Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Record of Environmental Consideration See44CodeofFederal RegulationPart 10. Project Name/Number: Trist Middle School / PW 11648 Project Location: 1Pirates Cove, Meraux, Louisiana, St. Bernard Parish 70075 (N29 92836 W-89.92573) Project Description: Project activities include repairing the following: glazed block and masonry walls, light gauge trusses, railing, metal studs, structural steel supports for the standing metal seam roof, wood furring, ply sheathing, roof sheathing, fiberglass panels in aluminum frame, caulking built- up roofing, standing seam metal roof, metal doors and frames, hollow metal steel doors, window glass aluminum window wall, window wall in steel frame, gypsum wallboard, wood flooring cork underlayment for wood flooring, resilient flooring, quarry tiles, carpet, terrazzo tiles, acoustical ceiling tiles, chalkboards, tack boards, toilet partitions and accessories, aluminum canopies, interior signage metal lockers, library equipment, freezer, kitchen equipment, surveillance cameras, CCTV stations PA systems, boiler, hydronic heating converter, classroom countertop cabinets, kitchen cabinets wood' shelving, built mwood cabinets, aluminum blinds, stage platform and wood stairs, reflective solar film over gymnasium windows, wood bleachers, water pipes and sanitary pipes, HVAC units window units, and fire and electrical systems. 4hazard mitigation proposals (HMP) are also included in the project worksheet. HMP 1is to mitigate the damage to the window walls and windows by installing hurricane roll up shutters made of extruded 51MM PVC slats. HMP 2is to mitigate damage to the wood strip flooring in the gymnasium by replacing the wood flooring with resilient flooring Wthick with urethane finish. HMP 3is to mitigate damage to the electrical wiring by migrating the electrical wiring from the first floor to the second floor and enclosing all of the wiring in 1-1/4" PVC conduits HMP 4is to mitigate damage to double tiered metal lockers by installing solid plastic lockers in place of the metal lockers. Documentation Requirements • No Documentation Required (Review Concluded) • (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) M(Long version) All applicable laws and executive orders were reviewed. Additional information for compliance is attached to this REC. National Environmental Policy Act fNEPA) Determination JZj Statutorily excluded from NEPA review. (Review Concluded) U Programmatic Categorical Exclusion -Category (Review Concluded) • Categorical Exclusion -Category LJ No Extraordinary Circumstances exist. Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) CI No (Review Concluded) Record of Environmental Consideration 1 07/22/06 ReviewerName: Letha Dawson Disaster/Emergency/ProEr«m^roiectTitli» npifimi a/u „ , Applicant: St. Bernard Parish School Board (FloodDamageJ °Sn"n/ProJ«' ™« DRI603LA/Humane Katnn./Public Assistance Program/ESBO128 NP Trist Middle School D Extraordinary Circumstances exist (See Section IV). U Extraordinary Circumstances mitigated. (See Section IV comments) D ^iror^^^r^^°YeS^-ionV)DNo ^^^^ D Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Reference EA or PEA in comments) |£J Environmental Impact Statement WtoS'cSr1"*rtS^ CritCriaf°r• AltematiVe^^ment(PermanentSchools)typeofproject This project has cond,t,ons and requires negation under the other Environmental and Historic Preser^tion (S) Laws Reviewer and Approvals • Project is Non-Compliant (See attached documentation justifying selection). FEMA Environmental Reviewer. Name: Letha Dawson, Environmental Specialist Signature ^^WUki , MW^ Date 07/22/2006 FEMA Regional Environmental Officer or delegated approving official Name: Donald Fairley, ELO Signature ^/^L^Sy. Date 07/22/2006 L Compliance Review for Environmental Laws (other than NEPA) A. National Historic Preservation Act 3 Not type of activity with potential to affect historic properties. (Review Conclude n\LT-Td ^Tumnatic ASreement (12/03/2004) Otherwise, conduct standard Section 106 review U Activity meets Programmatic Allowance # review. Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) D No (Review Conclude HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES H No historic properties that are listed or 45/50 years or older in project area. (Review Conclnd^n DBuildmg orstructure hstedor45/50 years or older inproject areaLd activity not exempt fromlew ArZZlt 12 t0nC ro°Pe mS AffeCtCd (FEMA fin^g/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Concur ' UDetermination of Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) UProperty aNational Historic Landmark and National Park Service was provided early notification during the consultation process. Ifnot, explain in comments nonrication U No Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) DNo (Review Cnnclnd.d) U Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) U Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) Are project conditions required Q Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Conclude ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES L>3 Project affects only previously disturbed ground. (Review Concluded^ LJ Project affects undisturbed ground. • Project area has no potential for presence of archeological resources Record of Environmental Consideration 07/22/06 Reviewer Name: LethaDawson Disaster/Emergency/Proeram/ProiertTin,-rmimuA/u „ , Applicant: St.BernardParishSchoolBoard (FloodDamage? y/rr°gr"m/Pr0Ject™e-DR1603LA'HumcaneKatnna/Pub.icAssistanceProgram/ESBO128 