Attachment D - Portage Housing NEPA CATEX.pdf

DHS 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 Civil Engineering Unit – Cleveland Oh

2. Title of Proposed Action:

STA Portage MI Housing

3. Identifying Number of Proposed Action:

DSS-USCG-2021-12096

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

Start Date: 03/03/2025 - End Date: 3/2/2026

5. Location of Proposed Action:

Site Specific: 22911 Chipewa Tr, Osceola Twp, Michigan, 49930

6. Description of Proposed Action:

This Planning Proposal defines the requirements, scope and estimated cost of the housing necessary to support the Coast Guard at Station Portage in Dollar Bay, MI. The project will provide sufficient, suitable accompanied personnel housing by constructing (7) new 3 or 4 bedroom units on the site of (6) current housing units adjacent to the existing CG Station Building. The existing six substandard units will be demolished.

SECTION II - Analysis of Extraordinary Circumstances

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

Remarks:

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.

o Yes ý No

A. Will the Proposed Action have a potentially significant effect on public health or safety?

Remarks:

Record of Environmental Consideration (Unclassified)

Page 1 of 4 Printed On 6/25/2021 12:06:38 PM o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý No

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

Remarks:

o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý No

H. Will the Proposed Action establish a precedent for future actions that have significant effects?

Remarks:

o Yes ý No

I. Is the Proposed Action significantly greater in scope or size than normally experienced for its particular category of action?

Remarks:

o Yes ý 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:

o Yes ý No

K. Is the Proposed Action related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts?

Remarks:

SECTION III - Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) Determination

Page 2 of 4 Printed On 6/25/2021 12:06:38 PM

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 E2* 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 CATEXs listed in Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 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 Section 5(B)(2) of DHS Instruction Manual 023-01-001-01, Revision 01, that would preclude the application of a CATEX due to the potential for significant environmental impacts.

SECTION IV - Conditions

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

ýAny 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.

ýThis 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:

Andrew Kaminski

Digitally signed by Andrew Kaminski at

06/11/2021 11:13 AM

Andrew Kaminski

Date:

06/11/2021

11b. Environmental Approver of this REC

Name:

Charlie Maricic (Level I)

Digitally signed by Charlie Maricic (Level I) at

06/23/2021 3:03 PM

Charlie Maricic (Level I)

Date:

06/23/2021

11c. Action Proponent

Page 3 of 4 Printed On 6/25/2021 12:06:38 PM

Name:

Neal Armstrong

Digitally signed by Neal Armstrong at

06/25/2021 12:06 PM

Neal Armstrong

Date:

06/25/2021

Page 4 of 4 Printed On 6/25/2021 12:06:38 PM

ATTACHMENT 7