Attachment A FTA DCE Worksheet Section II, NEPA Class of Action

Similar documents
PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT FOR APPROVAL OF CERTAIN CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS

The term Significant as used in NEPA is defined at 40 CFR and requires consideration of both context and intensity.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Process and Federal Agency Compliance

Categorical Exclusion Programmatic Agreement Between the Federal Highway Administration And the Indiana Department of Transportation

Arizona Association of County Engineers New Rules for Categorical Exclusions for FHWA Projects

Introduction. The term Significant as used in NEPA is defined at 40 CFR and requires consideration of both context and intensity.

APPENDIX A. NEPA Assessment Checklist

TRANSMITTAL LETTER. Design Manual Part 1B Post-TIP NEPA Procedures November 2015 Edition

GEOMETRIC DESIGN CRITERIA for Non-freeway Resurfacing, Restoration, and Rehabilitation Projects

NYSDOT Project Development Manual (PDM)

AREAWIDE BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION

Final Categorical Exclusion and Documented Categorical Worksheet

ARP SOP No SOP for CATEX Determinations Effective Date: Oct. 01, Federal Aviation Administration

Selecting Projects for Accelerated Bridge Construction

Instructions for the SDDOT Categorical Exclusion Checklist and Environmental Commitments Checklist

Sustainable Transportation

PROGRAM NAME: Northfield Owner-Occupied Home Rehabilitation 2015

Updates on FAA Order F. Agenda. Communicate FAA Order Updates. Educate attendees on the changes to FAA Order

Categorical Exclusion (CE)

Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Decision-Making Guide

MDOT SHA s NEPA/MEPA, Agency and Public Involvement Processes. Presentation to BRTB s Technical Committee August 1, 2017

Overview of the Project Development Process. Brian Blanchard, PE Assistant Secretary for Engineering and Operations

AND THE OHIO RAIL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

Kammy Horne, AICP. Austin, Texas

State Route 8 Bridge Replacement Project

Public Meeting. US Highways 18 & 281 and SD Highway 50 From Douglas County Line to SD46 Charles Mix County

WELCOME IL 47. Community Advisory Group Meeting #5 Waubonsee Community College Wednesday, May 31, 2017

6.0 Indirect Effects and Cumulative Impacts

Documenting Climate Change Considerations in the National Environmental Policy Act Process. Jeff Houk FHWA Resource Center June 7, 2010

Cost Estimating Guideline February, 2017

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY RECORD OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

How to Prepare Your Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) Information and Prepare a Brief Environmental Assessment

Technical Memorandum MULTIMODAL NEEDS. Prepared for: Oklahoma Department of Transportation. Prepared by:

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS. Categorical Exclusions for Oil and Gas Exploration and Development Activities. USDA Forest Service

Bureau of Indian Affairs NEPA Compliance Tribal Solar Working Group. March 24, 2015

Project Delivery. Rodger Rochelle, PE Technical Services Administrator. Mike Holder, PE Chief Engineer

THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS NON-NHS BRIDGE R&R POLICY

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration. RECORD OF DECISION June 2014

TAPPAN ZEE HUDSON RIVER CROSSING PROJECT

CODE CONSOLIDATION PHASE II SUMMARY OF CHANGES Effective February 1, 2011, Ordinance s

Highway Traffic Noise: Analysis and Abatement Guidance

Northwest State Route 138 Corridor Improvement Project

Environmental Assessment May 2007

Indirect and Cumulative Effects

Categorical Exclusion (CE)

California High-Speed Train Program FEIR/EIS

LONE HILL TO WHITE DOUBLE TRACK STUDY Community Open Houses May 16 & 17

Project Initiation Form

Conventional vs. Sustainable: A Matrix for Decision Making. APWA National Sustainability Conference Pittsburg, PA June 26, 2012

US-101 CORRIDOR ADVISOR S UPDATE 19 MARCH 2015

S-09: Auburn Station Access Improvements

Project Name: Gerber Stew Stewardship Contract CX Log #: OR-014 CX Chase Mtn./ Upper Bear Valley Plantation Thinnings

Downtown Estes Loop Project Frequently Asked Questions

Transportation Decision-making Principles of Project Evaluation and Programming. Chapter 1. Introductory Concepts in Transportation Decision Making

Durham-Orange Light Rail Transit Project

INDEX FOR UNIFORM FILE SYSTEM, ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

Standard Performance Attributes for Transportation Projects

Atlanta BeltLine Corridor Environmental Study. Technical Advisory Committee/Agency Coordination. Kick-Off Meeting

Holyoke Station Feasibility Study and Site Analysis

Determining Whether a Proposal is Subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Section 102 Updated March

U S H I G H W A Y 1 4 F I N A L E N V I R O N M E N T A L I M P A C T S T A T E M E N T ( F E I S

CREATE. Noise and Vibration Assessment Methodology

Corridor Advisory Group and Task Force Meeting #19

New Jersey Department of Transportation. Local Freight Impact Fund Handbook. Procedures and Criteria for Local Freight Impact Fund Grant Program

CHAPTER 21: COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES

CEQA Categorical Exemption Determination

Conclusions & Lessons Learned

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/ Section 106 Public Meeting Proposed Alternatives. December 14, 2017

transportation BUSINESS PLAN

FHWA and FTA Funding Source Eligibility

Project Purpose. Federal Railroad Administration

20. Security Classif. (of this page) Unclassified

Introduction to the Proposed Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Transportation Planning and Programming

SAN LUIS VALLEY PUBLIC LANDS CENTER

Route 7 Corridor Improvements Project Reston Avenue to Jarrett Valley Drive Public Hearing

FEDERAL BOULEVARD (5 TH AVENUE TO HOWARD PLACE) PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL LINKAGE STUDY TRAFFIC NOISE IMPACT ANALYSIS

MANTI-LA SAL NATIONAL FOREST

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT OWL CREEK GRAVEL PIT EXPANSION U.S. FOREST SERVICE

Northern Intermodal Transit Facility WHAT IS AN INTERMODAL TRANSIT FACILITY?

