Attachment_J-12_NEPA_Language.pdf

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 1

Attachment J-12

PROCEDURAL GUIDANCE COMPLYING WITH NATIONAL

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT REQUIREMENTS – PROPOSED

HOUSTON CONTRACT DETENTION FACILITY (CDF)

1.0) INTRODUCTION

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970 (Pub. Law 90-190; 42 U.S.C. § 4331 et seq) establishes a national goal of protecting the environment. NEPA requirements apply to any Federal project, decision, or action that might have a significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Prospective contractors (hereinafter “Offerors”) responding to this solicitation must assist ICE in complying with NEPA requirements. In addition to NEPA, Offerors must consider other environmental statutes including but not limited to: Clean Air Act of 1974; Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974; Endangered Species Act of 1973; National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; the Farmland Protection Policy Act, Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, and others.

Offerors must also consider applicable Executive Orders (EOs), such as EO 11988 and 12898.

A) Project Planning and Identification of Proposed Sites

During the planning phase of the project, the Offeror identifies a proposed site for contract performance and any construction, renovation or expansion activities that may be necessary. In order to identify possible environmental concerns and impacts to the environment, the Offeror should involve others at this stage through formal and/or informal meetings and consultations by making affected or interested parties aware of the proposed action and potential environmental impacts, and provide an opportunity to express comments or concerns. The Offeror should make a record of any consultations and/or meetings, and summarize any comments.

B) Preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA)

ICE will be reviewing and compiling information submitted by Offerors in order to create a Final EA for ICE’s proposed contract action. This Final EA will be drafted by ICE using information obtained directly from the Offerors’ submissions.

ICE will evaluate each submission and determine if the level of NEPA analysis is sufficient to warrant including it as a viable alternative for a siting location of the facility. In order to facilitate ICE’s NEPA compliance, each Offeror shall submit its own EA to ICE in accordance with the outline below. The Offeror may prepare its EA or contract for the preparation of all or parts of its EA. In order to adequately assess all of the potential environmental impacts, the environmental analysis requires a multi-disciplinary approach. Each Offeror’s EA shall contain the following:

Proposed Action and Purpose and Need:

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 2

The Proposed Action shall be as follows: “The proposed action is to evaluate the potential for impacts to the quality of the human environment for awarding a contract for the construction, renovation, and/or operation of a Contract Detention Facility (CDF) with an operational capacity of 1,000 beds to support ICE administration, processing, and court rooms on a parcel of land located within a 50 mile radius of the ICE Houston Field Office located at 126 Northpoint Drive, Houston Texas, 77060.

Under the proposed action, the contractor selected would be responsible for ensuring that the facility is operated in a manner consistent with the mission of ICE and state and federal laws and regulations. This Environmental Assessment (EA) serves to evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed action and alternatives, including the No Action Alternative, as stipulated by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.”

The Purpose and Need shall be as follows “the purpose of the Proposed Action is to provide a CDF with sufficient detention services, armed transportation services, on-call guard services, administrative and office space services, and parking spaces at the CDF to effectively and efficiently carry-out ICE’s mission of fulfilling orders for the securing and departure activities of detainees who are designated in removal proceedings and for arranging the detention of detainees when such becomes necessary and prescribed by law. The CDF is required because the capacity to support the effective detention of persons in the area has been reached.” The purpose and need will further describe the components of ICE’s need for the CDF (as outlined in the RFP) and the EA will evaluate the proposed action and the environmental impacts of the proposed action. The following is a brief list of evaluations and analyses required to be included in the EA. Please see Section 2.0 below for a more detailed discussion of the resource categories to be evaluated and discussed. The EA will include:

• An analysis of the “No Action Alternative.”

• Mitigation – if the EA requires mitigation in order to make a Finding of No

Significant Impact (FONSI), a detailed description of mitigation that will be performed prior to, during, or after contract performance.

• A listing of the documents and persons consulted in the preparation of the EA, those responsible for preparation of the EA, as well as a list of proposed recipients of the EA.

• Any other document or information (other than a discussion of the “No Action Alternative”) as may be necessary and as described in Section 2.0.

The environmental impacts of the proposed action should be presented in a manner that defines the issues and provides a clear basis for choice among options by ICE.

