Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA)_CE_Sch C_Hwy-281.pdf

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM

LANDSLIDE CORRECTION PROJECT

AC-803544 – ER-9999(312)

SITE ER-HWY-278 AT PR-157 KM. 0.4

SITE ER-HWY-281 AT PR-157 KM. 1.2

CIALES, PUERTO RICO

APRIL 2020

EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM-LANDSLIDE CORRECTION PROJECT

Sites 278 & 281 at PR-157, kms. 0.4 and 1.2 Ciales (AC- 803544 / ER-9999(312)) April 2020

2 | P a g e

Table of Content

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

III. PURPOSE AND NEED

IV. PLANNING CONSISTENCY

V. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EVALUATED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT:

Appendix A: Proposed Project Figures and Maps

Appendix B: Detailed Damage Inspection Reports

Appendix C: Proposed Project Plans

Appendix D: USFWLS Coordination

Appendix E: SHPO Coordination

Appendix F: Categorical Exclusion Check List

3 | P a g e

PUERTO RICO HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

State Project No. AC-803544 Federal Project No. ER-9999(312)-

Project Name Emergency Relief Program for Landslide Route No. PR-157

From Milepost Site 278 at Km. 0.4 Site 281 at Km. 1.2 To Milepost Site 278 at Km. 0.4

Site 281 at Km. 1.2 Municipality (ies) Ciales Length Site 278 – 74.49 meters

Site 281 – 56.06 meters

ROW Cost TO BE DETERMINED Construction Cost Site 278 - $254,898.65 Site 281 - $321,291.57 Total Cost- $576, 190.22

PROPOSED FACILITY

ROW Width 15.0 meters

No. Lanes & Width

One lane of variable width (minimum 2.49 meters) in each direction

Shoulder Width N/A Median N/A

Overall Roadway Width Varies from 5.24 to 6.10 meters

EXISTING FACILITY

ROW Width 15.0 meters

No. Lanes & Width

One lane of variable width (minimum 2.49 meters) in each direction

Shoulder Width N/A Median N/A

Overall Roadway Width Varies from 5.24 to

6.10 meters

4 | P a g e

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

(included project scope and location and refer to the attached project location map)

The proposed Emergency Relief Program for Landslide project takes place at the kilometers 0.4 and 1.2 of the PR-157 in the Municipality of Ciales. (See in Appendix A Figures 1 and 2: Location Maps and Figures 3 and 4:

Proposed Project Aerial Photos). PR-157 is a secondary road that goes from the intersection with road PR-149 in the Municipality of Ciales to the intersection with road PR-6615 in the Municipality of Orocovis (West to East). The existing roadway section of PR-157 consists of one lane of variable width (from 2.49 to 3.05 meters) in each direction for a total roadway typical section of 6.10 meters. See Figures 5 and 6 in Appendix A, PR-157 Typical Sections. The Right of Way of the PR-157 is 15.0 meters.

Road damages are due to the impacts associated with Hurricanes Irma (September 6, 2017) and María (September 20, 2017). Detailed Damage Inspection Reports (DDIR) were prepared for each site and approved by the FHWA (refers to Appendix B). The proposed works for each site is summarized below.

Location #1 (ER-HWY-Site 278 at Km. 0.4) - A landslide with an approximate length of 30 meters, at the south side of highway PR-157 at km 0.4 was observed. The project consists in the reconstruction of the landslide by using the alternative of Gravity Concrete Retaining Wall and the construction of new curbs at both sides of the road. The project length is 75.00 meters. The reconstruction of road will occur within the existing right-of-way.

No impact on right of way acquisition is expected.

Location #2 (ER-HWY-Site 281 at Km. 1.2) - A landslide with an approximate length of 20 meters, at the south side of highway PR-157 at km 1.2 was observed. The project consists in the reconstruction of the landslide by using the alternative of a Reinforced Soil Slope system. This area does not have a storm drainage system. As part of the stabilization of the affected land, the construction of a type-F curb is proposed to redirect the runoff to the low point of the area. This curb will have an approximate length of 55 meters. The survey study and the field visit to the area did not show affected utilities. For the construction of the proposed project at this site a temporary easement of 55.88 square meters at the north and 232.69 square meters at the south of the road is required. The reconstruction of road PR-157 at kilometer 1.2 will occur within the existing right-of-way. No impact on right of way acquisition is expected.

