ENVIRONMENTAL DESK REFERENCE FOR AIRPORT ACTIONS

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

OFFICE OF AIRPORT PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING AIRPORTS PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL DIVISION, APP-400 OCTOBER 2007

OFFICE OF AIRPORTS

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND. Before issuing decisions approving new and amended airport layout plans, airport sponsor applications for Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) funding, or other Federal actions to support airport development projects,1 the Office of Airports (ARP) must complete various environmental analyses. ARP must do so to satisfy the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and special purpose laws that apply to those Federal actions. In April 2006, ARP published FAA Order 5050.4B, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Implementing Instructions for Airport Actions. That Order supplements FAA Order 1050.1E, Environmental Impacts: Policies and Procedures. While Order 1050.1E provides instructions for implementing NEPA to all FAA Lines of Business, Order 5050.4B focuses on airport actions under ARPs scope. Order 5050.4B refers to Federal environmental requirements outside NEPA as special purpose laws. The Order states that, besides NEPA, FAA must comply with those laws before FAA may approve a proposed Federal action. Paragraph 9.t of the Order defines the term special purpose laws as:
[The] Federal laws, regulations, executive orders, or departmental orders that are outside NEPA. FAA must often address special purpose law requirements in completing its environmental analyses of major Federal actions involving airports. For example, before deciding if an action qualifies as a categorical exclusion, the responsible FAA official must examine extraordinary circumstances, which are often based on these laws, regulations, or orders. FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, provides more information on these items and how to address their requirements for all FAA organizations. 2

THE DESK REFERENCES PURPOSE. As a compendium, the Desk Reference summarizes applicable special purpose laws in one location for convenience and quick reference. Its function is to help FAA integrate the compliance of NEPA and applicable special purpose laws to the fullest extent possible. This integration should ensure that all environmental review procedures applicable to an airport action run concurrently rather than consecutively. The Desk Reference includes information addressing ways to evaluate potential environmental impacts due to a proposed airport action, and when appropriate, its reasonable alternatives. It also provides information on mitigation measures. If a conflict between a special purpose law and this Desk Reference occurs, the special purpose law takes precedence and should be relied upon. When citing a legal requirement, the responsible FAA official or other user should cite the law, order, or
1 2

See FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 9.g. The preamble to Order 5050.4B, published in the Federal Register on May 18, 2006, instructs Order 5050.4B users to follow instructions in FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, to comply with the special purpose laws until FAA issues the Desk Reference. Doing so allowed FAA to approve airport actions while ARP prepared the Desk Reference.

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

INTRODUCTION

regulation specifying the requirement, not the summary or description in the Desk Reference. ARP issues this Desk Reference to be more responsive to changes in the array of special purpose laws that are amended more often than NEPA and the CEQ regulations implementing NEPA. ARP believes the Desk Reference is the most flexible and quickest way to provide updated information in this changing legal and regulatory environment. To ensure rapid distribution, ARP has placed the Desk Reference on its web site.3 ARP will use this web site to distribute future changes to this Desk Reference as needed. Environmental assessments (EAs) that airport sponsors (or their consultants) prepare for FAA and the environmental impact statements (EISs) that FAA prepares are key parts of ARPs decision making process for airport actions. Therefore, responsible FAA officials must meet the requirements of Order 5050.4B when preparing those documents. In addition, ARP recommends that responsible FAA officials and other users refer to this Desk Reference for guidance to help integrate applicable special purpose laws with NEPA. DESK REFERENCE ORGANIZATION. ARP has organized each chapter of the Desk Reference in the same manner to provide consistency in the presentation of material. Each chapter is arranged according to the following headings: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING LAWS OR REGULATIONS. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT. Sections 1 through 7 of each chapter apply to EAs and EISs as they relate to applicable special purpose laws and, as needed, the analysis of extraordinary circumstance related to categorical exclusions. Section 8 applies solely to EISs. The Desk Reference addresses the 23 environmental impact categories listed in the following table.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CATEGORY Air Quality Biotic Resources Coastal Barriers Coastal Zone Management Compatible Land Use Construction Section 4(f) Federally-listed Endangered and Threatened Species Energy Supplies, Natural Resources, and Sustainable Design Environmental Justice Farmlands Floodplains Hazardous Materials Historic and Archeological Induced Socioeconomic Light Emissions and Visual Effects Noise Social Impacts Solid Waste Water Quality Wetlands Wild and Scenic Rivers Cumulative Impacts CHAPTER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

INTRODUCTION

Besides other important information on a resource category, each chapter contains the significant threshold for that category, if FAA established one in FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A. The Desk Reference does not include a significance threshold for an environmental category if Order 1050.1E does not include one. Often, the Desk Reference contains more information on how to evaluate an environmental category than Appendix A of Order 1050.1E does. ARP includes that added information because airport actions often disturb more physical area and involve more environmental categories than other FAA actions. ARP includes this information as a valuable aid to those who conduct comprehensive environmental analyses for airport actions. ARP also included that information because its staff has found the information helpful (Order 5050.4A, Airports Environmental Handbook, paragraph 47.e, contained much of that information). In other instances, analytical procedures or methods that have been developed since FAA published Order 5050.4A in 1985 may be helpful. FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, provides information on 18 impact categories, while the Desk Reference provides information on 23 categories noted in the table above. This is because the Desk Reference includes a specific chapter for each of these environmental categories: Biotic resources; Coastal barrier resources; Cumulative impacts;

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE Environmental justice; and Federally-listed endangered and threatened species.

INTRODUCTION

USING THE DESK REFERENCE. The Desk Reference should assist responsible FAA officials and other users in meeting the requirements of the special purpose laws applicable to the No Action alternative, the proposed action, and, as fitting, reasonable alternatives. Conducting the analyses the special purpose laws require is a critical part in completing the interdisciplinary analyses NEPA requires for airport actions. If there are instances where ARP staff or another user requires more information or has a question about a specific FAA policy, they should contact the lead environmental specialist in the Regional Airports Division office responsible for the proposed airport action. As needed, that specialist may contact Regional Counsel, the Office of Airports, Planning and Environmental Division (APP-400), or the Office of the Chief Counsel, Airports Environmental Law Division (AGC-600) for more information.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHAPTER CATEGORY Air Quality 1 Biotic Resources 2 Coastal Barriers 3 Coastal Zone Management 4 Compatible Land Use 5 Construction 6 Section 4(f) 7 Federally-listed Endangered 8 and Threatened Species Energy Supplies, Natural Resources, and Sustainable 9 Design Environmental Justice 10 Farmlands 11 Floodplains 12 Hazardous Materials 13 Historic and Archeological 14 Induced Socioeconomic 15 Light Emissions and Visual 16 Effects Noise 17 Social Impacts 18 Solid Waste 19 Water Quality 20 Wetlands 21 Wild and Scenic Rivers 22 Cumulative Impacts 23

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 1. AIR QUALITY

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

AIR QUALITY

a. General. This chapter discusses requirements to conduct air quality analyses for airport development projects under the NEPA and Clean Air Act. Generally, detailed analysis is needed for a project that, due to its size, scope, or location has the potential to affect the attainment and maintenance of established air quality standards. Those standards are known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards and are present for six criteria pollutants. Although the requirements under NEPA and the Clean Air Act differ in certain respects, generally the same analysis fulfills requirements under both. NEPA is more rigorous in that it may require detailed analysis where it is not needed under the Clean Air Acts (CAA) general conformity provisions. b. National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six criteria air pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO); lead (Pb);1 nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), particulate matter (PM) for both PM10 and PM2.5, and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Compliance with the NAAQS means the ambient outdoor levels of these air pollutants are safe for human health, the public welfare, and the environment. States are responsible for designating areas that are attainment, nonattainment, or maintenance for each of the criteria pollutants. States are required to develop EPA-approved plans, called State Implementation Plans (SIPs), to achieve or maintain the NAAQS within timeframes set under the Clean Air Act. c. Attainment area. An attainment area is a geographical area where the levels of all criteria air pollutants meet the NAAQS. (1) General conformity regulations do not apply to a Federal action located in an area that is designated attainment for all six criteria pollutants. (2) depending upon the size of the airport and the nature of the project, it may still be necessary to conduct an air quality analysis for NEPA purposes. The NEPA analysis is needed to determine whether project emissions would potentially cause significant air quality effects (e.g. cause levels of pollution that would exceed the NAAQS). d. Nonattainment area. A nonattainment area is a geographic area where the concentration of one or more of the criteria air pollutants is higher than the NAAQS. It is not uncommon for an area to have acceptable levels of five criteria pollutants but an unacceptable level for another. For example, the Washington, D.C.,

Evaluation of criteria air pollutants extends to their regulated precursors: volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) for ozone and SO2, NOx, VOCs, and ammonia (ammonia is a precursor only when the state and/or EPA determines a need to analyze ammonia) for PM2.5.

Chap. 1

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

metropolitan area is simultaneously designated attainment for CO but nonattainment for 8-hour ozone. (1) General conformity regulations do apply to a Federal action located in an area that is designated nonattainment for any of the six criteria pollutants. (2) depending upon the size of the airport and the nature of the project, it is normally necessary to conduct an air quality analysis for NEPA purposes. The NEPA analysis is needed to determine whether project emissions would potentially cause significant air quality effects (e.g. cause levels of pollution that would exceed the NAAQS). e. Maintenance area. This is an area previously designated nonattainment but re-designated as a maintenance area[under the CAA, States, not EPA designate area and EPA promulgates these designations 42 USC 7407(d)] because air pollution levels have improved above levels that would place the area in nonattainment status. An area may remain in maintenance status for up to 20 years before the re-designates the area as attainment. (1) General conformity regulations do apply to a Federal action located in an area that is designated maintenance for any of the six criteria pollutants. (2) Depending upon the size of the airport and the nature of the project, it is normally necessary to conduct an air quality analysis for NEPA purposes. The NEPA analysis is needed to determine whether project emissions would potentially cause significant air quality effects (e.g. cause levels of pollution that would exceed the NAAQS). f. Direct emissions. Direct emissions are emissions caused by the Federal action that occur at the same time and place as the Federal action. They include emissions from temporary construction activities as well as emissions caused by operation of airport facilities and aircraft. Construction emissions may represent a high proportion of the total emissions a project causes and may trigger general conformity requirements in areas designated as severe nonattainment or maintenance areas for pollutants such as O3 and serious nonattainment for PM10. To report a proposed actions total direct emissions (see section 1.k. of this chapter), assess construction emissions separately as a category and in combination with other categories of operational emissions (e.g., aircraft, ground support equipment, on-airport access traffic) the proposed action would cause. g. Indirect emissions. Indirect emissions are emissions caused by a proposed Federal action that occur later in time and/or at a distance from the proposed action. For General Conformity purposes (40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B) under the Clean Air Act (42 USC Sections 7409, 7410, 7502-7514 and 7571-7574), FAA must assess project-related emissions that are: (1) reasonably foreseeable at the time of the General Conformity evaluation; and

Chap. 1

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

(2) that FAA can practicably control through a continuing program responsibility. (See Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports and Air Force Bases,2 pg. 14, Section 2.1.5). Indirect emissions are added to direct emissions to determine the total direct and indirect emissions for the project. h. Total direct and indirect emissions. This is the total level of emissions due to combining total direct emissions with total indirect emissions. i. General Conformity. General Conformity refers to the requirements under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for federal agencies (other than FHWA and FTA) to show that their actions conform to the purpose of the applicable SIP. 3 Section 176(c) of the CAA states:
No department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government must engage in, support in any way or provide financial aid for, license or permit, or approve, any activity which does not conform to an approved State Implementation Plan (SIP).

As a result, Federal agencies cannot fund or approve activities that do not conform to the SIP established for a nonattainment or maintenance area. Therefore, a Federal action in nonattainment or maintenance area must not: (1) cause or contribute to NAAQS new violations; (2) increase the frequency or severity of any existing NAAQS; or (3) delay the timely attainment of a NAAQS, interim emissions decreases, or other milestones.
Note: EPA adopted regulations to implement this requirement at 40 CFR Parts 6, 51, Subpart W, and 93, Subpart B. Title 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B is commonly known as the General Conformity Rule.

j. State Implementation Plan (SIP). This is a states detailed description of the regulations, programs, and measures to be used in that state to reduce air pollution and fulfill its responsibilities under the Clean Air Act, as amended (CAA) to attain the NAAQS for all criteria pollutants within the legally required timeframes. The CAA requires each State to prepare and submit a SIP to EPA for approval. EPAs review process for SIPs includes opportunities for public comment.

2http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/policy_guidance/envir_policy/airquality_handbook/media/ 3

Handbook.pdf Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that EPA adopt regulations to ensure that projects sponsored by Federal agencies do not interfere with a States ability to meet or maintain the NAAQS. To fulfill the CAA requirements, EPA promulgated the Transportation Conformity Regulations on November 24, 1993, and the General Conformity Regulations on November 30, 1993. The Transportation Conformity Regulations address transportation plans, programs, and projects funded under Title 23 USC or the Transit Act. The General Conformity Regulations are applicable to all other Federal projects and actions, including FAA actions for airport development.

Chap. 1

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

k. Total net emissions. For purposes of general conformity, total direct and indirect emissions due to a proposed actions construction and operation in the future must be compared with the total direct and indirect emissions associated with the future no action/no build alternative to calculate the total net emissions of each criteria air pollutant and its precursors that a proposed action will cause. The total net emissions are then compared to the de minimis thresholds to determine whether a general conformity analysis and determination are needed.
emissions with the proposed airport action).

Example: Total net emissions for CO in 2012 = (Future (2012) No Action CO emissions - Future (2012) CO

l. Regionally significant actions. If a proposed airport actions total direct and indirect emissions exceed 10 percent of a nonattainment or maintenance area's total emissions inventory for a particular criteria pollutant, it is a regionally significant action. In such cases, FAA must prepare a General Conformity Determination even though the projects total net emissions are below de minimis. EPA designed the regional significance provision to address locating a large new project in a rural area having good air quality. Although no FAA project to date has qualified as regionally significant, project documentation for actions presumed to conform must include analysis to address this requirement. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION The Act establishes a national environmental policy and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) to oversee the Acts implementation. The national policy encourages citizens to maintain productive and enjoyable relations between activities and the environment; to promote efforts preventing or removing damage to the environment and biosphere; to stimulate the health and welfare of man; and to enrich our understanding of the Nations ecological systems and natural resources. Under NEPA FAA may have to prepare detailed air quality analysis for proposed projects and reasonable alternatives whose air quality emissions have the potential to cause violations of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the six criteria pollutants. The screening techniques and methodologies applicable to air quality assessments for airport projects are discussed in Chapter 2 of Air Quality Procedures For Civilian Airports & Air Force Bases, April 1997 (footnote 2 for web site.) OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

The National Environmental Policy Act, [42 USC Sections 43214347].

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

Chap. 1

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

AIR QUALITY

Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended [42 USC) Sections 7409, 7410, and 7502-7514

Section 176 (c) of the Clean Air Act, 42 USC 7571-7574; Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans [40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B]. Federal Presumed to Conform Actions Under General Conformity, 72 Federal Register 41565, dated July 30, 2007.4

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION The Act requires establishing National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and designating attainment or nonattainment areas based on those NAAQS within a state. It also requires preparation of State Implementation Plans (SIPs) for EPA approval. In addition, the Act requires compliance with General and Transportation Conformity rules. Procedures and criteria for determining if a proposed Federal action conforms to State (or Federal) air quality implementation plans. FAA is only required to demonstrate general conformity for the proposed airport action/preferred alternative. List of FAA actions presumed to conform under 40 CFR Section 93.153(f)

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA

FAA

b. Analytical guidance sources. We provide the following guidance sources to help FAA staff better understand how to plan, conduct, and use various air quality analyses and procedures.
GUIDANCE SOURCE General Conformity Guidance: Questions and Answers, July 13, 1994 (with limited revisions of May 5, 2006) General Conformity Guidance for Airports: Questions and Answers, September 25, 2002 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION This document provides 50 questions and answers to clarify how the General Conformity Rule should be applied. ISSUING AGENCY EPA

This document provides answers to 39 questions to clarify the application of the General Conformity Rule to Federal actions involving airport development.

EPA and FAA

4http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/0

7-3695.pdf

Chap. 1

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

GUIDANCE SOURCE Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports and Air Force Bases (and Addendum of September 2004)

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Commonly called the FAA Air Quality Handbook, this report provides technical information and recommended FAA guidelines and practices for conducting aviation-related air quality analyses in compliance with NEPA and the Clean Air Act. Figure 1 shows analysis thresholds for airport activity and whether a proposed airport action has the potential to cause air quality effects at various levels.

ISSUING AGENCY FAA/US Air Force

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. At airports, air pollutants and precursors of most concern include CO, NOx, PM10, PM 2.5, HC, and sometimes, SOx.5 Since Federal actions to support airport development projects could increase levels or concentrations of the above pollutants, air quality impacts are often issues of concern in airport environmental documents. (1) NEPA. Many airport actions are too small to require detailed air quality analysis. Whether an air quality assessment is required depends upon the nature of the project, the size of the airport and project, and the project areas air quality classification. See, section 6 of this chapter for more details about the screening criteria used to determine if an airport development project needs an air quality analysis. As noted in Figure 1 of the FAA/USAF Air Quality Handbook, such an assessment may be required under NEPA even in areas designated attainment for the pollutant(s) of concern. The protocol for air quality analysis for major airport development projects should be developed in close coordination with US EPA and State and local air quality agencies. (2) CAA General Conformity. An airport action is subject to General Conformity requirements only if it would occur in a nonattainment or maintenance area. The first step is to determine if the proposed project is within a nonattainment or maintenance area. Next, FAA determines whether the proposed project is exempt or on the Presumed to Conform List. (See below). If the proposed project is not exempt or presumed to conform, FAA undertakes an applicability analysis for the proposed airport action. The analysis uses an emissions inventory of a proposed airport actions or a preferred alternatives future direct and indirect emissions and those of the future no action/no build alternative. FAA uses the analysis to determine if the net emissions caused by a proposed airport action or preferred alternative in a nonattainment or maintenance area exceed the applicable de
Pollutant lead (Pb) is not normally a concern for airport projects, unless the chief source of Pb at the airport is the combustion of leaded aviation fuel used in piston-engine aircraft. See Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports and Air Force Bases, dated April 1997, pg. 11.
5

Chap. 1

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

minimis thresholds. If so, then FAA must follow the procedures to demonstrate conformity and issue a Conformity Determination for that action. The following sections summarize how to determine whether General Conformity requirements apply to a proposed airport development action. (a) Exempted actions. EPA identified the following Federal actions (Included here if they relate to airport actions) as exempt under the General Conformity Rule. EPA also provided illustrative examples of exempt actions in the preamble to the General Conformity Rule, noting that the exemptions were too numerous to list in the Rule. The actions are not subject to General Conformity requirements under 40 CFR Sections 93.153(c), (d), (e), and (f) because EPA determined that they have minimal (i.e., de minimis) emission levels. The actions are: (1) Actions covered by the Transportation Conformity regulations (40 CFR Section 93.153(a)); (2) Actions having net total direct and indirect emissions below the de minimis levels specified for each criteria pollutant (40 CFR Section 93.153(c)(1)); (3) Air traffic control activities and adopting approach, departure, and enroute procedures for air operations. 58 FR 63214, 63229. (4) Routine installation and operation of aviation navigational aids. 58 FR 63214, 63229. (5) Actions included on an agency presumed to conform list (40 CFR Section 93.153(f)); (6) Actions specifically listed in the rule as exempt, including: (a) routine maintenance and repair activities (40 CFR Section 93.153(c)(2)); (b) transfers of ownership of interests, land facilities, and real property (40 CFR Section 93.153(c)(2)(xiv)); (c) emissions from remedial or removal actions authorized under the Comprehensive Environmental Resource Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (40 CFR Section 93.153(d)(5)); (d) actions responding to natural disasters or emergencies (40 CFR Section 93.153(d)(2)); (e) demonstrations improving air quality research or having no harmful environmental effects (40 CFR Section 93.153(d)(3); or:

Chap. 1

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

(f) administrative, planning, enforcement, and inspection activities (40 CFR Sections 93.153(c)(6), 93.153(c)(xii), and inspection under 93.153(c)(v), respectively. (b) Presumed to Conform actions. For General Conformity purposes, EPA regulations allow Federal agencies to develop a list of actions whose emissions are typically below the de minimis thresholds for the various criteria pollutants. These actions are known as presumed to conform actions. This provision provides Federal agencies with another way to reduce unnecessary paperwork for actions that cause hardly any emissions. FAA has published a list of actions presumed to conform. See Federal Presumed to Conform Actions Under General Conformity, 72 Federal Register 41565, July 30, 2007. Federal agencies must demonstrate that presumed to conform actions are not regionally significant. See paragraph 1 (l) above. b. Airport actions typically requiring an air quality assessment under NEPA or general conformity applicability analysis. For NEPA purposes, most major airport development projects (e.g., new airport, new runway, major runway extension) will require an air quality assessment if pollutant levels are likely to exceed the NAAQS. To help determine if it is necessary to examine NAAQS in these situations, discuss the issue with State or regional air quality staff (e.g., during scoping and other consultation). Sections 6.b((1) and (2) of this chapter discuss screening criteria that are helpful in determining if an assessment is needed. c. Advisory determinations and planning activities not requiring an air quality or General Conformity analysis. The following actions would not alter air quality or they are advisory in nature (e.g., an airspace determination) and do not require an air quality analysis under NEPA or the CAA. (1) FAA determinations in response to proposals submitted on Form 7460 (Notices of Proposed Construction or Alteration in an airport vicinity or Form 7480 (Notices of Landing Area Proposal) (2) FAA approvals of noise compatibility programs under 14 CFR Part 150;6 (3) conditional approvals of airport layout plans.7 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. Airport projects, particularly those that involve stationary air pollutant sources, may be subject to permitting, certification, or approval under other provisions of the Clean Air Act or state or local law.

Airport sponsors may not implement measures in an approved NCP until FAA complies with applicable environmental
requirements.
7 A conditional approval does not authorize an airport sponsor to build the project.