If the EA indicates significant effects, which could be reduced to insignificant levels with mitigation measures, the EA should describe the mitigating measures, how the Offeror proposes to implement them and the proposed timeline for implementation.

The successful offeror will be contractually bound to execute the necessary mitigation actions. The Offeror will submit its completed draft EA to ICE for review and comment prior to ICE incorporating the information into its own EA for the proposed action.

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 3

C) Review of the Offeror’s EA

ICE OAQ and other Agency technical experts will review the Offeror’s EA based on the following over-arching criteria:

• Has the Proposed Action been adequately described?

• Have the relevant areas of potential environmental impact been properly identified and assessed?

• Have reasonable mitigation measures been identified, considered and described in an implementation plan where possible?

• Has a convincing case been made that the project as presently conceived will have only insignificant impacts on each of the identified areas of environmental concern?

• Have other agencies, officials, and stakeholders with an interest or potential interest been consulted?

D) Required Letters from Key Local Officials

The Offeror must prepare, submit, and obtain responses, as applicable from key local officials and regulatory stakeholders commenting on the environmental impacts of the proposal and submit them with the offer.

E) Review Comments and Modify Proposal, as Appropriate

The Offeror should review any comments received and incorporate them in its proposal, if appropriate. The comments, response to these comments, and any revisions to the proposed project must be submitted to ICE as part of the environmental analysis accompanying its proposal. If late comments are received, the Offeror shall consider whether they have any impact to its proposal, and forward both the comments and its assessment to ICE for Agency evaluation.

F) Final ICE EA

The information provided by an Offeror in its EA may be included, in whole or in part, in a publicly available EA prepared by ICE for the proposed contract action. If ICE’s EA is insufficient to support a FONSI or mitigated FONSI, then the Offeror may be required to provide additional documentation or information for consideration in its environmental documents. The requirement for additional documentation or information could be substantial.

2.0) CONTENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA)

An EA is a concise public document that provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or issue a FONSI as a result of completing an EA. It is designed to help public officials make

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 4 decisions that are based on an understanding of the human and physical environmental consequences of the proposed project and take actions, in the location and design of the project that protect, restore and enhance the environment.

In preparing an EA, it is important to understand the need for documented consideration of alternatives and the comprehensive nature of the impacts which must be analyzed.

Consideration must be given to all potential impacts associated with the construction activity (if applicable), project operation and maintenance, and the attainment of the project’s major objectives. This would include an analysis of the environmental impacts of the activities to be conducted by the Offeror. For example, if siting of the CDF would be located on undisturbed lands, the impacts to land use and soils would require an in-depth analysis in the appropriate sections of the EA.

The amount of analysis and material that must be provided will depend upon the nature and scale of the proposal, the environment in which it is located, and the range and complexity of the potential impacts. The amount of analysis and detail provided, therefore, must be commensurate with the magnitude of the expected impact. The document should be comprehensive, but analytic rather than encyclopedic. The analysis of each environmental factor (i.e., biological resources) must be taken to the point that a conclusion can be reached and supported concerning the degree of the expected impact with respect to that factor. Generally an EA can be completed in 25-50 pages in length, except in unusual cases where a proposal is so complex that a concise document may not be sufficient or where it is extremely difficult to determine whether the proposal could have significant environmental effects. A lengthy EA might indicate that an EIS is needed.

The following describes the required sections of the Offeror’s EA and what should be included in each section. Not every issue or potential impact will be relevant to each proposed project location. However, each environmental factor listed should be addressed with a brief explanation of the impact or why it is not relevant.

A) Executive Summary

The EA should contain an Abstract to include:

• A listing of the Project Sponsor(s);

• Contact Person(s);

• A brief description of the proposed action;

• A brief description of the location of the proposed action;

• A summary of the EA's findings; and

B) Introduction

This section should briefly describe the regulatory framework and action that constitutes the preparation of an EA.

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 5

C) Project Background

This section should include a detailed description of the existing conditions and the projects’ location.

D) Purpose and Need

This section should describe the purpose of the EA and the need for the proposed action as outlined in Section 1.B above. The description should include the scope and content of the analysis, the decision to be made, and a discussion of how the approach for public participation was developed.

