Record of Environmental Consideration 

See 44 Code ofFederal Regulation Part 10. 

Project NamelNumber: Police Department Building / PW 7366 

Project Location: 6799 Elysian Fields, New Orleans, Louisian~ Orleans Parish 70126 (N30.03007, 
W-90.06126) 

Project Description: Project activities include removing and installing 42 square feet ofasphalt three 
tab shingles on roof, removing and installing 144 square feet ofsuspended ceiling over dispatch room, 
and refInishing 200 square feet of suspended ceiling in waiting room. Hazard mitigation includes 
installing shingles using the FEMA publication 55 coastal construction manual. 

Documentation Requirements 

o No Documentation Required <Review Concluded) 
o (Short version) All consultation and agreements implemented to comply with the National Historic 
Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, and Executive Orders 11988, 11990 and 12898 are 
completed and no other laws apply. <Review Concluded) 


[g] (Long version) All applicable laws and executive orders were reviewed. Additional information for 
compliance is attached to this REC. 

National Environmental Policy Act (NEP A) Determination 

o Statutorily excluded from NEPA review. (Review Concluded) 
o Programmatic Categorical Exclusion -Category <Review Concluded)
o Categorical Exclusion -Category 
o No Extraordinary Circumstances exist. 
Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see section V) 0 No <Review Concluded) 
o Extraordinary Circumstances exist (See Section IV). 


o Extraordinary Circumstances mitigated. (See Section IV comments) 
Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) 


o Environmental Assessment 
o Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Reference EA or PEA in comments) 


[g] Environmental Impact Statement 

Comments: 6.20.2006. This project meets the criteria for an Alternative Arrangement (Pennanent Police and Fire Stations) 
type ofproject. This project has conditions and requires mitigation under the other EHP laws. 

Reviewer and Approvals 

o Project is Non-Compliant (See attached documentation justifying selection). 


FEMA Environmental Reviewer. 
Name: Brandon M. Clark, Environmental Specialist 


Signature ~M -~~ • Date.__6=1=21o..:..;/2=O=O.:::,.6____--!. 

FEMA Regional Environmental Officer or delegated approving official. 
~ame: Michael Gri~~A -/ 
SIgnature /t:.O@~ .Date._--!:6::....:/2~1..!..!:/2=O..:::..06:::..--___--!. 


I. Compliance Review for Environmental Laws (other than NEPAl 

A. National Historic Preservation Act 

~Not type ofactivity with potential to affect historic properties. (Review Concluded) 
D Applicable executed Programmatic Agreement Otherwise, conduct standard Section 106 review. 
D Activity meets Programmatic Allowance # _____-;;::::;-Are 
project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) No (Review Concluded) 

HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES 
~No historic properties that are listed or 45150 years or older in project area. (Review Concluded) 
D Building or structure listed or 45150 years or older in project area and activity not exempt from review. 

D Determination ofNo Historic Properties Affected (FEMA fmding/SHPOffHPO concurrence on file) 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D Determination of Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) 
D Property a National Historic Landmark and National Park Service was provided early notification 
during the consultation process. If not, explain in comments 
D No Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). 
Are projectcoruiitionsrequired? D Yes (see section V) D No (ReyiewConcluded) 
D Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPOffHPO concurrence on file) 
D Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) 
Are project conditions required D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 

ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 
~Project affects only previously disturbed ground. (Review Concluded) 
D Project affects undisturbed ground. 

D Project area has no potential for presence of archeological resources 
D Determination ofno historic properties affected (FEMA fmding/SHPOffHPO concurrence or 
consultation on file). (Review Concluded) 
D Project area has potential for presence of archeological resources 
D Determination ofno historic properties affected (FEMA fmding/SHPOffHPO concurrence on file) 
Are project conditions required D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D Determination ofhistoric properties affected 
D NR eligible resources not present (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). 

Are project conditions required DYes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D NR eligible resources present in project area. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on 
file) 

D No Adverse Effect Determination. (FEMA fmding/ SHPOffHPO concurrence on file) 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D Adverse Effect Determination. (FEMA fmding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) 

D Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No 
<Review Concluded) 

Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 


B. Endangered Species Act 

181 No listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action. 
eview Con luded 
Listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in the areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action. 

o No effect to species or designated critical habitat. (See comments for justification) 
Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) 
o May affect, but not likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat (FEMA 


detennination/USFWSINMFS concurrence on file) (Review Concluded) 
Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) 


o Likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat 

o Fonnal consultation concluded. (Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion on file) 
Are project conditions required? 0 YES (see section V) 0 NO (Review Concluded) 