The proposed project also includes the following works:

1. Pavement rehabilitation (cold milling)

2. Replacement of the affected guardrails

3. Installation of new guardrails and delineators

4. Installation of new pavement markings (yellow and white)

5. Construction of new or damaged curbs

6. Other miscellaneous works

These emergency relief works were determined by engineering evaluations based on field inspections and current PRHTA standards (PRHTA plans and specifications, MUTCD 2009, Roadside Design Guide 2011, and others).

5 | P a g e

III. PURPOSE AND NEED

On September 20, 2017, Puerto Rico was hit by the winds and rains of a catastrophic category 5 hurricane called María. María, left the island of Puerto Rico devastated, causing great damages in the highways. Multiple landslides have affected roads causing roadblocks and ground instabilities. Keeping roads and bridges in good condition is critical to the safety of the nation’s transportation system including Puerto Rico. PR-157 was severely affected by the hurricane.

Considering the effects of this major nature phenomenon and the consequences in the conditions and safety of the Puerto Rico’s highways, the Puerto Rico and Transportation Authority (PRHTA) has been working in their Emergency Relief Program for Landslide since the middle of last year. The program consists of the evaluation and reconstruction of landslides; i.e., slope instability, washouts and rock fall on several highway segments due to the impacts associated with Hurricanes Irma and María. Those highway segments are located within the Puerto Rico’s Federal Aid Highway System, and other highways and roads under the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) jurisdiction.

A brief description of damages occurred in each site is included below.

Location #1 (ER-HWY-Site 278 at Km. 0.4) -The landslide at site ER-HWY-278 was prompted by the heavy rains associated with Hurricanes Irma and Maria. The wedge of earth-rock fill materials at the side of the roadway was washed and scoured while sliding along a shallow contact with a steep and long slope. A landslide, on the south side of highway PR-157 was observed. The road was affected in an approximate length of 30 meters.

Location #2 (ER-HWY-Site 281 at Km. 1.2) - The landslide at site ER-HWY-281 was prompted by the heavy rains associated with Hurricanes Irma and Maria. The left bank of the Toro Negro River was undermined and eroded while sloughing and crumbling induced by intense flow and currents.

The scope of work is mainly focused on reconstructing the landslides along PR-157 (at Km. 0.4 and 1.2). In addition, Safety devices and drainage facilities affected by the events will be replaced. In order to restore PR- 157 in a manner that substantially conforms to the preexisting design, function, and location as the original.

Copy of the Proposed Project Plans are included in Appendix C.

6 | P a g e

IV. PLANNING CONSISTENCY

Estimated Construction Time: Site 278 – 135 days Site 281 – 195 days

Estimated Construction Cost: Site 278 - $254,898.65 Site 281 - $321,291.57

Estimated date for ROW: First Semester 2020 Estimated date for PS&E: First Semester 2020 Estimated date for Construction phase begins: First Semester 2020

Project STIP Consistency:

This Project will be financed with funds from the Emergency Relief Program associated to Hurricanes Irma and María. Enclosed is the Detailed Damage Inspection Report (DDIR). See Appendix B.

7 | P a g e

V. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

771.115 Classes of actions.

(b) Class II (CEs). Actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant environmental effect are excluded from the requirement to prepare an EA or EIS. A specific list of CEs normally not requiring NEPA documentation is set forth in $771.117(c) for FHWA actions or pursuant to $771.118(c) for FTA actions.

When appropriately documented, additional projects may also quality as CEs pursuant to $771.117(d) for FHWA actions or pursuant to $771.118(d) for FTA actions.

771.117 FHWA Categorical Exclusions.

(a) Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions which meet the definition contained in 40 CFR 1508.4, and based on past experience with similar actions; do not involve significant environmental impacts. They are actions which: do not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area; do not require the relocation of significant numbers of people; do not have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource; do not involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts; do not have significant impacts on travel patterns; or do not otherwise, either individually or cumulatively, have any significant environmental impacts.

(b) The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR1508.4) and 771.117(a) and normally do not require any further NEPA approvals by the FHWA:

Check one or more of the following improvements which apply to the project:

(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. 1079(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:

8 | P a g e

☒ (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.

(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 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

9 | P a g e

(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 storm water 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.

(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.