Chap. 1

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

Note: Emissions from projects that require a NSR or PSD are not included in the calculation of total direct and indirect emissions under general conformity 93.153(d)(1).

a. New Source Review (NSR). Generally managed by State air quality agencies, the NSR program (Title I of the CAA at Parts C and D) is a means to control air emissions from new or modified stationary sources (e.g., boiler plant, electrical generating facility). New and modified stationary sources at airports such as airport power plants and painting and maintenance facilities are sometimes subject to requirements NSR Programs and Permitting. The NSR Program requires preconstruction reviews of air quality emissions and using air pollution control technology or other emission reduction strategies. The NSR Program is comprised of three permitting programs: (1) minor sources located in attainment, unclassified, or designated nonattainment areas (minor source NSR); (2) major stationary sources located in designated nonattainment areas (nonattainment NSR); and (3) major sources located in attainment or unclassified areas (Prevention of Significant Deterioration or PSD). In nonattainment areas, the NSR Permit Program applies only to construction projects that will cause potential emissions exceeding certain thresholds. For new sources the potential emissions must exceed the pollutant levels that make it a major source. Major source thresholds vary by pollutant and by the degree of nonattainment for the area in which the source is located (i.e., based on the sources potential to emit from 100 tons per year down to 10 tons per year). For modifications to existing major sources (a physical change to an airport or a change in its operations), the modification must cause a significant net increase in emissions to trigger the NSR requirements. Under this Program, the owner or operator of a new or modified major stationary source must install control technology that can provide the lowest, achievable emission rate and offset emission increases that are above baseline emission levels. b. Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). The PSD Program applies to new or modified major stationary sources located in areas meeting the NAAQS for at least one criteria pollutant. Maintenance areas are included in the Program. The PSD Program also applies to new or modified major sources of non-criteria pollutants regulated under the CAA, but it doesnt apply to hazardous air pollutants listed and regulated under Section 112 of the CAA. Under the PSD Program, a source is considered major if it is: (1) in one of the 28 named source categories; (2) emits or has the potential to emit 100 tons of a criteria pollutant yearly; or

Chap. 1

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

(3) not in the named categories or has the potential to emit 250 tons per year of a PSD-regulated pollutant. c. Indirect Source Review (ISR). An ISR is a process used to study and reduce emissions from new or modified facilities or structures serving mobile sources and emitting a primary pollutant listed earlier (see section 1.a of this chapter). These facilities include airport parking lots or garages or commercial or industrial developments. Nine states have ISR regulations (see FAAs Air Quality Procedures for Civilian Airports & Air Force Bases, Appendix J). When needed, the responsible FAA official must ensure airport environmental reviews include ISRs for the states and facilities noted in that Appendix. Consult AEE and APP-400 for methods and models addressing non-aviation air emission sources. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Consultation with Federal, State, and local air quality and planning agencies. The U.S. EPA and State and local Air Quality and planning agencies have various duties and responsibilities in overseeing regional air quality, developing and managing SIPs, and enforcing the NAAQS. Regional, county, and municipal air quality agencies regulate and manage many activities in their respective areas. Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and county and municipal planning and environmental agencies often work with these agencies to develop and revise the SIP. MPOs are a source of current population data for purposes of air quality analysis. These parties also work to develop construction and operational SIP budgets for aviation and surface transportation actions or other activities affecting local or regional air quality. b. Early coordination with agencies is critical. FAA and the airport sponsor should coordinate a proposed air quality analysis with Federal, State and local agencies early in the environmental review process. That coordination helps to: (1) identify the types of issues, required permits, and available information relevant to the project; (2) obtain accurate air quality information and data on conditions in the project area that may address: (a) air monitoring and meteorological data; (b) the current and projected maintenance status of the project study area. attainment, nonattainment, or

(c) information on any non-Federal permitting requirements; or (d) SIP-related information such as emissions budgets, prescribed emission reduction measures, and attainment time frames; and (3) resolve air quality issues throughout the environmental review process.

Chap. 1

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

c. Public participation. FAA must afford appropriate opportunities for public participation under NEPA. In addition, if a General Conformity Determination is required, FAA must issue a notice in the local media stating that a draft General Conformity Determination is available for review and comments. Later, FAA must notify the public when it issues its final General Conformity Determination. 6.. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. an airport actions air quality assessment predicts and examines additional emissions that airport construction and/or operation would cause. The assessment examines increased emissions from airport-related vehicular traffic, new facility construction, and/or expansion of an airport's power plant. FAA and the airport sponsor use the results of the assessment to determine the net air quality impacts8 due to the proposed airport action and, when appropriate for NEPA, its reasonable alternatives. FAAs Air Quality Handbook, Appendix B, provides a useful project review checklist. b. Applicability analysis and exempt and presumed to conform actions. FAA must determine if a proposed FAA action supporting airport development projects in designated nonattainment or maintenance areas will achieve the purpose of the applicable SIP.9 To achieve that purpose, the action must meet and maintain the NAAQS. (1) The first step in the analysis is to determine if the proposed action is located within a nonattainment or maintenance area. Next, determine whether the proposed action is specifically exempt or an action that FAA has determined is presumed to conform. If it is, no further air quality analysis is needed; except to demonstrate that an action presumed to conform is not regionally significant (see section 1.l. of this chapter).10
Note: FAA is the only agency to date to establish a presumed to conform list. Federal Presumed to Conform Actions Under General Conformity, 72 Federal. Register 41565, dated July 30, 2007.

(2) If the action is not exempt or presumed to conform, conduct an applicability analysis. That analysis allows FAA to determine if an actions total net emissions equal or exceed the established screening criteria emission rates known

8 9

Total Net emissions = (Future No Action emissions - Future proposed airport action emissions) The same requirements apply to a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP), which may be developed in the event that the State is unable to complete an approved SIP. 40 CFR Section 93.153(b).

10

Chap. 1

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

as the de minimis thresholds. If the actions net emissions exceed the de minimis thresholds, a General Conformity Determination must be conducted. c. General Conformity analysis and Determination. The General Conformity Rule is designed to prevent Federal agencies from taking actions that increase emissions that would violate the SIP. The conformity regulations provide detailed guidance concerning how conformity may be demonstrated for the various criteria pollutants. The Rule also identifies methods available to demonstrate conformity for the various criteria pollutants. (1) when the total net direct and indirect emissions of an action located in an area designated nonattainment or maintenance exceed de minimis levels for one or more criteria pollutants, FAA must make a General Conformity Determination that may include more detailed air quality analysis; (2) FAA uses that analysis to demonstrate how the action will conform with the purpose of the SIP (or FIP, if one exists) as part of a General Conformity Determination; and (3) when a General Conformity Determination is needed, FAA must make that determination before the approving FAA official makes a decision on an action. d. When to conduct an air quality analysis for NEPA purposes. For purposes of the NEPA analysis, the guidelines presented in Figure 1 of the FAA Air Quality Handbook are an important reference. Figure 1 shows analysis thresholds for airport activity. (1) Actions at general aviation airports. If the proposed airport action would occur at an airport having a total of 180,000 general aviation and air taxi annual operations, an air quality analysis is required. (2) Actions at commercial service airports. If the proposed airport action would occur at an airport having more than 1.3 million enplanements (2.6 million passengers) or more than 180,000 general aviation and air taxi annual operations, an air quality analysis is required. (3) Actions serving a combination of operations and passengers. The Air Quality Handbook also includes a formula that combines operations and enplanements (see sections 6.d(1) and (2) of this chapter, respectively) to determine if an air quality analysis is needed. (4) Actions that increase traffic coming to the airport and increase congestion at off-airport highway intersections. Section 2.1.5 and Figure 3, Air Quality Analysis Guidelines and Thresholds, in the Air Quality Handbook address a special analysis for roadway intersections. The Section indicates that special intersection analysis and dispersion modeling for CO emission should be considered if the Level of Service (LOS) at the affected intersections is D, E, or F. Actions at these LOSs may cause carbon monoxide (CO) emissions that exceed the NAAQS.

Chap. 1

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

e. Model for determining air quality impacts for CAA and NEPA purposes. The Emissions Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) is the model FAA requires for all airport-related air quality analyses. Sections 6.e.(1)-(3) of this chapter provide important information on the version of the model to use. Section 6.e(4) and (5) provide information on the two major elements of an air quality. (1) Data and model version. The data and model version used should be the latest and most currently available when begining preparation of the air quality analysis for a proposed action; (2) When FAA issues a new model version. if FAA issues a new version of EDMS after a projects air quality analysis has begun, the updated version may be used to provide additional disclosure concerning air quality, but use of the new model is not required. (3) Major revision or addition to the analysis. Use of the new model should be considered carefully when there is a major revision or addition to the analysis (e.g. if baseline and/or forecast years are updated, thereby creating the potential for different impacts. 11 (4) Emissions Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS). FAA requires the use of this model for assessing aviation-related air quality impacts except hazardous air pollutants.12 The EDMS contains emission factors for aircraft engines, ground service equipment (GSE), motor vehicles, and other sources of emissions common to airports. To comply with FAA requirements, analysts must use the most current version of the model when preparing airport emission inventories and performing a dispersion analysis. (5) Emissions inventory. Typically reported in tons per year or kilograms per day, an emissions inventory provides a gross sum of total emissions for the future no action and proposed action alternatives (or reasonable alternatives if needed). An inventory may include emissions of all criteria air pollutants, except for ozone (O3). This is because ozone is a secondary pollutant (i.e., it forms in the atmosphere, usually on hot summer days and has two major precursors (volatile organic compound (VOCs) and nitrous oxide (NOx)). Levels of those compounds are used to estimate ozone levels. Analysts use the inventory results to compare the alternatives total emissions to future no action emissions (see Question 20 of the General Conformity Guidance for Airports, Questions and Answers, dated Sept. 25, 2002). (a) Actions requiring an emissions inventory. If a proposed airport action in a nonattainment or maintenance area is not exempt from CAA requirements nor presumed to conform (see sections 3.a.(2)(a) and (b) of this chapter), the responsible FAA official must ensure that FAAs environmental process includes an
63 Federal Register 18068, dated April 13, 1998.
The current EDMS version (Version 5.0) is not capable of predicting hazardous air pollutants, but
future versions are expected to provide that capability.

11 12

Chap. 1

Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

emissions inventory to assess potential effects for general conformity purposes. This inventory will allow FAA to conduct an applicability analysis to determine if the total net emissions a proposed airport action or preferred alternative would cause are above or below the applicable de minimis levels, (expressed annually, in tons per year (tpy)). (b) When the emissions inventory shows total net emissions are below de minimis levels. If total net emissions of the proposed airport action or alternative analyzed are below de minimis thresholds, and is determined not regionally significant, no further air quality analysis is needed. Therefore, the responsible FAA official may conclude the following: (1) For NEPA purposes, The action and/or alternatives (if alternatives are evaluated) will not cause a significant air quality impact, since it is unlikely the pollutant concentration analyzed would exceed a NAAQS (See FAA Air Quality Handbook, pg. 14, Section 2.1.5) ); and/or (2) For General Conformity purposes. FAA need not conduct additional analysis or make a General Conformity Determination. (c) When the emissions inventory shows total net emissions are above de minimis levels. The General Conformity Rule is designed to prevent Federal agencies from taking actions that increase emissions that would violate the SIP. The Rule also identifies methods available to demonstrate conformity for the various criteria pollutants. Consistent with the guidelines in the Air Quality Handbook, responsible FAA officials may use the analysis prepared for general conformity purposes to fulfill NEPA requirements. Doing so enables the officials to take a hard look at and disclose potential air quality impacts and identify alternative mitigation measures. If the total net emissions due to the proposed airport action exceed the de minimis thresholds or SIP emission budgets, FAA may demonstrate conformity by, among other things, conducting a dispersion analysis to determine if the action or alternative would violate any NAAQS. (1) For CAA purposes. If the proposed airport action would occur in a nonattainment or maintenance area and its total net emissions exceed the applicable de minimis threshold(s) or SIP emission budgets, FAA may, among other things, conduct a dispersion analysis for general conformity purposes. (2) For NEPA purposes. A dispersion analysis will also disclose whether the action has the potential to violate the NAAQS and cause a significant air quality impact under NEPA. Note that this analysis may be required depending upon the airport and the nature of the project, even if general conformity does not apply. See, the Air Quality Handbook and sections 6.d(1) and (2) of this chapter. The air quality impacts analysis under NEPA is broader than that required under general conformity, as it may include reasonable alternatives and cumulative impacts from actions FAA and other entities have or will undertake.

Chap. 1

Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

(3) Dispersion analysis. A dispersion analysis uses the emission inventory results combined with meteorological and other real world conditions to simulate the proposed airport actions pollutant concentration(s) over time and space. The results, expressed as parts per million or milligrams/cubic meter, are useful to identify potential air quality hot-spots and areas where NAAQS violations are likely to occur. A dispersion analysis is most commonly done for CO, but it is also suitable for other local pollutants, including PM10, NOx, SO2, and VOCs. Since the NAAQS are expressed as concentration levels, a dispersion analysis provides a direct means to determine if project-related emissions in the future have the potential to violate the NAAQS. d. Integration of General Conformity and NEPA compliance. The release of NEPA and general conformity applicability analyses and documents should be synchronized to the fullest extent possible. 40 CFR Section 1500.2(c) states:
Federal agencies shall to the fullest extent possible:(c) Integrate the
requirements of NEPA with other planning and environmental review
procedures required by law or by agency practice so that all such procedures
run concurrently rather than consecutively.

Although not required, the synchronized release of the draft General Conformity Determination and draft NEPA document helps make the environmental review process more efficient, facilitates public review and comment, and minimizes the risk of public confusion. Where a draft General Conformity Determination is not needed, the draft NEPA document should summarize and disclose the inventory and applicability analysis. (1) Draft documentation. Under the General Conformity Rule, if requested, FAA must make its draft General Conformity Determination available for public review. FAA must place a prominent advertisement in a daily newspaper having general circulation and serving the project area. The advertisement must tell the public of the draft Conformity Determinations availability. It must also state FAA is providing the public 30 days to review the draft Determination and submit written comments on it. FAA must respond to all comments received on the draft Determination. If requested, FAA must make these comments publicly available within 30 days of the date FAA issues its final General Conformity Determination. (2) Final documentation. FAA must make its final General Conformity Determination available to the public. Therefore, FAA should try to complete this Determination so that it can make it publicly available when FAA issues its Final EIS. FAA must publish a notice advertising the Final Determinations availability to the public in a daily newspaper of general circulation serving the project area. FAA must ensure the advertisement appears within 30 days of the date it issues its final General Conformity Determination. FAA must issue this final Determination before it approves the project (i.e., before issuing a ROD or other document signaling Federal approval for the airport sponsor to proceed with project construction). e. Airport-related hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). EPA has identified roughly 25 individual HAPs that are associated with emissions from aircraft and airport Chap. 1 Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

ground service equipment (GSE). However, EPA does not specify aircraft and airports in the definitions and categories of HAP sources in Section 112 of the CAA (Hazardous Air Pollutants).13 Nor has EPA established standards for HAPs. When compared with existing urban backgrounds, air quality monitoring studies near several large airports have not shown that increased HAP levels occur near those facilities. In fact, only a small percentage of an urban areas overall air pollution is attributable to airport emissions.14 Nevertheless, due to the emission levels of unburned hydrocarbons and particulates near airports, EPAs National Air Toxic Program notes that airports are complex facilities that emit HAPs. Therefore, to comply with NEPAs disclosure requirements, FAA reports HAPs emissions in its environmental documents for information purposes only. FAA does not use that information to assess human health risks. The responsible FAA official should consider whether 40 CFR Section 1502.22, which addresses incomplete and unavailable information, applies to HAPS emissions for major airport development projects. (1) For major projects normally requiring an EIS (e.g., new airport, new runway, major runway extension), the responsible FAA official should decide, in consultation with Federal, State, and local air quality agencies whether it is appropriate to conduct a HAPs emission inventory. This is, especially so when the action would occur in areas that are classified as nonattainment or maintenance for O3 or particulate matter (PM). (2) As needed, consult APP-400 to determine the HAPs FAA will analyze and the methodology FAA will use to conduct that analysis. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about air quality in the airport-affected area. FAAs Air Quality Handbook, Appendix B, provides a project Review checklist to help guide air quality analysts.

13 14

Section 213 of the CAA Aircraft Emission Standards addresses aircraft emissions. GAO (2003) estimates about 0.5 percent, 2003.

Chap. 1

Page 16

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD When a project or action exceeds one or more of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

FACTORS TO CONSIDER The responsible FAA must determine if the air quality impacts of a proposed airport action (or if needed, its reasonable alternatives) would exceed a NAAQS for the timeframes used for the NEPA analysis. FAAs Air Quality Handbook (pg. 14) states: In the action is in a nonattainment or maintenance area [and for this Desk Reference, an attainment area] it is assumed that a NAAQS assessment [i.e., emissions dispersion analysis] is not required for an airport or air base action, since it is unlikely the actions pollutant concentrations would exceed the NAAQS.

Adapted from: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction or special use expertise about air quality normally provide letters addressing air quality effects. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects under NEPA beyond those required to comply with applicable substantive requirements under the Clean Air Act. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the key information in those letters and cross-reference the appendix for further information. If FAA or the airport sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking required mitigation measures. c. Reporting air quality findings. The environmental document should contain enough information, materials, and evidence to fulfill applicable NEPA, state or local regulations, and/or CAA requirements. FAAs Air Quality Handbook, Appendix B, provides a Project Reviewers Checklist to help guide the developers and reviewers of an air quality analysis. If the proposed airport action requires or involves air quality mitigation measures as a condition of FAA approval or to mitigate the projects potential air quality impacts below the threshold of significance, the environmental assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) must identify those measures. Air quality environmental documentation should include: (1) Evidence of agency coordination. The environmental document must contain evidence that interagency consultation with the proper air quality agencies has occurred. (2) NEPA impact determination. Where detailed air quality analysis was conducted, the environmental document must contain a conclusion about potential

Chap. 1

Page 17

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

project-related impacts on air quality based on the results of an emissions inventory or a dispersion analysis, whichever is appropriate. If the emissions inventory indicates the proposed airport action or, if appropriate, a reasonable alternatives total net emissions are below de minimis levels, and there are no other unusual circumstances, the responsible FAA official may assume the proposed airport action or alternative would not cause a significant air quality effect (see FAAs Air Quality Handbook, section 2.1.5, pg. 14). (3) General Conformity Determination. When issuing a draft or final General Conformity Determination, FAA must notify the appropriate EPA Region, State and local air quality agencies, the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), the public, and, when applicable, Federal land management agencies. The environmental document for the proposed airport action should report the status of the Determination and include it as an appendix. The appendix should also include letters from the above agencies. The Determination will state the proposed airport action or the preferred alternative would not: (a) cause or contribute to new violations of a NAAQS; (b) increase the frequency or severity of an existing NAAQS violation; or (c) delay the timely attainment of a NAAQS or any required interim emission decreases or milestones. (4) Achieving General Conformity. Ways to achieve compliance with the General Conformity Rule include: (a) documenting that planned emission increases are included in the existing SIP; (b) persuading the State to include the emission increases in the SIP; or (c) offsetting or mitigating emission increases from the project, provided the offsets are for the entire action, not just an incremental amount to attain levels below de minimis standards. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. After completing the applicable air quality analyses, use the following information, criteria, and guidelines as appropriate to determine the degree of the alternatives air quality impacts. For major airport development projects, it may also be appropriate to prepare a HAPs emission inventory and disclose the results in the EIS. (1) If a dispersion analysis shows a criteria pollutant will exceed a NAAQS, a significant impact may occur. Chap. 1 Page 18

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

AIR QUALITY

(2) FAA must prepare an EIS if the responsible FAA official has information signaling significant air quality effects may occur and mitigation would not reduce impacts below the NAAQS. Further consultation with representatives from State or regional air quality officials, the MPO, and/or regional EPA air quality offices during EIS scoping will likely be needed. The responsible FAA official may wish to consider inviting some of those agencies to participate as cooperating agencies in preparing the EIS due to their expertise on air quality issues (e.g., analyses, alternatives to consider, or mitigation). As fitting, the EIS must contain information required under other parts of this chapter and the following: (a) the results of interagency consultation completed to more precisely define unresolved issues and the necessary steps, analyses, or actions required to address them; (b) the results of emission inventories or dispersion analysis; (c) a description of necessary air quality mitigation measures; (d) mitigation benefits or emission decreases; (e) time frames for adopting the mitigation, and (f) sponsor or State agency commitments to carry out the mitigation. b. Mitigation. The EIS should describe any mitigation measures agencies with air quality expertise recommend. The EIS, Record of Decision (ROD) and/or General Conformity Determination must identify the air quality mitigation measures FAA requires as part of its project approval or to lessen the projects potential air quality impacts in accordance with the CAA. Mitigation measures required to fulfill General Conformity Rule requirements generally should also fulfill requirements applicable to major airport development projects. That assures all reasonable steps have been taken to minimize significant adverse air quality impacts under 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B). FAA must analyze mitigation measures that Federal, State, and local air quality agencies recommend beyond those required under the CAA to assure FAA has fairly evaluated the potential environmental consequences to fulfill NEPA requirements. The EIS and ROD should summarize the measures, emission reduction benefits, and the process for administering, monitoring, and enforcing the proposed mitigation. If feasible the EIS and/or ROD should include a schedule that lists clear timelines for implementing the mitigation.

