicable in accordance with OSHA and industry standards.

Any change to the Proposed Action that may cause a physical interaction with the human environment will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other EP&HP requirements before the action can proceed.

This review addresses NEPA and other EP&HP requirements as described in DHS Directive 023-01.

This review may identify the need for additional federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc.

required for the Proposed Action. However, this review may not satisfy those requirements and the Proponent is responsible for ensuring that all other appropriate federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc. have been obtained.

Decision Documents Record of Environmental Consideration (REC), 14.77kB

Attachments Coastal Zone Consult, 2.62MB Flood Map.pdf, 736.48kB OHSHPO Consult Concurrence Response, 1.46MB SHPO Consult, 4.14MB Wetlands Map.pdf, 1.21MB

Comments There are no comments.

EPHP Review Environmental Resources

Is the Proposed Action a piece of a larger action or connected to another action? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : This is the final phase of a multi-phase development project at Base Cleveland Harbor. This work was not covered under the environmental review for previous phases.

Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety? Areas to consider include, but are not limited to: environmental justice considerations; air quality; noise

Page 4 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM impacts; hazardous wastes and/or contamination; wastewater; potable water; and changes in modes or safety of transportation. -- No Explain how the proposed action would not have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety. : The project area takes place on previously developed land and is fully contained within the Base Cleveland boundaries.

Would the proposed action place a disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effect on minority populations and low-income populations? -- No Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on species or habitats protected by the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, or Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act? -- No Provide a conclusion under which statute the determination was made (e.g., no effect, NLAA, LAA, for ESA, etc.), how the determination was made, why it is considered significant, and copies of any consultation (informal and/or formal). : The Proposed Action is replacing in kind on previously developed land.

Attachments: FWS, NMFS, or Wildlife Agency Consultation: Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf (Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf, 218.08kB) MA Verification Letter_ Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) Consultation and 4(d) Rule Consiste 12DEC22.pdf (MA Verification Letter_ Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) Consultation and 4(d) Rule Consiste 12DEC22.pdf, 248.47kB) What is your Endangered Species Act (ESA) finding and determination? -- May affect, not likely to adversely affect Explain how the determination was made, why it is considered NOT significant, and copies of any consultation (informal and/or formal). : The Proposed Action is occurring on land that is previously developed. Destruction of critical habitats for the affected species is not expected.

Attachments: ESA consultation : Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf (Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf, 218.08kB) ** This question should be carefully checked by the Environmental Reviewer.

What is your Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) finding and determination? -- No effect or negligible effect Explain how the determination was made (e.g., are species present in the area but your proposed action will have no effect or negligible effects? why?). Although not required, recommend attaching any consultation or correspondence conducted.: No MMPA protected species expected in the project area.

Attachments: MMPA consultation: Biological Assessment 2022-12-12.pdf (Biological Assessment 2022-12-12.pdf, 483.66kB) Would the proposed action adversely affect a species protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act or habitat for such species? -- No

Page 5 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Explain how the determination was made (e.g., are species present in the area but your proposed action will have no adverse effect or no significant effect? why?). Although not required, recommend attaching any consultation or correspondence conducted.: Proposed Action is expected to have no adverse effect because project area is previously developed. The project is replacing obsolete equipment and infrastructure with in-kind replacements.

Attachments: BGEPA MBTA consultation: (No files uploaded yet.)

What is your Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (essential fish habitat) finding and determination? -- No effect Attachments: EFH consultation: (No files uploaded yet.)

Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on an environmentally sensitive area?

Examples include, but are not limited to: areas having special designation or recognition such as prime or unique agricultural lands, coastal zones, designated wilderness study areas, wild and scenic rivers, 100-year floodplains, wetlands, sole source aquifers, Marine Sanctuaries, National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, National Monuments, etc. -- No resources present Please explain how you came to this determination. : Proposed Action is expected to have no adverse effect because project area is previously developed. The project is replacing obsolete equipment and infrastructure with in-kind replacements.

No agricultural lands, designated wilderness study area, wild and scenic rivers, sole source aquifers, marine sanctuaries, national wildlife refuges, national parks, or national monuments are located in the project area.

Project lies in Flood Zone "X".

Coastal Zone consistency to be determined.

Will the Proposed Action result in the potential violation of a Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed to protect the environment? -- No Please summarize determination. : The Proposed Action will not result in the potential violation of a Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed to protect the environment.

