Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Applicant: St. Bernard (Parish) Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA / Hurricane Katrina / Public Assistance Program / Maintenance Yard Lunchroom Record of Environmental Consideration See44 CodeofFederalRegulation Part10. Project Name/Number: Maintenance Yard Lunchroom / PW 11613 Project Location: 120 W. Agriculture Rd., Chalmette, Louisiana, St. Bernard Parish 70043 (N29.96159, W-89.95665) Project Description: Project activities include replacing and elevation the Maintenance Yard Lunchroom building. Ahazard mitigation proposal is included to reconstruct the building with CMU construction rather than wood framed construction. In addition, some mitigation will be achieved by compliance with current codes and standards and by good construction practices. Documentation Requirements LI NoDocumentation Required (Review Concluded) U (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) [3 (Long version) All applicable laws and executive orders were reviewed. Additional information for compliance is attached to this REC. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Determination • Statutorily excluded from NEPA review. (Review Concluded) • Programmatic Categorical Exclusion -Category (Review Concluded) Lj Categorical Exclusion -Category LJ No Extraordinary Circumstances exist. Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) • No (Review Concluded) • Extraordinary Circumstances exist (See Section IV). • Extraordinary Circumstances mitigated. (See Section IV comments) Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) • No (Review Concluded) Environmental Assessment • Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Reference EA or PEA in comments) Environmental Impact Statement Comments: 8/9/2006 This project meets the criteria for an Alternative Arrangement (Government and Court Administration Buildings) type ofproject. This project has conditions and requires mitigation under the other Environmental and Historic Preservation (EHP) Laws. Record of Environmental Consideration 1 08/09/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA /Hurricane Katrina /Public Assistance Program /Maintenance Yard LaThlm'* Reviewer and Approvals • Project is Non-Compliant (See attached documentation justifying selection). FEMA Environmental Reviewer. Name: Letha Dawson, Environmental Specialist Signature OLASLka JLjff iJl&gy-N Date 08/09/2006 t FEMA Regional Environmental Officer or delegated approving official. Name: Howard R. Bush, ELO Signature / ^> /-^-^Z> Date 08/09/2006 !• Compliance Review for Environmental Laws (other than NEPA) A. National Historic Preservation Act D Not type of activity with potential to affect historic properties. (Review Concluded) IS! Applicable executed Programmatic Agreement (12/03/2004) Otherwise, conduct standard Section 106 review. [Xj Activity meets Programmatic Allowance #Appendix A, Section I, A. Are project conditions required? £3 Yes (see section V) • No (Review Concluded) HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES D No historic properties that are listed or 45/50 years or older in project area. (Review Concluded) • Building or structure listed or 45/50 years or older in project area and activity not exempt from review. • Determination of No Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) • No (Review Concluded) • Determination of Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) D Property aNational Historic Landmark and National Park Service was provided early notification during the consultation process. Ifnot, explain incomments • No Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) • Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) • Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) Are project conditions required fj Yes (see section V) • No (Review Concluded) ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 13 Project affects only previously disturbed ground. (Review Concluded) LJ Project affects undisturbed ground. • Project area has no potential for presence of archeological resources • Determination of no historic properties affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence or consultation on file). (Review Concluded) • Project area has potential for presence of archeological resources • Determination of no historic properties affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required • Yes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) • Determination ofhistoric properties affected • NR eligible resources not present (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). Are project conditions required DYes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) • NR eligible resources present in project area. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) • No Adverse Effect Determination. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? fj Yes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) • Adverse Effect Determination. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) • Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) Record ofEnvironmental Consideration 2 08/09/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Dis.ster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR. 603LA /Hurricane Katrina /Public Assistance Program /MaimenTe?£"im ' Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) CMNMMr 8/9/2006-Historic review complete: Scope ofwork indicates ground disturbing activities associated with the rebuild and elevation of the structure within its pre-disaster footprint. Upon consultation of SHPO data, there is aknown archaeological site within .5 miles ofthe project area. Since building will be replaced within its pre-disaster footprint this scope ofwork meets Programmatic Agreement (12/3/2004) Allowance, Appendix A, Section I, A. If during the course of work, archaeological artifacts (prehistoric or historic) or human remains are discovered, the applicant shall stop work in the vicinity ofthe discovery and take all reasonable measures to avoid or minimize harm to the finds. The applicant shall inform their Public Assistance (PA) contacts at FEMA, who will in turn contact FEMA Historic Preservation staff. The applicant will not proceed with work until FEMA Historic Preservation staff have completed consultation with the Louisiana State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO). In addition, if unmarked graves are present, compliance with the Louisiana Unmarked Human Burial Sites Preservation Act (R.S. 8:671 ET SEQ.) is required. The applicant shall notify the law enforcement agency of the jurisdiction where the remains are located within twenty-four hours of the discovery The applicant shall also notify FEMA and the Louisiana Unmarked Burial Sites Board (call the Louisiana Division of Archeology at 225-342-8170) within seventy-two hours of the discovery. If this scope ofwork and/or the footprint/location ofthe new building changes, this project will need to be resubmitted for further Section 106 review prior to ground disturbing activities taking place outside of the pre-disaster footprint of the building. -Katherine Zeringue, Historic Preservation Specialist/Archaeologist Correspondence/Consultation/References: B. Endangered Species Act 13 No listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action (Review Concluded) • Listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in the areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action. U No effect to species or designated critical habitat. (See comments for justification) Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) fj No (Review Concluded) • May affect, but not likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat (FEMA determination/USFWS/NMFS concurrence on file) (Review Concluded) Are project conditions required? • Yes (see section V) [J No (Review Concluded) • Likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat • Formal consultation concluded. (Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion on file) Are project conditions required? fj YES (see section V) fj NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: C. Coastal Barrier Resources Act j|j Project is not on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area (Review Concluded). • Project is on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area. (FEMA determination/USFWS consultation on file) • Proposed action an exception under Section 3505.a.6? (Review Concluded) • Proposed action not excepted under Section 3505.a.6. Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) fj NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: D. Clean Water Act [3 Project would not affect any waters ofthe U.S. (Review Concluded) • Project would affect waters, including wetlands, ofthe U.S. fj Project exempted as in kind replacement or other exemption. (Review Concluded) • Project requires Section 404/401/or Section 9/10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) permit, including qualification under Nationwide Permits. Are project conditions required? fj YES (see section V) • NO (Review Concluded) Comments: Projectisnotinoradjacenttoanywaterwaysofthe US. Record of EnvironmentalConsideration 3 08/09/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Disaster/Emergency/Program/ProjectTitle: DRI603LA/HurricaneKatrina/PublicAssistanceProgram/MaintenanceYardLuThroom'5 Correspondence/Consultation/References: E. Coastal Zone Management Act fj Project is not located in acoastal zone area and does not affect acoastal zone area (Review concluded) l2