Chap. 1

Page 19

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 2. BIOTIC RESOURCES 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

BIOTIC RESOURCES

a. Biotic Resources. For purposes of this desk reference, the term biotic resources means various types of flora (plants) and fauna (fish, birds, reptiles, amphibians, marine mammals, coral reefs, etc.) in a particular area. The term also means rivers, lakes, wetlands, forests, upland communities, and other habitat types supporting flora and aquatic and avian fauna. b. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). A NEPA documents Biotic Resources chapter must address the effects on biotic resources due to a proposed action and its reasonable alternatives. The chapter must also address action-related effects and consequences on the affected areas state-listed rare or unique species or their habitats. However, the Biotic Resources chapter should not discuss action effects on Federally-listed endangered and threatened species. Instead, place that information in a separate chapter specifically addressing Federally-protected species (see Chapter 8 of this Desk Reference.) 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

When a Federal action would affect water resources, Section 662(a) of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (FWCA), as amended (16 USC Section 662(a)) specifically requires consideration of biotic resources. To comply with that section, FAA must coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to assess the effects of proposed FAA actions on aquatic areas. Consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is needed for actions affecting anadromous fish species and marine mammals. Also, FAA or the airport sponsor, as appropriate, must consult with state wildlife agencies having jurisdiction over affected biotic resources.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS 16 USC Section 662(a), Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Guidance for Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Landscape Practices on Federally Landscaped Grounds, 60 Federal Register (FR) 40837 or 60 FR 40837 Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species, 64 FR 6183. SUMMARY DESCRIPTION When a Federally approved or financed action would affect a stream or water body, the responsible Federal agency must consult with the FWS. Provides guidance for interpreting and applying the Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically Beneficial Landscape Practices on Federally Landscaped Grounds. Paragraph 3f of attachment 2; U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 5610.1C. When review of an application for an airport development action involving a new airport, a new runway, or a major runway extension indicates the action would have significant OVERSIGHT AGENCY FWS

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Office of the Federal Environmental Executive) Departments of the Interior (DOI), Commerce, Agriculture (USDA), and Transportation (DOT) FAA

49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B)

Chap. 2

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

BIOTIC RESOURCES

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act, 16 USC Section 1855(b)(2) et seq.). See 50 CFR Part 600 for regulations implementing this Act Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as amended, 16 USC Sections 703-711. See 50 CFR Part 10 for regulations implementing this Act Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended, 16 USC Sections 1361-1421. See 50 CFR Part 18 for regulations implementing this Act Executive Order 13089, Coral Reef Protection, 63 FR 32701.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION adverse effects on natural resources including fish and wildlife (among other environmental resources), the Secretary of Transportation may approve that application, but only after finding that no possible and prudent alternative exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effects. Prohibits actions that may affect essential fish habitat (EFH). Fisheries Councils throughout the country identify and describe fishery management plans to protect certain anadromous fish species. If an action would affect an EFH, an impact assessment on the affected EFH is needed. The assessment and any mitigation are done in consultation with NMFS. Actions that may take a migratory bird species are prohibited. If an action may take a migratory bird or affect its breeding habitat, consultation with the FWS is needed. If it is determined there are no feasible alternatives to taking the migratory bird or its nest, FWS must issue a permit for the taking. The permit will likely require mitigation. Actions that may take a marine mammal are prohibited. If an action may take a marine mammal, consultation with the NMFS must occur. Mitigation actions to minimize or avoid the potential take must be implemented. Orders Federal agencies to preserve and protect the health, heritage, social, and economic value of the countrys coral reef ecosystem and the marine environment

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

NMFS

FWS

NMFS

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. FAA must evaluate any airport development action subject to FAA approval or funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). In those instances, FAA must determine if the proposed action or its reasonable alternatives would significantly affect biotic resources. Typical airside actions that may cause those impacts include: new or expanded terminals or hangar facilities; building new or extended runways or taxiways; installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS) or expanding those facilities. Landside actions may include new or relocated access roadways, on-airport remote parking facilities or rental car lots. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. Permits do not cover all airport actions affecting biotic resources. However, those actions that could affect migratory birds, fish,

Chap. 2

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

BIOTIC RESOURCES

marine mammals, or sea turtles1 may require special permits. FAA or the airport sponsor, as fitting, must consult the FWS or NMFS to determine if permits issued under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or the Marine Mammal Protection Act, respectively, are needed. Also, a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Clean Water Act Section 404 permit is required if proposed airport development would require dredging or filling navigable waters or wetlands, collectively known as waters of the United States. (See Chapters 20 and 21 of this Desk Reference for information on how to analyze impacts to water quality and wetlands, respectively.) 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. As noted earlier, under the FWCA, FAA must consult with the FWS when FAA is considering an airport action that would impound, divert, deepen, control, modify, pollute, dredge, or fill any watercourse, water body, or wetland. FAA also coordinates with FWS and state agencies about action impacts on potentially affected biotic resources that do not occupy those waters. If an action would affect tidally influenced waters, Essential Fish Habitat, marine and anadromous fishes, marine mammals or sea turtles, coordination with NMFS should occur. This interagency coordination provides multidisciplinary input critical to FAAs evaluation of action impacts. In addition, this consultation helps FAA determine the adequacy of potential mitigation measures. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. As needed, the environmental document contains an evaluation of action-related biotic resources impacts. Impact analyses at the population or community level may be necessary. Consult with FWS and other expertise agencies to determine the proper analyses. a. Levels of analyses. If the proposed action or its reasonable alternatives would affect only previously disturbed airport property, populated areas, or farmland, the analyses would normally be minimal and straightforward. Impacts on undisturbed wildlife habitats require more analyses than that needed for already disturbed areas. Develop the analyses for the undisturbed areas in consultation with FWS and other agencies having expertise on the affected biotic resources and their habitats. Include construction impacts to ensure the NEPA document properly addresses temporary, constructed-related impacts on these resources. b. State-listed species. The responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental documents Biotic Resources chapter addresses action impacts on state-listed endangered and threatened resources. However, if those species are also Federally-protected, the Biotic Resources chapter of the NEPA document should report that fact and refer the reader to the document chapter addressing Federally-listed endangered or threatened species (see Chapter 8 for information on those species).

See 50 CFR Section 10.13 for migratory species; Section 224.101(a) for anadromous fish species; Section 224.101(b) for marine mammal species; and Section 224.101(c) for sea turtles.

Chap. 2

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

BIOTIC RESOURCES

c. Evaluating impacts. To evaluate impacts to biotic resources, the environmental document must provide the following information: and (1) names and locations of water bodies or watercourses the action would affect.

(2) an analysis of impacts and their consequences on common and unique biotic resources the no action, the proposed action, and any reasonable alternatives would cause.
Note: If the action would affect publicly-owned wildlife or waterfowl refuges of local, state, or national significance, refer to Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference for instructions on complying with Section 4(f). If the action may affect Federally-listed endangered and threatened species, refer to Chapter 8 for details.

d. Minor permanent habitat change determinations. The environmental document should provide the basis for determining the severity of permanent, minor habitat changes. Here, the environmental document should address each of the following criterion the no action, the proposed action and the reasonable alternatives (collectively called alternatives) would cause. (1) Does the affected habitat represent a small percentage of a particular habitat type commonly found in the affected area? Consult FWS and state wildlife personnel to help quantify the term small percentage. or (2) Does the habitat affected support a limited number of biotic resources commonly occurring in the affected area? e. Major permanent habitat change determinations. Major permanent habitat change determinations are needed when an alternative would remove or disturb small tracts of sensitive, important habitat. Consultation with the proper resource agency is important here. The environmental document should address each of the following criterion for each alternative. (1) Is the affected habitat critical to the areas ecological stability? (2) Does the affected habitat support species or populations not commonly found in the affected or surrounding area? (3) Does the affected habitat comprise a large percentage of a particular habitat type occurring in the affected or surrounding area? Consult FWS and state wildlife personnel to help quantify the term large percentage. or (4) Will the action permanently remove the affected areas biotic community from a portion of the habitat it currently uses or will the community leave the affected habitat for a long-term (i.e., 8-10 years)? f. Actions involving coral reefs. If an FAA action would affect a part of a coral reef ecosystem, FAA should fund a study (subject to funding availability) to determine how the sponsor should carry out measures to monitor, manage, and restore the coral reef the

Chap. 2

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

BIOTIC RESOURCES

action would affect. This includes measures that would reduce impacts from action-related pollution or sedimentation. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the consultation and analyses discussed above, use the significance thresholds in column 1 of the following table. Consider factors in column 2 when determining if the action meets a threshold. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about the protection or management of the affected species. The official should complete added analysis for each reasonable alternative that would cause long-term habitat impacts (see section 6.e(4) of this chapter).
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD Consider scientific literature addressing the affected species and information from agencies having expertise addressing those species. Also review information on: Action effects on population dynamics. FACTORS TO CONSIDER Consult the proper agency(ies) to determine if an area sufficient to sustain species commonly found in the affected area would remain if the alternative were implemented. Determine if the action would affect habitat supporting floral or faunal species not commonly occurring in the affected area. If the action affects such habitat, consult the correct agency(ies) to determine if the action would affect a small tract of sensitive habitat needed for the survival or well-being of the affected biotic resource. Consider the locations of other nesting or breeding grounds relative to the affected area and if resource agencies suggest those areas could sustain the disturbed species.

Action effects on sustainability and reproduction rates. Natural and artificial mortality (aircraft strikes). The minimum population size needed to maintain the affected populations.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Potential mitigation measures. (1) Agency recommendations. During the environmental review process, FWS and other resource agencies normally provide letters addressing biotic resource impacts. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate impacts. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the sponsor or FAA does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should explain clearly why the mitigation was not adopted. (2) Possible mitigation. After the impacts to biotic resources have been determined, consider the following mitigation measures to reduce those impacts: (a) erosion controls to protect bordering biotic resources;

Chap. 2

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

BIOTIC RESOURCES

(b) phasing various construction activities to avoid breeding, nesting, flowering, or pollination seasons; (c) providing escape routes for mobile species; (d) using landscape rehabilitation to restore or enhance existing, degraded habitat, or to create new habitat; (e) changing design to minimize impacts on sensitive resources; (f) buying adjoining habitat to create a preserve for displaced wildlife or to create a buffer zone; or (g) adopting recommend and justify. 8. mitigation measures FWS or other resource agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. When a significant impact to biotic resources would occur, FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the significance threshold. The EIS should contain the information noted below as well as the applicable information discussed throughout this chapter. b. Photographs. Aerial photographs and field survey(s) to help further define the extent or distribution of the affected biotic resources. c. Resource importance. A description of the significance of affected biotic resources. As fitting, this should address the following issues: (1) the species or communities the action would destroy or displace; (2) the importance of affected species or communities to the impacted area; (3) the species range; and (4) the locations of sites significant to those resources (e.g., breeding or nesting areas) relative to the location of the alternatives considered. d. Other information. Refer the reader to other chapters discussing impacts to other resources (e.g., water quality, noise, and induced development, etc.) that could also affect the action areas biotic resources. e. Mitigation. Describe proposed mitigation when FWS or other consulted agencies provide such recommendations. FAA should fully consider those measures and balance their benefits against those of the proposed action. Explain why FAA or the sponsor did not adopt any recommended measure. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 2

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 3. COASTAL BARRIERS

COASTAL BARRIERS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITION. Barrier islands are geologically unstable formations and cannot support development. Yet, they protect the mainland by buffering storm or hurricane-driven winds or waves. As a result, these islands protect fish, wildlife, human life, and property along coasts and shorelines. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OVERSIGHT AGENCY Section 5 of this Act bans Federal agencies from providing financial The Coastal Barrier support for almost all actions occurring Resources Act of 1982 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on any unit of the Coastal Barrier (CBRA), as amended by the (FWS) or Resource System. Section 6 provides Coastal Barrier Improvement Federal Emergency Management minimal exceptions (48 Federal Act of 1990, 16 USC Agency (FEMA) Register 37036). CBRA Advisory Sections 3501-3510. Guidelines provide more information (48 FR 45664 and 57 FR 52730). Adapted from FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, Section 3. For information about coral reefs, see Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference addressing biotic resources.

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

b. The Coastal Barrier Resource System (CBRS). The Department of the Interior (DOI), through the FWS and the National Park Service (NPS), develops and maintains maps entitled Coastal Barrier Resource System. Barrier islands occur along all coastlines of the United States, but the longest, best defined chains occur along the coasts of the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Great Lakes. Contact regional FWS offices for maps dated October 24, 1990 (or later if the DOI Secretary revises them). FEMA regional office Flood Insurance Maps also show CBRS elements. 3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. An action involving the CBRA. Facilities built in the CBRS harm barrier island geology and ecology. They are prone to storm or hurricane damage. In passing the CBRA, Congress minimized the loss of human life by discouraging development in storm-prone, high-risk areas. In doing so, it also prevented impacts to ecologically fragile coastal barriers comprising the CBRS and stopped wasteful Federal funding for actions occurring on the islands comprising the CBRS. (1) Banned actions. FWS identified examples of Federal program expenses and financial support not allowed within the CBRS. Financial assistance, including Federal expenditure and financial assistance for development within the CBRS, includes FAA grants for airport planning and development (48 FR 45664). Similarly, without specifically mentioning the FAA, financial assistance that is prohibited includes grants (57 FR 52730).

Chap. 3

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL BARRIERS

Banned actions further include approving Federal money to buy any road or airport (among other facilities) within the CBRS. Banned actions do not include financial support for environmental studies, planning, or assessments that FAA requires to comply with other requirements. (2) Excepted actions. As noted in Section 2 of this chapter, Section 6 of the CBRA provides for exceptions to that Act. Section 6 allows Federal agencies to provide funding for navigational equipment (among other actions), but the expenditure must be consistent with the CBRA. Therefore, FAA may provide financial support to set up, operate, or maintain navigational aids and devices that are parts of the nations air navigation system. Excepted actions include access to those aids or devices. FAA may also provide financial support for environmental studies or planning for those aids or devices to comply with FAA Orders 1050.1E or 5050.4B. (3) Required consultation. As needed, the airport sponsor or responsible FAA official should review CBRS maps to determine if an action under consideration would occur within the CBRS. Consultation with FWS to determine if the action would involve the CBRS is prudent. However, before approving a request for a grant financing an excepted action, the responsible FAA official must ensure consultation with FWS or FEMA has occurred. Those agencies must be provided the opportunity to comment on the action before FAA makes a decision on the action. FWS will determine if the action is consistent with the CBRA. (4) Actions not involving Federal financial support. The CBRA addresses Federal expenditures only. It does not appear to address Federal actions that do not involve expenditures. However, if a sponsor requests a Federal action that would not include Federal funding (e.g., Airport Layout Plan (ALP) approvals), ARP urges sponsors and responsible FAA officials to meet the requirements of this chapter. ARP recommends this approach to meet the spirit of the CBRA and promote environmental stewardship. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. None required. If a sponsor proposes an action that would involve an element of the CBRS, the sponsor must provide proof of consultation with FWS. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. To complete the analysis, the environmental document should contain the following information listed below. a. Unit identification. Identify the CBRS unit where the excepted action would occur. b. Describe the action. Describe the action and any alternatives so the reviewer understands clearly the proposed action and why it qualifies as an excepted action. c. Funding. proposed action.
Chap. 3 Provide the dollar amount and source of Federal funding for the Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL BARRIERS

d. Risks. Evaluate risks to coastal resources and human safety or property associated with the excepted action. Do this by providing the following information: (1) Risks to human safety. Describe the risks to human safety that would result if a severe storm or hurricane struck the barrier island. (2) Risks to facilities. Describe the storm or hurricane-induced damage risks to the facility that would be maintained, replaced, rebuilt, or repaired. e. Proof of consultation. FAA environmental documents should contain information verifying that consultation with FWS or FEMA has occurred. The document should include FWS or FEMA recommendations that would prevent or reduce an excepted actions effects on the barrier islands ecology or measures needed to protect human life or property. The document should also contain a sponsors commitment to carry out that mitigation. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. To avoid repeating information on impacts to coastal biotic life or historic, cultural, or recreational resources, refer the reader to those chapters of the environmental document that discuss the affected coastal resources in detail. Preparers should place a note in the environmental assessments (EA) Coastal Barrier chapter telling the reader to review the chapters in the EA discussing the affected resources found on the coastal barrier. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After consulting the appropriate FWS or FEMA office and completing the analyses discussed above, the responsible FAA official should use the significance threshold in column 1 of the following table. Consider factors in column 2 when determining if an action meets a threshold. The responsible FAA official should consider those factors in consultation with FWS or FEMA.

Chap. 3

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL BARRIERS

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD

FACTORS TO CONSIDER FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, Section 3, does not provide a threshold. However, after consulting with the jurisdictional FWS or FEMA office, the responsible FAA official should determine if the proposed action would cause either of the following conditions: An unacceptable risk to human safety or property. Adverse effects to the barriers environmental resources that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated.

None.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Agency recommendations. During the environmental review process, FWS or FEMA will likely provide letters on coastal barrier impacts. Those letters may include recommended measures to mitigate those impacts. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the sponsor or FAA does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should explain clearly why the mitigation was not adopted. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. When a significant impact to coastal barrier resources would occur, FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the significance threshold. The EIS should contain the information noted below as well as the applicable information discussed throughout this chapter. That information should address funding exceptions and consultation with FWS or FEMA. The EISs Coastal Barrier section should refer the reader to any significant impacts reported in other EIS sections specifically addressing affected resources found on the coastal barrier. b. Mitigation. Describe proposed mitigation when FWS or FEMA provide that information. FAA should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. Explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation FWS or FEMA recommends. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 3

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 4. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

a. Actions in coastal zones. Under most circumstances, all airport actions that would occur in or that would affect a coastal zone of a state having an approved state coastal zone management program must comply with that program to meet the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (CZMA). This includes those actions FAA directly undertakes (e.g., installing a radar lighting system for a proposed runway), as well as sponsor-proposed airport development actions (e.g, building or extending a runway or an access road). b. Coastal zones. Coastal zones are those waters and their bordering areas in states along the coastlines of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico and the shorelines of the Great Lakes. These zones include islands, beaches, transitional and intertidal areas, and salt marshes. Note the CZMA applies to a project that would directly affect coastal resources, even if it is not within a states designated coastal zone. c. Coastal Zone Management Program (CZMP). Coastal zone management plan consistency provisions apply only to states having a CZMP the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has approved. Approved CZMPs contain a coastal states objectives, policies, and standards to minimize direct effects on its coastal or shoreline resources and information the CZM agency needs to assess an actions consistency with the CZMP. This information often addresses recreational, historical, cultural, or aesthetic values. CZMPs also identify coastal or shoreline segments to which the CZMP applies. If an airport activity is proposed in a state not having an approved CZMP, this chapter does not apply. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

This chart provides information on the law and regulations for proposed actions in states having approved CZMPs.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) as amended, 16 USC Sections 1451-1464.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION When a proposed action would occur in a coastal zone or affect coastal zone resources of a state having an approved CZMP, the Act applies to a Federal agency or a non-Federal entity who seeks a Federal license or permit or Federal funding. The Act requires the actions proponent to certify the proposed activity would be consistent with the policies of the states CZMP. The responsible Federal agency may not approve the

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

State CZM Agency, NOAAs Office of Coastal Zone Management

Chap. 4

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION proposed activity, unless: the State agency managing the CZMP agrees with the Federal agency or project proponents certification the action is consistent with the applicable CZMP; State concurrence is conclusively presumed; or The Secretary of Commerce determines the activity is either consistent with the objectives of the CZMA or it is needed for national security.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

NOAA regulations on Federal coastal zone consistency are:

15 CFR, Part 930, Subpart C Consistency for Federal Activities.

Complying with this subpart assures that FAA activities (or those a party undertakes on FAAs behalf) that occur in or are reasonably foreseeable to affect coastal zones are consistent with the states approved CZMP. These activities include rulemaking, planning, physical alteration, and exclusion of uses.

15 CFR, Part 930, Subpart D Consistency for Activities Requiring a Federal License or Permit.

Complying with this subpart assures that Federally licensed, permitted, or approved activities that occur in or that affect a states coastal zone resources are consistent with the states approved CZMP. It also includes any lease to a non-federal entity or approving use of Federal property for a non-Federal activity.

State CZM Agency and NOAAs Office of Coastal Zone Management

15 CFR, Part 930, Subpart F Consistency for Federal Support to State and Local Governments.

Complying with this subpart assures that Federal agencies may approve Federal support (i.e., grants) to applicant agencies for actions that are consistent with a states approved CZMP. Applicant agencies include any unit of state or local government, or a special purpose district.

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. Listed or unlisted actions outside a designated coastal zone. The CZM agency may determine that a listed or unlisted action would affect coastal resources. It is important to note that agency may make this determination for an action that would occur outside the

Chap. 4

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

geographical bounds of a state's designated coastal zone area. Therefore, consultation with the CZM agency is highly recommended. When a CZM agency determines an action would occur in or affect coastal resources, FAA must assure compliance with this chapter.
Note: An action proposed for any coastal zone along the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, or the Great Lakes shorelines may also be subject to the requirements of the Coastal Zone Resources Act (CZRA) protecting coastal barriers. Refer to Chapter 3 of this Desk Reference for information on the CZRA.

b. Listed activities in or affecting a States coastal zone. To comply with 15 CFR Sections 930.53(b) and 930.95(a), states having approved CZMPs develop a list of activities that are likely to affect a coastal zone or its resources. The responsible FAA official or the airport sponsor should review that list to determine if the following airport activities or any others under the scope of the Office of Airports are likely to affect a states coastal zone or its resources. The official or sponsor must do so to meet 15 CFR Section 930.53. Direct questions addressing CZMA applicability to the CZM agency in the state where the proposed action would occur. Examples of airport-related activities that may be listed include: (1) actions funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program; or (2) airport development actions the AIP or PFC do not fund, but that require Office of Airports approval. c. Unlisted activities in or affecting a States coastal zone. Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs, sets up an intergovernmental review process for EAs and EISs. This process allows CZM agencies to review pending actions to determine if an unlisted Federal action would occur in or affect the coastal zone or its resources. When the CZM agency decides an unlisted action might cause coastal zone impacts, that agency has the right to require compliance with the state CZMP (15 CFR Section 930.53(a)). CZMP compliance for unlisted actions is contingent on the CZM agency notifying the sponsor, FAA, and NOAAs Office of Coastal Resource Management the action would occur in a coastal zone or affect its resources. The CZM agency must notify them within 30 days of receiving notice of the proposed action. If the CZM agency fails to do so, it waives the right to review the unlisted activity. d. Categorically excluded actions. The intergovernmental review noted above does not occur for actions FAA normally categorically excludes (CATEX). As a result, the CZM agency does not have the opportunity to review a proposed CATEX, nor does the sponsor or FAA know if the CZM agency wishes to review the proposed action. FAA cannot categorically exclude an action that is not consistent with any Federal requirement. As a result, to avoid environmental processing delays, the airport sponsor or FAA, as fitting, should consult the CZM agency about any proposed categorically excluded action that is in the coastal zone or that could affect coastal resources. If the CZM agency does not wish to review the action, FAA may categorically exclude it, provided no other extraordinary circumstance applies. If

Chap. 4

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

the CZM agency issues a consistency concurrence, the responsible FAA official may categorically exclude the proposed categorically excluded action. If the CZM agency will not issue its concurrence for the proposed categorically excluded action, FAA will require an EA or EIS. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Documents needed for unlisted actions. The CZM agency has the authority to require activities not listed in a states CZMP to comply with the CZMA (unlisted activities). When this occurs, the environmental document should include the following information: (1) The CZM agencys notice to the sponsor and FAA that the CZM agency wishes to review the proposed, unlisted activity. The CZM agency must provide this notice within 30 days after learning of the proposed activity. (2) If FAA or the sponsor contests the CZM agencys determination to review the action, either party must file comments with the NOAA Assistant Administrator within 15 days after receiving the CZM agencys notice of that determination. The environmental document should include the notice and FAA or sponsor-prepared comments. (3) The NOAA Assistant Administrator must issue a decision on the CZM agencys determination to review the proposed action. That decision must occur within 30 days from the date of the CZM agency's notice of determination noted above. The sponsor, the CZM agency, and FAA must receive written notice of NOAAs decision. The environmental document should include the decision.
Note: The sponsor or FAA has the right to appeal a CZM agencys decision to review an unlisted action. Either party may file an appeal with the NOAA Assistant Administrator. But to avoid delays in the environmental review process, ARP recommends seeking the CZM agencys consistency concurrence rather than filing the appeal.

b. The sponsors consistency certification. After finding the proposed action complies with the applicable State CZMP, the airport sponsor must make the following written certification to the CZM agency in the state where the action will occur (15 CFR Section 930.57(b)). The responsible FAA official must include a copy of the sponsors certification in an appendix to FAAs environmental document.
The proposed activity complies with the enforceable policies of (enter States name) approved management program and will be conducted in a manner consistent with such program.

