Categorical Exlclusion Form (NEPA).pdf

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

ROCR 910(1)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: ROCR 910(1) Date: 4/14/2022

Project Name: Reconstruction of Edgewater Stables Access Bridge

Location: Rock Creek Park Washington, D.C.

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, proposes to replace the Edgewater Stables Access Road bridge at Rock Creek, adjacent to Beach Drive. This includes removal of all existing bridge components (piers, abutments, sub and super structure, and approaches), and the construction of a new 2-span bridge with a center pier located instream of Rock Creek. Additional work includes installation of erosion sediment control and in-stream riprap scour countermeasures, temporary in-stream equipment access ramps, preparation and installation of material stockpile and equipment storage areas, curb removal and pavement repair, and the installation of SWM BMPs.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

• If the initial bridge/culvert or structure assessments failed to detect Indiana bats, but you later detect bats prior to, or during construction, please submit the Post Assessment Discovery of Bats at Bridge/Culvert or Structure Form (User Guide Appendix E) to this Service Office within 2 working days of the incident. In these instances, potential incidental take of Indiana bats may be exempted provided that the take is reported to the Service.

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance On 09/11/2018 FHWA coordinated with the USFWS. FHWA concluded that the project is not likely to adversely affect the following species: Northern Long-eared Bat (Myotis 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) septentrionalis), Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus), and Hay's Spring Amphipod (Stygobromus hayi). As there has been no change to the project scope the coordination is still valid. Based on the project description, the project would have no effect on the threatened Northern Long Eared Bat (NLEB) (Myotis septentrionalis). The project may rely on the revised February 5, 2018, FHWA, FRA, FTA Programmatic Biological Opinion for Transportation Projects within the range of the Indiana Bat and Northern Long-eared Bat (PBO) to satisfy requirements under Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (87 Stat.884, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance In a letter dated 12/17/2021, the Rock Creek Park coordinated with the DC State Historic Preservation Office. The determination made was that, there will be no adverse effect on historic properties. The project includes replacing the existing, non-historic bridge with a very similar bridge in the same location and rehabilitating the two existing bioretention structures nearby. No archaeological surveys are warranted.

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance N/A

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

ROCR 910(1)

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

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.

Stephanie Dawson Environmental Protection Specialist Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Federal Highway Administration

Date

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 Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division Federal Highway Administration

Date

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

If Yes, De Minimis Finding:☐ Programmatic:☐ Individual 4(f): ☐

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

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? ☒Yes ☐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?

☐Yes ☒No

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

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 (Myotis septentrionalis)

• Monarch Butterfly (Danaus plexippus)

• Hay's Spring Amphipod (Stygobromus hayi).