Categorical Exclusion Form (NEPA) - Sch B_AC-830579_Hwy-106_108.pdf

Emergency Relief Program

PR-124 KM. 16.0, 21.9 & 23.4

LARES-LAS MARIAS, PUERTO RICO

GROUP 3B

December 2020

Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION

Landslide and Road Damage Evaluation and Repair Recommendations PR-124 Km. 16.0, 21.9 and 23.4 Lares, Puerto Rico

AC-809544/AC-898579/AC-830579

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority Categorical Exclusion Action Classification Form

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

III. PURPOSE AND NEED

IV. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

V. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EVALUATED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

VI. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT:

APPENDIXES

Appendix A Emergency Declaration Documents Appendix B Project Maps, Figures and Drawings Appendix C Detailed Damage Inspection Reports (DDIR) Appendix D USFWLS Coordination Appendix E SHPO Coordination Appendix F Categorical Exclusion Checklist

PUERTO RICO HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION ACTION CLASSIFICATION FORM

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

State Project No. AC-809544/AC-898579/

AC-830579

Federal Project No. ER-9999(318)/ER-124(10)

Project Name

Emergency Relief Program Landslide Repair PR-124, Km 16.0, km, 21.9 & 23.4

Route No.

PR-124

From Milepost 15.88 To Milepost 23.95

ER-HWY-104 15.88 ER-HWY-104 17.30

ER-HWY-106 22.0 ER-HWY-106 23.0

ER-HWY-107 23.45 ER-HWY-107 23.95

Municipality (ies) Las Marias - Lares Total Length 2.92 Km (3 segments) ROW Cost To be determined Construction Cost $1,763,954.40

II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

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

The Proposed Action The Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority (PRHTA) proposes the reconstruction and repairs of the following road segments of the PR-124, in the Municipalities of Las Marias and Lares:

Project ID Road Segment

ER-HWY-104 PR-124 Km 16.0

ER-HWY-106 PR-124 Km 21.9

ER-HWY-108 PR-124 Km 23.4

These road segments were affected by landslides due to the impact associated with Hurricanes Irma and Maria on September 2017. See Declaration of Emergency Documents on Appendix A. The reconstruction activities would be financed by Emergency Funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).

EXISTING FACILITY

ROW Width 6.50 mts.

No. Lanes & Width 2 lanes,

3.25 mts. each Shoulder Width 0 mts. Median 0 mts.

Overall Roadway Width 6.50 mts.

PROPOSED FACILITY

ROW Width 6.50 mts.

No. Lanes & Width 2 lanes,

3.25 mts. each Shoulder Width 0 mts. Median 0 mts.

Overall Roadway Width 6.50 mts.

The PRHTA understands that the proposed action complies with the definition of a Categorical Exclusion (CE). CE 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.

Location The proposed action is found on State Road PR-124, in Pezuela and Espino Wards of the Municipality of Lares and Chamorro Ward of the Municipality of Las Marias. The project is divided into three (3) areas, where the proposed construction and repair activities would be performed. The locations of the proposed project are shown in Appendix B, Figure No.1, Projects Location Map and Figure No. 2, Aerial Photo.

The Lambert coordinates for each area are:

Area 1 Km. 16.0, PR-124 (X= 149,460.308, Y=244,648.091) Area 2 Km. 21.9, PR-124 (X= 150,375.597, Y=248,156.713) Area 3 Km. 23.4, PR-124 (X= 151,161.452, Y=248,772.991)

Existing Conditions The existing conditions for each segment are described below and copy of the Detailed Damage Inspection Reports (DDIR) on Appendix C.:

PR-124 Km. 16.0 (ER-HWY-104) This segment is located in a rural-residential area of the Municipality of Las Marias. On the eastbound side, there are exposed profiles covered with vegetation, a product of the cut to build the road. Evidence of landslides is still visible in some segments. A stream of clear water flows parallels to the road through a rocky-bottom ditch. On the westbound side, there is a steep slope that ends at the Quebrada Guaba. Here there are two large landslide areas enclosed by temporary concrete barriers, where part of the road was lost. There is a metal guardrail, which is partially unsupported. In the landslide located further west, there is a residence that was affected. At the time of the field visit, part of the house had already collapsed.. It is a residential building on concrete stilts, with concrete floors and walls, wood and metal pitched roof and louvered aluminum windows. The surface asphalt on the road is in poor condition. There are trench scars that suggest the presence of buried utilities. (See Figure No. 3, Aerial Photo of the segment on Appendix B)

