Attachment 6 NEPA_HogbackRestorationLTFMay2021 signed.pdf

For Actions Not Requiring a Decision Memo

May 5, 2021 Project: Hogback Lookout Restoration

Hogback Lookout, located in section 17, T. 35 N., R. 1 W., is no longer suitable for human habitation. This is primarily due to:

• deferred maintenance including a restroom that no longer works and interior water damage from a roof leak (see photo 4), and

• recent significant vandalism of the cab windows allowing wildlife to enter and take up residence (see photos 1 and 2).

This letter to the project file documents my decision to allow restoration of the lookout so that people can once again occupy it. Work will include cab interior cleanup, flooring and ceiling replacement work, replacement of broken windows, replacement of doors and hardware, removal of defunct plumbing systems, electrical panel and breaker upgrades, and interior painting. A portable toilet will be installed on an existing concrete slab in vicinity of lookout (see photo 5) and crushed rock placed around the access way to the toilet. The old legacy pit toilet void is exposed and a hazard so it will be backfilled with crushed rock. To deter future vandalization, a lockable gate will be installed on the closed portion of Forest Road 35N93 leading to lookout (see map 1).

The following resource protection measure will be implemented as part of the project:

• Should inadvertent effects to or unanticipated discoveries of human remains be made on Region 5 lands, the County Coroner [California Health and Safety Code 7050.5(b)] shall be notified immediately. If the remains are determined to be Native American or if Native American (Indian) cultural items pursuant to NAGPRA are uncovered, the provisions of NAGPRA and its regulations at 43 CFR 10 and ARPA at 43 CFR 7 shall be followed on federal lands [Programmatic Agreement Stipulation

7.9 (a)].

I have determined that this action fits within the following category: 36 CFR 220.6(d)(3) “Repair and maintenance1 of administrative sites.” This is a category of action for which a project or case file and decision memo are not required.

1 The actions proposed in this project would meet the definition described by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board and the Forest Service: “Maintenance: The act of keeping fixed assets in acceptable condition. It includes preventive maintenance, normal repairs, replacement of parts and structural components, and other activities needed to preserve a fixed asset so that it continues to provide acceptable service and achieves its expected life. Maintenance includes work needed to meet laws, regulations, codes, and other legal direction as long as the original intent or purpose of the fixed asset is not changed. Maintenance excludes activities aimed at expanding the capacity of an asset or otherwise upgrading it to serve needs different from, or significantly greater than those originally intended.”

NEPA DOCUMENTATION

The proposed action was reviewed by the appropriate Forest resource specialists and included consideration of the potential for effects on the resources specified at 36 CFR 220.6(b). Based on this review, I find there are no extraordinary circumstances that might give rise to significant environmental effects requiring further analysis and documentation in an EA or an EIS.

Hogback Lookout was previously determined to be ineligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. This determination is documented in letter from State Historic Preservation Officer to the Forest Service (Pacific Southwest Region) dated December 1, 2003. A “Previous Adequate Survey and Screened Undertaking” form (NRM # R2021051400045) has been completed for the project and it is anticipated that there will be no effect to historic properties from the activities proposed as part of this project.

I also find that the proposed action complies with the requirements of other applicable laws, regulations, and policies including the Shasta-Trinity National Forests Land and Resource Management Plan, the Endangered Species Act (no effect determination by biologists) and the National Historic Preservation Act (meets the terms of the R5 Programmatic Agreement).

I have concluded that the proposed action can be categorically excluded from documentation in an EIS or EA. This project is not subject to legal notice and opportunity to comment procedures (36 CFR 218.23), and the pre-decisional objection process2. Implementation may begin immediately.

for SARA E. ACRIDGE District Ranger

Attachment:

1. Project Photos and Map

2 The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-76; January 17, 2014) directs that the 1992 and 2012 legislation establishing the 36 CFR 215 (post-decisional appeals) and 36 CFR 218 (pre-decisional objections) processes shall not apply to any project or activity implementing a land and resource management plan that is categorically excluded under NEPA. The Agricultural Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-79; February 7, 2014) repealed the Appeals Reform Act (P.L. 102-381) and directs that the pre-decisional objection process established in the Consolidated Appropriation Act of 2012 shall not apply to categorically excluded projects or activities.

ATTACHMENT 1 – PROJECT PHOTOS AND MAP

Photos 1 & 2. Window vandalized allowing wildlife to enter and live in the lookout cab.

Photo 3. Vandalism of some of the other cab windows.

Photo 4. Some of the deferred maintenance.

Photo 5. Existing concrete slab which will be used to install portable restroom on.

Map 1. Approximate location of locked gate installation.