The airport sponsor should include the following data and information with that certification (15 CFR Section 930.58): (1) A detailed description of the proposed action and its associated facilities (e.g, access road, support buildings, etc). The information must be sufficient to allow an evaluation of effects on coastal resources;

Chap. 4

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

(2) Data and information in the CZMP the CZM agency will need to assess the actions consistency with the CZMP; and (3) A brief assessment noting the coastal zone effects the proposed action and its associated facilities would have on relevant CZMP elements.
Note: An airport sponsor should provide the CZM agency confidential information, only if: 1) the agency clearly explains why it needs that information to make a reasoned decision on the proposals consistency, and 2) the sponsor is satisfied that acceptable protection against public disclosure exists (15 CFR Section 930.58(c)).

c. CZM agency concurrence with the sponsors consistency certification. CZMA section 307(c)(3)(A) (16 USC Section 1456(c)(3)(A) and 15 CFR Section 930.63(a)) require the responsible CZM agency to notify FAA and the airport sponsor of its concurrence or objection to the sponsors consistency certification. The CZM agency must make this finding within 6 months following start of its review. The environmental document must contain proof that: (1) The CZM agency agrees with the sponsors consistency certification; or (2) The states concurrence is presumed. In this case, include a copy of the sponsors dated consistency certification to demonstrate the CZM agencys 6-month review period requirement has been met. d. CZM agency objection to sponsor consistency certification. If the CZM agency objects to the sponsors consistency certification, that agency must notify the sponsor and FAA of its objection. As noted above, the State agency must do so within 6 months after beginning its review of the sponsors certification and the information the CZM agency needs to assess that certification. To comply with 15 CFR Section 930.64, once FAA receives a State agency objection to a consistency certification, FAA shall not issue a Federal license or permit (in FAAs case, an unconditional ALP approval or AIP funding), except under certain specific circumstances. As set forth in 15 CFR Section 930.63, the CZM agency objections based on insufficient information may contain the following information: (1) reason(s) why the action is inconsistent with specific elements of the CZMP; (2) an alternative measure (if one exists) that, if the airport sponsor adopts it, may allow the action to occur in a manner consistent with the enforceable policies of the CZM program; (3) a description of the information needed and why the agency needs that information to determine if the action would comply with the CZM program; and

Chap. 4

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

(4) a statement from the agency telling the sponsor the sponsor has the right to appeal to NOAA about the objection (see section 4.e. of this chapter). e. The sponsors appeal of a CZM agencys objection. If more information or informal discussions do not enable the sponsor and CZM agency to resolve the agencys objection to the sponsors consistency certification, the sponsor may appeal the CZM agencys objection to the NOAA Assistant Administrator for Coastal Management (Assistant Administrator). The sponsor must file the appeal with the Assistant Administrator within 30 days of the date the CZM agency notifies the sponsor of its objection. When the sponsor files an appeal, the approving FAA Official cannot approve the action, unless the Assistant Administrator determines the action is consistent with the purposes of the CZMA. The environmental document prepared for this situation should contain the following information: (1) a copy of the sponsors intent to file an appeal under 15 CFR, Subpart H (the sponsor should tell the responsible FAA official that it intends to file an appeal); (2) a copy of the NOAA Assistant Administrators finding that the action is permissible because it is: ...consistent with the objectives or purposes of the Act, if it satisfies each of the following three requirements. Per 15 CFR Section 930.121, the finding will cite all of the following reasons as the basis for the NOAA Assistant Administrators decision: (a) the action significantly or substantially promotes the national interest, as defined in the CZMA; (b) the actions contribution to the national interest outweighs adverse coastal zone impacts, separately or cumulatively; and (c) there is no reasonable alternative. and (3) a copy of the NOAA Assistant Administrators concurrence with the CZM agencys objection;
Note: 15 CFR, Subpart G, Sections 930.110-930.116 describe mediation procedures Federal and CZM agencies may use to resolve disagreements about the states administration of CZMP requirements. Refer to that Subpart as necessary. The NOAA Assistant Administrator will try to issue a decision within the 90-day period following public notice of the sponsors appeal request.

f. FAA action when the CZM agency objects to a sponsors consistency certification. The approving FAA Official cannot approve or finance any airport action after the CZM agency tells FAA it objects to the sponsors consistency certification. Here, FAA may approve the proposed action only if the NOAA Assistant Administrator finds the action consistent with the purposes of the CZMA. If, during its review of an action, FAA decides it will not approve

Chap. 4

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

or finance a proposed action, the responsible FAA official must immediately notify the sponsor and the CZM agency of that decision. g. FAAs consistency certification. When FAA itself will build a facility connected to a proposed airport project (e.g., installing NAVAIDS for a proposed runway), the FAA Line of Business (LOB) responsible for the connected facility must make its own consistency certification. The LOB should do so as soon as practicable after finding its proposed action complies with the applicable state CZMP (15 CFR Section 930.36(b)). The text of the environmental document must tell the reader about FAAs certification and refer the reader to the appendix of that document that includes a copy of that certification. That certification should briefly state that the proposed action would/would not be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the CZMP (15 CFR 930.39). The certification should also include this information: (1) A detailed description of the proposed action and its associated facilities (e.g, access roads, support buildings, etc.) and their coastal zone effects; and (2) Information sufficient to support FAAs consistency statement. The statement should infer the proposed action and its facilities are consistent with the CZMP. In making this finding, the airport sponsor must show consistency with the management program to the maximum extent practicable. There is no need to make findings for policies the CZMP does not address. h. State agency response to a Federal consistency determination. A state CZM agency must tell FAA of its agreement or disagreement with FAAs consistency determination as early as practical after providing for public participation (15 CFR Section 930.41(a)). If the CZM agency does not issue a decision on FAAs determination within the 45-day period following receipt of FAAs determination, it must tell FAA about the status of the matter and why there is a delay (15 CFR Section 930.41(a)). In no case may FAA approve the action or any connected action sooner than 90 days from the date FAA issued its consistency determination, unless FAA and the CZM agency agree to an alternative period as discussed in 15 CFR Section 930.34(c)). i. CZM agency objection to FAAs consistency determination. If the CZM agency objects to FAAs consistency determination, the CZM agency must provide the reasons for its objection (15 CFR Section 930.43). That agency must describe why FAAs action is inconsistent with the CZMP and which alternatives, if adopted, would make the action consistent with the CZMP. If, as grounds for objecting, the state CZM agency maintains that FAA did not provide enough information, the CZM agency must describe the nature of the missing information and why it is needed. j. Conflict with existing law. If the CZM agency objects to FAAs consistency determination, FAA and that agency should try to resolve their differences during the remainder of the 90-day period mentioned above. If they do not resolve the differences Chap. 4 Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

within that period, FAA should consider delaying the final action until it and the CZM agency resolve their issues. However, at the end of the 90-day period, FAA may proceed with its action, even if the CZM agency has not withdrawn its objection. FAA may do so because an existing requirement particular to FAA (i.e., aviation laws or safety standards) may prohibit consistency with the CZMP. In this case, FAA must provide the CZM agency or local agency with a written statement citing the statutory provisions or legal authority limiting FAAs discretion to comply with the CZMP. i. Mediating an objection. Either FAA or the CZM agency may request that the Secretary of Commerce mediate an objection (15 CFR Section 930.44). Procedures to do so are in 15 CFR Part 930, Subpart G. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. Consultation with NOAA or the state CZM agency is necessary to verify coastal zone management areas near the proposed action. If coastal zone effects would occur, the environmental document must record needed consultation with the State agency or NOAA. (1) Project description. Refer the reader to that portion of the environmental document describing the proposed action. If a written description is not enough, include maps, diagrams, or other relevant material. (2) Consistency findings. The sponsor or the responsible FAA LOB, as proper, should review the terms of the CZMP (i.e., air, water, erosion, beach access, etc.), briefly describe the proposed actions effects on those terms, assess those effects, and explain why the project is consistent with the CZMP. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. Use the information prepared to meet the requirements noted earlier in this chapter. The environmental documents Coastal Zone Management chapter should use that information to determine the severity of impacts on coastal resources by using the information discussed in section 7 of this chapter. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. Due to their locations, some airport development actions are in or affect coastal zones. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with the airport sponsor, an allied FAA LOB, and the CZM agency. For airport development actions, use the following information to determine the level of a proposed actions impacts on coastal zone resources.

Chap. 4

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

FACTORS TO CONSIDER

None.

FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, Section 3, does not provide a threshold for these resources. Because of the number of airports in coastal areas or that could affect coastal resources, ARP recommends the responsible FAA official consider the following factors when addressing effects on coastal zone resources. Does the CZM agency object to the sponsors consistency certification? If yes, has the sponsor changed the project so it is consistent with the applicable coastal zone management plan(s)? If not, has the sponsor successfully appealed the CZM agencys consistency objection to the NOAA Assistant Administrator? If the airport action includes facilities FAA will install, did the responsible FAA organization provide proof that it will install the necessary aviation facilities in a manner consistent with the approved coastal zone management plan to the maximum extent practicable? Did the CZM agency agree or disagree with FAAs finding? If not, has FAA changed the proposed installation to meet the CZM plan? If not, explain why.

From: Table 7-1, Order 5050.4B

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, the CZM agency provides information on the approved CZMP, if requested. That information may include recommended measures to promote consistency with the CZMP. An appendix to the environmental document should include the recommendations. The environmental document should summarize the most important information and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix to aid the reader. If the sponsor or FAA rejects any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should explain clearly why the recommendation was rejected. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. Focus EIS scoping and content on any issues impeding the State agencys consistency concurrence. The EIS must include any information that agency determines necessary, unless the information is protected from public disclosure (see 15 CFR Section 930.58(c)). The responsible FAA official should consider inviting the state CZM agency to be a cooperating agency during the EIS process. b. Cooperating agency. If consultation with the CZM agency signals that agency will object to a consistency certification, the Approving FAA Official cannot approve the proposed

Chap. 4

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT

action (15 CFR Sections 930.64 and 930.90). To address this, FAA should consider inviting the CZM agency to engage as a cooperating agency during environmental document preparation. The environmental document should contain the applicable information discussed in this chapter and any information the State agency determines necessary to make the action consistent with its CZM plan. The Approving FAA Official may approve the proposed action only when the CZM agency determines the proposed action is consistent with that plan. c. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation or CZM agency changes to the proposed action. The approving FAA official cannot authorize the action, unless the CZM agency agrees the action, as proposed or adjusted, will be consistent with the CZMP (15 CFR Sections 930.64 and 930.90). The airport sponsor and FAA should consider fully the mitigation or changes and balance their benefits against those of the proposed action. If needed, the EIS should explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation or changes the CZM agency recommended. If feasible, provide and a schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 4

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 5. COMPATIBLE LAND USE 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

a. General. The compatibility of existing and planned land uses in the vicinity of an airport is usually associated with the extent of the airports noise impacts. Activities that may alter aviation-related noise impacts and affect land uses subjected to those impacts typically involve: (1) airport development actions to accommodate fleet mix changes or the number of aircraft operations; (2) air traffic changes; or (3) new approaches to the airport made possible by new navigational aids. b. Land use compatibility and noise. If the noise analysis described in Chapter 17 of this Desk Reference concludes that there is no significant noise impact, a similar conclusion usually may be made about compatible land uses. Also, if the action would cause noise impacts that affect land uses such as social or induced socioeconomic effects (e.g., community disruption, relocation impacts, etc.), analyze those effects in the context of the affected resource(s). Therefore, describe those impacts in the appropriate chapter of the environmental document that addresses those resources. To avoid duplicating that information, the documents Compatible Land Use chapter should cross-reference the pages in those chapters containing that information.
Note: Chapters 15 and 18 discuss induced socioeconomic and social impacts, respectively.

c. Land use compatibility not related to noise. Besides the effects of noise on land use compatibility, FAA should also assess the compatibility of land uses in the vicinity of an airport to ensure those uses do not adversely affect safe aircraft operations. Examples of such land uses that may adversely affect those operations include municipal landfills and wetland mitigation that attract wildlife species hazardous to aviation. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Under this section, the Secretary of Transportation (the Secretary) may approve an application for a project grant. The Secretary may do so only if the project is consistent with the plans (existing when FAA approves the project) of public agencies authorized by the state to plan for development of the area surrounding the airport. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS 49 USC Section 47106(a)(1) (Airport Improvement Project grant application approval conditioned on satisfying project requirements)

FAA

Chap. 5

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

49 USC Section 47107(a)(10) (Airport Improvement Project grant application approval conditioned on assurances on airport operations)

49 USC Sections. 47501 to 47510. (Noise Abatement) 14 CFR Part 150

49 USC Section 44718, Subsection (d) (Limitation on Landfill Construction)

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION For airport actions, the Compatible Land Use chapter of the environmental document must include documentation to support the required airport sponsors assurance under this section. That assurance must state that appropriate action, including adopting zoning laws, has been or will be taken to the extent reasonable. Such actions are needed to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and purposes compatible with normal airport operations, including the landing and takeoff of aircraft. The assurance must be related to existing and planned land uses. These sections require the Secretary to: establish a single system showing a highly reliable relationship between projected noise and surveyed reactions of individuals to noise; establish a single system to determine the reaction of individuals (at or near airports) to noise resulting from airport operations; and identify land uses that are normally compatible with various exposures of individuals to noise levels. Regulations at 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150 provide this information. Birds attracted to municipal solid waste landfill facilities (MSWLF) near airports pose aviation hazards. MSWLFs built after Congress enacted Public Law 106-181 (April 5, 2000) cannot be located within 6 miles of a public airport: receiving Airport Improvement Program (AIP) grants; chiefly serving general aviation aircraft; and chiefly having regularly scheduled flights of aircraft with 60 seats or less. Note: The State of Alaska is exempt from this requirement.

FAA

FAA

FAA

Chap. 5

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

40 CFR Section 258.10 (Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills; Airport Safety)

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recognizes that MSWLFs often attract large numbers of birds because these facilities provide food and cover. As a result, birds using MSWLFs could cause potential threats to aircraft safety. This regulation requires the following minimum separations between the airport and MSWLF: 5,000 feet for airports serving pistonpowered aircraft; or 10,000 feet for airports serving turbine-powered aircraft. In addition, the owner/operator of a new MSWLF within a 5-statute mile radius of any airport runway serving either aircraft type has certain duties. The owner/operator must: notify the airport and FAA of the proposal; and show and have proof in its operating manual that the MSWLFs design and use will not pose aviation hazards. FAA, the U.S. Air Force (USAF), U.S Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the Department of Agriculture Wildlife Services (WS) signed this MOA. The MOA provides guidelines to these agencies on how they will cooperatively address wildlife habitats near public use airports

FAA

Interagency Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) of July 2003 addressing wildlife hazards and airports.

FAA, USAF, Corps, EPA, FWS, and WS

Chap. 5

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. Airport development actions funded under the AIP and other airport actions subject to FAA approval, such as Airport Layout Plan (ALP) changes and Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs), have the potential to cause off-airport land use impacts. Typical actions causing such impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots; significant changes in aircraft operations; and significant construction activity. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATES, AND APPROVALS. None. However, an airport sponsor filing a project grant application for airport development must provide the following assurances to FAA. a. Consistency with local land use planning. The sponsor must provide a letter from the public agency authorized by the state to plan for the area surrounding the airport. To comply with 49 USC Section 47106(a)(1) (see the table in section 2 of this chapter), the letter should state that the proposed action is consistent with land use plans existing at the time FAA approves the project. An appendix to the environmental document must include the letter. If the state has not designated an agency, consult the Airport Planning and Environmental Division, APP-400, Regional Counsel or the Airports Environmental Law Division, AGC-600.
b. Land uses in the airport area. The sponsor must provide a written assurance verifying action has been or will be taken to restrict land uses next to or near the airport as discussed in 49 USC Section 47107(a)(10)), described in the table in section 2 of this chapter. An appendix to the environmental document must include evidence that the sponsor has provided the requisite assurance for the proposed action. This evidence may be a letter. FAA must ensure information regarding the necessary assurances appears in an appendix to the environmental document.

5.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURESENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. General. When reviewing environmental documents, the responsible FAA official should ensure the land use compatibility issues noted below are addressed where appropriate. b. Airport sponsor efforts to ensure compatible land uses. FAA recognizes that not all airport sponsors have land use control authority. FAA officials should contact the appropriate state and local planning organizations to encourage the development of appropriate compatible land use controls early in the project planning stage. Even airport

Chap. 5

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

sponsors lacking jurisdictional control in the affairs of the community where the proposed airport action would occur are required, at a minimum, to use their best efforts to promote airport compatible land uses and zoning measures in airport-affected areas. These efforts focus on developing existing and future land uses next to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport that are compatible with airport operations. To do so, airport sponsors should work with land use authorities and review FAAs Airport Noise Compatibility Planning Toolkit for helpful information (e.g., buying land in fee or using its best effort to persuade local jurisdictions to impose airport-compatible zoning near the airport). It is FAAs responsibility to ensure that the assurances given by the airport sponsor regarding compatible land uses are reasonable. (1) Land use assurances. The land use section of the environmental document should include documentation to support the required airport sponsor assurances noted in section 4.a. of this chapter. (2) Landfills and other wildlife attractants. Due to aviation safety concerns, information regarding land uses that may attract wildlife is critical in FAA decision making. According to FAA AC 150/5200-33B, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports, these land uses often include: (a) solid waste landfills; (b) existing or proposed dredge spoil containment areas; (c) wastewater treatment facilities; (d) wetlands, wildlife refuges; or (e) other land uses that attract wildlife that is hazardous to aviation. Information regarding potential wildlife attractants is helpful in determining if incompatible land uses other than those related to noise are or would be near the proposed action. The environmental documents Compatible Land Use chapter should disclose the presence of any of these land uses within the distances referenced by FAA AC 150/5200-33B: 5,000 feet of an airport serving piston-powered aircraft; 10,000 feet of an airport serving turbine-powered aircraft; and/or 5 statute miles of a runway end and a landfill that could cause hazardous bird species to fly across the airports approach or departure airspace.

Chap. 5

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

a. Noise impacts on common land uses. Table 1 in 14 CFR Part 150, Airport Noise Compatibility Planning, and FAAs Airport Noise Compatibility Planning Toolkit, depict compatible land use guidelines for several land uses as a function of day-night average sound level (DNL) values (see Chapter 17, section 1.b for more information). The ranges of DNL values in Table 1 at the end of this chapter reflect the statistical variability of the responses of large groups of people to noise. However, note that a particular DNL level may not accurately assess an individuals perception of an actual noise environment. Compatible or noncompatible land use is determined by comparing the predicted or measured DNL values at a site to the values listed in Table 1. b. Areas where the DNL 65 standard may not apply. Part 150 guidelines may be relied upon where the land uses specified in Table 1 are relevant to the value, significance, and enjoyment of the lands in question. However, FAA also recognizes that the guidelines do not adequately address the effects of noise on visitors to areas within a historic site, national park, or wildlife refuge protected under Section 4(f) of the DOT Act and where nonaircraft noise is very low and a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature or attribute of the sites significance (see Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference). Specifically, Part 150 land use categories: (1) are not sufficient to determine the noise compatibility of areas within a national park or national wildlife refuge where noise is very low and a quiet setting is a generally recognized purpose and attribute, or to address noise effects on wildlife. (2) may not be relevant to a wildlife refuge used for bird-watching; or (3) bear little relevance to a historic village preserved specifically to evoke the atmosphere of rural life in an earlier era.
Note: See FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, paragraphs 4.2c, 6.2h, 6.2i, 14.3, and 14.4b, and Chapter 17 of this Desk Reference for more information.

c. Noise impacts on wildlife habitat. Some airport projects could affect areas supporting wildlife or farm animals (e.g., refuges, farms, or ranches). Do not use Part 150 guidelines. They are based on human reactions to noise. As a result, guidelines should not be used to determine impacts on wildlife. Research shows aircraft noise causes inconsistent reactions and effects on various species according to the different life history stages of a species. For projects where aircraft noise impacts could affect wildlife or farm animals, review published studies addressing noise effects on the species of concern. If FAA expects the proposed activity would cause noise impacts on wildlife, the environmental document should cross-reference the environmental documents chapters discussing noise and/or biotic resources. This avoids repeating noise impact descriptions, their causes, the analyses used to determine impacts, the impacts, and their consequences.

Chap. 5

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

d. Land use changes because of physical disturbances. Besides noise, physical land disturbances may alter existing land uses. For example, building a proposed runway may disrupt a community by taking or moving a highway or altering a wetland or biotic community. To avoid repeating information presented elsewhere in the environmental document, the documents Compatible Land Use chapter should simply state airportrelated physical disturbance would change existing land uses (i.e., filling a wetland to develop a taxiway) and refer readers to those pages of the document addressing the affected resources. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE. a. General. The noise analysis completed per Chapter 17 of this Desk Reference provides information related to an actions projected noise impacts. To avoid duplication, the environmental documents Compatible Land Use chapter should cross-reference (or summarize) the information in the documents Noise chapter addressing an alternatives effects on compatible land uses. In addition, the Compatible Land Use chapter should discuss any land uses not related to noise as discussed in section 1.c of this chapter.
ORDER.1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER The responsible FAA official determines if any alternative would have land use consequences such as: See significance threshold for noise community disruption; business relocations; induced socioeconomic impacts; wetland or floodplain impacts; or critical habitat alterations.