(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;

(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;

(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. 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;

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

(5) Changes in access control;

(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.

10 | P a g e

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EVALUATED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

ECOLOGICAL

1. Will the project have a substantial impact on any unique or important natural resource?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

Due to the project scope, no substantial impact on any unique or important natural resource is expected.

2. Does the project involve habitat here federally listed endangered or threatened species may occur?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

According to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) IPaC) website, the following endangered and/or threatened species have the potential to occur in the study area, however, no critical habitat has been designated for these species:

Birds:

Puerto Rican Broad-winged Hawk Buteo platypterus brunnescens Puerto Rican Parrot Amazona vittata (Sites ) Puerto Rican Sharp-shinned Hawk Accipiter striatus venator

Reptiles:

Puerto Rican Boa Epicrates inornatus (Sites )

3. Does the project qualify as a minor action that may be conducted thin a blanket clearance (Self-

Certification Endangered Species Act Certification) without adversely affecting the recovery and survival of listed endangered or threatened species?

☒ Yes ☐ No Additional comments:

For the proposed project a consultation letter would be submitted to USFWS. The USFWLS indicates on January 3, 2020 letter, that the proposed project is not likely to adversely affect federally-listed species or their critical habitats conditioned to the implementation of Best Management Practices (BMP’s) previously provided for the species prior and during the road damage reparis to avoid or minimize impacts to federally listed species. Copy of the letters are included in the Appendix D, FWLS Coordination.

4. Does the project affect USACE jurisdictional areas?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The project would not affect jurisdictional water of the USACE

11 | P a g e

5. If the project involves wetlands, is the amount of permanent and/or temporary wetland taking less than one-tenth (1/10) of an acre and have all practicable measures to avoid and minimize wetland takings been evaluated?

Yes ☒ No

The proposed project would not affect USACE jurisdictional areas including wetlands.

6. Does the project affects areas covered under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act?

No USACE jurisdictional areas would be affected by the proposed project.

7. Does the project involve any known underground storage tanks (UST’s) or hazardous materials sites?

Yes ☒ No

No UST or hazardous material sites would be affected with the proposed project.

8. Will a U.S. Coast Guard permit be required?

Additional comments:

There are no water bodies located within the project area. The Toro Negro River is located at estimated distance of 64 meters south of the project area. No US Coast Guard permit required for the project.

9. Does the project located within a floodplain zone?

☐ Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project is not located within a floodplain zone. See Figures 7 and 8: Floodplain Zone in Appendix A. The project is located outside the 500-year flood boundaries. This area is classified as Zone X outside the 1% and 0.2% of annual flooding.

10. Does the project affect water bodies?

Additional comments:

The proposed works will not affect any water bodies. There are no water bodies located within the project area. The Toro Negro River is located at estimated distance of 64 meters south of the project area.

12 | P a g e

11. Does the project require the preparation of a Hydrologic-Hydraulic Study?

Additional comments:

No Hydrologic-Hydraulic Study is required for the proposed Project. There are no water bodies located within the project area.

12. Does the project affect Wild and Scenic Rivers?

Additional comments:

The proposed project would not affect any designated Wild and Scenic Rivers for Puerto Rico. No designated Wild and Scenic Rivers for Puerto Rico are located within project limits.

13. Does the project may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat?

Additional comments:

The proposed project would not affect Essential Fish Habitat. No Essential Fish Habitat is located within project limits.

14. Does the project affect coastal municipalities?

The project is located outside of the coastal or maritime zones.

15. Will the project result in the modification of any existing regulatory floodway?

The proposed project would not affect the existing floodplain levels.

16. Will the project require any stream relocations or channel changes?

The proposed project would not require any stream relocation or channel changes.

17. Does the project affects trees?

A Tree Inventory was performed and no tree would be impacted by proposed action.

13 | P a g e

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

18. Will the project induce substantial impacts to planned growth or land use for the area?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not induce substantial impacts to planned growth or land use for the area.

19. Will the project require the relocation of any family or business?

The proposed project would not require the relocation of family or business.

20. Will the project have a disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effect on any minority or low-income population?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not have a disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effect on any minority or low-income population.