PR-124 Km. 21.9 (ER-HWY-106) This segment is located in a rural-residential area, southwest of the urban area of Lares. The landslide, indicated by the presence of temporary concrete barriers, is located on the westbound side of PR-124.

Here, a part of the roadway and shoulder was lost. On the opposite side of the landslide, or eastbound, there is a headwall in stone and concrete with three rectangular concrete bollards. Here starts a concrete pipe that was cast in place, in which the marks of the molds used in its construction are visible. The pipe, which crosses the road from northeast to southwest, discharges into a plantain field, where there is a gradually descending slope. At the time of the field visit, the pipe was clear, although at the entrance gives the impression of having been partially underground. This drainage structure collects the runoff water from the mountain behind two residences, and from their parking area. On the eastbound side of the road, there are profiles covered with vegetation, a product of the cut that was made during its construction. (See Figure No. 4, Aerial Photo of the segment on Appendix B

PR-124 Km. 23.4 (ER-HWY-108) The segment is located in a rural area southwest of the urban center of Lares. On the eastbound side of the road, there are temporary concrete barriers protecting an area where part of the road shoulder and gutter was lost. On the opposite side of the road, there is a high profile with furrows left by the landslide. In fact, part of this soil was piled up on the eastbound side and already has vegetation growth. A runoff trench was formed in the landslide area. In this area, there is a concrete drainage pipe. The intake is located in a concrete box found under a small concrete slab on the westbound side of the road. A concrete culvert about 35 m west was identified where the project starts. This structure shows two periods of construction.

On the westbound or upstream side, it has straight walls and floors with vaulted ceilings, and decorated bollards at the level of the road; on the eastbound, it is a rectangular box whose front wall extends upwards to form a concrete barrier in the manner of bollards. The upstream intake of the structure is partially obstructed with vegetative debris. (See Figure No. 5, Aerial Photo of the segment on Appendix B

Proposed Project The project consists in performing repairs on the segments of the PR-124 roadway which include primarily the embankment stabilization of areas of the road where landslides have occurred, the improvement of the drainage system of the road section, application of protective measures for erosion control, strengthening and replacement of existing drainage system (pipes, culverts, manholes and inlets) which have failed, and the replacement of safety features like guardrails and pavement markings.

Gabion Retaining Wall and Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall shall be the methods used for the stabilization and segments reconstruction of PR-124. For the proposed activities, additional ROW would be necessary.

Site Amount of Additional ROW

Square Meters Cuerdas

Site 104 – PR-124 km 16.0 366.00 0.0932

Site 106 – PR-124 km 21.9 50.61 0.012

Site 108 – PR-124 km 23.4 246.00 0.063

Also, temporary construction easement (720.497 square meters (0.183 cuerdas)) would be necessary for Site 104. Design drawings showing the roadway plan, typical sections of the PR-124, ROW limits, acquisitions, and proposed repairs are included in Appendix B.

III. PURPOSE AND NEED

Purpose The purpose of the Project is to stabilize the deteriorating sections of the PR-124 roadway, to ensure the safety of this vital transportation corridor. Stabilizing the roadway and slopes adjacent to the roadway, and the drainage system improvements would ensure a quality visitor experience that meets with the federal highway standards.

Need The proposed project is needed for the following reasons:

The roadway segments are in poor condition due to the movement of the landslides, which has opened deep tension cracks and large subsurface cavities adjacent to the roadway.

The movement of the roadway bases has created a safety hazard for the traffic.

The potential exists for a catastrophic failure of the roadway sections.

The roadway is an important corridor for local traffic.