Use the information from the factors addressing these specific issues to determine the severity of compatible land use effects.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, the public agency authorized by the state to plan for the areas surrounding the airport normally provide a letter addressing land use effects. The letter may include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include a copy of the letter. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in that letter, accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information, and the status of any recommended mitigation measures. Chap. 5 Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

If the airport sponsor or FAA determines that some or all of the recommended mitigation measures are not reasonable under the circumstances, the environmental document should clearly explain the sponsors or FAAs rationale for not adopting the mitigation. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. When the noise analysis completed per instructions in Chapter 17 of this Desk Reference indicates that a significant noise impact, pursuant to NEPA, would occur over noise sensitive land uses within the DNL 65 dB contour, the analysis in an EIS should include a discussion of noise impacts on those areas. Review information in sections 6.b. and c. of this chapter for information on situations where the DNL 65 dB standard may not apply. b. Mitigation. Any mitigation measures to be taken in addition to those associated with other land use controls should be discussed. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5020-1, Noise Control and Compatibility Planning for Airports, presents guidance for airport operators and planners to help achieve compatibility between airports and their surrounding areas. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when the public agency the state authorized to plan for the areas surrounding the airport normally provides that information. FAA or the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve Federal funding for major airport development projects unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203.(b)(4). In accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), an EIS must discuss and adopt reasonable mitigation measures recommended by the public planning agency or agencies having jurisdiction for the area surrounding the airport. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 5

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

TABLE 1. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH YEARLY DAY-NIGHT

AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS
Yearly Day-Night Average Sound Level (Ldn) in decibels Land Use Residential Residential, other than mobile homes and transient lodgings Mobile home parks Transient lodgings Public Use Schools Hospitals and nursing homes Churches, auditoriums, and concert halls Government services Transportation Parking Commercial Use Offices, business and professional Wholesale and retail- building materials, hardware and farm equipment Retail trade-general Utilities Communication Manufacturing and Production Manufacturing, general Photographic and optical Agriculture (except livestock) and forestry Livestock farming and breeding Mining and fishing, resource production and extraction Recreational Outdoor sports arenas and spectator sports Outdoor music shells, amphitheaters Nature exhibits and zoos Amusements, parks, resorts, and camps Golf courses, riding stables and water recreation Below 65 YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES 65-70 NO (1) NO NO (1) NO (1) 25 25 YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES (6) YES (6) YES 70-75 NO (1) NO NO (1) NO (1) 30 30 25 YES (2) YES (2) 25 YES (2) 25 YES (2) 25 YES (2) 25 YES (7) YES (7) YES 75-80 NO NO NO (1) NO NO NO 30 YES (3) YES (3) 30 YES (3) 30 YES (3) 30 YES (3) 30 YES (8) NO YES 80-85 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES (4) YES (4) NO YES (4) NO YES (4) NO YES (4) NO YES (8) NO YES Over 85 NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES (4) NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES (8) NO YES

YES YES YES YES YES

YES (5) NO YES YES YES

YES (5) NO NO YES 25

NO NO NO NO 30

NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO

Numbers in parenthesis refer to notes; see continuation of Table 1 for notes and key.
NOTE: The designations in this table do not constitute a Federal determination that any use of land is acceptable or
unacceptable under Federal, State, or local law. The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible land
uses and the relationship between specific properties and specific noise contours rests with local land use authorities.
FAA determinations under Part 150 are guidelines and are not intended to substitute for land uses determined to be
suitable by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses.

Chap. 5

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

COMPATIBLE LAND USE

TABLE 1. LAND USE COMPATIBILITY WITH YEARLY DAY-NIGHT

AVERAGE SOUND LEVELS

Key to Table 1 Land Use and related structures compatible without restrictions. Land Use and related structures are not compatible and should be prohibited. Noise Level Reduction (outdoor to indoor) to be achieved through incorporation of noise attenuation into the design and construction of the structure. Land use and related structures generally compatible; measures to achieve NLR of 25, 30 or 35 dB must be incorporated into design and construction of structure. Notes for Table 1 Where the community determines that residential or school uses must be allowed, measures to achieve outdoor to indoor Noise Level Reduction (NLR) of at least 25 dB and 30 dB should be incorporated into building codes and be considered in individual approvals. Normal residential construction can be expected to provide a NLR of 20 dB, thus, the reduction requirements are often stated as 5, 10 or 15 dB over standard construction and normally assume mechanical ventilation and closed windows year round. However, the use of NLR criteria will not eliminate outdoor noise problems. Measures to achieve NLR of 25 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. Measures to achieve NLR of 30 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. Measures to achieve NLR of 35 dB must be incorporated into the design and construction of portions of these buildings where the public is received, office areas, noise sensitive areas or where the normal noise level is low. Land use compatible provided special sound reinforcement systems are installed. Residential buildings require an NLR of 25. Residential buildings require an NLR of 30. Residential buildings not permitted. (End of Table 1)

YES NO NLR 25, 30, or 35

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5) (6) (7) (8)

Chap. 5

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 6. CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

1. INTRODUCTION. Airport construction may cause various environmental effects primarily due to dust, aircraft and heavy equipment emissions, storm water runoff containing sediment and/or spilled or leaking petroleum products and noise. In most cases, these effects are subject to Federal, State, or local ordinances or regulations. While the long-term impacts of the proposed action are usually greater than construction impacts, sometimes construction may also cause significant short-term impacts. Descriptions of the many construction impacts associated with airport actions are often covered in the descriptions of other environmental impact categories. Therefore, to avoid repeating information in chapters of an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS) that address a specific environmental resource, a documents construction impacts chapter, if one is prepared, should describe the general types and natures of construction-related impacts and the measures proposed to minimize potential, construction-induced adverse effects. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

At the Federal level, construction impacts often concern water and air quality effects and, to a lesser extent, noise. The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program contained in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 122 addresses construction disturbances of 1 acre or more. General Conformity regulations in 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart B, address construction effects in nonattainment or maintenance areas. See Chapters 1 and 20 of this Desk Reference for more information on evaluating project effects on air quality and water quality, respectively. For other resources, analyses done to meet Federal laws, regulations, and guidelines would govern how to assess construction effects on those resources.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Part 122.26(a)(9) requires an NPDES permit for storm water discharges due to small construction activity (i.e., disturbing 1 acre, but less than 5 acres). Part 122.26(a)(1)(ii) requires an NDPES permit for storm water discharges due to construction activities disturbing at least 5 acres of land. In both instances, the discharge must be covered under an NPDES industrial storm water permit, unless another individual or general NPDES permit already covers the construction discharge. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

40 CFR, Part 122, NPDES

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a state to which EPA has delegated NPDES authority.

Chap. 6

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

Clean Air Act Section 176(c), 49 USC, Section 7401 et. seq., as amended Include construction-related air quality emissions when a sponsor proposes an action in a nonattainment or maintenance area. NEPAs purposes are: to declare a national policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between man and his environment; to promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere and stimulate the health and welfare of man; to enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to the Nation; and to establish a Council on Environmental Quality.

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ)

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 USC, Sections 4321-4347

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

Building new airport facilities may cause temporary impacts to wildlife and fisheries habitats, water and air quality, ambient noise levels, historic resources, and local traffic patterns. Typical airport actions causing construction impacts include: airside activities (e.g., new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new airports or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.) and landside activities (e.g., new or relocated access roadways and remote parking facilities and rental car lots). 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. General. Construction equipment can increase off-site, ambient noise levels. In addition, exhaust from equipment, dust, or burning debris can degrade local air quality. The air quality analyses undertaken to comply with the disclosure requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act and substantive requirements of the Clean Air Act General Conformity regulations must include air quality emissions the projects construction activities would cause (refer to Chapter 1, Air Quality, for more information). Off-site local traffic patterns could be disrupted and cause air quality impacts as well. Erosion may degrade water quality. As a result, FAA should consider the concerns of agencies responsible for protecting local air or water quality or maintaining traffic flow. Environmental documents prepared for airport actions involving construction should Chap. 6 Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

contain information on the status of the airport sponsors efforts in getting any necessary permits. b. NPDES storm water permit for construction. EPA notes excavating 1 acre or more often requires the operation of equipment (i.e., bulldozers, cranes, dump trucks, etc.) disturbing or removing trees or ground cover or filling or leveling land. According to EPA, these disturbances cause sediment runoff rates typically 10 to 20 times those of agricultural areas and 1,000 to 2,000 times the rates of forested areas.1 As a result, substantial adverse water quality impacts could occur when airport construction disturbs 1 acre or more. The storm water regulation (found at 40 CFR Section 122.26) has two provisions regarding construction activity. One provision addresses a construction activity that would disturb 5 or more acres. Another provision addresses a small construction activity, that is, a project disturbing 1 acre or more but less than 5 acres. (1) In either instance, an airport sponsor must obtain an NPDES storm water discharge permit as outlined in 40 CFR Section 122.26(c). (2) For a small construction activity, compliance with NPDES requirements is not necessary if: (a) the rainfall erosivity factor2 is less than 5 during the period of construction activity; or (b) stormwater controls are not needed based on an EPA approved total maximum daily load or an equivalent analysis that determines that such allocations are not needed to protect water quality. See 40 CFR Sections 122.26(b)(15)(i)(A) and (B). (3) FAA does not require an airport sponsor to have an NPDES permit when it approves a project, when it accepts a sponsors EA, or when it completes an EIS. However, if the sponsor receives the permit before the EA or EIS is finished, the EA or EIS should include a copy of the permit. In all cases, EAs and EISs should explain what the airport sponsor has done to obtain the permit and the status of the sponsors NPDES storm water permit application. Provide letters from the permitting agency that indicate if there are any pending issues regarding permitting.

EPA Stormwater Phase 2 Final Rule, Construction Site Runoff Control, Minimum Control Measure, EPA Fact Sheet 2.6, January 2000; http://rvcog.org/pdf/rainstorming/subsection1.1.5.pdf

Erosivity factor (R in the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation): The rainfall erosivity factor is determined per Chapter 2 of Agriculture Handbook Number 703, Predicting Soil Erosion by Water: A Guide to Conservation Planning With the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE), pages 2164, dated January 1997.

Chap. 6

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

c. Air quality issues. Construction activity emissions due to the proposed or preferred alternative must be included as part of any analysis when calculating direct emissions. d. Agency letters. To determine the information needs of agencies concerned with construction-related impacts, contact the agencies listed in each of the chapters addressing those resources the proposed construction activities would affect. For example, when construction could degrade nearby water quality, consult with the resource agencies listed in Chapter 20, Water Quality. 5. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

Environmental documents should refer the reader to other chapters in an EA or EIS that address air quality or water quality in detail. The documents respective construction impact section should include proof that needed consultation has occurred. In particular, the section on construction impacts should include consultation with EPA or the appropriate State agency (when EPA has an approved NPDES program). 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. To avoid repeating discussions and to reduce the bulk of an EA or EIS, the construction section of those documents should refer the reader to the chapters addressing the resources construction would affect (e.g., chapters on noise, air quality, water quality, biotic communities, etc.). The construction chapter, if one is prepared, should present only a general description of impacts that the EA or EIS does not discuss elsewhere. Generally, this would be a summary of specific construction-related impacts, and their expected durations and consequences (i.e., sedimentation increases would/would not smother fish eggs). b. Mitigation. This construction chapter of the environmental document should discuss the measures the sponsor will take to minimize the impact of construction (e.g., proper muffling of equipment noise, dust control, detention basins, detours, etc.). At a minimum, the environmental document should discuss the specifications described in Item 156 of Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5370-10A, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. Significant construction impacts would most likely occur when unusual circumstances exist (e.g., excavating ecologically sensitive areas, construction-induced traffic congestion that would substantially degrade air quality). After completing the above analyses, use the findings and the significance threshold for the resource(s) construction would affect to determine the degree of construction impacts. A significant impact would

Chap. 6

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS

occur when the severity of construction impacts cannot be mitigated below FAAs threshold levels for the affected resource. b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about affected resources normally provide letters addressing impacts on those resources. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in the appendix for further information. (1) If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted construction mitigation. (2) All on-site construction activities must be conducted in accordance with FAA AC 150/5370-10, Standards for Specifying Construction of Airports, and by using best management practices (BMPs). These measures must be considered throughout the preparation of plans and specifications for each construction project. The construction contractor should meet the adopted plans and specifications throughout the project construction period. Implementing these measures will prevent or minimize most potential construction-related impacts to the environment and surrounding community. FAA AC 150/5370-10, Item P-156, provides further information on potential mitigation measures. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. Sometimes, construction impacts alone due to airport construction may cause a significant impact identified and the impacts cannot be avoided or mitigated below the applicable significance threshold(s) for the affected resource. In those cases, FAA must prepare an EIS addressing the impacts. Where appropriate the EIS should contain a discussion of the concerns resource agencies identified and the reasons why impacts cannot be mitigated below an applicable threshold (e.g., where the Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a Jeopardy Biological Opinion). b. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when expertise agencies provide that information. FAA should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. If feasible, the EIS should also provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation and explain why the sponsor or FAA does not adopt any mitigation a resource agency recommends.

Chap. 6

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 7. SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES 1. INTRODUCTION.

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

a. 49 USC Section 303(c). Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 is currently codified as 49 USC Section 303(c). Consistent with FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix 1, paragraph 6.1a, this Desk Reference refers to Section 303(c) as Section 4(f). b. Section 4(f) requirements. Section 4(f) states that, subject to exceptions for de minimis impacts, the Secretary of Transportation (Secretary) may approve a transportation program or project requiring the use of publicly-owned land of a park, recreational area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, state, or local significance or land of a historic site of national, state, or local significance as determined by the official having jurisdiction over those resources only if: (1) there is no prudent and feasible alternative that would avoid using those resources, and (2) the program or project includes all possible planning to minimize harm resulting from the use. c. De minimis requirements relating to Section 4(f).1 Section 4(f) is considered satisfied with respect to historic sites and parks, recreation areas, and wildlife and waterfowl refuges if the Secretary makes a de minimis impact finding. These requirements apply only to actual physical impacts, not constructive use. (1) De minimis findings for historic sites. FAA may make this finding on behalf of the Secretary if: (a) under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), it has determined the project will not adversely affect or not affect historic properties; (b) the Section 106 finding has received written concurrences from the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) (and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), if the ACHP is participating); and (c) the Section 106 finding was developed in consultation with parties consulting in the Section 106 process. (2) De minimis findings for parks, recreation areas, and wildlife or waterfowl refuges. FAA may make this finding on behalf of the Secretary if:

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/HEP/qasdeminimus.htm

Chap. 7

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(a) it has determined, after public notice and opportunity for public review and comment, that the project will not adversely affect the activities, features, and attributes of the eligible Section 4(f) property; and (b) the officials with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property have concurred with FAAs determination. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

a. The chart provides information on the law and regulations pertaining to Section 4(f) resources.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Describes Congress intent to preserve publicly-owned parks and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance, or any historic site of national, state, or local significance. The section defines the conditions needed for the DOT Secretary to approve use of these resources for transportation projects. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

DOT Act of 1966 [Title 49, USC Section 1653 (f); amended and recodified in 49 USC Section 303]

DOT and FAA

DOT Order 5610.1C, Attachment 2, paragraph 4. FAA also uses as guidance the FHWA/FTA 4(f) procedures for determining constructive use under 23 CFR 771.135. FAA similarly intends to use the final FHWA/FTA procedures for granting approvals and determining use under Section 4(f) that will be included in 23 CFR Parts 771 and 774. See, 71 Federal Register (FR) 42611, dated July 27, 2006.

Provide Departmental procedures for meeting Section 4(f) requirements and FHWA/FTA Section 4(f) Regulations Implementing Section 4(f).

DOT and FAA

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (L&WCFA) [16 USC, Section 4601 et. seq.); 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 59.

Section 6(f) provides funds for buying or developing public use recreational lands through grants to local and state governments. Section 6(f)(3) prevents conversion of lands purchased or developed with L&CWFA funds to nonrecreation uses, unless the Secretary of the Department of the Interior (DOI), through the National Park Service (NPS), approves the conversion. Conversion may only be approved if the conversion is consistent with the

Department of the Interior (DOI) and National Park Service (NPS)

Chap. 7

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION comprehensive statewide outdoor recreation plan in force when the approval occurs, and the converted property is replaced with other recreation property of reasonably equivalent usefulness and location and at least equal fair market value.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

b. Section 4(f) policies and procedures. DOT and FAA policies and procedures for preparing Section 4(f) evaluations and determinations and for consulting with other agencies are stated in DOT Order 5610.1C, Attachment 2, paragraph 4, and in Section 4(b)(1), below. As noted in the chart above, FAA uses Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)/Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 4(f) regulations as guidance to the extent relevant to FAA programs. FAA also uses FHWAs Section 4(f) Policy Paper of March 1, 2005, as an aid in implementing Section 4(f). c. Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (L&WCFA). Replacement satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior is specifically required as a measure to minimize harm to recreational areas and facilities purchased or developed using funds under the L&WCFA. To meet Section 6(f) requirements, FAA must: (1) comply with Section 4(f); (2) provide the information DOI requires to make findings required under 36 CFR Part 59 (see chart in section 2.a. of this chapter); and (3) coordinate with NPS and the State agency responsible for the Section 6(f) resource. d. Housing and Urban Development funded lands. Federal grant money may be used to buy the land the proposed airport action would involve (for example, open space under Housing and Urban Development (HUD) conservation programs). Therefore, if appropriate, FAAs environmental document should include evidence of or reference to consultation with HUD. 3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. As a modal administration within the U.S. DOT, FAA is responsible for Section 4(f) determinations for airport actions. When FAA is considering an action described in section 3.b. of this chapter, the responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental analysis discusses the potential use of Section 4(f) resources. If the action also involves

Chap. 7

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

Section 6(f) L&WCFA resources, the responsible FAA official must ensure the analysis also addresses applicable requirements under that statute (see section 2.c. of this chapter). b. Actions. Typical airport actions that may cause Section 4(f) and/or Section 6(f) impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots; significant amounts of construction or demolition activity; and a significant change in aircraft operations that results in new or changed flight tracks and accompanying noise impacts. c. Presumption of Significance. Section 4(f) resources are presumed to be significant, unless the official having jurisdiction over the site concludes that the entire site is not significant. FAA must review any statement of insignificance. d. Multi-use areas. Where Federal lands are managed for multiple uses, the Federal official having jurisdiction over the lands shall determine whether the subject lands are being used for park, recreational, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or historic purposes. FAA considers a national wilderness area providing purposes similar to a park, refuge, or historic site to be subject to Section 4(f), unless the controlling agency specifically determines the area is not being used for Section 4(f) purposes. e. Temporary lease or agreement permitting interim use of airport property for Section 4(f) purposes. Through a lease or other agreement, an airport sponsor owning property designated for transportation purposes may allow an entity to temporarily use the property as a park or recreation area on an interim basis during the period the property is not needed for transportation purposes (i.e., a temporary Section 4(f) resource). However, when making such arrangements, the airport sponsor should exercise caution. The sponsor should ensure the lease or agreement includes specific terms clarifying that the use of the property for Section 4(f) purposes is temporary. Although Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit (FTA) and FAA policies indicate that a Section 4(f) determination is not ordinarily required in such circumstances, at least one Federal circuit court has reached a contrary conclusion. See, 71 Federal Register (FR) 42611, dated July 27, 2006.2

In Stewart Park & Reserve Coalition v. Slater, 352 F.3d 545 (2nd Cir. 2003), the court held that Section 4(f) does not require the permanent designation of a public parkland for the parkland to receive protection under Section 4(f). The court ruled that Section 4(f) applied to the temporary parkland, even though the public lands a proposed highway project would use were originally acquired for transportation purposes (airport expansion and access). The court determined that although the land was never permanently designated as a parkland, it was available and used as a public park and recreational area for almost 30 years. The court stated that 30 years of uninterrupted use could not be characterized as interim. See Appendix A, question 18 of FHWAs Section 4(f) guidance dated March 1, 2005, for additional information.

Chap. 7

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

f. Deliberate change in Section 4(f) classification. Section 4(f) will apply when a State or local agency changes the use of a property from a Section 4(f)-type use to a transportation use in anticipation of a request for FAA approval. In this case, Section 4(f) will apply, even though the change in use may have occurred before a sponsor requested FAA approval. This is especially true where the change in use appears to have occurred to avoid Section 4(f) requirements. g. Determining if an action would use a Section 4(f) resource. The responsible FAA official must decide if an action FAA is considering would physically or constructively use 4(f) resources. (1) Physical use. When a project would require the physical taking of lands being used for park or other Section 4(f) purposes, there is generally no latitude for judgment regarding Section 4(f) applicability, unless the de minimis provisions of 49 USC Section 303(d) apply. This is because a physical use would eliminate or substantially hinder the intended use of the Section 4(f) property. A physical use would occur: (a) when the proposed project or a reasonable alternative would physically occupy a portion of or all of a Section 4(f) resource; (b) when the proposed project permanently incorporates the resource for project purposes through acquisition or easement; (c) if alteration of structures or facilities located on Section 4(f) properties is necessary, even though the action does not require buying the property; or (d) if temporary occupancy meets one of the following conditions: (1) the duration of project occupancy is greater than the duration needed to build a project and there is a change in ownership of the land; (2) the projects work scope is major in the nature and magnitude of changes to the Section 4(f) resource; (3) anticipated permanent adverse physical impacts would occur and a temporary or permanent interference with Section 4(f) activities or purposes would occur;

Although this case involved an unusual circumstance (i.e., an interim 4(f) use exceeding 30 years), the responsible FAA official should use caution when evaluating a project involving a temporary 4(f) resource. The official should contact Regional Counsel, the Office of the Chief Counsel, Airports and Environmental Law Division, AGC-600, or the Airport Planning and Environmental Division, APP-400.

Chap. 7

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(4) the land use is not fully restored (i.e., it is not returned to a condition that is at least as good as that existing before the project); or (5) there is no documented agreement with the appropriate Federal, state, or local official having jurisdiction over the resources with regard to the conditions noted in section 3.g.1(d)(1)-(4) of this chapter. 2. Constructive use. Unlike physical use, a constructive use does not physically occupy or require purchase of the Section 4(f) resource. A constructive use would occur when an action would substantially impair that resource. Substantial impairment occurs only when the activities, features, or attributes of the resource that contribute to the resources significance or enjoyment are substantially diminished. Potential causes of constructive use include shifts in user population because of direct use of bordering properties, and/or non-physical intrusions such as noise, air pollution, or other effects that would substantially impair the resources use. For example, noise from new nighttime cargo operations could cause sleep disturbance and substantially impair a park campgrounds use as an overnight camping area. (a) Constructive use and the use of Part 150 guidelines. FAA experience shows that noise impacts are most often the major cause of airport-related constructive use of Section 4(f) resources. (1) Analysts may rely upon land use compatibility guidelines in 14 CFR Part 150 to determine if a project would constructively use a Section 4(f) resource, where land uses specified in Part 150 guidelines are relevant to the value, significance, and enjoyment of the Section 4(f) resources in question. As a result, these guidelines apply in evaluating noise impacts on lands used for traditional recreational activities. Reliance on the day-night average sound level (DNL) is appropriate because DNL is the best measure of significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
Note: DNL is the only noise metric with a substantial body of scientific data on the reaction of people to noise, and has been systematically related to Federal land use compatibility guidelines (see Chapter 5 of this Desk Reference for more information).

