Record of Environmental Consideration REVISED FOR FEMA ENVIRONMENTAL --LOUISIANA See 44 Code of Federal Regulation Part 10 Project NamelNumber: Chester Elementary School Modular Classrooml PW 15483vsn3 Applicant Name: Recovery School District Project Location: 3929 Erato St. New Orleans, LA 70125 Latitude: 29.95306, Longitude: -90.09679 Project Description: Hurricane Katrina caused catastrophic damage on August 29,2005 to Chester Elementary School Modular Classroom. This project is one among a total of 22 contributing (donor) facilities approved by FEMA for replacement. The Recovery School District chooses to use eligible funds for this replacement project (less demolition costs) towards the renovation of another existing RSD school. This project scope of work includes only the demolition and disposal of Chester Elementary School Modular Classroom. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Determination D Statutorily excluded from NEPA review (Review Concluded) D Programmatic Categorical Exclusion D Categorical Exclusion -Category D No Extraordinary Circumstances exist. Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) D Extraordinary Circumstances exist (see Section IV). D Extraordinary Circumstances mitigated. (see Section IV comments) Are project conditions required? D Yes (see section V) D No (Review Concluded) D Environmental Assessment D Supplemental Environmental Assessment (Reference EA or PEA in comments) D Environmental Impact Statement [8J Scope of work requires public involvement plan Comments: This project meets the criteria to utilize the Alternative Arrangements process within the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) approved by the Council on Environmental Quality, Department of Homeland Security, and FEMA on 3/23/06. Based on documentation provided by the applicant, FEMA has determined that the Recovery School District has conducted a satisfactory process of public involvement and outreach in its project development and is otherwise • eligible for consideration under Alternative Arrangements for NEPA compliance. The Recovery School District is responsible for archiving public involvement materials. This material will be available at close-out for authentication and such documentation will be made available for the closeout reviewer. D Project is Non-Compliant (see attached documentation justifying selection). Reviewer and Approvals FEMA Environmental Reviewer: Name: Adam Borden, E/~nmen:~pe~list, FEMA LA-TRO Signature ..-' ~~ Date __'i...L.---"!J-,--4-L·_-..:;:.O_~-,----'. FEMA Environmental Liaison Officer or Delegated Approving Official: Name: Cynthi r, D Environmental Liaison Officer, FEMA LA TRO Signat~_---=-i~~:s:::..&~s..-:.~~..;=....;.=-___Date _Y--,-,-(_d'/--'-!./...c.V_Cf-,-'__~ Record of Environmental Consideration (Version April 2001) I. Compliance Review for Environmental Laws (other than NEPAl A. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) D Not type of activity with potential to affect historic structures or archaeological resources (Review Concluded) D Activity meets Programmatic Agreement, December 3,2004. Appendix A: Allowance No. Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see Section V) D No I:8J Programmatic Agreement not applicable for historic structures or archeological sites, must conduct standard Section 106 Review (see comments). D Other Programmatic Agreement dated applies HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES D No historic properties that are listed or 45/50 years or older in project area. (Review Concluded) I:8J Building or structure listed or 45/50 years or older in project area and activity not exempt from review. I:8J Detertnination of No Historic Properties Affected (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? I:8J Yes (see Section V) D No (Review Concluded) Detertnination of Historic Properties Affected (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) D Property a National Historic Landmark and National Park Service was provided early notification during the consultation process. Ifnot, explain in comments D No Adverse Effect Detertnination (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? D Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) Adverse Effect Detertnination (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) o Resolution of Adverse Effect completed (MOA on file) Are project conditions required D Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES D Project scope of work has no potential to affect archeological resources (Review Concluded) I:8J Project affects only previously disturbed ground. (Review Concluded) o Project affects undisturbed ground or grounds associated with a historic structure Project area has no potential for presence of archeological resources D Detertnination of no historic properties affected (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) (Review Concluded) D Project area has potential for presence of archeological resources Detertnination of no historic properties affected (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required D Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) o Detertnination of historic properties affected o NR eligible resources not present (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required D Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) D NR eligible resources present in project area (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) o No Adverse Effect Detertnination (FEMA findingl SHPOITHPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? D Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) o Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA findinglSHPOITHPO concurrence on file) D Resolution of Adverse Effect completed (MOA on file) Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) Comments: FEMA, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), has detertnined that the demolition of Chester Elementary School Modular Classroom and removal offoundation will have no effect on historic properties. Corre.fpondence/ConsultationlRe!erences: -Amber Martinez, Historic Preservation Specialist B. Endangered Species Act I:8J No listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action. (Review Concluded) D Listed species and/or designated critical habitat present in the areas affected directly or indirectly by the Federal action. D No effect to species or designated critical habitat. (See comments for justification) Are project conditions required? 0 Yes (see Section V) D No (Review Concluded) Record of Environmental Consideration (Version April 2007) o May affect, but not likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat (FEMA determinationlUSFWSINMFS concurrence on file) (Review Concluded) Are project conditions required? Yes (see Section V) 0 No (Review Concluded) o Likely to adversely affect species or designated critical habitat o Formal consultation concluded, (Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion on file) Are project conditions required? 0 YES (see Section V) 0 NO (Review Concluded) Comments: Project is located in an urban or previously developed area, Neither listed species nor their habitat occur in or near this site, thus FEMA finds there wiII be no effect to threatened or endangered species, Correspondence/Consultation/References: USFWS emergency consultation provisions determined in letters dated September 15, 2005 for Katrina. C. Coastal Barrier Resources Act [gJ Project is not on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area (Review Concluded). o Project is on or connected to CBRA Unit or Otherwise Protected Area. (FEMA determinationlUSFWS consultation on file) o Proposed action an exception under Section 3505,a.6