For the rehabilitation of the PR-124 roadway segments, PRHTA proposes the construction of a Gabion Retaining Walls for segments ER-HW-104 and ER-HW-108, and Reinforced Concrete Retaining Walls for segment ER-HW-106, based on the following reasons:

Gabion Retaining Walls

Their strong base prevents them from being dragged away during heavy downpours.

They help to reduce the velocity of running water, as the rocks dissipate its energy, which helps reduce erosion processes caused by water or excessive seepage on steep or mild slopes.

As time passes, gaps between the rocks would be filled by vegetation and silt, which would further reinforce the wall.

Handling and transportation the materials are quite simple, which helps to reduce the time taken to build the Gabions.

Gaps between the rocks allow water to flow through the structure, helping to maintain a low groundwater level.

Gabion walls resist breakage and separation, due to the flexibility of the wire mesh construction.

The gravel and rocks used in gabion construction are natural to the environment and can endure years of wear through water erosion.

Less Impact in Right of Way Area.

Less Impact on Earthwork Fill.

No need for Road Closure during construction. Works can be done in half section of the road.

Reinforced Concrete Retaining Walls

Can be built on the edge of the road as a jersey barrier.

The closer the retaining wall is to the roadway edge; the less retaining wall height is required.

Less Impact in Right of Way Area.

Estimated Construction Cost is the lowest in comparison with the other alternatives.

IV. PLANNING CONSISTENCY PHASE I

Estimated construction time: Six (6) months to one (1) year

Estimated Construction Cost: $1,763,954.40

Estimated date for ROW: First Semester 2021

Estimated date for PS&E: First Semester 2021

Estimated date for Construction phase begins: First Semester 2021

Project STIP Consistency:

This project will be financed with funds from the Emergency Relief Program associated to Hurricanes Irma and Maria. Detailed Damage Inspection Reports (DDIR) are included in Appendix C.

IV. 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 qualify 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.

(c) The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) 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. 107(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.

AC-809544

(8) Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption would 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:

(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 the 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 other areas 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

(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 stormwater 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) 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. 138 or 49 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 the existing road, bridge, or ramps, that would result in major traffic disruptions;

(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.

V. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES EVALUATED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

ECOLOGICAL

1. Would 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:

The proposed project would not affect critical habitats where federally listed endangered or threatened species may occur.

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?

Nevertheless, to comply with Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The USFWS IPaC website was used to obtain an Official Species list identifying the federally protected species which could occur within the study area and to make an anticipated Effects Determination for each species. The USFWS IPaC Official list identify the following species as potentially affected by activities within the project area: Puerto Rican Boa (Chilabothrus inornatus). According to the nature of the project, habitat characteristics, and the implementation of USFWS BMPs, it is the agency belief, that the project is not likely to adversely affect federally-listed species or their critical habitats. However, if any of the species is sighted within the project area USFWLS conservation protocols would be implemented during construction. A consultation letter to USFWLS was submitted and concurred on January 3, 2020. Copy of the USFWLS concurrence is included in Appendix D.

4. Does the project affect USACE jurisdictional areas?

The project would not affect jurisdictional water of the US

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?

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

6. Does the project affect areas are 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?

No UST’s or hazardous materials were observed within the project limits.

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

The proposed project construction is in upland, not required Coast Guard permit.

9. Does the project locate within a floodplain zone?

The FEMA flood map panels for the Project Areas are 72000C1035H and 72000C0570H, with an effective date on April 19, 2005. A Zone X floodplain has been mapped for the subject areas. See Appendix B, Figure 4, FEMA Flood Maps.

10. Does the project affect water bodies?

No water bodies would be affected by the project right of way. The PR-124 road segments are located in the mountainous zone, surrounded by steep slopes and natural drainage channels, responsible for directing the runoff to the nearby water bodies. As part of the scope of the proposed project, control measures against erosion and sedimentation would be implemented to prevent the release of sediment outside the proposed project areas.

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

The proposed project did not require the preparation of an H-H study.

12. Does the project affect Wild and Scenic Rivers?

The proposed project would not affect any designated Wild and Scenic Rivers for Puerto Rico.