APPENDIX H- ALTERNATIVES PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED

SRF 101 SRF Cross Cutters: Understanding the Environmental

Environmental Review and

South Dakota Department of Transportation. Interchange Modification Justification Report. Interstate 90 Exit 44 (Bethlehem Road - Piedmont)

Traffic Study Guidelines

ALTERNATIVE PROJECT DELIVERY DIVISION

DECISION MEMO. West Fork Blacktail Deer Creek Hardened Crossing

Indirect and Cumulative Effects

Louisiana Road And Bridge Conditions Threatened By $12.5 Billion Transportation Funding Backlog

PLAN CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

2.1 Project Definition/Classification/Initial Study Project Definition

APPENDIX A HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS

Exhibit A Scope of Work and Deliverables

PLAN 2040 Regional Transportation Plan Update. Final Recommendations. Transportation and Air Quality Committee March 13, 2014

TRANSPORTATION PLAN Donald Vary

REGIONAL SOLICITATION ROADWAY APPLICATIONS: POTENTIAL CHANGES. TAB September 20, 2017

Distribution Restriction Statement

RECORD OF DECISION OF THE FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION

PRACTITIONER S HANDBOOK

Project Steering Committee April 14, 2015

Port Jervis Line Service Strategy Report. Appendix C: Port Jervis Line Capacity Improvements Analysis

Transcription:

Attachment A FTA DCE Worksheet Section II, NEPA Class of Action

ATTACHMENT A Federal Transit Administration DCE Worksheet Section II, NEPA Class of Action II. NEPA Class of Action Answer the following questions to determine the project s potential class of action. If the answer to any of the questions in Sections A or B is YES, contact the FTA Region 10 office to determine whether the project requires preparation of a NEPA environmental assessment (EA). A. Will the project significantly impact the natural, social and/or economic environment? B.1 Is the significance of the project s social, economic or environmental impacts unknown? B.2 Is the project likely to require detailed evaluation of more than a few potential impacts? B.3 Is the project likely to generate intense public discussion, concern or controversy, even though it may be limited to a relatively small subset of the community? C.1 Does the project appear on the following list of Categorical Exclusions (CEs)? The types of activities listed below describe actions which, when the corresponding conditions are met, are under usual circumstances categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis under 23 CFR 771.118(c). Unusual circumstances may include, but are not limited to, the presence of wetlands, historic buildings and structures, parklands, or floodplains in the project area, or the potential for the project to impact other resources. (Descriptions of each type of activity, and corresponding conditions, are available here; this worksheet simply lists the name of each exclusion.) YES (If checked AND there are no special circumstances, check the applicable box and briefly describe the activity in Section III.A below. Then proceed to the signature block on the back page.) NO (continue to Section II.D) Page A-1

Utility and Similar Appurtenance Action 23 CFR 771.118(c)(1) Pedestrian or Bicycle Action 23 CFR 771.118(c)(2) Environmental Mitigation or Stewardship Activity 23 CFR 771.118(c)(3) Planning and Administrative Activity 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4) Activities Promoting Transportation Safety, Security, Accessibility and Communication 23 CFR 771.118(c)(5) Acquisition, Transfer of Real Property Interest 23 CFR 771.118(c)(6) Acquisition, Rehab, Maintenance of Vehicles or Equipment 771.118(c)(7) 23 CFR Maintenance, Rehab, Reconstruction of Facilities 23 CFR 771.118(c)(8) Assembly or Construction of Facilities 23 CFR 771.118(c)(9) Joint Development of Facilities 23 CFR 771.118(c)(10) Emergency Recovery Actions 23 CFR 771.118(c)(11) (Several conditions attach to this type of CE. We recommend you consult with FTA if you think this CE may apply to your action.) D. Does the project appear on the following list of potential documented Categorical Exclusions? Projects that are categorical exclusions under 23 CFR 771.118(d) require additional documentation demonstrating that the specific conditions or criteria for the CEs are satisfied and that significant effects will not result. YES (Check correct box below and continue to Part III) NO (Contact FTA Regional Office) Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoring, rehabilitating, or reconstructing shoulders or auxiliary lanes. Bridge replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes. (NOTE: Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for one or a limited number of parcels, and only where it will not limit the evaluation of alternatives (including alignments) for planned construction projects Page A-2

Acquisition of right-of-way. (NOTE: No project development on the acquired right-ofway may proceed until the NEPA process for such project development, including the consideration of alternatives, where appropriate, has been completed.) Construction of bicycle facilities within existing transportation right-of-way. Facility modernization through construction or replacement of existing components. Other actions which meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and will not result in significant environmental effects. Actions must not: induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use; require the relocation of significant numbers of people; have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource; cause significant air, noise, or water quality impacts; have significant impacts on travel patterns; or otherwise have significant environmental impacts (either individually or cumulatively). Page A-3

Page A-4