(2) Historic sites. FAA may also rely on Part 150 guidelines when evaluating effects on historic properties used as residences. However, as noted above, those guidelines may not be appropriate for nationally-significant historic resources where a quiet setting is a generally recognized purpose and attribute. An example is a historic village preserved specifically to convey a rural life atmosphere of an earlier era or a Native American traditional cultural property (See Chapter 14). Responsible FAA officials should note that if a historic neighborhood is historically significant due to architectural characteristics, then project-related noise increases would not constitute a constructive use. Such noise increases would not substantially impair the characteristics that make the

Chap. 7

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

neighborhood eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. See section 3.k. of this chapter for more information. (3) Section 4(f) resources when a quiet setting is a recognized feature or attribute. When evaluating use of Section 4(f) resources in this situation, analysts should carefully evaluate how the uses of the 4(f) resources compare to the land use categories under 14 CFR Part 150 guidelines. The Part 150 Land Use Compatibility Table may be used as a guideline to the extent the normal activities and aesthetic values associated with land uses specified in the Table are comparable and relevant to the Section 4(f) resources value, significance, and enjoyment. For example, the Table does not adequately address the effects of increased aircraft noise on expectations and purposes of those who visit a wildlife refuge to watch birds. k. Applicability and coordination between Section 4(f) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Section 4(f) applies to all historic sites of national state, or local significance, whether or not these sites are publicly owned or open to the public. However, except in unusual circumstances (see note below), Section 4(f) protects only historic or archeological properties on or eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Therefore, the responsible FAA official should review the following information to ensure proper coordination between these laws when necessary.
Note: For purposes of Section 4(f), an historic site is significant only if it is on or eligible for the National Register, unless FAA determines that the application of Section 4(f) is appropriate. For example, if a historic site is determined not to be NRHP-listed or eligible, but an official (such as the Mayor, President of the local historic society, etc.) formally provides information to indicate that the historic site is locally significant, the responsible FAA official may determine it is appropriate to apply Section 4(f). If the FAA official finds Section 4(f) does not apply, the environmental document should include the basis for not applying Section 4(f). That basis may include the reasons why the historic site was not eligible for the NRHP. See FHWA Policy Paper dated March 1, 2005, 3. Historic Sites for more information.

(1) Effects on NRHP-listed or eligible properties. When determining Section 4(f) applicability to an actions effects on historic properties, the responsible FAA official should complete the process and analysis Section 106 of the NHPA requires (see Chapter 14 of this Desk Reference). Using the results of the Section 106 process, the official should consider the following information when deciding if DOT Section 4(f) would apply to historic properties. (a) Projects incorporating or occupying a historic site. If a project would permanently incorporate or occupy land of an historic site, Section 4(f) would apply. Section 4(f) applicability does not depend on FAAs finding of No Properties Affected, No Adverse Effect, or Adverse Effect. (b) Projects not incorporating or occupying a historic site. If a project would not permanently incorporate or occupy land of an historic site, Section 4(f) may still apply. To determine if Section 4(f) applies, examine the proximity of impacts in terms of

Chap. 7

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

constructive use. Do so in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) when appropriate. (1) if project impacts would substantially impair the features or attributes that contribute to the propertys National Register eligibility or listing, Section 4(f) would apply. (2) if the impacts would not substantially impair the features or attributes that contribute to the propertys National Register eligibility or listing, Section 4(f) would not apply. (2) Effects on NRHP-listed or eligible archeological properties. When assessing project effects on archeological resources on or eligible for the NRHP, including discoveries that occur during construction, consider the following information after consulting with the SHPO, or THPO when appropriate: (a) Resources warranting preservation in place. If a project would physically occupy a location containing archeological resources and those resources warrant preservation in place, Section 4(f) would apply. (b) Resources warranting data recovery. If a project would physically occupy a location containing archeological resources but consultation with the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) determines the archeological resources are important chiefly for data recovery and not warrant preservation in place, Section 4(f) would not apply.
Note: FAA is responsible for complying with Section 106 of the NHPA regardless of how it addresses Section 4(f) requirements.

4.

PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Permits. With one exception, there are no permits, certifications, or approvals required to use resources protected under DOT Section 4(f). NPS approval is required to convert Section 4(f) resources acquired or developed using funds under Section 6(f) of the L&WCFA. b. Information and reviews from other agencies. Section 2 of this chapter lists information other agencies may provide. (1) Section 4(f) resources. As noted above, input from agencies having jurisdiction over affected Section 4(f) resources plays an important part in FAA Section 4(f)

Chap. 7

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

evaluations and determinations. As a matter of policy, DOT agencies provide the DOI 45 days to review all Section 4(f) evaluations.3 (a) Send the Section 4(f) evaluations to: Director, Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance
Department of the Interior
Main Building, MS 2342
1849 C Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20240.
(b) Do not send copies of the Section 4(f) Evaluation and Determination to any office within DOI. The Director will send copies to the appropriate DOI agency for review. The responsible FAA official should provide copies of FAAs Evaluation and Determination as noted here: (i) Alaska: provide 16 copies;

- (ii) For projects in the Eastern U.S., including Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Minnesota, and Missouri: provide 12 copies; or - (iii) For projects in the Western U.S., (e.g., areas west of the western boundaries of the states listed in section 4.b(1)(b)(ii)), provide 18 copies. (2) Section 6(f) resources. If a proposed airport project would cause a use of a Section 6(f) resource, then FAA must ensure the project sponsor fulfills the Section 6(f) requirements for conversion to another use. According to 36 CFR Section 59.3, the airport sponsor must submit the request for conversion of the 6(f) resource to the State Liaison Officer. That Officer submits the request to the Regional Director of the National Park Service. The Regional Director must approve the conversion. The environmental document should include proof the applicable requirements of 36 CFR Part 59 have been met. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. General. FAA environmental documents must thoroughly discuss Section 4(f) issues. If FAA finds no prudent and feasible alternative to avoid use of the 4(f) resource exists, the documents must provide FAAs rationale for that conclusion.4 The documents

3Letter from the Dept. of the Interior, Office of the Secretary, dated December 12, 2002, discussing the environmental review process. 4

FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1007.e(5)(a) provides information on factors used in determining the prudence of an alternative.

Chap. 7

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

must also describe measures needed to minimize unavoidable use of Section 4(f) resources. (1) When a proposed action involves Section 6(f) resources, FAAs environmental document should include evidence of consultation with the L&WCFA sponsor and any other State or local officials having jurisdiction over the Section 6(f) land; (2) The document should also include NPS approval of a L&WCFA State Liaison Officers request to convert Section 6(f) land to uses other than recreational; and (3) The documents should also include evidence of concurrence or efforts to obtain concurrence of appropriate officials having jurisdiction over Section 4(f) lands addressing actions proposed to minimize harm. Whether or not Federal agency lands are involved, the documentation shall reflect consultation with DOI and, as pertinent, HUD or USDA. b. Preparing a Section 4(f) evaluation. The responsible FAA official must prepare this evaluation after determining an action would involve a Section 4(f) resource. The evaluation may be issued along with the projects NEPA document or issued separately in a document called a Section 4(f) Statement. (1) If FAA presents the evaluation in the NEPA document, clearly list the pages of the document including the evaluation and all pertinent information. (2) If FAA presents the evaluation in a separate document, clearly label the document as Section 4(f) Statement and include a brief project description to inform reviewers who may not examine the EA or EIS prepared for the project. (3) In either case, the document should include all agency letters on significance of the 4(f) resource and any other correspondence from appropriate jurisdictional agencies. (4) When appropriate, include Section 6(f) information in the NEPA document or the Section 4(f) Statement. c. Section 4(f) evaluation content. The responsible FAA official must ensure the Section 4(f) evaluation contains the following information: (1) Owner. The name of the owner and type of Section 4(f) property. Include information on property ownership, such as leases, easements, covenants, or restrictions; (2) Size. Provide the acreage and location of the affected Section 4(f) property and any of its unique or irreplaceable qualities; (3) Visual information. Provide detailed maps or drawings of sufficient scale to identify the relationship of the action to the Section 4(f) property;

Chap. 7

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(4) Uses. Describe briefly the Section 4(f) resources activities, features, or attributes that qualify the resource for protection. Note if the action would result in physical or constructive use of the resource; (5) Access. Describe access to the Section 4(f) property. Note if the project would limit or prohibit that access. Describe patronage and provide an estimate of the number of users or visitors; (6) Associated areas. Describe any relationship the affected resource has to other similarly used, nearby lands; (7) Prudent and feasible alternatives. Determine if a prudent or feasible alternative that avoids the Section 4(f) resource exists. If such an alternative exists and it would meet the project purpose and need, FAA may not select an alternative that would use the Section 4(f) resource. If no such alternative exists, thoroughly explain how the responsible FAA official determined this. For example, explain why a rejected alternative poses unique technical problems requiring extraordinary amounts of money to implement or why innovative engineering or construction techniques are not possible or prudent; and
Note: If needed, see Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1007.e.(5), and 71 Federal Register 42611, dated July 27, 2006, for more information on feasible and prudent alternatives.

(8) Mitigation. When no prudent and feasible alternative exists, all possible planning to minimize harm to the Section 4(f) resource is required. Consultation with the agency owning or administering the resource or the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) for historic resources is recommended. In addition, the DOI and other Federal, State, or local agencies having jurisdiction over the affected resource is important. These efforts help to inform FAAs judgment concerning potential impacts and possible measures to minimize harm due to use of Section 4(f) resources. The responsible FAA official must carefully evaluate comments from such agencies and explain why any recommended mitigation was not adopted. Include evidence of concurrence or efforts to obtain concurrence from appropriate officials having jurisdiction over Section 4(f) resources regarding measures proposed to minimize harm. Whether or not Federal agency lands are involved, the documentation shall reflect consultation with DOI and, as needed, HUD or USDA. d. Section 6(f) evaluation. As noted in 36 CFR Section 59.3, the State Liaison Officer submits a written request on behalf of the airport sponsor to convert Section 6(f) land to non-recreational use. The evaluation must contain the following information. The responsible FAA official should ensure the environmental document prepared for an action involving a Section 6(f) resource includes this information: (1) NPS Statement. A statement from the Regional NPS Director authorizing the State agency having responsibility over the Section 6(f) resource to convert the resource to non-recreational uses.

Chap. 7

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(2) Correspondence. Letters or other information to or from the airport sponsor, FAA, or the responsible State agency addressing the conversion. (3) Analysis. Requests for conversion submitted to the Regional NPS Director must contain the following information under 36 CFR Part 59. (a) Boundaries. Provide the boundaries of the property to be converted. Boundaries are depicted or otherwise described on the Section 6(f)(3) boundary map and/or as described in other project documentation DOI approved in establishing the Section 6(f) property (36 CFR Section 59.1). Include boundaries of the replacement property (36 CFR Section 59.3(c)). Often, the area of analysis is outside the boundaries of the Section 6(f) tract because more land may be needed to protect the recreational areas integrity. The airport sponsor should work closely with the State agency responsible for the Section 6(f) property. This ensures the analysis includes the tracts not funded under the L&WCFA but essential to the recreational areas function. (b) Alternatives. Thoroughly analyze all practical alternatives that would avoid converting the Section 6(f) resource to aeronautical use. Typically, the analysis of prudent and feasible alternatives done for Section 4(f) purposes is sufficient here. (c) Replacement area. Replacement of the Section 6(f) resource that will be converted is required to satisfy Section 6(f) requirements. Provide the following information to ensure needed information is available. (i) Describe the replacement property. Replacement property use and location characteristics must be reasonably equivalent to those of the converted area or facility, but it need not provide the same recreational experiences (36 CFR Section 59.3(b)(3)). (ii) Provide the replacements fair market value. Provide proof that the fair market value of the replacement area is at least equal to that of the converted property. The value must be based on an approved appraisal, prepared according to uniform Federal appraisal standards. The fair market value excludes the value of structures or facilities that will not serve a recreation purpose (36 CFR Section 59.3(b)(2)). (iii) Political jurisdiction over the replacement area. Generally, the same political jurisdiction that purchased or developed the property to be converted should administer the replacement property. Provide information addressing this issue (36 CFR Section 59.3(b)(3)). (iv) Partial conversion. Some actions require only partial conversion of a Section 6(f) property. In this instance, assess the effects of the converted area on the remaining unconverted area. If the Regional NPS Director approves the partial conversion,

Chap. 7

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

the unconverted area or facility must remain recreationally viable, or it must be replaced (36 CFR 59.3(b)(5)).

Chap. 7

Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(v) Coordination. Provide proof that all necessary coordination has occurred. This includes compliance with Section 4(f) requirements (36 CFR 59.3(b)(6)). (vi) Interagency review. Provide proof that intergovernmental clearinghouse review has occurred for actions involving conversion and substitution significantly changing the original L&WCFA project (36 CFR 59.3(b)(8)). (vii) Comprehensive plans. Provide proof the proposed conversion and substitution will be according to the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan and/or an equivalent recreation plan(s) (36 CFR 59.3(b)(9)). d. When NPS denies a conversion request. If the Regional NPS Director denies a conversion request, the responsible FAA official must ensure the evaluation contains the Regional NPS Directors reasons for the denial. Here, FAA must work closely with the state agency responsible for the Section 6(f) property and the regional NPS office to resolve issues preventing the conversion. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. To determine impacts on Section 4(f) resources, the responsible FAA official should use the information obtained in completing other sections in this chapter. The environmental document or Section 4(f) Statement should present that information along with the following information. a. Would a use occur? Based on the analysis completed to satisfy the various sections of this chapter, the responsible FAA official should state whether the project would use a Section 4(f) property. b. How would project use of a Section 4(f) resource affect that resource? If a project would physically or constructively use a Section 4(f) resource because no prudent and feasible alternative exists, describe: (1) the uses that the proposed project would eliminate or impair; and (2) the effects on the Section 4(f) resource due to that use. c. Does the project include all possible measures to minimize harm? Describe all possible mitigation needed to reduce impacts and harm on the Section 4(f) resource due to project use. Include evidence of concurrence or efforts to obtain concurrence of appropriate officials having jurisdiction over Section 4(f) lands regarding the measures proposed to minimize harm. If FAA or the airport sponsor does not adopt a recommended measure, explain why (e.g., mitigation would attract wildlife hazardous to mitigation). d. Section 4(f) Determination. The approving FAA official must sign and date the Section 4(f) Statement or the Section 4(f) evaluation included in the NEPA document.

Chap. 7

Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

Based on the enclosed Section 4(f) analysis, I have determined there is no prudent and feasible alternative that would avoid using (name the area the action would use), a Section 4(f) protected resources. The project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to this resource. FAA will condition its approval of this project to fulfill its Section 4(f) responsibilities.

Any Section 6(f) documentation should be included as an appendix to the Section 4(f) evaluation included in the NEPA document or Section 4(f) Statement. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. To determine the degree of project-related Section 4(f) impact, the responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with pertinent agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise:
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD When the proposed action involves a physical use that would be more than minimal or a constructive use would occur. In either case, mitigation is not enough to sustain the resources designated use. FACTORS TO CONSIDER Determine if the proposed action or a reasonable alternative would eliminate or severely degrade the intended use of the Section 4(f) resource. That is, would the proposed action or alternative physically or constructively use (i.e., substantially impair the use of) that resource? The responsible FAA official should determine if mitigation is satisfactory to the agency having jurisdiction over the protected resource, (e.g. by replacement in kind of a neighborhood park). No objection by affected agencies may be construed as agreement for this purpose. If an agency having jurisdiction advises that proposed mitigation is unsatisfactory and will not avoid significant impacts, more detailed impact analysis is likely needed as part of an EIS.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, the public agency having jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource normally provides a letter addressing the projects effects on the resource. The letter may include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include a copy of the letter. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in that letter and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA of the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. Examples of mitigation to minimize harm to the Section 4(f) resource may include: (1) changing project design to lessen the impact on the Section 4(f) resource;

Chap. 7

Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SECTION 4(f) RESOURCES

(2) replacing lands or facilities to provide lost uses or provide uses the jurisdictional agency supports; (3) providing monetary compensation to enhance the remaining segments of the affected Section 4(f) resource; (4) building noise walls or setting up visual or vegetative buffers to lessen adverse visual affects; or (5) enhancing project access the jurisdictional agency supports (i.e., handicapped access ramps). 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the significance threshold in section 7 of this chapter. The EIS must contain evidence of consultation and concurrence as described in section 5.a. of this chapter. Besides the information discussed in prior sections, the EIS should contain the following information: (1) a thorough explanation of why no prudent and feasible alternatives that would avoid the use of the Section 4(f) resource exist; and (2) a detailed discussion of all possible mitigation or planning to minimize harm caused by the use of the Section 4(f) resource included in the project.

Chap. 7

Page 16

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 8. FEDERALLY-LISTED

ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES
1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

ENDANGERED SPECIES

a. General. The Biotic Resources chapter in Appendix A of Order 1050.1E combines information on Federally-listed endangered and threatened species and species not protected under the Endangered Species Act (16 USC Section 1531, et. seq (ESA)). However, this Desk Reference separates information on these species. The Office of Airports (ARP) has done that to highlight the specificity of the regulations implementing the ESA. Readers seeking information on species not protected under the ESA should review Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference. b. The Endangered Species Act. To satisfy the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) must determine if a proposed action under its purview would affect a Federally-listed species or habitat critical to that species (critical habitat). For purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) Major construction activity. Under the ESA, a major construction activity is a construction project (or undertaking with similar physical impacts), which is, in NEPA terms, a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment (50 CFR Section 402.02). (2) Endangered species. Any species that either the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) or the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) designates in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of the species range (16 USC Section 1532(6)). (3) Threatened species. Any species that either FWS or NMFS states is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of the species range (16 USC Section 1532(20)). (4) Candidate species. Any species that either FWS or NMFS is considering for listing as endangered or threatened, but has not yet been the subject of a proposed rule. These species have no legal status and do not have protection under the ESA. However, their inclusion is intended to alert Federal agencies of potential proposals or listings (50 CFR Section 402.12(d)).
Note: Candidate species are called proposed species throughout 50 CFR Part 402 et seq, except at 50 CFR Section 402.12(d). There, Section 402 refers to proposed species as candidate species. However, due to years of familiarity within the Office of Airports with the term candidate species, this Desk Reference uses the term candidate species as a synonym for proposed species.

(5) Critical habitat. This is a designated area having physical and biological features essential to a listed species survival. Examples include nesting grounds, migration

Chap. 8

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

routes, wintering grounds, or other areas needed to support a life history stage. A species need not occupy an area for it to be critical habitat. When analyzing impacts that would affect areas within critical habitat boundaries, FAA (or the airport sponsor, or consultant, if FAA designates a non-Federal representative as noted below in section 1.b.(7) of this chapter) will informally consult with either FWS or NMFS. This allows FAA to focus on those areas within those boundaries the species specifically needs to sustain itself (16 USC Section 1532(5)(A)). (6) Service Director. This is the FWS Regional Director or Field Supervisor, or the NMFS Service Director to whom the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce, respectively, has delegated the authority to protect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species (50 CFR Section 402.02).
Note: Consultation with the NMFS is required when the action may affect anadromous or marine fish species, marine mammals, or critical marine habitat.

(7) Designated non-Federal representative. A person or consultant a Federal agency designates to act as its representative and on its behalf during informal consultation. The person or consultant may also prepare a biological assessment (BA) on the agencys behalf, but the Federal agency remains responsible for the BAs content and effects finding (50 CFR Section 402.02). 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS The Endangered Species Act, 16 USC Section 1531-1544 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Protects Federally-listed endangered or threatened species and their critical habitats. Requires Federal agencies to consult with either the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary), as appropriate, through their respective authorized designees. Requires Federal agencies to consult with the Secretary on any actions likely to adversely affect or jeopardize a Federallylisted species or its critical habitat. OVERSIGHT AGENCY FWS or NMFS

16 USC Section 1536(a)(2), also known as Section 7(a)(2)

FWS or NMFS

16 USC Section 1536(a)(3) and (4), also known as Sections 7(a)(3) and (4)

FWS or NMFS

Chap. 8

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

ENDANGERED SPECIES

16 USC Section 1536(b), also known as Section 7(b)

16 USC Section 1536(c), also known as Section 7(c)

16 USC Section 1536(d), also known as Section 7(d)

50 CFR Part 402, Interagency Cooperation

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Requires the Secretary to issue a written biological Opinion (Opinion) describing how the proposed Federal action would affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat. The Secretary issues this Opinion after reviewing a BA and consulting as the Federal agency on the proposed actions impacts on the species. If the Secretary issues a Jeopardy Opinion, FAA cannot approve the action. In such cases, FAA can do so only if the airport sponsor changes the action enough to allow the Secretary to issue a No Jeopardy/Adverse Modification Opinion or obtains an exemption from the Endangered Species Committee. Requires Federal agencies to request information from the Secretary on the presence of any Federally-protected species or critical habitat that may be near the proposed action. Prevents a Federal agency or applicant seeking Federal approval from irreversibly or irretrievably committing resources that would effectively foreclose using reasonable and prudent alternatives. Such alternatives would avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of Federally-listed species or adversely modifying their critical habitats. Provides the procedures for agency coordination under Section 7 of the ESA, as amended.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

FWS or NMFS

FWS or NMFS

FWS or NMFS

FWS or NMFS

Note: FWS or NMFS critical habitat designations do not create wilderness areas, wildlife preserves, or wildlife refuges for purposes of 49 USC Section 303 (Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation [DOT] Act) nor close the area to human access. Under the ESA, FAA approved or financed actions may occur in those habitats, provided the actions do not jeopardize the protected species existence or the Secretary issues an exemption under 50 CFR Section 453.