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

The proposed project would not affect Essential Fish Habitat. _

14. Does the project affect coastal municipalities?

The project is located outside of Coastal or maritime zones.

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

_The proposed project would not affect the existing floodplain levels.

16. Would 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 affect trees?

The proposed project would require the cut of trees. According to the “Reglamento Conjunto para la Evaluación y Expedición de Permisos Relacionados al Desarrollo, Uso de Terrenos y Operación de Negocios” issued on June 7, 2019”, a mitigation plan will be necessary to mitigate the tree impacts. Nevertheless, an Administrative Order Number 2019-01 was issued by Permit Management Office on January 8, 2019 to extend the streamline permit process for the projects related to the emergency. The Order authorize the cut of trees without the request of a permit. The Administrative Order is effective until the declaration of state of emergency by the Governor of PR is valid. If a tree mitigation plan is requested, monetary compensation would be performed according to the agreement between Department of Natural and Environmental Resources and PRHTA.

SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

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

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

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

The proposed project would not require the relocation of family or business. An abandoned residence building affected by landslides was identified in the ER-HWY-104 segment. A demolition of the building and temporary construction easement is required for the proposed project development.

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

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?

For the proposed activities, additional ROW would be necessary. For Site 104 at PR-124 km 16.0, an amount of 366.00 square meters (0.0932 cuerdas) are required. In the cases of Site 106 at km 21.9 and Site 108 at km 23.4, an amount of 50.61squre meters (0.012 cuerdas) and 246.00 square meters (0.063 cuerdas), respectively are necessary.

Also, temporary construction easement (720.497 square meters (0.183 cuerdas)) would be required for Site 104. Construction easements would be acquired to accommodate the proposed slopes repairs and drainage improvements. PRHTA would provide compensation for landowners under laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the FHWA Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act).

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

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

23. Does the project affect community services?

The proposed project would not affect the community’s services.

24. Does the project consider non-discrimination considerations?

The proposed project took into consideration non-discrimination practices. The project consists in corrective actions to guarantee a safer connection for the surrounding communities. By implementing these measures, the PRHTA made sure that the project does not cause disproportionately high and/or adverse environmental effects on low income and/or minority population located near the project area. The project was developed in compliance with DOT Order 5610.2 (a) and Executive Order 12898.

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

No effects on noise levels are expected. A temporary minimal 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)?

The proposed project complies with the national air quality standards (NAAQS). _

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

Due to the scope of the project, no impact on the existing air quality levels would be expected. A temporary increase in 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 any farmland or its operations.

29. Does the project have any significant aesthetic effects?

No adverse impacts to the existing visual character and quality are anticipated.

30. Does the project affect recreational areas?

The proposed project would not affect recreational areas.

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

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

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

The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on permanent local traffic patterns or community cohesiveness. The project would keep the same geometry and would improve safety traffic along the PR-124.

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

Throughout construction, the PR-124 segments would be remaining open, but temporary half section closure may be necessary. Proper advance notice of the closure would allow uninterrupted access. The Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) for the Proposed Project includes the temporary half section closure; the installation of the temporary traffic control device;

the installation of temporary traffic signs; concrete barriers; and others.

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

_The proposed project does not require a bridge replacement.

35. The project requires to affect a bridge or a culvert?

At ER-HWY-106 site there is a drainage structure that would be replaced as part of the proposed project activities. This drainage structure is considered eligible to the NRHP. For this site a documentation and monitoring plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. Also, at ER-HWY-108 site, there is a culvert is considered eligible to the NRHP, but it is not impacted by the proposed project. For this site a Protection Plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure.

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

proposed project activities. This drainage structure is considered eligible to the NRHP. For this site, a documentation and monitoring plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. Also, at ER-HWY-108 site, there is a culvert is considered eligible to the NRHP, but it is not impacted by the proposed project. For this site, a Protection Plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. For ER-HWY-104, no historic properties were found during the evaluation.

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

No substantial controversy is expected related to the proposed project.