Will the Proposed Action have an effect on the quality of the human environment that is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity, likely to be highly uncertain, or likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks? -- No Required: Please explain. : The Proposed Action will not have an effect on the quality of the human environment that is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity, likely to be highly uncertain, or likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks. The project area is previously developed land and is updating existing infrastructure that is at end of life.

Will the Proposed Action employ new or unproven technology that is likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks, where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly uncertain, or where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity? -- No

Page 6 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Required: Please explain.: No new or unproven technology that is likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks, where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly uncertain, or where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity will be utilized in this project.

Will the Proposed Action establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : The proposed action will not establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects.

Is the Proposed Action significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action? -- No Required: Please summarize determination.: Proposed Action is not significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action.

Will the Proposed Action have the potential to result in the significant degradation of existing poor environmental conditions? Will the Proposed Action initiate a potentially significant environmentally degrading influence, activity, or effect in areas not already significantly modified from their natural condition? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : Proposed action will not result in stress or degradation of the quality of work space, communities, public health and the natural environment.

Environmental degradation may be caused by actions that include, but are not limited to: discharge of water or wastewater; fill material placed in wetland or stream; spread of invasive species;

contamination of soil/water; and material spills.

Is the Proposed Action related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : The Proposed Action is not related to other actions.

Are there any other requirements for the protection of the environment that need to be considered for this proposed action? -- No

HHistoric Preservation & Cultural Resources Is the Proposed Action a piece of a larger action or connected to another action? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : This is the final phase of a multi-phase development project at Base Cleveland Harbor. This work was not covered under the environmental review for previous phases.

Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety? Areas to consider include, but are not limited to: environmental justice considerations; air quality; noise impacts; hazardous wastes and/or contamination; wastewater; potable water; and changes in modes or safety of transportation. -- No Explain how the proposed action would not have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety. : The project area takes place on previously developed land and is fully contained within the Base Cleveland boundaries.

Page 7 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Would the proposed action place a disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effect on minority populations and low-income populations? -- No Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on species or habitats protected by the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, or Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act? -- No Provide a conclusion under which statute the determination was made (e.g., no effect, NLAA, LAA, for ESA, etc.), how the determination was made, why it is considered significant, and copies of any consultation (informal and/or formal). : The Proposed Action is replacing in kind on previously developed land.

Attachments: FWS, NMFS, or Wildlife Agency Consultation: Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf (Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf, 218.08kB) MA Verification Letter_ Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) Consultation and 4(d) Rule Consiste 12DEC22.pdf (MA Verification Letter_ Northern Long-Eared Bat (NLEB) Consultation and 4(d) Rule Consiste 12DEC22.pdf, 248.47kB) What is your Endangered Species Act (ESA) finding and determination? -- May affect, not likely to adversely affect Explain how the determination was made, why it is considered NOT significant, and copies of any consultation (informal and/or formal). : The Proposed Action is occurring on land that is previously developed. Destruction of critical habitats for the affected species is not expected.

Attachments: ESA consultation : Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf (Species List_ Ohio Ecological Services Field Office 12DEC22.pdf, 218.08kB) ** This question should be carefully checked by the Environmental Reviewer.

What is your Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) finding and determination? -- No effect or negligible effect Explain how the determination was made (e.g., are species present in the area but your proposed action will have no effect or negligible effects? why?). Although not required, recommend attaching any consultation or correspondence conducted.: No MMPA protected species expected in the project area.

Attachments: MMPA consultation: Biological Assessment 2022-12-12.pdf (Biological Assessment 2022-12-12.pdf, 483.66kB) Would the proposed action adversely affect a species protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act or Migratory Bird Treaty Act or habitat for such species? -- No Explain how the determination was made (e.g., are species present in the area but your proposed action will have no adverse effect or no significant effect? why?). Although not required, recommend attaching any consultation or correspondence conducted.: Proposed Action is expected to have no adverse effect because project area is previously developed. The project is replacing obsolete equipment and infrastructure with in-kind replacements.

Page 8 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Attachments: BGEPA MBTA consultation: (No files uploaded yet.)

What is your Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (essential fish habitat) finding and determination? -- No effect Attachments: EFH consultation: (No files uploaded yet.)

Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on an environmentally sensitive area?