NPTristMiddleSchool • Determination ofno historic properties affected (FEMA finding/SHPOATHPO concurrence or consultation on file). (Review Concluded) incurrence or • Project area has potential for presence ofarcheological resources • Determination of no historic properties affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project cond.t.ons required • Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Conclude ' LJ Determination of historic properties affected DNR eligible resources not present (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) HI M^r ^ud^^^ Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Conch.ded^ RecordofEnvironmentalConsideration t 07/22/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Comments: Project is not in or adjacent to any waterways of the US. Correspondence/Consultation/References: E. Coastal Zone Management Act D Project is not located in acoastal zone area and does not affect acoastal zone area (Review concluded) I2SI Project is located in acoastal zone area and/or affects the coastal zone E3 State administering agency does not require consistency review. (Review Concluded) |_J State administering agency requires consistency review. Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) D NO (Review Concluded) C»«*ZT FEM/LhaS d P-Ject is located in zoTb a^oeSvee 2t of 100-yr flood and 500-yr flood or mcertain areas subject to flooding with average depths less than one foot or where the contributing drainage area ,s less than one square mile; or in areas protected by levees from the base flood ^jecTi renal building to pre-disaster footprint which is not likely to impact any floodplain. Project includes proposed miSion wS Record ofEnvironmental Consideration 07/22/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson Disaster/Emergency/ProEram/ProiectTitlP-nRifimi4/u „, Applicant: St. Bernard Parish School Board (Flood Damage? 0^'m/?ro'ect ™e-DR16°3LA /Humcane Katrma/ Public Assistance Program /ESB0128 NP Tris. Middle School whichever is higher. JahniJiTK^^S^ ^ "*"*" ^(HEAG)**»^ site' Co/-rg5powrfe«ce/coAMM/rar/o/i//-ej/ere/icej: B. E.0.11990-Wetlands HNo Effects on Wetland(s) and project located outside Wetland(s) -(Review Concluded! U Located in Wetland or effects Wetland(s) "qeq> DBeneficial Effect on Wetland -(Review Concluded) U Possible adverse effect associated with constructing in or near wetland U Review completed as part offloodplain review • 8Step Process Complete -documentation on file Are project conditions required? DYES (see section V) QNO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: CEO. 12898 -Environmental Justice For Low Income and Minority Populations HNo Low income or minority population in, near or affected by the project -(Review Concluded! * r0PUIatl0I1S U Low income or minority population in or near project area Cd> DNo disproportionately high and adverse impact on low income or minority population-(Review Concluded) • Disproportionately high or adverse effects on low income or minority population * Are project conditions required? DYES (see section V) DNO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: III. Other Environmental Issues Identify other potential environmental concerns in the comment box not clearly falling under alaw or executive order (see environmental concerns scoping checklist for guidance). Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: IV. Extraordinary Circumstances Based on the review of compliance with other environmental laws and Executive Orders, and in cons,derat.on of other environmental factors, review the project for extraordinary circumslces. " *2S££?l!!l CjrCrStance «** rec*uire an Environmental Assessment (EA) with the exception of (ii) StS , ^ I1" C°nJUnCtl0n Wkh C°ntr0VerSy °n an e"vironmental issue. If the circumstance L be mitigated, please explain in comments. Ifno, leave blank. Yes D (i) Greater scope or size than normally experienced for aparticular category of action U (ii) Actions with ahigh level ofpublic controversy • (iii) Potential for degradation, even though slight, of already existing poor environmental conditions; • (iv) Employment of unproven technology with potential adverse effects or actions involving unique or unknown environmental risks; Record ofEnvironmental Consideration 6 nn,^,n, 07/22/06 Reviewer Name: Letha Dawson D (v) Presence of endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat, or archaeological cultural, historical or other protected resources; U (vi) Presence of hazardous or toxic substances at levels which exceed Federal, state or local regulations orstandards requiring action orattention- U (v..) 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 i—i sole orprincipal drinking water aquifers; U (vin) Potential for adverse effects on health or safety; and U (ix) Potential to violate afederal, state, local or tribal law or requirement imposed for the protection ofthe environment. • (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 proposed action may not be significant by themselves. Comments: None V. Environmental Review Project Conditions General comments: None Project Conditions: • Per FEMA flood recovery guidance, dated 04/12/2006, where possible, all equipment and contents should be elevated to either the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) shown on the current eirective firm or at least 3feet above the Highest Existing Adjacent Grade (HEAG) at the building site, whichever is higher. Monitoring Requirements: None Record of Environmental Consideration 7 07/22/06