I I Reviewer Name: Catherine Jones Applicant: St. Bernard Parish j Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA/ Hurricane Katrina/ PublicAssistance Program / 5LiftStationsinSt. Bernard i Record ofEnvironmental Consideration ^••••••mmmmmmmmmm^—mmmmm^mm^^"""^"^^^^^^^^^^^^^ | See44Code ofFederalRegulationPart10. Project Name/Number; 5 Lift Stations in St. Bernard Parish / PW 6639 Project Location: Intersection of Mistrot and Paul Dr, and 4 Other Sites in St. Bernard, Louisiana, St. Bernard Parish (N29.93792, W-89.92357) ; Project Description: Projectactivities includereplacingthepumpmotors,motormegger,motorcontrol panel, conduits, and electrical equipment. Hazard mitigation will be achieved by compliance with current codes and standards. Documentation Requirements I I No Documentation Required (Review Concluded) I I (Shortversion) Allconsultation andagreements implementedtocomplywiththeNational Historic Preservation Act, Endangered Species Act, and Executive Orders 11988, 11990 and 12898 are completed and no other laws apply. (Review Concluded) E3 (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 I I Statutorily excluded from NEPA review. (Review Concluded) f ^ Programmatic Categorical Exclusion -Category (xv) (Review Concluded) | O Categorical Exclusion -Category j O No Extraordinary Circumstances exist. j Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) O No (Review Concluded) \ CH Extraordinary Circumstances exist (See Section rV). I~l Extraordinary Circumstances mitigated. (See Section IVcomments) Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) \Z\ No (Review Concluded) I I Environmental Assessment I I SupplementalEnvironmentalAssessment(ReferenceEAorPEAincomments) I I Environmental Impact Statement Comments: Refer to Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Restoration and/or Improvement ofInternal Facility Systems and Components dated 09/01/2005. See attached Reviewer and Approvals I I ProjectisNon-Compliant(Seeattacheddocumentationjustifyingselection). FEMA Environmental Reviewer. Name: Catherine Jones, Environmental Specialist Signature JfoaJTrtu A^Tu Date 6/13/2006 Record of Environmental Consideration 1 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: Catherine Jones Applicant: St. Bernard Parish Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA/Hurricane Katrina/Public Assistance Program/ 5LiftStationsinSt.Bernard FEMA Regional Environmental Officer or delegated approving official. Name: Michael lei Grisham, Grisham,Grisham, DELO Signature J\J\xaJcJ{ yLJ\to~k^ . Date 6/13/2006 I. Compliance Review for Environmental Laws (other than NEPA) A. National Historic Preservation Act ^ Nottypeofactivitywithpotentialtoaffecthistoricproperties.(ReviewConcluded) |~1 Applicable executed Programmatic Agreement Otherwise, conduct standard Section 106 review. r~l Activity meets Programmatic Allowance # Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Concluded) HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES ^1No historic propertiesthatare listedor45/50 years orolderinprojectarea. (ReviewConcluded) H]Buildingorstructurelistedor45/50yearsorolderinprojectareaandactivitynotexemptfrom review. • Determination of No Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Concluded) • Determination of Historic Properties Affected (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) CH Property a National Historic Landmark and National Park Service was provided early notification during the consultation process. If not, explain in comments • No Adverse Effect Determination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Concluded) • Adverse EffectDetermination (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) f"~| Resolution of Adverse Effect completed. (MOA on file) Are project conditions required Q Yes (see section V) O No (Review Concluded) ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES E3Project affects only previously disturbed ground. (Review Concluded) l~1 Project affects undisturbed ground. I IProjectareahasno potentialforpresenceofarcheologicalresources 0 Determinationofno historicpropertiesaffected(FEMAfinding/SHPO/THPOconcurrence or consultation on file). (Review Concluded) I IProjectareahaspotentialforpresenceofarcheologicalresources • Determinationofno historicpropertiesaffected(FEMAfinding/SHPO/THPOconcurrence on file) Are project conditions required \Z\ Yes (see section V) Q No (Review Concluded) 1 I Determination of historic properties affected O NR eligible resources not present (FEMA finding/SHPO/THPO concurrence on file). Are project conditions required [IJYes (see section V) Q No (Review Concluded) O NReligible resources present inproject area. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) • No Adverse EffectDetermination. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Are project conditions required? Q] Yes (see section V) \Z\ No (Review Concluded) • Adverse EffectDetermination. (FEMA finding/ SHPO/THPO concurrence on file) Record of Environmental Consideration 2 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: CatherineJones Applicant: St. Bernard Parish Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA/HurricaneKatrina/PublicAssistanceProgram/ 5LiftStationsinSt.Bernard I I Resolution ofAdverse Effect completed. (MOA onfile) Are project conditions required? [_] Yes (see section V) n No (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: B. Endangered Species Act Ixl No listed species and/or designated critical habitat present inareas affected directly orindirectly by the Federal action. (Review Concluded) I IListed species and/or designated critical habitat present inthe areas affected directly orindirectly by the Federal action. I~lNoeffecttospeciesordesignatedcriticalhabitat (Seecommentsforjustification) Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) LZ| No(Review Concluded) I IMayaffect,butnotlikelytoadverselyaffectspeciesordesignatedcriticalhabitat(FEMA determination/USFWS/NMFS concurrence on file) (Review Concluded) Are project conditions required? \Z\ Yes (see section V) C3 No(Review Concluded) I ILikelytoadverselyaffectspeciesordesignatedcriticalhabitat I I Formal consultation concluded. (Biological Assessment and Biological Opinion onfile) Are project conditions required? \Z\ YES (see section V) \Z\ NO(Review Concluded) Comments: None C. Coastal Barrier Resources Act IxlProjectisnotonorconnectedtoCBRA Unit orOtherwise ProtectedArea (Review Concluded). I IProjectisonorconnectedtoCBRAUnitorOtherwiseProtectedArea.(FEMAdetermination/USFWS consultation on file) I IProposed action anexception under Section 3505.a.6? (Review Concluded) f~1 Proposed action not excepted under Section 3505.a.6. Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) [U NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: D. Clean Water Act Ixl Project would not affect any waters ofthe U.S. (Review Concluded) l~lProjectwouldaffectwaters, includingwetlands,oftheU.S. [~1 Projectexemptedasinkind replacementorotherexemption. (Review Concluded) I IProject requires Section 404/401/or Section 9/10 (Rivers and Harbors Act) permit, including qualification under Nationwide Permits. Areproject conditions required? Q YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: Project is not in or adjacent to any waterways ofthe US. Correspondence/Consultation/References: £. Coastal Zone Management Act I IProjectisnot locatedina coastalzoneareaanddoesnotaffectacoastalzonearea(Review concluded) IxlProjectislocatedina coastal zone areaand/oraffectsthecoastal zone Ixl State administering agency does not require consistency review. (Review Concluded). I IState administering agency requires consistency review. Record of Environmental Consideration 3 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: Catherine Jones Applicant: St. Bernard Parish Disaster/Emergency/Program/ProjectTitle: DR1603LA/HurricaneKatrina/PublicAssistanceProgram/5LiftStationsinSt.Bernard Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: FEMA HAS DETERMINED 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 1x1 Project does not affect, control, or modify a waterway/body of water. (Review Concluded) I IProject affects controls or modifies a waterway/body of water. I ICoordination with USFWS conducted l~lNoRecommendations offered byUSFWS. (Review Concluded) l~~l Recommendations provided by USFWS. Are project conditions required? \Z\ YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: Project is not in or adjacent to any waterways of the US. Correspondence/Consultation/References: G. Clean Air Act IxlProject will not result inpermanent airemissions. (Review Concluded) l~1 Projectislocated inanattainment area. (Review Concluded) I IProjectislocatedina non-attainmentarea. I ICoordination required with applicable state administering agency.. Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) \Z\ NO (Review Concluded) Comments: Project will not result in permanent air emissions. Correspondence/Consultation/References: H. Farmland Protection Policy Act IxlProjectdoesnotaffectdesignated primeorunique farmland. (Review Concluded) l~lProjectcausesunnecessaryorirreversibleconversionofdesignated primeorunique farmland. I I Coordination with Natural Resource Conservation Commission required. I I Farmland Conversion Impact Rating, Form AD-1006, completed. Are project conditions required? • YES (see section V) CD NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: I. Migratory Bird Treaty Act I IProject not located within a flyway zone. (Review Concluded) IxlProjectlocatedwithin aflyway zone. IxlProjectdoes not have potentialtotake migratory birds. (Review Concluded) Are project conditions required? \Z1 Yes (see section V) £^| No(Review Concluded) I IProject has potential to take migratory birds. • Contact madewith USFWS Are project conditions required? O YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: See letter from Don Fairley to Mr. Russ Watson with USF&WS, dated 09/14/2005. 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 aremet Record of Environmental Consideration 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: Catherine Jones Applicant: St. Bernard Parish | Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA / Hurricane Katrina / Public Assistance Program / 5Lift Stations in St. Bernard | Correspondence/Consultation/References: http://pacificflywQy.qov/Documents/MissiSsippi map.pdf. J. Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Kl Project not located inor near Essential Fish Habitat. (Review Concluded) f~l Projectlocatedinor nearEssentialFishHabitat. I IProject does not adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat. (Review Concluded) Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) \Z\ No(Review Concluded) I IProject adversely affects Essential Fish Habitat (FEMA determination/USFWS/NMFS concurrence on file) I INOAA Fisheries provided norecommendation(s) (Review Concluded). Are project conditions required? Q Yes (see section V) Q No(Review Concluded) I INOAA Fisheries provided recommendation(s) 1~1 Written reply toNOAA Fisheries recommendations completed. Are project conditions required? CH YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: K. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act ^ ProjectisnotalonganddoesnotaffectWildorScenicRiver(WSR)-(Review Concluded) I IProjectisalongoraffectsWSR • Project adversely affects WSR as determined byNPS/USFS. FEMA cannot fund the action. (NPS/USFS/USFWS/BLM consultation on file) (Review Concluded) • Project does not adversely affect WSR. (NPS/USFS/USFWS/BLM consultation on file) Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: L. Other Relevant Laws and Environmental Regulations II. Compliance Review for Executive Orders A. E.0.11988 -Floodplains l~1 NoEffect onFloodplains/Flood levels and project outside Floodplain -(Review Concluded) E3Located inFloodplain orEffects onFloodplains/Flood levels I INoadverse effect onfloodplain and notadversely affected bythe floodplain. (Review Concluded), Areproject conditions required? Q Yes(seesection V) Q No (Review Concluded) I IBeneficial Effect onFloodplain Occupancy/Values (Review Concluded). I IPossible adverse effects associated with investment in floodplain, occupancy or modification of floodplain environment [3 8 Step Process Complete -documentation on file Are project conditions required? ^ YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: 05/16/2006 -THE PARISH OF ST. BERNARD ENROLLED IN THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM 03/13/1970. PER FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAPS (FIRM) 225204 0290 B, 0295 B, 0460 B AND 0480 B DATED 05/01/1985. PROJECTS ARE LOCATED AT 5 SITES PARISH WIDE IN ZONES A2 AREAS OF 100-YEAR FLOOD; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS DETERMINED; AND ZONE B AREA PROTECTED FROM THE 100-YR Record of Environmental Consideration 5 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: Catherine Jones Applicant: St. BernardParish Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA/HurricaneKatrina/PublicAssistanceProgram/ 5LiftStationsinSt.Bernard FLOOD BY LEVEE, DIKE OR OTHER STRUCTURE SUBJECT TO FAILURE OR OVERTOPPING DURING LARGER FLOOD. THE PROJECT IS REPAIR/REPLACEMENT OF 5 SEWER LIFT STATION FACILITIES. LIFT STATIONS ARE FUNCTIONALLY DEPENDANT ON THE SEWER SYSTEM. PER 44 CFR 9.11(D)(9), THE REPLACEMENT OF BUILDING CONTENTS, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT, WHERE POSSIBLE, DISASTER PROOFING OF THE BUILDING AND/OR ELIMINATION OF SUCH FUTURE LOSSES BY RELOCATION OF THOSE BUILDING CONTENTS, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT OUTSIDE OR ABOVE THE BASE FLOODPLAIN. HARRIET WEGNER, FPM FPMCorrespondence/Consultation/References: B. E.0.11990 -Wetlands £3NoEffects onWetland(s) andproject located outsideWetland(s) -(Review Concluded) |~] Located in Wetland or effects Wetland(s) I IBeneficial Effect on Wetland -(Review Concluded) I IPossibleadverseeffectassociatedwithconstructinginor nearwetland l~lReviewcompletedaspartoffloodplain review I I8 Step Process Complete -documentation onfile Are project conditions required? O YES (see section V) Q NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: C. E.0.12898 -Environmental Justice For Low Income and Minority Populations ^ NoLowincomeorminoritypopulationin,nearoraffectedbytheproject-(Review Concluded) I ILowincomeorminoritypopulationinor nearprojectarea I INodisproportionatelyhighandadverseimpactonlowincomeorminoritypopulation-(Review Concluded) I IDisproportionately high or adverse effects on low income or minority population Are project conditions required? Q YES (see section V) \^\ NO (Review Concluded) Comments: None Correspondence/Consultation/References: III. Other Environmental Issues Identify other potential environmental concerns in the comment box not clearly falling under a law 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 consideration of other environmental factors, review the 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. If the circumstance can be mitigated, please explain in comments. If no, leave blank. Yes I I (i)Greaterscopeorsizethannormallyexperiencedforaparticularcategoryofaction Record of Environmental Consideration 6 06/13/06 Reviewer Name: CatherineJones Applicant: St. BernardParish Disaster/Emergency/Program/Project Title: DR1603LA/HurricaneKatrina/PublicAssistanceProgram/ 5LiftStationsinSt.Bernard l~l (ii) Actions with a high level ofpublic controversy (iii) Potential for degradation, even though slight, ofalready existing poor environmental conditions; l~1 (iv) Employment ofunproven technology with potential adverse effects oractions involving unique or unknown environmental risks; l~l (v) Presence of endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat, or archaeological, cultural, historical or other protected resources; 1 I (vi) PresenceofhazardousortoxicsubstancesatlevelswhichexceedFederal,stateorlocal regulations or standards requiring action or attention; l~l (vii) Actions with the potential toaffect special status areas adversely orother critical resources such as wetlands, coastal zones, wildlife refuge and wilderness areas, wild and scenic rivers, sole or principal drinking water aquifers; I I (viii) Potential for adverse effects on health orsafety; and I I (ix)Potentialtoviolateafederal,state,localortriballaworrequirementimposedforthe protection ofthe environment. I~1 (x) Potential for significant cumulative impact when the proposed action iscombined with other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions, even though the impacts ofthe proposed action may not be significant by themselves. Comments: None V. Environmental Review Project Conditions Project Conditions: 1. Thisprojectmustcomplywithallconditions oftheattachedProgrammaticCategorical Exclusion. 2. PER44CFR9.11(D)(9), THEREPLACEMENT OFBUILDING CONTENTS, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT, WHERE POSSIBLE, DISASTER PROOFING OF THE BUILDING AND/OR ELIMINATION OF SUCH FUTURE LOSSES BY RELOCATION OF THOSE BUILDING CONTENTS, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT OUTSIDE OR ABOVE THE BASE FLOODPLAIN. Monitoring Requirements: None Record of Environmental Consideration 7 06/13/06