Examples include, but are not limited to: areas having special designation or recognition such as prime or unique agricultural lands, coastal zones, designated wilderness study areas, wild and scenic rivers, 100-year floodplains, wetlands, sole source aquifers, Marine Sanctuaries, National Wildlife Refuges, National Parks, National Monuments, etc. -- No resources present Please explain how you came to this determination. : Proposed Action is expected to have no adverse effect because project area is previously developed. The project is replacing obsolete equipment and infrastructure with in-kind replacements.

No agricultural lands, designated wilderness study area, wild and scenic rivers, sole source aquifers, marine sanctuaries, national wildlife refuges, national parks, or national monuments are located in the project area.

Project lies in Flood Zone "X".

Coastal Zone consistency to be determined.

Will the Proposed Action result in the potential violation of a Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed to protect the environment? -- No Please summarize determination. : The Proposed Action will not result in the potential violation of a Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed to protect the environment.

Will the Proposed Action have an effect on the quality of the human environment that is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity, likely to be highly uncertain, or likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks? -- No Required: Please explain. : The Proposed Action will not have an effect on the quality of the human environment that is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity, likely to be highly uncertain, or likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks. The project area is previously developed land and is updating existing infrastructure that is at end of life.

Will the Proposed Action employ new or unproven technology that is likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks, where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly uncertain, or where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity? -- No Required: Please explain.: No new or unproven technology that is likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks, where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly uncertain, or where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity will be utilized in this project.

Page 9 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Will the Proposed Action establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : The proposed action will not establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects.

Is the Proposed Action significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action? -- No Required: Please summarize determination.: Proposed Action is not significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action.

Will the Proposed Action have the potential to result in the significant degradation of existing poor environmental conditions? Will the Proposed Action initiate a potentially significant environmentally degrading influence, activity, or effect in areas not already significantly modified from their natural condition? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : Proposed action will not result in stress or degradation of the quality of work space, communities, public health and the natural environment.

Environmental degradation may be caused by actions that include, but are not limited to: discharge of water or wastewater; fill material placed in wetland or stream; spread of invasive species;

contamination of soil/water; and material spills.

Is the Proposed Action related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts? -- No Please explain how you came to this determination. : The Proposed Action is not related to other actions.

Are there any other requirements for the protection of the environment that need to be considered for this proposed action? -- No Will the proposed action have a potentially significant effect on a district, highway, structure, or object that is listed, or eligible for listing, on the National Register of Historic Places, a historic or cultural resource, traditional or sacred site, or result in the destruction of a significant scientific, cultural, or historic resource? -- No resources present Please explain how you came to this determination. : No listed resources are in the project area.

Page 10 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

DDHS Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) for Categorically Excluded Actions under NEPA

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this Record of Environmental Consideration (REC) is to provide a record that the potential for impacts to the quality of the human environment has been considered in the decision to implement the Proposed Action described below, in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and DHS Directive 023-01 and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01 on implementation of NEPA. DHS integrates the NEPA process with review and compliance requirements under other Federal laws, regulations, Executive Orders, and other requirements for the stewardship and protection of the human environment, as reflected in Section II (8) of this REC. Signature of the DHS Proponent on this REC demonstrates that they have considered the potential for impacts to the human environment in their decision to implement the Proposed Action as required by NEPA, and are committing to any conditions listed in Section IV of this REC that may be required for implementation of the project. When completed, the form is to be signed by the Preparer, the Environmental Approver, and the Action Proponent. The completed REC becomes a part of the administrative record for the Proposed Action.

SECTION I - Description of Proposed Action

1. Name of Component Authorizing the Proposed Action:

U.S. Coast Guard USCG Facilities Design & Construction Center - Norfolk Va

2. Title of Proposed Action:

Rehabilitate Waterfront, Station Cleveland Harbor

3. Identifying Number of Proposed Action:

DSS-USCG-2022-15056

4. Estimated Start Date and Useful Life of Proposed Action:

Start Date: 03/01/2023 - End Date: 3/1/2025

5. Location of Proposed Action:

Site Specific: 1055 E 9th St, Cleveland, Ohio, 44144

6. Description of Proposed Action:

This project is the final phase of a multi-phase development at Base Cleveland Harbor. The waterfront work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of approximately 750 feet of steel sheet pile bulkhead with associated tieback and fender systems, construction of a new concrete cap at the MORRO BAY and NEAH BAY moorings as well as adjacent to the southern property line, upgrade existing floating dock to include worn hardware and components and installation of new electrical shore ties and convenience outlets, upgrade of the existing waterfront light fixtures to illuminate both the landside and waterside operations, installation of new conduits and RB-S shore ties, and dredging to support new pile installation. The shore side work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of the parking barriers and protective fence rail at the bulkhead;

repair and repaving of parking areas disturbed by construction, replacement and slope correction of the existing sanitary sewer lines and shore ties that serve the NEAH BAY and MORRO BAY, relocation of waterfront and vessel storage building electrical service to the base primary electrical distribution system, and demolition of the electrical distribution building. The fuel farm will be removed and a new fuel farm will be constructed with the same size tanks.