E) Proposed Action and Alternatives

An important element of the process of preparing the EA is the investigation and evaluation of alternatives to the proposed action. This section should describe the proposed action and “No Action” alternative as mandated by NEPA and provide a basis for comparison. The evaluation should also include a summary of the “alternatives considered but eliminated.”

F) Affected Environmental and Consequences

This section provides the technical basis for decision making and the comparison of alternatives. It should include an evaluation of the extent of the impacts of the project (and associated surrounding lands), to include the activities to be conducted by the participants as well as any related projects. For example, a related project would be a necessary extension or expansion of a water or sewer system or new road construction for access purposes. The environmental impacts of these related activities must also be assessed within the EA. Unique or sensitive areas must be noted including, but not limited to: residential areas, schools, hospitals, recreational areas, historical sites, lakes, rivers, parks, floodplains, wetlands, natural landmarks, steep slopes, important farmlands and forest lands, endangered species habitats, or other unique or sensitive features.

The EA should include location maps of the project area as well as: a U.S.

Geological Survey “15 minute” (“7½ minute”, if available), quadrangle map which clearly delineates the area and the location of the project site; FEMA Flood Insurance and National Wetland Inventory maps for the project area; site photos; information from a soil survey for the project; and if available, an aerial photograph of the site. When necessary for descriptive purposes or environmental analysis, include maps and other similar graphic information. All graphic materials should be of high quality resolution. The EA should include at least a review and discussion of the following resource categories:

• Geology/Soils, Topography, and Seismicity: Indicate topographic conditions including areas of steep slope. Indicate geologic and soil features and

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 6 characteristics including features that may influence planning, design, construction and/or operation of the proposed facility. Indicate whether the project will either directly or indirectly convert an important farmland identified in the Farmland Protection Policy Act as further defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 7 CFR Part 658. If a conversion may result, determine if there is a practicable alternative to avoiding it. If there is no such alternative, determine whether all practical mitigation measures are included in the project.

• Hydrology and Water Resources: Discuss, in terms of amounts and types of effluents, all direct and indirect aspects of the project which will affect hydrologic resources (i.e., surface and groundwater). Evaluate the impacts of the facility on existing water quantity and quality of such resources. Indicate whether the facility is either located within a 100-year and/or 500-year floodplain or a wetland or will impact a floodplain or wetland. If so, determine if there is a practicable alternative project location. If there is no such alternative, determine whether all practicable mitigation measures are included as part of the project and document as an attachment with these determinations.

• Biological Resources: Indicate all aspects of the project including construction, and known direct and indirect effects which will affect the natural environment including wildlife, their habitats, and unique natural features. Indicate whether the project will either affect a federal or state listed endangered or threatened species or critical habitat, or adversely affect a proposed critical habitat for endangered or threatened species, or jeopardize the continued existence of a proposed endangered or threatened species. This analysis should be conducted in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife when appropriate.

The results of any required coordination will be described along with any completed biological opinion and mitigation measures required for the project.

• Cultural Resources and Historic Properties: The Offeror shall detail the steps taken to comply with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s (ACHP) Regulations. First, indicate that the National Register of Historic Places has been consulted and whether there are any listed properties located within the area to be affected by the project. Second, indicate the steps taken, such as historical/archeological surveys, to determine if there are any properties eligible for listing located within the affected area as applicable.

Summarize the results of the consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and attach appropriate documentation of the SHPO’s views.

Based upon this process and the views of the SHPO, state whether or not an eligible or listed property will be affected. If there will be an effect, discuss those steps and protective measures taken to comply with the Advisory Council’s regulations. Describe the affected property and the nature of the effect.

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 7

• Aesthetics/Visual Impacts: Indicate any sensitive or unique views, vistas or adjacent land uses which could be adversely impacted by the proposed project. Use photographs to support this section where applicable.

• Hazardous Materials and Waste: Indicate the presence of any known or suspected hazardous materials contamination within the proposed site.

Include a discussion of the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (or equivalent) within the EA (where applicable).

