Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

NP-ROCR 15(2)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: NP-ROCR 15(2) Date: 3/5/2021

Project Name: Joyce Road Bridge Reconstruction

Location: Rock Creek Park Washington, DC

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117 (c)(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.

See 23 CFR 771.117 for full description of CE categories, including additional requirements when applying (c)26-28.

Project Description The Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), in cooperation with the National Park Service (NPS), will replace the Joyce Road Bridge (Structure No. 3450-003P). Joyce Road NW is a two-lane road with an alignment that generally runs north-south. The Joyce Road Bridge overpasses Luzon Branch, a small stream that generally flows parallel with Joyce Road NW from north to south and into Rock Creek. The bridge abutments and adjacent retaining walls provide grade separation between Joyce Road NW and the lower stream channel. To the west of the site is the Rock Creek Golf Course consisting of open, grassy fields with a rolling hill to flat terrain. Immediately south of the site, Military Road NW overpasses Joyce Road NW. East of the site is 16th Street NW (oriented north-south) plus housing and business development which is separated from the site by a small woodland area surrounding Luzon Branch.

The Joyce Road bridge is currently in poor condition due to deterioration of the structural concrete (15-ton weight limit), cracking in the asphalt wearing surface, and failed joints. The project will replace the superstructure with precast concrete beams and a cast-in-place concrete deck. The new sub abutments will be supported on micropiles and the new abutments will be constructed immediately behind the existing abutments to support the superstructure. Existing bridge abutments and retaining walls are to remain and be protected in place. Additionally, the current metal railings are too short and do not meet the AASHTO minimum height requirements for pedestrian barriers, so they will be replaced with a similar railing found along Beach Drive https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=842bb87055f89f1d0ff242f2b9e20ff7&mc=true&node=pt23.1.771&rgn=div5#se23.1.771_1117

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

NW. Reconstruction of the approach roadway and other miscellaneous repairs are anticipated as part of this project. A full road closure is anticipated as part of this project.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

• All work shall be replacement in kind and adhere to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.

• In the event that archeological resources are discovered during the course of the project, work will immediately halt and Rock Creek Park Cultural Resources Program will be notified. Work will be allowed to resume only after the finds have been assessed and notice to proceed has been given.

• Any Rock Creek Park infrastructure impacted during construction activities, including but not limited to paved and unpaved roadways, walkways, turf, shall be restored to pre-work conditions or better upon completion of the project.

• In order to maintain the no effect determination, project work shall comply with the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects in the Range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long-Eared Bat, February 2018 Revision, found at https://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/fhwa/pdf/AppC_AMMsRevisedFeb2018 .pdf

• All tree trimming, tree removal, and bridge removal will be conducted between November 15 and March 31.

• All staging areas will be limited to previously disturbed land.

• The use of outdoor lighting during the active season (April 1 to October 31) will be evaluated, and light pollution will be minimized by angling lights downward or via other light minimization measures.

• A NPS natural resource staff member will survey the area for the Hay’s Spring Amphipod and Northern Long-eared Bat prior to tree trimming, tree removal, and bridge work and removal to ensure no species are using the structures nor will be impacted by project work. If species will be impacted, the CO or NPS natural resource staff shall establish measures for avoiding disturbance and complete any required reporting to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).

• Project work shall not disturb wildlife species found nesting, hibernating, estivating, or otherwise living in, or immediately nearby, the work site. If Federally protected species are encountered during construction activities, work will cease and the contractor will notify the CO and NPS natural resource staff immediately.

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance The project was reviewed through the USFWS’s Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) system. The USFWS responded in a letter dated December 22, 2020, stating that, “The https://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/fhwa/pdf/AppC_AMMsRevisedFeb2018.pdf https://www.fws.gov/Midwest/endangered/section7/fhwa/pdf/AppC_AMMsRevisedFeb2018.pdf

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) project as proposed has “no effect” on the endangered, threatened, or candidate species listed on your IPaC species list because while the project is within range of the species, it is unlikely that the species would occur within the project area that was submitted.”

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance The NPS completed an Assessment of Actions Having an Effect on Historic Properties (approved on December 17, 2020), documenting that the proposed project would have no adverse effect on historic properties. The replacement bridge would replicate the existing bridge, except for the railings which would be replaced with the same type of railings used on other structures in the park. The project would not adversely affect the historic characteristics of the Rock Creek Park Historic District that make it eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. No known archeological resources are present within the area of potential effect.

The District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office responded in a Federal Agency Section 106 Review Form that, dated January 27, 2021, and concurred that the project will have no adverse effect on historic properties.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance The NPS prepared a Categorical Exclusion Documentation Form (PEPC Project Number 98030), finding that the project is categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis, which was approved on February 22, 2021.

23 CFR § 771.117 Section (e) Actions described in (c)(26), (c)(27), and (c)(28) of this section may not be processed as CEs under paragraph (c) if they involve:

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

• No right of way acquisition or residential or non-residential displacement is required for this project.