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. Airport actions needing ESA compliance. The activities discussed below require FAA approval of an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) or a change to an ALP, or approval of financing for airport development. Compliance with the ESA is needed for these actions if the

Chap. 8

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

responsible FAA official or Service Director determines the actions may affect Federallylisted endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats. (1) Applying the ESA to a proposed action. To determine if the projects affected area contains any Federally-listed species or critical habitat, the responsible FAA official or FAAs non-Federal designee should review the list of Federally-designated endangered and threatened species it compiles or that the FWS or the NMFS, as appropriate, provides. (2) Major construction actions causing direct impacts. Section 1.b.(1) of this chapter defines the types of activities the ESA would address. For airport actions, these activities normally include: airside development such as a new airport, a new or expanded terminal or hangar, a new or extended runway or taxiway, or installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS) Landside activities include building a new access road or moving one, a remote parking facility, or rental car lots. (3) No species or critical habitat present. If a careful review suggests a projectaffected area would not involve a Federally-listed species or its critical habitat, the environmental document should state that fact. Further consultation with either FWS or NMFS under the ESA is not needed, but consultation may be required for Biotic Resources the ESA does not protect (See Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference). b. State-listed endangered or threatened species. Some airport actions do not affect Federally-listed species or their critical habitats, but they may affect state-listed endangered or threatened species. Although the ESA does not protect state-protected species or habitats, the responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental documents prepared for such airport actions address effects on state-protected resources. Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference provides more information. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Sponsor-prepared correspondence. If an airport sponsor believes its proposed action may affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat, the airport sponsor may request that FAA start early consultation with the Service Director. In this instance, the airport sponsor must certify in writing to FAA that it: (1) has a definitive proposal outlining the action and its effects; and (2) intends to implement its proposal, if authorized. (50 CFR Section 402.11(b)). b. FAA-prepared correspondence. Usually, FAA must prepare the documents discussed below. This Desk Reference also provides information below and in sections 4.b.(4) and (5) of this chapter to help the responsible FAA official prepare the documents that are not normally needed, but that ESA regulations require for specific situations. The

Chap. 8

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

responsible FAA official should review the following information to determine if it applies to the proposed action. (1) Letter seeking the start of early consultation. The airport sponsor may request early consultation when it has reason to believe the action may affect Federallylisted species or critical habitat (see section 5.a.(1) of this chapter). To start this process, the responsible FAA official must prepare a letter to the Service Director seeking the start of early consultation. The letter must contain the information noted in section 4.a. of this chapter (50 CFR Sections 402.11(b) and (c)). (2) Letter requesting information on Federally-listed or candidate species or critical habitat. This letter helps to determine if Federally-listed or candidate species or their critical or proposed habitats are in the projects affected area. FAA, or its non-Federal designee, must prepare the letter to the Service Director seeking the above information (50 CFR Section 402.12(c); see section 4.b.(4)) of this chapter). (3) Letter requesting the start of formal consultation. FAA must prepare this letter to the Service Director requesting the start of formal consultation. FAA sends this letter after the BA is prepared and the FAA itself, or in consultation with the Service Director, determines whether the action would likely affect a Federally-listed species or alter critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.14(c)). The letter must provide the following information pursuant to 50 CFR Sections 402.14(c)(1)-(6): (a) a description of the major construction action FAA will consider; (b) a description of the specific area the action may affect; (c) a description of any Federally-listed species or critical habitat the action may affect; (d) a description of the manner in which the action may affect any Federallylisted species or critical habitat and an analysis of any cumulative effects; (e) any existing, relevant reports, including environmental impact statements, environmental assessments, or BAs or other information sources on the species; and (f) any other relevant available information on the action, the affected listed species, or critical habitat. (4) Letter notifying the Service Director of a non-Federal designee. If FAA decides to use a non-Federal designee to conduct informal consultation or to prepare the BA, FAA must prepare a letter to the Service Director giving notice of that decision. The letter must identify the non-Federal designee. If the airport sponsor is not the designee, FAA and the airport sponsor will select a consultant. When a designee will prepare a BA, the responsible FAA official must: Chap. 8 Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

(a) provide guidance and supervision in preparing the BA; (b) independently review and evaluate the BAs scope and content; and (c) accept responsibility for compliance with Section 7 of the ESA (50 CFR Section 402.08). (5) Letter notifying either FWS or NMFS of lead agency designation. When a proposed action involves more than one Federal agency, a designated lead agency may fulfill the required consultation or conference requirements. In this case, FAA and the other Federal agency(ies) will designate the agency that will meet those requirements. When FAA is the designated agency responsible for complying with the ESA, it must provide written notice to the Service Director. The notice must state that FAA is the designated lead agency for ESA purposes. In making this decision, FAA and the other Federal agency(ies) must consider the time sequence of agency involvement in the action, the magnitude of the agencys involvement, and the agencys relative expertise with respect to the actions environmental effects (50 CFR Section 402.07). (6) FAA comments on the Service Directors draft biological Opinion. If FAA chooses to comment on the Service Directors draft Opinion, it may do so by filing a written request with the Service Director. The filing must occur at least 10 days before the end of the 45-day period the Service Director has to prepare the Opinion (see section 4.c.(4) of this chapter). Although FAA may review the entire Opinion, it may file comments addressing only the reasonable and prudent alternatives the Service Director proposes in the draft Opinion. If FAA submits comments on the draft Opinion within 10 days of the deadline, the Service Director is automatically entitled to a 10-day extension to the 45-day period the Service Director has to prepare the draft Opinion (50 CFR Section 402.14(g)(5)). (7) Notifying the Service Director of FAAs final decision on an action. If the Service Directors Opinion states an action would jeopardize the continued existence of a Federally-listed species or adversely modify critical habitat, FAA must notify the Service Director of its final decision on an action. However, before making that decision, the airport sponsor and FAA should review the Opinion. This review is needed to determine if the airport sponsor will accept those requirements the Service Director deems necessary to avoid jeopardizing the affected Federally-listed species or critical habitat. If, after consulting with FWS or NMFS and FAA, the airport sponsor determines it cannot meet the requirements, FAA may notify the Service Director of the airport sponsors desire to apply for an exemption under 50 CFR Part 453 (50 CFR Section 402.15). c. Service Director documents. The Service Director must prepare certain documents in addition to those the airport sponsor or FAA prepares. The responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental document prepared for an action contains the appropriate correspondence record.

Chap. 8

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

(1) Letter addressing the presence of Federally-listed or candidate species or critical habitats. The Service Director must send a letter to FAA or its non-Federal designee in reply to a request for information on Federally-listed or candidate species or designated or critical habitat that may be in the project area. The Service Director must respond within 30 days after receiving the notification of, or the request for, a species list (50 CFR Section 402.12(d)). When FAA or the airport sponsor provides a list, the Service Director shall either concur with or revise the list. When no list has been provided, the Service Director must provide written information to FAA or its non-Federal designee stating if species or critical habitats are present in the project area. In deciding if the species or habitats are present, the Service Director will use the best scientific and commercial data available (50 CFR Section 402.12(d)). (2) Letter discussing the presence of candidate species. The ESA does not protect candidate species, but the Service Director often provides information on them. The Service Director does this to alert FAA and the airport sponsor that there is a chance the candidate species may be listed before the airport sponsor finishes the proposed project. It also tells FAA and the airport sponsor that FAAs continued oversight of the project requires FAA to meet ESA requirements if the candidate species is later listed as a Federallyprotected species (50 CFR Section 402.10(d)). (3) Service Director comments on a BA. The Service Director will provide written concurrence or non-concurrence with the findings presented in the BA. The Service Director must do so within 30 days after receiving the BA from FAA (50 CFR Section 402.12(j)). (4) The biological Opinion. Based on information in the BA and other sources, the Service Director issues this Opinion. It provides the Service Directors findings regarding the severity of project-induced impacts on a Federally-listed species or critical habitat. (a) The Service Director will issue a No Jeopardy Opinion or a Jeopardy Opinion within 45 days after the 90-day formal consultation period ends. The Opinion will: (1) summarize the information on which the Service Director bases the Opinion; (2) provide a detailed discussion of the actions impacts on Federallylisted species or critical habitat; and (3) clearly state if the action is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a Federally-listed species or destroy or adversely modify any critical habitat (50 CFR Sections 402.14(g)(5) and (h)). (b) The 45-day Opinion preparation period may not be extended, unless FAA obtains the written consent of the airport sponsor to do so, or FAA or the airport sponsor submits written comments on the draft Opinion. When comments are submitted, a 10-day

Chap. 8

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

extension period automatically occurs. FWS or NMFS may not issue its Opinion during the period FAA or the airport sponsor are reviewing the draft Opinion (50 CFR Section 402(g)(5)). (c) The airport sponsor may request a copy of the draft Opinion from FAA, and submit its comments on the draft Opinion through FAA. d. No Jeopardy Opinion. This Opinion means the Service Director determined that the action would not likely jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or destroy or adverse modify critical habitat. Issuance of this Opinion ends the ESA process. The action may proceed, provided it would not cause an incidental take of protected species (50 CFR Section 402.14(h)(3); see section 4.f. of this Chapter). e. Jeopardy Opinion. FWS or NMFS issues this Opinion if an action would jeopardize a Federally-listed species (50 CFR Section 402.14(h)(3)). Jeopardizing a species means the action would directly or indirectly reduce the likelihood of a species survival and recovery (i.e., reduces the species reproductive success, numbers, or distribution). (1) In addition to the information noted in sections 4.c(4)(a)(1)-(3) of this chapter, the Jeopardy Opinion will contain conservation recommendations to help reduce or eliminate the proposed actions effects on a listed species or critical habitat. The Opinion will also contain recommended reasonable and prudent alternatives. These alternatives will consider: (a) changes in project design; (b) changes in construction schedules to avoid animal breeding seasons; and/or (c) extra research or other measures to minimize adverse impacts on the Federally-protected species or habitat. (2) In evaluating these alternatives, FWS or NMFS will consult FAA or the airport sponsor. If requested, FWS or NMFS will make the Opinion available to FAA so it may analyze the reasonable and prudent alternatives. If, after this review, no alternative is available, the Service Director will state to the best of his or her knowledge no reasonable and prudent alternative is known. f. Incidental Take Statement (Statement). The ESA does not ban a taking if an airport sponsor complies with the Statements conditions. Therefore, the Service Director issues this Statement when unintentional takings would not jeopardize the species existence (50 CFR Section 402.14(i)). To ensure the incidental take does not jeopardize the species, the Service Director will issue this Statement with an Opinion. If the Service Director issues an Incidental Take Statement allowing unintentional taking or accidental killing, the airport sponsor must adhere to the Statements terms and conditions. FAA must

Chap. 8

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

include the Statements conditions in any approvals or grants. The Service Director will include conditions in the Statement specifying: (1) the allowable amount or extent of such incidental take of the species; (2) those reasonable and prudent measures the Service Director considers necessary or appropriate to minimize the impact of that taking; (3) the terms and conditions the airport sponsor must follow, including, but not limited to reporting requirements needed to implement the measures mentioned in section 4.f.(2) of this chapter; and (4) the procedures that will be used to handle or dispose of any individuals of a species taken (50 CFR Section 402.14(i)). 5. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Types of consultation. FWS or NMFS, FAA, and/or the airport sponsor or its consultant (as non-Federal representatives) participate in the consultation. The following sections describe the various types of consultation and who is responsible for completing each. The consultation depends on the status of the affected species or habitat and the severity of impacts. (1) Early consultation. This is an optional process an airport sponsor may choose when it has information indicating an action may affect Federally-listed species or critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.11(b)). Here, the airport sponsor must: (a) provide FAA with written certification that the airport sponsor intends to carry out the proposed action; (b) provide an outline of the action and its effects on the protected species or habitat; and (c) request that FAA begin early consultation with either the FWS or the NMFS. FAA must make a written request to either FWS or NMFS seeking this consultation. That request must include the above information and a BA when the airport sponsor proposes a major construction action. Then, FAA would begin consulting with the Service Director to address the proposed actions potential effects on Federally-listed species or their critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.11 (c)). (2) Informal consultation. Informal consultation is another optional process. It includes all discussions, correspondence, or other information between the Service Director, FAA, or a non-Federal designee. Informal consultation is designed to help FAA determine if Chap. 8 Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

formal consultation or a conference is needed. The informal consultation also provides an opportunity for the Service Director to recommend changes or modifications to the action that FAA and the airport sponsor could implement to avoid the likelihood of adverse effects to the Federally-listed species or critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.13). Informal consultation may end if either of the following occurs: (a) If the responsible FAA official determines the action is unlikely to adversely affect Federally-listed species or critical habitat. If the Service Director concurs, no further FAA responsibilities under the ESA are required (50 CFR Section 402.13(a)). At this stage, the Service Director may also suggest modifications to the action that an applicant could implement to avoid the likelihood of adverse effects to listed species or critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.13(b)). (b) If, during this consultation or the review of the BA, the responsible FAA official or the Service Director determines the action may affect Federally-listed species or designated critical habitat, formal consultation is necessary (50 CFR Section 402.14(b)(1)). (3) Formal consultation. An action that may affect a Federally-listed species or adversely modify critical habitat triggers formal consultation. Therefore, FAA must review its actions at the earliest possible time. If the responsible FAA official determines an action may affect a protected species or critical habitat, FAA may begin formal consultation without first completing informal consultation. During formal consultation, the Service Director determines if an actions effects would jeopardize the Federally-listed species continued existence or adversely change its critical habitat. To do so, the Service Director, FAA, and the airport sponsor work cooperatively to determine if any reasonable and prudent alternatives would allow the action to occur without jeopardizing the species existence or adversely changing critical habitat (50 CFR Sections 402.14(a) and (b)). Within 45 days after concluding formal consultation, the Service Director will deliver a biological Opinion to FAA and the airport sponsor. (a) When formal consultation is not needed. needed if either of the following conditions occurs: Formal consultation is not

(1) FAA determines, and the Service Director provides written concurrence, that informal consultation or the BA indicates the proposed action is not likely to adversely affect any Federally-listed species or critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.14(b)(1)); or (2) a preliminary biological Opinion issued after early consultation is confirmed as the final biological Opinion (50 CFR Section 402.14(b)(2)). (b) Starting formal consultation. To begin this 90-day process, FAA must make a written request to the Service Director. For major construction actions, FAA may not file this request until it has reviewed the completed BA and sent it to the Service Director. Chap. 8 Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

Note the Service Director may require formal consultation when no consultation has occurred for actions that may affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat. In this case, the Service Director must file a written request with FAA explaining why formal consultation is necessary (50 CFR Sections 402.14(b)(2) and (c)). (c) Extending formal consultation. Normally, formal consultation concludes within a 90-day period. However, that 90-day period may be extended for various reasons, including a Service Directors determination that more data would provide a better basis for preparing the biological Opinion. (1) Actions involving only FAA and the FWS or the NMFS. Here, FAA and the Service Director may mutually agree to extend the consultation for a specified period. (2) Actions involving an airport sponsor, FAA, and the FWS or the NMFS. In these instances formal consultation cannot be extended more than 60 days without the airport sponsors consent. The Service Director will provide the airport sponsor a written statement describing the: (a) reasons why a longer period is required; (b) information that is required to complete the consultation; and (c) the estimated date on which the consultation will be completed.
Note: If more information is needed, but FAA and the Service Director cannot agree on the duration of an extended period needed to obtain the data, the Service Director will develop a biological Opinion based on the best scientific and commercial data available at the time the Service Director prepares the Opinion.

(d) Terminating formal consultation. Usually, formal consultation ends when the Service Director issues the biological Opinion (i.e., typically within 45 days after FAA and the Service Director conclude formal consultation). However, FAA may end formal consultation if it determines: (1) the proposed action is unlikely to occur; or (2) the proposed action is unlikely to adversely affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat, and the Service Director concurs with that determination. In either case, FAA must provide written notice to the Service Director that it wishes to terminate formal consultation (50 CFR Section 402.14(l)). (e) Re-initiating formal consultation. Re-initiating formal consultation is required and will be requested by FAA or the Service Director where FAA retains discretionary involvement over the action, or where it is authorized by law to do so if:

Chap. 8

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

(1) the airport sponsor exceeds the amount or extent of the taking specified in the Incidental Take Statement; (2) new information reveals an actions impacts may affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat in a manner or to an extent not previously considered; (3) the identified action is subsequently modified in a manner that causes an effect to the Federally-listed species or critical habitat that was not considered in the biological Opinion; or (4) the identified action may affect a newly-listed species or newly-designated critical habitat (50 CFR Section 402.16). b. Consultation requirements for actions involving candidate species or proposed critical habitat. If the Service Director informs FAA that only candidate species or proposed critical habitat may be present in the project area, a BA is not needed. Still, there may be a need to confer with the Service Director. This informal conference helps the Service Director, FAA, and the airport sponsor identify potential conflicts between the action and a candidate species or proposed critical habitat early in project planning. The conference gives the Service Director an opportunity to make advisory recommendations. These may help to minimize or avoid adverse effects that, if not mitigated, could jeopardize the candidate species continued existence or destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat (50 CFR Sections 402.10 and 402.12(d)(1)).
Note: Describe impacts to candidate species in the environmental documents Biotic Resources chapter, not in the chapter on Federally-listed endangered and threatened species. Document preparers should include a note in the documents Federally-listed Endangered and Threatened Species chapter that the Biotic Resources chapter contains information on candidate species or proposed critical habitat. See Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference.

(1) Determining the need for a conference. To decide if an action warrants a conference, the responsible FAA official must decide if the proposed action would likely jeopardize the continued existence of any candidate species or cause the destruction or adverse modification of the proposed critical habitat. (a) If the official determines the action is unlikely to jeopardize a candidate species or its habitat, FAA must notify the Service Director of that determination. In this instance, a conference is not needed, unless the Service Director requests one after reviewing FAAs decision and other available information. (b) If the official determines the action is likely to jeopardize the candidate species or adversely modify proposed critical habitat, FAA should begin a conference with the Service Director. Sponsors should be involved in these conferences to the greatest extent practicable (50 CFR Section 402.10(c)).

Chap. 8

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

(2) Consultation requirements if a candidate species is later Federally-listed. Sometimes, before an airport sponsor completes an action, FWS or NMFS lists a candidate species as a Federal endangered or threatened species or determines its habitat is designated critical habitat. In either instance, FAA must review the action to determine if formal consultation is needed (see section 5.a.(3) of this chapter). 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. If information indicates that a major construction activity may affect Federally-listed endangered or threatened species or critical habitat, the responsible FAA official must ensure that a BA is prepared and completed before a construction contract is signed and construction begins (50 CFR Section 402.12(b)(2)). a. The BA. FAA and the Service Director use the BA: (1) to discuss the species present in the area of a major construction activity, the severity of the activitys impacts on the species or critical habitat, and measures that may be needed to protect the species or habitat; and (2) to determine if formal consultation is needed. b. When a BA is unnecessary. No BA is needed when a major construction activity involves any of the following: (1) The Service Director tells FAA or the non-Federal designee that no known Federally-listed species or critical habitat occurs in the actions impact area; (2) A Federally-listed species or critical habitat is in the actions impact area, but the action would not disturb land or water; (3) The Service Director tells FAA or the non-Federal designee that only candidate species or proposed critical habitat occur in the actions impact area; or (4) If conditions (1) or (3) occur, consultation with the Service Director may be needed. The consultation keeps FAA aware of the status of species or critical habitat. It also ensures that the FAA fulfills its responsibilities regarding Federally-listed species or critical habitat, should the candidate species or habitat be listed or designated during an actions environmental review process (50 CFR Section 402.12(d)(1)). c. Preparing the BA. The BA must provide the Service Director with the best scientific and commercial data available during the consultation period. The information may include results of FAA, airport sponsor, or consultant conducted studies. (1) To prevent delays in completing an actions overall environmental review process and ESA Section 7 compliance, the BA should be completed while the NEPA document is being prepared. This allows FAA to use the information in the BA during the NEPA process to determine if a major construction activity would significantly affect a Chap. 8 Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

protected species or its critical habitat. It also helps to streamline the overall environmental review process. (2) If a non-Federal designee prepares the BA, FAA must provide guidance and supervise the documents preparation because FAA is responsible for BA content (50 CFR Section 402.08). Therefore, the responsible FAA official must independently review the completed version. (3) The BA should include information on candidate species only if they are found with Federally-listed species (50 CFR Section 402.12). d. BA contents. The responsible FAA official may use discretion to determine the BAs content. For example, the official must consider the nature of the proposed action and any concerns the Service Director has noted. As appropriate, the FAA official should include some or all of the following information in the BA: (1) the results of an on-site inspection of the project-affected area to determine the presence (including seasonal occupancy or use) of Federally-listed species or critical habitat; (2) the views of recognized experts regarding the species of concern; (3) a review of the literature and other information regarding the species of concern; (4) an analysis of the actions effects on the species or habitat of concern, including consideration of cumulative effects, and the results of any related studies; and (5) an analysis of alternate actions the FAA considered for the proposed action (50 CFR Section 402.12.(f)). e. BA completion date. FAA or the designated non-Federal representative must complete the BA within 180 days after preparation of that document begins (i.e., receipt of or concurrence with the species list), unless the Service Director and FAA agree to a different period of time. FAA and the Service Director may extend this 180-day period, but before doing so, FAA must provide the airport sponsor a written statement. The statement must specify the proposed extensions estimated length and the reasons why the extension is needed. FAA must provide this letter to the airport sponsor before the 180-day period ends (50 CFR Section 402.12(i)). f. Sending the BA to the Service Director. FAA must submit the BA to the Service Director for review. The Service Director will respond to FAA in writing within 30 days. That response will note if the Service Director concurs with the findings of the BA. FAA has the option of starting formal consultation concurrently with the submission of the BA (50 CFR Section 402.12(j)). Chap. 8 Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

g. How FAA uses the BA. The responsible FAA official uses the BA to determine the degree to which a proposed major construction activity may affect a Federally-listed species or critical habitat. Based on that information, the official will determine whether formal consultation or a conference is required under 50 CFR Sections 402.14 or 402.10, respectively. Note that the Service Director must subsequently concur with the responsible FAA officials opinion about the need for formal consultation. (1) No species listed or critical habitat. If a BA indicates there are no listed species or critical habitat present in the area, or it is unlikely that major construction activity would cause adverse effects, the responsible FAA official may recommend to the Service Director that no formal consultation is needed. (2) No adverse effects. If a BA suggests that it is unlikely that the activity would cause adverse effects on a Federally-listed species or designated critical habitat, the responsible FAA official may recommend to the Service Director that no formal consultation is needed. (3) Jeopardizing a candidate species. If a BA suggests the activity would not adversely affect a Federally-listed species or designated critical habitat, but it is likely to jeopardize candidate species or habitat important to that species, the responsible FAA official may recommend to the Service Director that no formal consultation is required. However, a conference may be needed to discuss project effects on candidate species. g. How the FWS or NMFS uses the BA. The Service Director uses the BA: (1) to determine if FAA should start formal consultation; (2) as the basis for a biological Opinion; or (3) as a basis for a preliminary biological Opinion (50 CFR Section 402.12.(k)(2)). 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the BA and the consultation process discussed earlier in this chapter, the responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with FWS or NMFS personnel to determine the degree of impact on Federallylisted species or their critical habitats.