• Social Environment and Environmental Justice: Describe demographic characteristics and conditions of the host community and county. Include statistics from the U.S. Census and other similar sources to indicate: total population, age cohorts, educational attainment, income, racial and ethnic characteristics, labor force, major employers, employment/unemployment rates, total housing units, etc. Indicate whether any populations will be removed or relocated as a result of the proposed action and the number of people to be relocated. Discuss disproportionate impacts to any existing minority and low-income communities compared to communities in the Houston metropolitan area and the state of Texas as a whole. Discuss how impacts resulting from the project such as changes in land use, transportation impacts, air emissions, noise, etc., will effect nearby residents and users of the project area and surrounding areas. Discuss whether the proposal will result in population changes and, if so, their nature and scale.

• Human Health and Safety: Describe the potential impacts of any population increases on the area’s public and community services such as schools, health care, social services, police and fire protection.

• Land Use: Describe existing site land use and adjacent land uses; evaluate the effect of altering the land use of the project site and how this change will affect the surrounding land uses. Describe the existing land use plan and zoning restrictions for the project area (if applicable).

• Utilities and Infrastructure: Describe existing utility systems serving the area of the project site (i.e., potable water supply, wastewater collection and treatment, electric power and/or natural gas supply, etc.). Indicate the demands to be placed upon existing utility systems as a result of the proposed project and evaluate the adequacy of these systems to accommodate the proposed project. If any utility system is or will be inadequate or overloaded, describe the steps being taken for necessary improvements and their completion dates. Indicate if recycling or resource recovery programs are or will be used. Discuss any steps/actions to be undertaken to conserve water and/or energy consumption. Cite any contacts with appropriate agencies that must issue necessary approvals and/or permits.

• Traffic and Transportation Systems: Describe principal access routes to the project site. Discuss whether the project will result in an increase in motor vehicle traffic and the existing roadway’s ability to safely accommodate any such increases. Indicate if additional traffic control devices are to be installed to accommodate traffic. Describe any improvements to the transportation system which will be necessary as a result of the project. Discuss how these

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 8 new traffic patterns will affect the land uses described earlier, especially residential, commercial, schools, and recreational.

• Air Quality: Discuss the amounts and types of emissions to be produced from all aspects of the project and known indirect effects (such as increased motor vehicle traffic) which will affect air quality. Indicate the existing air quality in the area and if topographical or meteorological conditions hinder or affect the dispersal of air emissions. Evaluate the impact on air quality given the types and amounts of projected emissions, the existing air quality, and topographical and meteorological conditions. Discuss the project’s consistency with the State’s air quality implementation plan for the area, the classification of the air quality control region within which the project is located, and status of compliance with air quality standards within the region (e.g., non-attainment areas).

• Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change: Discuss impacts to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions and climate change adaptation/resilience.

Compare GHG emissions with CEQ reporting thresholds as applicable.

• Noise: Discuss the nature and volume of noise emissions to be produced from all aspects of the project and known indirect effects (such as increased motor vehicle traffic) which will affect noise conditions. Indicate the existing noise conditions in the area and other predominant noise sources.

Evaluate the impact on existing noise conditions given the types and amounts of projected noise sources and the existing noise conditions.

G) Cumulative Impacts

This section will summarize any cumulative impacts of this project and any directly-related projects. Give particular attention to land use changes and air and water quality impacts. Summarize the results of the environmental impact analysis done for any of these related projects. Summarize any potential adverse impacts pointed out in the above analysis.

H) Summary of Significant Impacts, Required Mitigation, and Best

Management Practices

This section will summarize significant impacts and potential required mitigation.

Evaluate the potential adverse impacts of the proposed action as identified in the above analysis. Describe any measures which will be taken to avoid or mitigate the identified adverse impacts. Analyze the environmental impacts and potential effectiveness of the mitigation measures.

I) References Consulted in Preparing the EA

The Offeror is encouraged to conduct informal outreach and consultations with appropriate experts from Federal, state, and local agencies, universities, and other organizations or groups whose knowledge could be helpful in the assessment of potential impacts. All informal outreach activities should be conducted in the Offeror’s name. Offeror’s shall not represent ICE or the Federal Government in

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 9 any way or present themselves as agents of the Federal Government. Any misrepresentations will result in delays in EA reviews at the cost of the Offeror.

In so doing, each reference should be listed and include documents, maps and similar publications along with the name, title, and organization of individuals contacted in addition to the date of contact. Related correspondence should be attached to the EA. As the lead Federal Agency for this project, ICE will be conducting formal consultations with appropriate Federal, state, and local agencies.