IComments: None 

C. Coastal Barrier Resources Act 

181 Project is not on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area (Review Concluded). 

D Project is on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area. (FEMA detennination/USFWS consultation on 
file) 

o Proposed action an exception under Section 3505.a.6? {Review Concluded)
o Proposed action not excepted under Section 3505.a.6. 
Are project conditions required? 0 YES (see section V) D NO <Review Concluded) 


Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

D. Clean Water Act 

181 Project would not affect any waters ofthe U.S. (Review Concluded) 

o Project would affect waters, including wetlands, ofthe U.S. 

o Project exempted as in kind replacement or other exemption. (Review Concluded) 
o Project requires Section 404/40 1I0r Section 9/10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) pennit, including qualification 
under Nationwide Pennits. 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) 0 NO (Review Concluded) 


Comments: Project is not in or adjacent to any waterways ofthe US. 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

E. Coastal Zone Management Act 

o Project is not located in a coastal zone area and does not affect a coastal zone area (Review concluded) 

181 Project is located in a coastal zone area and/or affects the coastal zone 
IZI State administering agency does not require consistency review. (Review Concluded). 
D State administering agency requires consistency review. 

Are project conditions required? 0 YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: FEMA HAS DETERMlNED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL 
ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT AND THE LOUISIANA COASTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN (LCMP). 

Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

F. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act 

IZI Project does not affect, control, or modifY a waterwaylbody ofwater. (Review Concluded) 

o Project affects, controls or modifies a waterwaylbody of water. 

D Coordination with USFWS conducted 
D No Recommendations offered by USFWS. (Review Concluded) 


o Recommendations provided by USFWS. 
Are project conditions required? 0 YES (see section V) 0 NO (Review Concluded) 


Comments: Project is not in or adjacent to any waterways of the US. 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

G. Clean Air Act 
181 Project will not result in pennanent air emissions. (Review Concluded) 
D Project is located in an attainment area. (Review Concluded) 
D Project is located in a non-attainment area. 


D Coordination required with applicable state administering agency.. 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: Project will not result in permanent air emissions. 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

B. Farmland Protection Policy Act 
181 Project does not affect designated prime or unique farmland. (Review Concluded) 
D Project causes unnecessary or irreversible conversion of designated prime or unique farmland. 


D Coordination with Natural Resource Conservation Commission required. 
D Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, Form AD-l 006, completed. 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

I. Migratory Bird Treaty Act 
D Project not located within a flyway zone. (Review Concluded) 
181 Project located within a flyway zone. 


181 Project does not have potential to take migratory birds. (Review Concluded) 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) 181 No (RevIew Concluded) 
D Project has potential to take migratory birds. 
D Contact made with USFWS 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: See letter from Don Fairley to Mr. Russ Watson with USF&WS, dated 09114/2005. Specifically, FEMA has 
determined that restoration projects funded with federal resources will not have adverse impacts on migratory birds or other 
fish and wildlife reserves. These determinations are based on the understanding that the conditions outlined in the Louisiana 
Endangered Species Summary are met 

Correspondence/Consultation/References: http://pacificflyway.gov/Documents/Mississippi map.pdf I 

J. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 
181 Project not located in or near Essential Fish Habitat. (Review Concluded) 
D Project located in or near Essential Fish Habitat. 


D Project does not adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat. (Review Concluded) 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D Project adversely affects Essential Fish Habitat (FEMA determinationlUSFWSINMFS concurrence on file)
D NOAA Fisheries provided no recommendation(s) (Review Concluded). 
Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 
D NOAA Fisheries provided recommendation(s) 
D Written reply to NOAA Fisheries recommendations completed. 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

K. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act 

Record ofEnvironmental Consideration 4 


181 Project is not along and does not affect Wild or Scenic River (WSR) • (Review Concluded) 
D Project is along or affects WSR 
D Project adversely affects WSR as detennined by NPS/uSFS. FEMA cannot fund the action. 
(NPS/uSFS/uSFWSIBLM consultation on file) (Review Concluded) 
D Project does not adversely affect WSR. (NPSlUSFS/uSFWSIBLM consultation on file) 

Are ro'ect conditions re uired? YES see section V D NO eview Concluded 
Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

L. Other Relevant Laws and Environmental Regulations 

II. Compliance Review for Executive Orders 

A. E.O.11988 -Floodplains 
D No Effect on FloodplainslFlood levels and project outside Floodplain -(Review Concluded) 
181 Located in Floodplain or Effects on FloodplainsIFlood levels 

181 No adverse effect on floodplain and not adversely affected by the floodplain. (Review Concluded), 

Are project conditions required? 181 Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) 

D Beneficial Effect on Floodplain OccupancyNalues (Review Concluded). 