21. If the project involves the acquisition of right of way, is the amount of right of way acquisition considered minor?

☒ Yes ☐ No Additional comments:

The reconstruction of road PR-157 at kilometers 0.4 will occur within the existing right-of way. For the construction of the proposed project at kilometer 1.2, a temporary easement of 55.88 square meters at the north and 232.69 square meters at the south of the road is required.

22. Does the project have any impact in the community cohesion of the adjacent project’s neighborhoods?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not have any impact in the community cohesion of the adjacent project’s neighborhoods.

23. Does the project affect the community services?

The proposed would not affect the community’s services.

14 | P a g e

24. Does the project consider the non-discrimination issues?

☒ Yes No

The proposed project considers the non-discrimination considerations.

25. Does the project have any impact in the existing noise levels?

Additional comments:

Due to the scope of the project no impact in the existing noise levels would be expected. A temporary increase of the existing noise levels would be expected during the construction phase of the project.

26. Does the project comply with the attaining air quality standards (NAAQS)?

☒ Yes No

The propose project complies with the attaining air quality standards (NAAQS).

27. Does the project have any impact existing air quality levels?

Additional comments:

Due to the scope of the project no increase in the existing air quality levels would be expected. A temporary increase of the existing air quality levels would be expected during the construction phase of the project.

28. Does the project affect farmlands areas?

The proposed project would not affect farmlands areas.

29. Does the project have any significant aesthetic effects?

Additional comments:

No significant aesthetic effects would be expected due to the construction of the proposed project.

30. Does the project affect recreational areas?

The proposed project would not affect recreational areas.

15 | P a g e

31. Will the project involve any changes in access control?

The proposed project would not involve any changes in access control.

32. Will the project have an adverse effect on permanent local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on permanent local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness.

33. Will traffic be maintained during construction using existing roads, staged construction, or on-site detours?

☒ Yes No Additional comments:

The traffic would be maintained in the existing road during the construction phase of the project.

Maintenance of Traffic Plans were designed for this project and are part of the PS&E.

34. If the project is a bridge replacement project, will the bridge be replaced at this existing location (along the existing facility) and will all construction proposed in association with the bridge replacement project be contained on the existing facility?

Yes ☒ No

The proposed project does not require a bridge replacement.

35. Does the project affect a bridge or a culvert?

The project does not affect a bridge or a culvert.

36. Is the bridge or culvert considered as historical structure?

Additional comment:

No historical structure would be affected by the proposed project.

16 | P a g e

37. Is there substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the project?

Yes ☒ No

No substantial controversy is expected related with the proposed project.

38. Will the project have an effect on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the project?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on social, economic or environmental grounds.

39. Will the project affect any archeological remains which are important to history or prehistory?

Additional comments:

An Identification of Historic Properties and Assessment of Effects Report (refers to Appendix E) was performed by the Archeologist Jaqueline Lopez for each site with the objective of identifying the presence or absence of cultural resources in the proposed action area of potential effects (APE). According with the reports no archaeological sites are located within or adjacent to the projects area.

40. Will the project affect any historic property?

Additional comments:

According with the recommendations included in the An Identification of Historic Properties and Assessment of Effects Reports prepared for the project, the proposed action should have no effect on historic properties, as there are no historic properties within the project area, and the potential of finding previously unknown archeological resources during project activities is very low.

A SHPO consultation letter was submitted on November 20, 2019 requesting their concurrence with our determination of no effect on historic properties for the project. SHPO requested additional information on December 18, 2019. The additional information requested was submitted to SHPO on February 3, 2020. See Appendix E, SHPO Coordination.

If unexpected cultural resources are encountered at any time within the project area, work should cease in the immediate vicinity of such discoveries and SHPO would be notified. After, such notification, project activities should not resume without and/or written from SHPO.

17 | P a g e

41. Will the project require the use of Section 6 (f) resources (Land and Water Conservation Fund Act)

Yes ☒ No

The project would not cause impacts to recreational properties acquired with LWCFA Funds.

42. Will the project require the use of Section 4 (f) resources (public, parks, recreation lands, wildlife, historic sites, or historic bridges, as defined in Section 4 (f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966?

Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project would not affect any publicly owned parks, recreational area, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, or public and private historical sites.

43. Will the project require relocation of utilities or construction of new facilities?

Additional comments:

The proposed project does not require the relocation of utilities or construction of new facilities.

Nevertheless, if an unexpected utilities facility is encountered at any time within the project area a consultation with PRASA, PREPA and the JRTC would be performed if required.