J) List of Preparers

The EA should include a list of those individuals responsible for its preparation including names, titles, education, licenses and other related credentials.

K) Appendices

The EA should include a listing of agencies and officials provided with copies of the document for review and comment. This would include federal, state, local/county agencies and organizations, public libraries, interested citizens, etc.

The Offeror need not submit information to the public for public review and/or involvement. ICE will compile information gathered from the Offerors and include in an agency EA that will be made available for public review. Discuss any positive and/or negative comments or public views raised about the project and the consideration given to these comments. Indicate whether a public hearing or public information meeting has been held and include a summary of the results and any objections raised. Indicate any other examples of the community’s awareness of the project, such as newspaper posting or public notifications.

3.0) TABLE OF CONTENTS (TOC)

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Section 1.0 – INTRODUCTION

Section 2.0 – PROJECT BACKGROUND

2.1 Existing Conditions

2.2 Project Location

Section 3.0 – PURPOSE AND NEED

3.1 Scope and Content of the Analysis

3.2 Decision to be made

3.3 Public Participation

Section 4.0 – PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES

4.1 Proposed Action Alternative

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 10

4.2 No Action Alternative

4.3 Summary of Alternatives Considered but Eliminated

Section 5.0 – AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND CONSEQUENCES

5.1: Geology/Soils, Topography, and Seismicity:

5.1.1 Affected Environment

5.1.2 Environmental Consequences

5.1.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.1.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.2: Hydrology and Water Resources:

5.2.1 Affected Environment

5.2.2 Environmental Consequences

5.2.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.2.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.3: Biological Resources:

5.3.1 Affected Environment

5.3.2 Environmental Consequences

5.3.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.3.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.4: Cultural Resources and Historic Properties:

5.4.1 Affected Environment

5.4.2 Environmental Consequences

5.4.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.4.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.5: Aesthetics/Visual Impacts:

5.5.1 Affected Environment

5.5.2 Environmental Consequences

5.5.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.5.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.6: Hazardous Materials and Waste:

5.6.1 Affected Environment

5.6.2 Environmental Consequences

5.6.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.6.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.7: Social Environment and Environmental Justice:

5.7.1 Affected Environment

5.7.2 Environmental Consequences

5.7.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.7.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 11

5.8: Human Health and Safety:

5.8.1 Affected Environment

5.8.2 Environmental Consequences

5.8.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.8.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.9: Land Use:

5.9.1 Affected Environment

5.9.2 Environmental Consequences

5.9.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.9.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.10: Utilities and Infrastructure:

5.10.1 Affected Environment

5.10.2 Environmental Consequences

5.10.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.10.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.11: Traffic and Transportation Systems:

5.11.1 Affected Environment

5.11.2 Environmental Consequences

5.11.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.11.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.12: Air Quality:

5.12.1 Affected Environment

5.12.2 Environmental Consequences

5.12.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.12.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.13: Greenhouse Gas and Climate Change:

5.13.1 Affected Environment

5.13.2 Environmental Consequences

5.13.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.13.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

5.14: Noise:

5.14.1 Affected Environment

5.14.2 Environmental Consequences

5.14.2.1 No Action Alternative

5.14.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

Section 6.0 – CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

6.1 Affected Environment

6.2 Environmental Consequences

6.2.1 No Action Alternative

J-15: NEPA compliance documentation language for ICE CDF – Houston, TX Page 12

6.2.2 Proposed Action Alternative

Section 7.0 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, REQUIRED

MITIGATION, AND BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

Section 8.0 – REFERENCES CONSULTED IN PREPARING THE EA

Section 9.0 – LIST OF PREPARERS

Section 10.0 – APPENDICES

4.0) POINTS OF CONTACT

Arnold Casterline Jr.

DCR Contracting Officer

ICE OAQ

500 12th St. SW Washington, DC 20536

(202) 732-2394 Arnold.P.Casterline@ice.dhs.gov

Elizabeth L. Kennett ICE Environmental, Energy, and Sustainability Project Manager 500 12th St. SW Washington, DC 20536

(202) 732-6649 Elizabeth.L.Kennett@ice.dhs.gov mailto:Arnold.P.Casterline@ice.dhs.gov mailto:Elizabeth.L.Kennett@ice.dhs.gov