SECTION II - Analysis of Extraordinary Circumstances

7. Proposed Action is not a piece of a larger action Proposed Action is a piece of a larger action

Remarks:

Page 11 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

8. For A through K, check the appropriate box and provide an explanation when appropriate. Include a summary of any coordination or consultation that occurred with a resource or regulatory agency, if relevant.

Yes No A. Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety?

Remarks:

Yes No B. Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on species or habitats protected by the Endangered Species Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, or Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act?

Remarks:

Yes No C. Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on a district, highway, structure, or object that is listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)?

Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on a historic or cultural resource, traditionalor sacred site, or result in the destruction of a significant scientific, cultural, or historic resource?

Remarks:

Yes No D. Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on an environmentally sensitive area?

Remarks:

Yes No E. Will the Proposed Action result in the potential violation of a Federal, State, or local law or requirement imposed to protect the environment?

Remarks:

Yes No F. Will the Proposed Action have an effect on the quality of the human environment that is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity, likely to be highly uncertain, or likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks?

Remarks:

Yes No G. Will the Proposed Action employ new or unproven technology that is likely to involve unique or unknown environmental risks, where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly uncertain, or where the effect on the human environment is likely to be highly controversial in terms of scientific validity?

Remarks:

Yes No H. Will the Proposed Action establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects?

Remarks:

Yes No I. Is the Proposed Action significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action?

Remarks:

Yes No J. Does the Proposed Action have the potential to result in significant degradation of existing poor environmental conditions? Will the Proposed Action initiate a potentially significant environmentally degrading influence, activity, or effect in areas not significantly modified from their natural condition?

Remarks:

Page 12 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Yes No K. Is the Proposed Action related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts?

Remarks:

SECTION III - Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) Determination

9. This action is not expected to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts as described in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). The proposed action has been thoroughly reviewed by the U.S. Coast Guard and it has been determined, by the undersigned, that this action is categorically excluded under current DHS CATEX LL14*,L21*,L29 from further environmental documentation, in accordance with Section 3 of DHS Directive 023-01, Environmental Planning Program since implementation of this action:

I. Clearly fits within one or more of the categories of excludable actions listed in Appendix A of DHS Instruction 023-01-001-01;

II. Is not a piece of a larger action which has been segmented into smaller parts in order to avoid a more extensive evaluation of the potential for significant environmental impacts;

III. Does not involve any extraordinary circumstances, as defined in DHS Instruction 023-01-001-01, Section V(B)(2), that would create the potential for a normally excluded action to have a significant environmental effect.

SECTION IV - Conditions

Page 13 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

10. The following conditions are required to implement the Proposed Action:

If active bird nests (e.g. nests containing eggs or chicks) are observed in the project area, USCG Environmental Program Manager shall be contacted and the location of the nests may need to be avoided.

All microwave communication equipment will be hung greater than the minimum safe distance from ground level and out of reach from the public. All radio frequency (RF) transmitting/radiating equipment shall comply with health and safety standards and all RF hazards shall be marked accordingly.

This review addresses NEPA and other EPHP requirements as described in DHS Directive 023-01 Rev. 01 and Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Rev. 01. This review may identify the need for additional federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc. required for the Proposed Action. However, this review may not satisfy those requirements and the Proponent is responsible for ensuring all other appropriate federal, state, and/or local permits, approval, etc. have been obtained.

Greenhouse gas emissions and energy reduction/conservation will be given appropriate consideration in equipment and material selection.

In an event of a spill of petroleum, oils, or lubricants, measures to contain and clean up the spill will follow the procedures outlines in the USCG Spill Response Plan. Drip pans will be placed under all equipment and vehicles remaining onsite overnight or for an extended time period.