44. Will the project affect the airport clearance?

The project doesn’t affect the airport clearance.

45. Will the project consider the accommodations of pedestrian and bicycle facilities as part of its scope?

☐ Yes ☒ No Additional comments:

The proposed project’s scope does not include the accommodations of pedestrian and bicycle facilities. No bicycle facilities or pedestrian facilities exist within the project limits.

46. Will the project required public involvement activities?

Additional comments:

The public would be informed the proposed works using message boards and public announcements through social medias and newspapers, as well as other methods prior the commencement of the construction phase.

18 | P a g e

47. Does the project have any potential of controversy?

No potential of controversy is expected for the proposed project.

The Categorical Exclusion Check List prepared for the proposed project is included in Appendix F.

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT:

1. The proposed works would be constructed mostly within the existing right of way. Nevertheless, for the construction of the proposed project at kilometer 1.2, a temporary easement of 55.88 square meters at the north and 232.69 square meters at the south of the road is required.

2. This project would not cause effect on historic properties. If unexpected cultural resources are encountered at any time within the project area, work should cease in the immediate vicinity of such discoveries and SHPO would be notified.

3. For the erosion and sedimentation control in the project area, our Agency would require the project’s contractor to prepare and implement an Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, the Solid Wastes Generated Permit (DS-3), and a permit for atmospheric emission source and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (if required). Also, we would request the contractor to comply with any other applicable regulations.

4. During the construction of Sites ER-HWY-278 and 281, the PR-157 would remain open to traffic.

A MOT would be prepared specific for each project.

5. If the project requires the relocation of utilities in areas where PREPA and PRASA pipe lines are close to excavation, a note in the project final plans would be included to indicate that the contractor shall perform an exploratory excavation.

6. A BMP’s for the followings endangered or threatened species: Puerto Rican Boa (Epicrates inornatus), Puerto Rican parrot (Amazona vittata), Puerto Rican sharp-shinned hawk (Accipiter striatus venator) and Puerto Rican broad-winged hawk (Buteo plattpterus brunnescens) are required to be implemented prior and during the road damage repairs to avoid or minimize impacts to federally listed species.

6/12/2020

Gregory Shelton FHWA

APÉNDICE A

FIGURES, PHOTOS AND MAPS

Sites 278 & 281 at PR-157

October, 2019

Figure 1: Site ER-HWY-278 at PR-157 Km. 0.4

Figure 2: Site ER-HWY-281 at PR-157 Km. 1.2

Figure 3: Aerial Photo Site ER-HWY-278 at PR-157 Km. 0.4

Figure 4: Aerial Photo Site ER-HWY-281 at PR-157 Km. 1.2

Figure 5: PR-157 at Km. 0.4 Typical Section

Figure 6: PR-157 at Km. 1.2 Typical Section

Figure 7:

Figure 8:

APÉNDICE B

DETAILED DAMAGE INSPECTION REPORT (DDIR)

APÉNDICE C

PROPOSED PROJECT PLANS

APÉNDICE D

USFWLS COORDINATION

APÉNDICE E

SHPO COORDINATION

EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM- LANDSLIDES AND ROAD DAMAGES

(AC-805544, 806544, 809544, 817544, 819544, 821544, 822544, 827544, 801544 AND 812544)

TABLE 1 – SECTION 106 DETERMINATION – NO EFFECT ON HISTORIC PROPERTIES

1 | P a g e

AC Number Road Km Municipality ER-HWY Section 106 Determination Archaeologists

1 805544 PR-1 44.06 CAGUAS 1 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

2 805544 PR-3 102.80 YABUCOA 338 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

3 805544 PR-3 103.10 MAUNABO 339 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

4 805544 PR-3 103.40 MAUNABO 340 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

5 805544 PR-3 103.60 MAUNABO 341 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

6 805544 PR-3 104.30 MAUNABO 342 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

7 805544 PR-9918 0.20 YABUCOA 471 No effect on historic properties Anabel Arana Lanzas and

Marisol Martínez Garayalde

8 806544 PR-796 4.4 CAGUAS 424 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

2 | P a g e

9 806544 PR-182 11.5 YABUCOA 313 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

10 806544 PR-182 13.9 YABUCOA 314 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