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

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

39. Would the project affect any archeological remains which are important to history or pre-history?

The repair of the landslide and road damage on PR-124 should have no effect on any archeological remains, within the project area, and the potential of finding previously unknown archaeological resources during project activities is very low. 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.

40. Would the project affect any historic property?

proposed project activities. This drainage structure is considered eligible to the NRHP. For this site, a documentation and monitoring plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. Also, at ER-HWY-108 site, there is a culvert is considered eligible to the NRHP, but it is not impacted by the proposed project. For this site, a Protection Plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. A consultation letter to SHPO was submitted and their concurred with our determination of no adverse effect to historic property with the implementation of a documentation and monitoring plan.

For ER-HWY-104, no historic properties were found during the evaluation. A consultation letter was submitted to SHPO on November 19, 2019 requesting their concurrence with our determination of no effect on historic properties. SHPO requested more information on December 18, 2019. The additional information was submitted on February 19, 2020.

Copy of the consultation letters, reports and SHPO responds are included on Appendix E.

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.

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

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

42. Would 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?

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

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

The proposed project does not require relocation of utilities or construction of new facilities. Nevertheless, due to the impacts of Hurricanes Irma and Maria, rehabilitation, and replacement of PRASA and PREPA utilities are required. A consultation to PRASA and PREPA are required for replacement and rehabilitation requirements.

44. Would the project affect airport clearance?

The project doesn’t affect the airport clearance.

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

No accommodation of pedestrian and bicycle facilities are part of the project’s scope. PR- 124 segments are two lane roadway without shoulders, and its capacity for expansion is limited. Its geometry and operational components would be preserved.

46. Would the project required public involvement activities?

The public would be informed of the proposed project by the use of variable messages boards and public announcements through social media and newspapers, as well as other methods prior the commencement of the construction phase.

47. Does the project have any potential of controversy?

No potential of controversy is expected for the proposed project.

An Environmental Categorical Exclusion Checklist is included on Appendix F.

VI. Environmental Commitments required for the proposed project:

1. For the proposed activities, additional ROW would be necessary. For Site 104 at PR-124 km

16.0, an amount of 366.00 square meters (0.0932 cuerdas) are required. In the cases of Site 106 at km 21.9 and Site 108 at km 23.4, an amount of 50.61squre meters (0.012 cuerdas) and

246.00 square meters (0.063 cuerdas), respectively are necessary. Also, temporary construction easement (720.497 square meters (0.183 cuerdas)) would be required for Site

104. Construction easements would be acquired to accommodate the proposed slopes repairs and drainage improvements. PRHTA would provide compensation for landowners under laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the FHWA Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act (Uniform Act).

2. At ER-HWY-106 and ER-HWY-108 sites there are structures considered eligible to the NRHP.

For those sites, a documentation and monitoring plan would be implemented to avoid adverse effects to this structure. 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.

3. The project is not likely to adversely affect federally-listed species or their critical habitats.

Implementation of USFWS BMPs for Puerto Rican Boa (Chilabothrus inornatus) will be performed. if any of the species is sighted within the project area USFWLS conservation protocols would be implemented during construction.

4. During the construction, the PR-124 segments would be remaining open, but temporary half section closure may be necessary. A TMP/MOT would be prepared specifically for this project.

5. Erosion and sedimentation control measures would be implemented during the construction activities to prevent the discharge of pollutants into the nearby water bodies. Our Agency would require the authorization to prepare and implement a Consolidated General Permit and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit (if required). Also, we would request the contractor to comply with any other applicable regulations.

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

Nevertheless, due to the impacts of Hurricanes Irma and Maria, rehabilitation, and replacement of PRASA and PREPA utilities are required. A consultation to PRASA and PREPA are required for replacement and rehabilitation requirements. 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.