All contractors and onsite personnel shall comply with and strictly adhere to applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards and common-sense practices, including OSHAs Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, 29 C.F.R. 1926, and General Industry, 29 C.F.R. 1910. Additionally, the contractor shall also abide to any applicable State and local safety/health/sanitation/construction codes and standards. If OSHA regulations conflict with other State or local standards, the more stringent standard will govern.

All applicable permits, permissions, and authorizations from applicable landowners and Federal, state, and local regulatory authorities shall be obtained prior to initiating the Proposed Action.

All used oil will be recycled if practicable. All non-recyclable hazardous and regulated materials and wastes will be collected, characterized, labeled, stored, transported, and disposed of in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, including proper waste manifesting procedures.

Any change to the Proposed Action that may cause a physical interaction with the human environment will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other EPHP requirements before the action can proceed.

Work zones shall be clearly demarcated. Danger or caution signs will be posted as applicable in accordance with OSHA and industry standards.

Any change to the Proposed Action that may cause a physical interaction with the human environment will require re-evaluation for compliance with NEPA and other EP&HP requirements before the action can proceed.

Page 14 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

This review addresses NEPA and other EP&HP requirements as described in DHS Directive 023-01. This review may identify the need for additional federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc. required for the Proposed Action. However, this review may not satisfy those requirements and the Proponent is responsible for ensuring that all other appropriate federal, state, and/or local permits, approvals, etc. have been obtained.

SECTION V - Signatures

11a. Preparer of this REC Name:

Jessica Parks

Digitally signed by Jessica Parks at 12/13/2022

8:10 AM

Jessica Parks

Date:

12/13/2022

11b. Environmental Approver of this REC Name:

Richard Hylton (Level II)

Digitally signed by Richard Hylton (Level II) at

03/09/2023 2:38 PM

Richard Hylton (Level II)

Date:

03/09/2023

11c. Action Proponent Name:

John Berry

Digitally signed by John Berry at 03/13/2023

1:02 PM

John Berry

Date:

03/13/2023

Page 15 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Preview of Attachments The following pages will display this project's attachments that are of these file types:

.jpg /.jpeg

.png

.gif

.txt

.pdf

The attachments of compatible file types from this project are:

Flood Map.pdf Wetlands Map.pdf Coastal Zone Consult (USCG STA Cleveland Coastal Zone Consistency Consult (Printed).pdf) SHPO Consult (SHPO Consult Package Cleveland (Print).pdf) OHSHPO Consult Concurrence Response (2023CUY56946_1096674_ReviewLetter_NE.PDF)

Note:

All project attachments can be downloaded at the 'File Upload/Manage Attachments' page.

Page 16 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Rehabilitate Waterfront, Station Cleveland Harbor

Page 16 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 17 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 17 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Wetlands Map - Clev

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Servi wetlands_team@fws.gov

Wetlands

Estuarine and Marine Deepwater

Estuarine and Marine Wetland

Freshwater Emergent Wetland

Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland

Freshwater Pond

Lake

Other

Riverine

December 12, 2022

0 0.085 0.170.0425 mi

0 0.1 0.20.05 km

1:5,122

This map is for gen Service is not resp base data shown o be used in accorda Wetlands Mapper

Page 18 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 18 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Commanding Officer United States Coast Guard Facilities Design and Construction Center

5505 Robin Hood Road, Suite K Norfolk, VA 23513-2431 Phone: 757-852-3410

11000 Steve Holland Federal Consistency Coordinator Ohio Coastal Management Program 105 West Shoreline Drive Sandusky, Ohio 44870

Dear Mr. Holland:

Please find enclosed a Federal Consistency review for the Rehabilitate Waterfront Cleveland Harbor project at the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Station Cleveland Harbor, Cleveland, Ohio at 1055 E 9th Street, Cleveland, OH 44052. The proposed scope of work includes the replacement an existing sheet pile bulkhead, mooring and fendering systems for two USCG vessels, upgraded shore tie systems, exterior lighting, and a marina fueling system (fuel tanks, distribution, and dispensers). Two sheds (Cutter Storage and Electric Transformer) located upland will be demolished that are no longer needed. Additionally, the existing parking areas will be repaved and the sanitary sewer lines will be replaced/repaired as required. Enclosure (1) provides a conceptual site plan, which provides a visual aspect of the overall project.

We have reviewed Ohio’s coastal zone enforceable policies as they relate to this project and concluded/determined that the project will not cause coastal effects. Enclosure (2) provides the basis of our “negative determination” and the USCG requests your written concurrence with our consistency determination. Lastly, enclosure (3) provides a completed Ohio Consistency Certification Statement.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. If further information is required, please contact Mr.