11 806544 PR-715 4.4 CAYEY 407 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

12 806544 PR-748 1.4 GUAYAMA 412 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

13 806544 PR-748 4.0 GUAYAMA 413 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

14 806544 PR-971 6.30 NAGUABO 470 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

15 809544 PR-124 16.0 LAS MARIAS 104 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

16 817544 PR-816 0.7 BAYAMON 438 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

3 | P a g e

17 817544 PR-816 2.6 BAYAMON 439 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

18 817544 PR-816 2.8 BAYAMON 440 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

19 817544 PR-816 4.5 BAYAMON 441 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

20 817544 PR-816 5.1 BAYAMON 442 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

21 817544 PR-816 6.4 BAYAMON 443 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

22 817544 PR-816 6.7 BAYAMON 444 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

23 817544 PR-140 14.15 UTUADO 158 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

24 817544 PR-140 14.9 UTUADO 160 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

4 | P a g e

25 817544 PR-140 15.2 UTUADO 162 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

26 817544 PR-140 19.1 UTUADO 166 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

27 817544 PR-812 4.3 BAYAMON 431 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

28 817544 PR-812 4.9 BAYAMON 432 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

29 817544 PR-812 8.1 BAYAMON 433 No effect on historic properties Aida Belen Rivera Ruiz

30 819544 PR-5141

0.3

JAYUYA

No effect on historic properties Jaqueline Lopez Melendez 0.35 374

0.6 375

43 821544 PR-144

6.3

JAYUYA-CIALES

206 No effects on historic properties

Marlene Ramos Velez

6.8 207 No effects on historic properties

7.25 208 No effects on historic properties

10.8 209 No effects on historic properties

11.35 210 No effects on historic properties

12.1 216 No effects on historic properties

12.6 212 No effects on historic properties

12.7 213 No adverse effects on historic properties, requires a protection plan

13.6 214 No effects on historic properties

5 | P a g e

14.35 213, Ciales No effects on historic properties

18.2 214, Ciales No effects on historic properties

A 821544 PR-146

9.8

CIALES

No effect on historic properties Marlene Ramos Velez 16.4 220

14.1 224

B 821544 PR-951 5.0 CANOVANAS 469 No effect on historic properties Marlene Ramos Velez

C 822544 PR-7790 1.7 AGUAS BUENAS 421 No effect on historic properties Aramis Font Negron

D 822544 PR-795 8.0 AGUAS BUENAS 422 No effect on historic properties Aramis Font Negron

E 824544 PR-411 4.9-5.0 AGUADA 351 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

F 824544 PR-635 11.7 HATILLO 396 No effect on historic properties Sharon Melendez Ortiz

G 827544 PR-1

23.0

GUAYNABO

No effect on historic properties Arqueologia Mauras Inc. 23.7 480

25.4 481

H 827544 PR-1 116-118 JUANA DIAZ 3 No effect on historic properties Arqueologia Mauras Inc.

6 | P a g e

I 827544 PR-155 45.5 MOROVIS 264 No effect on historic properties Arqueologia Mauras Inc.

J 877544 PR-143 34.1 OROCOVIS 200 No effect on historic properties Arqueologia Mauras Inc.

K 803544 PR-157 0.4 CIALES 278 No effect on historic properties Jaqueline Lopez Melendez

L 803544 PR-157 1.2 CIALES 281 No effect on historic properties Jaqueline Lopez Melendez

M 803544 PR-157 10.4 OROCOVIS 282 No effect on historic properties Jaqueline Lopez Melendez

N 803544 PR-157 16.4 OROCOVIS 283 No effect on historic properties Jaqueline Lopez Melendez

O 811544 PR-179 13.25 GUAYAMA 308 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

P 811544 PR-722 5.7 AIBONITO 410 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

Q 811544 PR-149 42.8 CIALES 227 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

7 | P a g e

42.9 228

R 811544 PR-865 0.9 TOA BAJA 452 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

S 811544 PR-146 19.3 CIALES 221 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

T 811524 PR-524 0.70 ADJUNTAS 380 No effect on historic properties Fernando Alvarado Muñoz

U 818544 PR-10 52.3 ARECIBO 11 No effect on historic properties Osvaldo Torres

V 816544 PR-155 37.00 MOROVIS 258 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

W 816544 PR-155 38.35 MOROVIS 259 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