(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;

• No permit from the U.S. Coast Guard is required for this project. The project is anticipated to be authorized under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer’s Nationwide Permit 3 Maintenance or Nationwide Permit 14 – Linear Transportation Projects.

(3) A finding of “adverse effect” to historic properties under the National Historic Preservation Act, the use of a resource protected under 23 U.S.C. 138 or 49 U.S.C. 303 (section 4(f)) except

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04) 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;

• The District of Columbia State Historic Preservation Office concurred that the project will have no adverse effect to historic properties on January 27, 2021.

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

• Joyce Road would be temporarily closed during construction; however, the temporary closure will not result in major traffic disruptions.

(5) Changes in access control;

• The project will not result in changes to 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.

• The project will not result in floodplain encroachment, other than for functionally dependent uses. Luzon Branch is not designated or proposed for inclusion in the National System of Wild and Scenic Rivers.

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

Categorical Exclusion Recommendation:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I believe the project should be categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis.

Lisa T. Landers Environmental Protection Specialist

Federal Highway Administration

Categorical Exclusion Determination:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with which I am familiar, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA analysis. The project meets the 23 CFR 771.117(a) definition of a categorical exclusion. No unusual circumstances per 23 CFR 771.117(b) apply.

Kevin S. Rose Environmental Team Leader

Federal Highway Administration

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

Appendix A: Environmental Checklist

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act:

• Are Federally-listed species potentially present in the study area? ☒Yes, see Notesi ☐No If Yes, effects determination:

☒No Effect ☐May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect ☐May Affect, Likely to Adversely Affect

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act:

• Are historic properties known to be present in the study area? ☒Yes ☐No

If Yes, will they be impacted by the project? ☐Yes ☒No

• Will previously undisturbed ground be disturbed?

☐Yes ☒No

• Effects determination:

☐No Historic Properties Affected ☒No Adverse Effect ☐Adverse Effect, MOA Executed

• Was tribal consultation completed? ☐Yes ☒No

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

Are impacts to Waters of the US anticipated? ☒Yes ☐No If Yes, approval anticipated:

☒Nationwide Permit (NWP) ☐Regional General Permit ☐Individual Permit

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

• Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System) Will the land disturbance threshold likely be exceeded to require a permit and SWPPP?

☐Yes ☒ No

• Is post-construction stormwater management review/approval anticipated? ☐Yes ☒No

• ☒Project is consistent with Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands

Floodplains:

• Is the project in a FEMA floodplain?

☒Yes ☐No ☐ Floodplain not mapped

• ☒ Project is consistent with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management

Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act:

• Does the project meet the Section 4(f) exemption for Federal lands transportation facilities under

Section 1119(c)(2) of MAP-21, 23 U.S.C. 138(a)? ☒Yes ☐No

• Is there a use of a Section 4(f) property in the study area? ☐Yes ☐No

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

If Yes, De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ Individual 4(f): ☐ Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

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

☐Yes ☒No

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

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

• Is the project in a Coastal Zone? ☐Yes ☒No

• If yes, will a Federal Consistency Review be completed? ☐Yes ☐No

Right of Way:

• Is the project completely within the transportation facility’s right-of-way? ☒Yes ☐No

• If no, will the project require relocations or easements? ☐Yes ☐No

Hazardous Waste and Materials:

• Are hazardous materials or contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds (as set by U.S. EPA, County Environmental Health, etc.) present? ☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, is the nature and extent of the hazardous materials or contamination fully known? ☐Yes ☐No, plan for securing information provided in Notes Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act:

• Are there Wild and Scenic Rivers? ☐Yes ☒No ☐Eligible If Yes, has review by the river-administering agency been completed? ☐Yes ☐No

Clean Air Act:

• Is the project in a non-attainment area? ☒Yesii ☐No

If Yes, is the project on the Transportation Improvement Program(TIP)/State Implementation Plan(SIP)? ☒ Yes ☐No

Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Regulations:

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

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

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

• ☒ Does not apply.

Environmental Justice and Title IV Act:

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

☐Yes, explanation provided in Notes section ☒No

• Will the project induce disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority, low income, or special groups? ☐Yes, additional analysis is needed ☐No Farmland Protection Policy Act for Highway Projects:

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

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

☐Yes ☒No Does the project affect any other resources not listed above? Explain below and list anticipated permits:

i Federally-listed species per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s IPaC:

Northern Long-eared Bat Hay’s Spring Amphipod ii The District is in nonattainment of the ozone NAAQS. The District is in attainment of the PM2.5 and carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS but was previously in nonattainment of both standards. The following SIPs for ozone, PM2.5, and CO were approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency because they adequately demonstrate how the District plans to attain or maintain each NAAQS:

1997 8-Hour Ozone SIP 1997 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) Maintenance Plan 1994 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance Plan – effective through March 2016