Richard Hylton, at (757) 852 – 3404 or by e-mail at rick.d.hylton@uscg.mil.

Sincerely, J. D. BERRY, P.E.

Captain, U. S. Coast Guard Commanding Officer

Enclosures: (1) Conceptual Site Plan

(2) Basis of Determination

(3) Ohio Consistency Certification Statement

Digitally signed by

BERRY.JOHN.1013996373

Date: 2023.01.20 09:24:39 -05'00'

Page 19 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 19 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Enclosure (1) Conceptual Site Plan

Page 20 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 20 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

U

SC

G S

TA

C

LE

VE

LA

N

D H

A R

B O

R

E

TH

S

TR

EE

T

C

LE

VE

LA

N D

, O H

N G

S

YS

TE

M

W

A L

SI

ZE

A

N D

LO

C

A

TI

O N

C O

A

ST

G U

A R

D E

XC

H

A N

G E

LO

A

D

IN

G D

O C

K S

H A

LL

R

EM

A

IN

O

PE

N

D U

R

IN

G C

O N

ST

R

U C

TI

O

N A

N D

D

EM

O

LI

TI

O

N

C O

N C

R

ET

E

PA

VE

M

EN

T

N

EW

F

LO

A

TI

N G

PI

ER

N

O

TI

O N

A L

B R

EA

ST

IN

G

D O

LP

H

IN

O

R

FE

N D

ER

P

IL

E

(P

ER

D O

R

6-

FT

W

ID

TH 6-

FT

W

ID

TH

10-FT W

IDTH

C O

N

ST

R U

C T

N

EW

B U

LK

H

EA

D

RPUID 15449

RPU

ID

SA

FE

TY

B

UF

FE

R

SA

FE

TY

B

UF

FE

R

VI

SI

TO

R

S B

ER

TH

SAFETY BUFFER

D O

U B

LE

B

O

LL

A R

D (T

YP

B O

LL

A

R D

(T

YP

C

LE

A T

(T

YP

NN

US

CG

S

TA

TI

O

N

CL

EV

EL

AN

D

HA

RB

O R

- C O

NC

EP

TU

AL

S

IT

E

PL

AN

6, 7, Page 21 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 21 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Enclosure (2) Basis of Determination

Page 22 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 22 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

BASIS OF DETERMINATION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project replaces, repairs, upgrades many existing systems/components at USCG Base Cleveland Harbor. This station provides harbor for and supports the MOORO BAY and NEAH BAY vessels as well as other smaller in-water assets. The waterfront work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of approximately 750 feet of steel sheet pile bulkhead and associated concrete cap with associated tieback and fender systems, replacement of existing floating docks to include worn hardware and components and replacement of new shore ties (water, sewage, electric, communications), upgrades of the existing waterfront light fixtures to illuminate both the landside and waterside operations, and installation of new conduits and small boat shore ties.

The shore side work includes, but is not limited to; replacement of the parking barriers and protective fence rail at the bulkhead; repair and repaving of parking areas disturbed by construction, replacement and slope correction of the existing sanitary sewer lines and shore ties that serve the NEAH BAY and MORRO BAY, the demolition of waterfront and vessel storage building electrical service to the base primary electrical distribution system, and demolition of the electrical distribution building. The existing marina fueling system will be removed, and a new fuel system will be installed with the same capacity and that meets all modern building codes and regulations with regard to secondary containment, leak detection, and overfill protection.

Project Site Location 1055 E 9th Street

Cleveland, OH 44052

Page 23 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 23 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

USCG STA Cleveland Harbor

Existing Site Conditions

Typical Existing Floating Dock

West Side of USCG STA Cleveland Harbor

Page 24 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 24 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Existing Parking Lot (To be Repaved) and Bulkhead

Existing Marina Fuel System

Page 25 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 25 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Existing Bldgs. To be Demolished

Page 26 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 26 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Review of Enforceable Policies of Ohio’s Coastal Management Program

1. Issue Area: Coastal Erosion and Flooding

The proposed project replaces approximately 750 linear ft. of an existing sheet pile wall bulkhead. It will be installed directly outboard of the existing failing bulkhead as close as practicable. Additionally, existing floating piers and fendering/mooring will be replaced. The proposed project does not include any dredging and waste sediments will not be generated. The project does include some earthwork and backfill for the area between the existing and new bulkheads and in order to provide adequate bulkhead tiebacks. USCG will employ appropriate erosion controls to prevent excavated soils from entering the adjacent surface waters. All required Ohio stormwater construction erosion and stormwater control permits will be obtained and complied with. The proposed project will not have an effect on shore erosion, sedimentation, floodplain management, and flood protection. The proposed project is consistent with the management objectives of this issue area.