D Possible adverse effects associated with investment in floodplain, occupancy or modification of floodplain 

environment 
D 8 Step Process Complete -documentation on file 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: 06/15/2006-THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS/ORLEANS PARISH ENROLLED IN THE NATIONAL 
FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM 08/01170. PER FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP 225203 0095 E, DATED 
03/01/84, PROJECT IS LOCATED IN ZONE "AO{1.5)", AREA OF 100-YR SHALLOW FLOODING, FLOOD 
HAZARD FACTORS NOT DETERMINED. PER ABFE PANEL LA-EE32, DATED 6/512006, SITE IS LOCATED IN 
ZONE "ABFE" 3'ABOVE HEAG. PROJECT IS ROOF REPAIR OF POLICE STATION BUILDING AND 
REPLACEMENT OF CONTENTS AND EQUIPMENT TO PRE-DISASTER FOOTPRINT. AS PER 44 CFR 9.11, 
MITIGATION OR MINIMIZATION STANDARDS MUST BE APPLIED. WHERE POSSmLE, BUILDING 
CONTENTS, MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT (MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL) MUST BE ELEVATED TO OR 
ABOVE ADVISORY BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS OR 3' ABOVE HEAG, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER. MITIGATION 
WAS CONSIDERED AND PROPOSAL IS ATTACHED. PROHNE, CFM. 

Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

B. E.O. 11990 -Wetlands 
181 No Effects on Wetland{s) and project located outside Wetland(s) -(Review Concluded) 
D Located in Wetland or effects Wetland{s)


D Beneficial Effect on Wetland -(Review Concluded) 

D Possible adverse effect associated with constructing in or near wetland 
D Review completed as part offloodplain review 
D 8 Step Process Complete -documentation on file 


Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 

Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

C. E.O.12898 -Environmental Justice For Low Income and Minority Populations 
181 No Low income or minority population in, near or affected by the project -(Review Concluded) 
D Low income or minority population in or near project area 

D No disproportionately high and adverse impact on low income or minority population-(Review Concluded) 
D Disproportionately high or adverse effects on low income or minority population 
Are project conditions required? D YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) 


Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

III. Other Environmental Issues 

Identify otber potential environmental concerns in tbe comment box not clearly falling under a law or 
executive order (see environmental concerns scoping cbecklist for guidance). 

Comments: None 
Correspondence/Consultation/References: 

IV. Extraordinary Circumstances 

Based on tbe review of compliance witb otber environmental laws and Executive Orders, and in 
consideration of otber environmental factors, review tbe project for extraordinary circumstances. 

• A "Yes" under any circumstance may require an Environmental Assessment (EA) with the exception of(ii) which 
should be applied in conjunction with controversy on an environmental issue. Ifthe circumstance can be mitigated, 
please explain in comments. If no, leave blank. 

Yes 

o (i) Greater scope or size than normally experienced for a particular category of action 
o (ii) Actions with a high level ofpublic controversy 
o (iii) Potential for degradation, even though slight, of already existing poor environmental 
conditions; 
o (iv) Employment ofunproven technology with potential adverse effects or actions involving 
unique or unknown environmental risks; 
o (v) Presence of endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat, or archaeological, 
cultural, historicalor other protected resources; 
o (vi) Presence ofhazardous or toxic substances at levels which exceed Federal, state or local 
regulations or standards requiring action or attention; 
o (vii) Actions with the potential to affect special status areas adversely or other critical resources 
such as wetlands, coastal zones, wildlife refuge and wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, 
sole or principal drinking water aquifers; 
o (viii) Potential for adverse effects on health or safety; and 
o (ix) Potential to violate a federal, state, local or tribal law or requirement imposed for the 
protection of the environment. 
o (x) Potential for significant cumulative impact when the proposed action is combined with 


other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, even though the impacts of the 
ro osed action rna not be si ificant b themselves. 

Comments: None 

V. Environmental Review Project Conditions 

Project Conditions: 

1. This project must comply with all conditions of the attached Programmatic Categorical 
Exclusion. 
2. As per 44 CFR 9.11, mitigation or minimization standards must be applied. Where 
possible, building contents, materials, and equipment (mechanical or electrical) must be 
elevated to or above advisory base flood elevation or 3' above highest adjacent grade 
(HAG), whichever is higher. 


Monitoring Requirements: None 

Record ofEnvironmental Consideration 6 06/21/06