X 816544 PR-155 39.10 MOROVIS 260 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

Y 816544 PR-155 40.30 MOROVIS 261 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

8 | P a g e

Z 816544 PR-155 43.00 MOROVIS 262 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

1 816544 PR-155 43.25 MOROVIS 263 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

2 816544 PR-155 56.70 MOROVIS 265 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

3 816544 PR-155 30.10-30.20 OROCOVIS 267 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

4 816544 PR-156 3.60 OROCOVIS 270 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

5 816544 PR-156 4.40 OROCOVIS 271 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

6 816544 PR-156 6.30-6.40 OROCOVIS 273 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

7 816544 PR-156 3.70-3.80 OROCOVIS 275 No effects on historic properties Marisol Martinez Garayalbe

Landslide and Road Damage Evaluation and Repair

Identification of Historic Properties and Assessment of Effects / Section 106 Review Process PR- 157 / Km. 1.2/ Ciales [ER-HWY-281] AC-803544

Prepared for:

Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority

Environmental Studies Office and

Puerto Rico State Historic Preservation Office

Jaqueline López Meléndez

May 8, 2019, revised in June 20, 2019

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 2

Preamble

On September 20, 2017, Puerto Rico was hit by the winds and rains of a catastrophic category 5 hurricane called María. María, left the island of Puerto Rico devastated, causing great damages in the highways. Multiple landslides have affected roads causing roadblocks and ground instabilities. Keeping roads and bridges in good condition is critical to the safety of the nation’s transportation system including Puerto Rico.

The Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority (PRHTA) has been working in their

Emergency Relief Program for Landslide and Road Damage Evaluation and Repair

Recommendations since the middle of last year. The program consists of the evaluation and reconstruction of landslides; i.e., slope instability, washouts and rock fall on several highway segments due to the impacts associated with Hurricanes Irma and María. Those highway segments are located within the Puerto Rico’s Federal Aid Highway System, and other highways and roads under the Department of Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) jurisdiction.

The main goal of this project is to evaluate the existing highways conditions to determine the extent of landslide damages by the execution of sites reconnaissance, investigations, monitoring and studies, necessary to provide appropriate recommendations to reconstruct the highway to its previous condition.

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that all federal agencies take into account the potential effects of their proposed projects on historic properties. This form has the objective of facilitating, streamlining and expediting the FHWA’s compliance under the law, and the Puerto Rico State Preservation Office (PRSHPO) review process for these projects.

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 3

I. Project General Information I.1. Project name: Landslide and Road Damage Evaluation and Repair

I.2. State Project no.: ER-HWY-281

I.3. Federal Project no.: ER-9999-312

I.4. Road: PR-157

I.5. KM: 1.2

I.6. Municipality: Ciales

I.7. Coordinates: LAT/LONG 18.230629, -66.517043

NAD 83 X=191146 Y=243975

I.8 Proposed construction activities

All the alternatives require the same excavation to reach the foundation level in order to construct the retaining element. Originally, we (Behar-Ybarra and Associates) recommended the Gravity Concrete Retaining Wall at this location, but as part of the Global Stability Evaluation and in order to increase the safety factor and avoid more depth excavations, the Geotechnical Engineer recommended to change the system to a Reinforce Soil Slope or Mechanical Stabilization. Therefore we recommend the Alternative of Soil Reinforced.

The base of the foundation shall be placed at depths of 10’ on the very weathered/fractured rock, or elevations 418.5 and 420.4 meters approximately in exploration points 1 and 2, respectively.

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 4

II. Cultural Resources1. Desk Review.

For purposes of this form, the project’s area of potential effects (APE) corresponds to the project area.

II.1. Are there any known archaeological sites within or adjacent to the project area?

X No. ___Yes. Complete Table 1.

II.2. Are there any known buildings, structures or objects within the project area?

II.3. Is the project located within a known historic district or adjacent to one?

II.4. Is the segment of the road where the project is located 50 years or older?

___ No. X Yes. Include in Table 1.

II.5. Are there any prior cultural resources surveys conducted within the project area or that include the project area?

X No. Continue to section III. ___ Yes. Complete Table 2 and continue to II.6.

II.6. Were cultural resources identified in a prior cultural resources survey?