7. The proposed project would require the cut of trees. According to the “Reglamento Conjunto para la Evaluación y Expedición de Permisos Relacionados al Desarrollo, Uso de Terrenos y Operación de Negocios” issued on June 7, 2019”, a mitigation plan will be necessary to mitigate the tree impacts. Nevertheless, an Administrative Order Number 2019-01 was issued by Permit Management Office on January 8, 2019 to extend the streamline permit process for the projects related to the emergency. The Order authorize the cut of trees without the

Gregory A Shelton

12/14/2020

Appendix A - Emergency Declaration Documents

Appendix B Project Maps, Figures and Drawings

Figure No. 1 Location Plan

Figure No. 2 Aerial Photo

Figure No. 3 Aerial Photo – Segment ER‐HWY‐104

Figure No. 4 Aerial Photo – Segment ER‐HWY‐106

Figure No. 5 Aerial Photo – Segment ER‐HWY‐108

Figure No. 6 FEMA Flood Maps

Figure No. 7 Zoning Maps

Appendix C Detailed Damage Inspection Reports (DDIR)

Appendix D USFWLS Coordination

Emergency Relief Program Landslide and Road Damages Table 1 ‐ Projects Information

Column1 AC Number Road Km Municipality ER-HWY-ID Critical Habitats NWI per IPaC Reptiles Plants Amphibians Birds Proposed Engineering Solution PRTHA Determination

1 809544 PR-1 24.8

(Southbound) Guaynabo 4 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Proposed Dumped Rip-Rap and Concrete Gutters

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus. A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

2 828544 PR-111 43.1 Utuado 34 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gabion Wall, Rip-Rap and Concrete Headwall May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

3 828544 PR-111 43.3 Utuado 35 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gabion Wall, Rip-Rap and Wingwall May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

4 802544 PR-111 44.9 Utuado 37 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Retaining wall, guardrails, May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

5 828544 PR-111 45.4 Utuado 38 None None Epicrates inornatus Cordia bellonis None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gabion Wall, Rip-Rap and Concrete Headwall, Curb, Catch basin, storm sewer

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

6 828544 PR-111 56.4 Utuado 48 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata, Columba inornata wetmorei

Special inlet, Rip-rap, storm sewer, curb type C, cncrete swale, guardrail, gabion wall

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata and Columba inornata wetmorei . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

7 802544 PR-111 66.2 Utuado 53 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gabion Wall, Rip-Rap and Wingwall May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

8 809544 PR-112 14.1 Moca 60 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Retaining Wall, Single Face Guard Rail, Concrete Barrier (Type C), Concrete Paved Gutter.

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

9 818544 PR-121 11.65 Yauco 81 None R2UBHx* Epicrates inornatus None None None Curb & Gutter, Gabion Wall, W-Beam Guardrail, Asphalt Pavement.

May affect, Not likely to adversely E. inornatus species. A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

10 809544 PR-124 16 Lares 104 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Reinforced Soil Wall May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus. A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

11 809544 PR-124 2.4 Las Marias 105 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Provide drainage system May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata. A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

12 809544 PR-124 21.9 Lares 106 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Provide drainage system May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

13 802544 PR-124 22.35 Lares 107 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Ret.Wall, Shallow Concrete, Dumped Rip-Rap Class 1 May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

14 809544 PR-124 23.4 Lares 108 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Reinforced Soil Wall May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

15 809544 PR-128 51.3 Moca 133 None None Epicrates inornatus None None None Concrete Paved Waterway, Single Face Guard Rail, Concrete Barrier (Type C), May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

16 809544 PR-128 51.63 Lares 134 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gravity Retaining Wall, Barrier, Waterway (Type V).

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

17 809544 PR-128 51.71 Lares 135 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gravity Retaining Wall, Waterway type VII, Curb & Gutter (Type F).

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

18 809544 PR-128 51.77 Lares 136 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gravity Retaining Wall, Concrete Barrer (Type C), Waterway (Type VII).

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E. inornatus, Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata . A biologist will visit the site before the earth moving activities begin to certify that no ESA listed species are present. If any species are found within the project site the BMPs provided by USFWS shall be implemented.

19 809544 PR-128 51.83 Lares 137 None None Epicrates inornatus None None Buteo platypterus brunnescens, Amazona vittata Gravity Retaining Wall, Concrete Barrier, Curb & Gutter (Type F), Waterway (Type V), Single face Guardrail.

May affect, Not likely to adversely affect E.