2. Issue Area: Water Quality

The proposed project is not expected to have any positive or negative water quality effects. The proposed project is not expected to have any point source pollution. No hazardous materials or petroleum products are expected to be discharged at the project location. All materials brought on site shall be limited to amount needed for the execution of the work; no storage of excess materials is permitted. All materials containing hazardous substances shall be accompanied by the appropriate MSDS sheet; the contractor is bound by contract to follow all federal, state, and local regulations for use, storage, and disposal of materials.

The proposed project is not expected to have any non-point source pollution. Approximately 1.5 acres of land disturbance, most of which represents the parking lot to be repaved, will be disturbed during this proposed project. The USCG will obtain and comply with all permit conditions of Ohio land disturbance and Storm Water requirements from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency. Based on field conditions, appropriate erosion and sedimentation controls will be employed to prevent land-disturbed soils from entering the adjacent surface waters.

The proposed project will not have an effect on potable water, public water supplies, surface water, or ground water. The proposed project will not have a negative effect on water quality, and is therefore consistent with the management objectives of this issue area.

3. Issue Area: Ecologically Sensitive Resources

This site is located in a fully developed area defined by existing bulkheads, paved parking, existing buildings, roads, heavy development, etc. The USCG analyzed federal and state listed threatened and endangered species in the area and evaluated the potential effects of the proposed project on threatened and endangered species. Based on the evaluation, the USCG does not expect impacts to federal or state listed species. There are no Federal wildlife refuges, wilderness areas, natural areas, natural features, wetlands, or critical habitat within the vicinity of the proposed project. The in-water work is subject to state and federal permitting, and all permit

Page 27 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 27 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM conditions will be followed to include any time of year restrictions and other precautions necessary to protect fish habitat and in-water natural resources. The upland land is fully developed and for the most part is paved or covered by buildings. Best management practices will be utilized to reduce sedimentation from soil erosion. Due to the project location and on-site habitat, bald eagles and piping plovers are not expected to be encountered within the project area, and no impacts to this species are expected.

The USCG concludes that the proposed project will have no effect on federal and state listed threatened or endangered species, their habitats, or proposed or designated critical habitat. The proposed project will not have an effect on ecologically sensitive resources, and is therefore consistent with the management objectives of this issue area.

4. Issue Area: Ports and Shore Area Development

The proposed project will have minimal effects on submerged lands. In water structures and supporting components will be replaced in kind in the same locations and at the same USCG Station in which the service has operated for decades. This work will have no effect on public trust rights. The proposed project will allow for the continued use of the facility supporting USCG missions of maritime safety and security which in turn supports port safety and development. The proposed project will not have a negative effect on port and shore area development, and is therefore consistent with the management objectives of this issue area.

Replacement structures of the USCG dock facilities at Station Cleveland will actually reduce impacts to surrounding public docks, as upgrades will enhance USCG operations and benefit the general public and sounding Port areas.

5. Issue Area: Recreation and Cultural Resources

The proposed project will not have a negative effect on recreational resources in the area. The proposed project will allow for the continued use of the facility supporting USCG missions of maritime safety and security which in turn supports public safety of maritime recreation. The proposed project will not limit public access to beaches and lakeshore recreation. The proposed project will not have a negative effect on fishing and hunting recreational resources.

The USCG has determined that the proposed project represents an undertaking under 36 CFR

800.3. As a result of our evaluation of the area of potential effects, no historic properties were identified. The USCG intends to consult with the Ohio State Historic Preservation Office under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, in order to obtain their concurrence with this determination.

The proposed project will not have a negative effect on recreational and cultural resources and is therefore consistent with the management objectives of this issue area.

6. Issue Area: Fish and Wildlife Management

The proposed project is not expected to have a negative impact on fisheries and wildlife management resources. The proposed project is not expected to have a negative impact to fish

Page 28 of 51 Printed On 3/13/2023 2:14:39 PM

Page 28 of 51 Printed On…