____No. Continue to section III. ___Yes. Include resource in Table 1.

1 For definitions and examples of concepts (site, buildings, structures, objects) refer to the National Register Bulletin How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation https://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_4.htm.

https://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/nrb15/nrb15_4.htm

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 5

III. Site Visit

III.1. Name of archaeologist who conducted the site visit and date(s) of the visit:

Jaqueline López Meléndez. February 2, 2019

III.2. Is there a bridge, culvert, or other drainage structures in the project area?

X No. Continue to III.4. ___Yes. Continue to III.3.

III.3. Is the structure 50 years or older?

____ No. Continue to III.4. ___ Yes. Include in Table 1 and continue to III.4.

III.4. During the site visit, were previously unknown sites, buildings, structures or objects identified within or adjacent to the project area?

X No. Continue to III.6. ___Yes. Continue to III.5.

III.5. Is the site, building, structure or object that was identified during the site visit 50 years or older?

___ No. Continue to III.6. ___Yes. Include in Table 1 and continue to III.6.

III.6. Describe the current conditions of the project area, including staging areas and new access roads.

The landslide is located at km 1.2 of highway PR-157 in the rural area of Ciales (Photos 1-3).

The landslide affected the south lane of the road. The landslide is approximately 14 meters long.

In the lane contrary to the landslip we can see a cut of more than 3 meters high.

From the road in the gliding area we can observe the Toro Negro River several meters below.

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 6

Table 1: Archaeological sites, historic properties and historic districts located within or adjacent the project area.

Name SHPO id # IPRC id

Description Is the site within or adjacent the project area? / Distance to site

NRHP eligibility (listed, eligible, potentially eligible, not-eligible, unknown)

Road

This segment of road PR- 157 appears constructed in the topographic quadrangle of 1960.

Within Not-eligible

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 7

IV. Effects on historic properties

Fill this section for each cultural resource listed on Table 1. If there are no resources, continue to section V.

Cultural resource name and i.d. code(s): Road PR-157 Km. 1.2

IV.1. Is this cultural resource listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)?

___Yes. Continue to IV.3.

X No. Continue to IV.2

IV.2. Is this cultural resource eligible to the NRHP?

___Yes. Explain below. Discuss structure significance and integrity. In section V you should include recommendations on how to minimize or mitigate the adverse effect on this property.

X No. Explain below and continue to section V.

___ Unknown. A NRHP-eligibility assessment should be recommended in section V.

The PR-157 is a secondary road that connects the towns of Orocovis and Jayuya. The segment where the landslide is located appears in the topographic quadrangle of 1960 (Figure 6). Only the eastern part of the road is built in the topographic quadrangle of 1946. In this quadrangle we observed that the highway PR-157 formerly known as highway 15 left to the north of the town of Orocovis and passed through the neighborhoods Barros and Damián Arriba. By 1952, another piece of road had been built, covering the Damián Arriba neighborhood a bit more For 1957 the PR-157 road is observed until the Cacao neighborhood, passing through Damián Abajo and Collores. For the 1960 the highway PR-157 connects with the highway PR-149 that goes towards the town of Villalba.

Road PR-157 is not associated with an event that has made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history, or to the lives of significant persons. Neither does it embody distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction. It is concluded therefore, that this road segment does not meet any of the criteria of significance to be considered eligible to the

NRHP.

IV.3. Will any of the project activities have an adverse effect on this cultural resource as defined in 36 CFR part 800.5(a)(1)?

___ Yes. Continue to IV.4. ___ No. Continue to section V.

IV.4. Can this adverse effect be avoided?

___Yes. Explain below and continue to section V.

___ No. In section V, include recommendations on how to minimize or mitigate the adverse effect on this property.

Landslides and Road Damage Evaluation Repair, Identification of Historic Properties and Evaluation of

Effects PR-157, km. 1.2, Ciales [ER-HWY-281] Page 8

V. Recommendations V.1. Choose the options that apply:

____ There are no cultural resources within the project area, and the possibility of finding previously unknown cultural resources within the project area is null or low. No further studies are recommended.

___ There are no previously known cultural resources within the project area, but there is a high possibility of finding previously unknown cultural resources within the project area. A cultural resources assessment is recommended. Explain and justify in V.2.

X There is a cultural resource within the project area, and this resource is not eligible to the

NRHP. No further studies are recommended. Explain in V.2.

___…