Chap. 8

Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD

ENDANGERED SPECIES

FACTORS TO CONSIDER The responsible FAA official should consider the information in the biological assessment prepared for the action and all of the information gleaned during the Section 7 consultation process discussed in this chapter. Based on that information, the official should consider the following factors: Critical habitat area: Would sufficient critical habitat area remain in the project area to sustain the protected species? Reasonable and prudent alternatives: Determine if any reasonable and prudent alternative exists that would then reduce adverse effects on the protected species or critical habitat. Agency input: Use the expertise of FWS or NMFS personnel to help determine impact severity.

When the FWS or NMFS determines a proposed action would likely jeopardize a species continued existence or destroy or modify a species critical habitat.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Mitigation. FWS or NMFS normally provide letters addressing effects on Federally-protected species or critical habitat. To meet ESA requirements efficiently and effectively during the environmental review process, FAA would use input from the appropriate Service Director to develop mitigation for impacts on protected species. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of the FWS or the NMFS letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended reasonable or prudent alternative or mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. Based on the level of effect, determine those measure(s) or action(s) that would lessen harm to the species or critical habitat. Note that each affected Federally-listed species or critical habitat may require a separate strategy. Examples of measures that may be considered include the following, provided they do not promote increases in populations of species hazardous to aviation: (1) improving existing habitat; (2) creating new habitat; (3) buying private lands for preservation and management; and (4) moving the protected species.

Chap. 8

Page 16

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENDANGERED SPECIES

If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. When the responsible FAA official determines that the project effects meet or exceed the significant impact threshold and mitigation would not reduce those effects below the threshold, FAA must prepare an EIS to address these effects. In this instance, FAA may wish to request that the FWS or the NMFS, as appropriate, participate as a cooperating agency due to their respective expertise and jurisdiction regarding Federallylisted endangered or threatened species and critical habitats. Besides the information the BA contains, the EIS must provide the following material, as appropriate. b. Added or expanded studies. These include results of any additional biological studies that would provide more information to enable the Service Director to modify his/her biological Opinion. The environmental document may incorporate a biological assessment by reference for an action that is very similar to the proposed action (50 Section 402.12(g)). When doing so, the responsible FAA official should provide a written certification that: (1) the proposed action involves similar impacts to the same species and the same geographic area; (2) No new species have been listed or proposed or no new critical habitat designated or proposed for the action area; and (3) FAA has supplemented the biological assessment with relevant changes in information. c. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation FWS or NMFS provide. FAA and the airport sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. The EIS should include any project changes, reasonable and prudent alternatives, or mitigation measures not previously considered that would reduce adverse impacts and prevent jeopardizing the Federally-listed species or destroying or modifying critical habitat. It should explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation FWS or NMFS recommends. If feasible, the EIS should provide an estimated schedule for completing accepted mitigation. d. Exemption. If the airport sponsor wishes to use this provision, the EIS should include a statement from the airport sponsor (or FAA on the airport sponsors behalf). The statement should indicate that the sponsor will request an exemption to Section 7(g) of the ESA. See 50 CFR Part 451 for more information on this rarely used provision.

Chap. 8

Page 17

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 9. ENERGY SUPPLY, NATURAL RESOURCES,

AND SUSTAINABLE DESIGN

ENERGY SUPPLY

1. INTRODUCTION. Airport development actions have the potential to change energy requirements or use consumable natural resources. To comply with the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations mentioned in Section 2 of this chapter, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) environmental documents must evaluate potential impacts on supplies of energy and natural resources needed to build and maintain airports. FAA policy supports developments displaying environmental sustainability. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1502.16(e) and (f)

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION When reviewing the environmental effects of a proposed action and its reasonable alternatives assess each alternatives energy requirements, energy conservation, and the use of natural or consumable resources. Mitigation must also address needed mitigation measures. Encourages each Federal agency to expand the use of renewable energy in its facilities and for its actions.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

CEQ

Executive Order 13123, Greening the Government Through Efficient Energy Management (64 Federal Register 30851, dated June 8, 1999)

FAA

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. FAA must evaluate any airport development action subject to FAA approval or funding under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) to determine if the proposed action would cause significant impacts on energy supplies or natural resources. Typical actions that could cause such impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, airfield lighting, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or moved access roadways, remote parking facilities and rental car lots; significant changes in air traffic and airfield operations; and significant construction activity. b. FAA should study how the action sponsor proposes to conserve resources, use pollution prevention, minimize aesthetic effects, and address public (both local and traveling) sensitivity to these concerns. This approach satisfies National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). NEPA requires agencies touse a systematic interdisciplinary approach, which will ensure the integrated use of the natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision making. Chap. 9 Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENERGY SUPPLY

4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. FAA does not require permits or certifications for these resources. However, FAA environmental documents should contain letters or other documents from local public utilities and suppliers addressing their capacities to provide energy and resources to build and operate the action. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. Typically, local agencies or businesses may have information on available energy supplies and consumable natural resources. When preparing an environmental document, consultation with the following entities may be helpful: a. Local utility companies may be sources of information on available and planned electrical, natural gas, water, and sewage capacities. b. If unusual, fuel-consuming construction or operational circumstances are expected, local suppliers of consumable construction materials and aircraft or ground vehicle fuels may be valuable sources for information concerning the materials or fuels. c. State or local agencies responsible for enforcing local rules, ordinances, or guidelines may have information on sustainability measures. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. To determine action-related impacts on energy supplies and consumable natural resources, the environmental document should contain the following information, as needed: (1) Utility impacts. Proposed major changes in stationary facilities may require large demands on local existing or planned utilities. Examples utility impacts include projected airport or terminal lighting or heating demands or water supply for terminal-related water usage and sewage disposal. (2) Consumable materials. If scarce or unusual materials are needed to build the proposed action or a reasonable alternative, estimate the volumes of consumable construction material and their availability from local suppliers. (3) Aircraft fuel consumption. The environmental document should discuss how proposed changes would affect existing aircraft fuel use. (a) Would ground movement or run-up times for aircraft increase substantially without matching increases in operational efficiency? If yes, estimate increased aircraft fuel consumption. (b) If flight changes incorporated for action-induce noise abatement purposes noticeably increase flight times, provide estimates of increased aircraft fuel consumption.

Chap. 9

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENERGY SUPPLY

(c) If the action would substantially increase aircraft operations, (i.e. siting a new hub operation or a new air carrier or air cargo service) provide estimates of increased fuel consumption for operations related to the action. (d) If the action would substantially increase the number of on-airport service vehicles or substantially alter the time needed for the existing service fleet to arrive at gates, provide estimates of increased fuel consumption these vehicles would cause. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE. a. General. After completing the consultation and analyses discussed above, use the significance threshold in column 1 of the following table. Consider factors in column 2 when determining if an action meets a threshold. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having special expertise on energy or natural resources, or sustainability.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER The action would cause a substantial demand on available energy or natural resource supplies. When an actions construction, operation, or maintenance would cause demands that would exceed available or future (project year) natural resource or energy supplies. When compared to future no action conditions, changes in aircraft movements or ground vehicle use would cause a statistically significant increase in fuel consumption. Consumable natural resources necessary for construction are rare. The action would not be consistent with smart growth requirements of the agency having jurisdiction over the area where the airport is located.

From Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Potential mitigation measures. During the environmental review process, local agencies or businesses may provide letters or information on energy or natural resource supplies or sustainability measures. Those letters may include recommendations to mitigate impacts. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the sponsor or FAA does not adopt any recommended

Chap. 9

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENERGY SUPPLY

mitigation, the environmental document should explain clearly why the recommendation was not adopted. Examples of mitigation measures may include: (1) airfield design improvements that provide efficient aircraft operations; (2) ground access improvements; (3) energy and resource conservation designs; (4) electric ground support equipment (GSE); or (5) sustainability measures (skylights, energy conservation plans, solar heating or electricity, or using drought-resistant landscaping that will not attract wildlife hazardous to aviation (see FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on and near Airports). 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. If the actions impacts exceed the significance threshold for this resource category, FAA may need to prepare an EIS. If it does, FAA should invite the Department of Energy (DOE) to become a cooperating agency during the NEPA process due to DOEs expertise on energy and consumable natural resources. DOE can aid FAA in determining if any added analyses are needed or determining the severity of action-induced energy or consumable resource impacts. b. Information. Besides the information discussed previously, the EIS should contain the following as appropriate: (1) any additional information needed to fully explain impact severity; (2) information verifying coordination with DOE and other interested parties occurred; or (3) a discussion of measures the sponsor will use to mitigate impacts (e.g., more efficient airfield design and operations, improved ground access, using renewable resources, etc.) not previously considered. c. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when agencies having expertise in energy, natural resource supply, or sustainable design issues provide that information. FAA or the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106 (c)(1)(B),

Chap. 9

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENERGY SUPPLY

FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). The EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures recommended by agencies having expertise in energy, natural resource supply, or sustainable design sciences in accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B). If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 9

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

CHAPTER 10. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS. a. General. Environmental justice analysis considers the potential of Federal actions to cause disproportionate and adverse effects on low-income or minority populations. Environmental justice ensures no low-income or minority population bears a disproportionate burden of effects resulting from Federal actions. Since the late 1980s, Federal agencies have used various definitions for environmental justice issues. To help describe environmental justice, this Desk Reference incorporates the following definition from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) Office of Environmental Justice:
The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people, regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic group, should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental effects resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of Federal, State, local, and tribal programs and policies.

b. Low-income. According to DOT Order 5610.2, Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations, Appendix 1.a, this is a person having a median household income at or below the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) poverty guidelines. Although DOT Order 5610.2 directs DOT agencies to HHS poverty guidelines, guidance from the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the EPA uses the Census Bureaus annual statistical poverty thresholds on income and poverty (Series P-60) to define low income. Normally, HHS and Census Bureau data differ. As a result, the responsible FAA official may use either HHS or Census Bureau data. c. Low-income population. A low-income population is any readily identifiable group of low-income persons who live in geographic proximity, and, if circumstances warrant, geographically dispersed/transient persons (such as migrant workers or Native Americans) who will be similarly affected by a proposed program, policy, or activity. d. Minority. DOT Order 5610.2 Appendix 1.c defines this term as a person who is: (1) Black (a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa); (2) Hispanic (a person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race); (3) Asian American (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands); or (4) American Indian and Alaskan Native (a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America and who preserves cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition).

Chap. 10

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

e. Minority population. This population is one the action would affect. It is comprised of Black, Hispanic, Asian-American, or American Indian and Alaskan Native individuals. Each, several, or all of these ethnic groups may live in geographic proximity to one another or may be geographically scattered or transient (e.g., migrant workers) who will be similarly affected by a proposed program, policy, or activity. When examining a population living in geographic proximity, analysts should consider areas within a governing bodys jurisdiction, a neighborhood, a census tract, or other similar limit. This reduces the potential for artificially diluting or inflating the minority population(s) analyzed.
Note: CEQs definition of minority population states that: 1) the minority population of an affected area exceeds 50 percent; or 2) the minority population percentage of the affected area is meaningfully greater than the minority population percentage in the general population or other appropriate geographic analysis. In addition, a minority population also exists if there is more than one minority group present and the minority percentage, when calculated by aggregating all minority persons, meets one of the above thresholds. FAA recognizes this definition, but for purposes of this Desk Reference will use the definition in DOT Order 5610.2 to comply with DOT policy.

f. General population. This is the population that an action affects, but that is not a low-income or minority population. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (59 FR 7629, February 11, 1994) U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 5610.2, Environmental Justice in Minority and Low-Income Populations, April 15, 1997 Environmental Justice: Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act, December 10, 1997 Final Guidance for Consideration of Environmental Justice in Clean Air Act 309 Reviews, July 1999 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Requires Federal agencies to provide public involvement for low-income or minority populations. This includes demographic analysis identifying and addressing potential action impacts on low-income or minority populations that may experience a disproportionately high and adverse effect. Outlines the DOTs commitment to the principles of environmental justice and presents a program for department-wide implementation. Presents CEQs guidance on addressing environmental justice issues under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). Provides EPA guidance and answers oftenasked questions about environmental justice. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

CEQ, EPA

DOT

CEQ

EPA

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. Any airport development action funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or any airport action subject to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval may cause environmental justice impacts. Typical actions that may involve environmental justice issues are: a new airport; airfield/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or moved access roadways, remote parking Chap. 10 Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

facilities, and rental car lots; significant changes in aircraft operations; and significant amounts of construction activity. b. To properly apply environmental justice requirements, it is important to determine if a low-income or minority population occurs in the area the action or its reasonable alternatives would affect. It is also important to know if a low-income or minority population uses a particular action-affected resource or if an affected resource is important to that population. Impacts due to aircraft noise, air quality degradation, direct and induced socioeconomic effects, degraded water quality, and effects to cultural or community cohesion, traffic, and history often affect low-income or minority populations. However, other impacts may be of concern. As noted in section 5 of this chapter, timely consultation with human resource agencies regarding locations of low-income or minority populations relative to an actions impact areas is important. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. No legal or regulatory requirements for formal permits or certificates exist for environmental justice issues. However, to comply with Executive Order 12898 and DOT Order 5610.2, FAA environmental documents must demonstrate that FAA has considered carefully and properly the goals of those Orders. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. Compliance with Executive Order 12898, the Presidential Memorandum on environmental justice, and Order 5610.2, requires FAA to analyze impacts on low-income and minority populations. FAA must discuss those impacts after considering demographic data on populations exposed to or who use the resources a Federal action would affect. This allows FAA to identify adverse (i.e., unfavorable in a meaningful or unique way) effects that may disproportionately affect low-income or minority populations. b. Timely consultation is critical. Timely consultation with State and local human resource agencies very early in the NEPA process is critical because it: (1) ensures identification of resources the action would adversely affect; (2) helps determine if a low-income or minority population sustains the identified effect or if the affected resource is important to that population; (3) helps determine if mitigation or offsetting benefits would avoid or reduce disproportionate effects on an affected low-income or minority population. c. The importance of public outreach. CEQ notes it is important to recognize that the cultural, historic, or social concerns of a low-income or minority population amplify that populations perceptions of an actions effects.1 Consequently, reaching out to local community leaders, tribal elders, or other suitable spokespeople early in the environmental process is a very important step in completing efficiently and effectively an environmental justice analysis. Often, that contact is the best way to collect information essential to addressing an affected populations culturally important concerns and needs (e.g.,
1

CEQ. 1997. Environmental Justice Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act, page 9.

Chap. 10

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

subsistence consumption of fish, vegetation, and wildlife; unique ceremonial lands; or water bodies, landforms, buildings, or vistas important to a populations culture). In some instances, outreach efforts scheduled for certain times and places may be the only way to gather that information. d. Non-English speaking populations. The responsible FAA official should consider providing summaries of important issues in languages other than English. This helps ensure that affected minority populations whose primary language is not English are aware of the actions most critical aspects. e. Information sources for environmental analyses. As needed, review DOT Order 5610.2 to ensure the NEPA document contains information on environmental justice. To aid in preparing the environmental justice analysis, use the following information sources for demographic information: (1) The U.S. Census Bureau provides geographic data and Series P-60 reports that provide information on income and poverty. (2) HHS provides poverty data used to define low-income populations per DOT Order 5610.2. (3) EPAs Environmental Justice Query Mapper provides information on EPApermitted facilities and their surrounding communities and access to other databases (superfund, toxics release inventories, safe drinking water information system, etc.). (4) State, county, regional, and local planning agencies. (5) State and local tax and employment agencies or other agencies that may collect economic indicator data. (6) Chambers of Commerce, civic groups, trade associations, and other commercial organizations. (7) Standard demographic surveys identifying ethnic pockets and living patterns within an affected community. (8) Community associations or groups (churches, sports clubs, social groups outreach groups, community leaders, and economic departments of colleges or universities) may provide information on how community members depend on or use natural resources for subsistence or cultural reasons. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. Examples of environmental justice concerns. The following information highlights some environmental areas to consider when assessing environmental justice impacts. This is a partial list. Contact local, regional, State, and Federal agencies to help complete this analysis if needed.

Chap. 10

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

(1) Human health. After determining that mitigation or offsetting benefits would not reduce adverse impacts, consider the following to determine the actions human health effects as needed. (a) A health-related environmental justice issue would result if either of these occurs: (1) The risk to any low-income or minority population is greater than the general community would experience. (2) The risk to low-income or minority populations is unacceptable when compared to the norms set for the affected areas general population. If all affected population segments experience an unacceptable level of risk, no environmental justice issue would occur. This is because the action would not cause disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority or low income populations. (b) Describe how a populations ethnic, racial, or social segments use the affected resource. (c) Analyze the affected communitys dose-response to the identified hazard. (2) Historic or cultural resources. When assessing an actions adverse impacts to a historic site on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), determine if affected resources are important to the history or culture of low-income or minority populations. When compared to the general population, determine if these populations would experience the effects of the adverse impact more than the general population would experience (i.e., a disproportionately high level of adverse effect). (3) Community disruptions. Determine if a proposed action would disrupt the continuity of a low-income or minority neighborhood and if suitable relocation is available for displaced residents or businesses. Determine if the disruption would adversely affect the ability of a low-income or minority population to efficiently use public and private community services or substantially alter traffic patterns. Determine if any of these disruptions are disproportionately more adverse than those the generally affected public would experience. (4) Cumulative effects. This part of the analysis should focus on identified adverse cumulative impacts. Determine if any low-income or minority populations experience a disproportionately high level of cumulative effects. As needed, consult planning authorities for support. b. Determining environmental justice impacts. The following information provides an outline on how the responsible FAA official may determine if an action would cause environmental justice impacts. (1) Identify those resources the action would affect. (2) Using information from Step (1), identify the populations:

Chap. 10

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (a) that would experience the impact; (b) that would use the affected resources; or

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

(c) to whom the affected resources are important for subsistence or cultural reasons. (3) Would the effects identified in Step (1) be adverse (unfavorable in a meaningful or unique way)? The following information should guide the analysis: (a) Examine each effect to decide if the effect meets a significance threshold. (b) To do so, use the significance threshold for that resource as defined in FAA Order 1050.1E Appendix A. A conclusion that an effect is significant indicates the effects potential to cause a disproportionately high and adverse effect to a minority or low-income population. (c) Note that not all adverse impacts within the meaning of DOT Order 5610.2 will meet or exceed a significance threshold. Some adverse impacts are not significant impacts as defined in FAA Order 1050.1E Appendix A, yet they may be unfavorable in a meaningful or unique way. As a result, the responsible official must undertake a case-by-case analysis of an actions unique facts. The official does this to determine if impacts not rising to a level of significance for NEPA purposes nonetheless represent a disproportionately high and adverse effect for environmental justice analysis purposes.2 (4) If examination of these considerations reveals that the effects identified in Step 1 are not adverse, stop the analysis. If effects are found to be adverse, continue the analysis as indicated below. (5) Are any of the populations identified in Step (2), low-income or minority populations? (a) If no, stop this analysis. (b) If yes, continue to Step (6). (6) Calculate the percentage of low-income or minority people the action would adversely affect by using the following equation. 3 To do so, divide the number of low-income
2

The following is one example of an unfavorable, but not significant impact that must be considered for environmental justice concerns: An airport action requires residential relocations that do not, standing alone, represent a significant impact under the criteria set forth in FAA Order 1050.1E Appendix A. However, the relocations fall exclusively on low-income households. Further, there is insufficient relocation housing for persons of limited means. In this instance, although the relocations alone are not a significant impact, the relocation of only low-income households may nonetheless be a disproportionately high and adverse effect.

Chap. 10

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

or minority people identified in Step 5 by the number of people in the general population (see section 1.f of this chapter). (7) Does the percentage derived in Step 6 exceed 50%? If yes, a disproportionately high and adverse effect on low-income or minority populations may occur. Note that in some cases the percentage derived in Step (6) may not be an appropriate way to determine if a disproportionately high and adverse effect to minority populations would occur. This is especially so when the action does not disproportionately affect any population segment (i.e., the percentage in Step (6) is less than or equal to 50), but the lowincome or minority populations experience a more severe impact because they have a unique relationship to the affected resource.4 (8) Would mitigation or offsetting benefits counterbalance or prevent the disproportionate effects identified in Step (7)? An example of an offsetting benefit would be an action that creates a shift of the 65 DNL contour that results in removal of a minority population, or a portion of a minority population, from that contour (a) If no, you have identified an environmental justice impact. Consult regional counsel or APP-400 if needed and review information in section 8 of this chapter. (b) If yes, you have identified an environmental justice impact that has been properly mitigated or offset. No further environmental analysis is needed. c. Displaying or reporting environmental justice impacts. To aid in presenting information regarding environmental justice effects, consider using a spatial display or Geographic Information Systems (GISs). These displays are effective aids in presenting information. GIS is especially effective because it visually integrates the relationship among the biological, physical, cultural, social, and demographic concerns of the affected population(s). The environmental justice discussion in an environmental document should cross-reference information addressing effects determinations presented in the other parts of the documents Environmental Consequences section. This reduces the repeating of information found elsewhere in that document. d. Mitigation. Normally, environmental justice mitigation would relate to measures reducing a particular adverse effect on a particular resource. After consulting with the parties noted in section 5 of this chapter, mitigation measures or offsetting benefits that reduce the impact to the affected low-income or minority communities must be identified in
For example, FAA may need to determine if a proposed action would significantly affect water quality, making a river segment unsuitable to support a coho salmon population a Tribe consumes or sells to sustain itself.
3

An example would be when an action adversely affects a salmon population important to all affected populations, but a tribe is more severely affected because it relies on the salmon for subsistence living or cultural ceremonies. To determine if this is the case, the responsible FAA official or analyst should consult the leaders of affected groups. This consultation is often helpful in determining if the affected community depends on the affected resource for subsistence or cultural reasons.
4

Chap. 10

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

the EA or EIS pursuant to Order 5610.2, Section.8.c. If no mitigation or offsets can be identified, or if such measures or offsets are not practicable, the environmental document must explain this conclusion and its basis. This is because Order 5610.2, paragraph 8.c explicitly requires that actions involving disproportionately high and adverse effects to EJ communities will only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects are not practicable. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. The responsible FAA official should consider the information obtained from the process in section 6 of this chapter. The official may wish to consult representatives of the affected low-income or minority population(s) when deciding if a disproportionate effect would occur as discussed in section 6
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD A significant impact may occur when an action would cause disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on low-income or minority populations. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B. FACTORS TO CONSIDER None.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, entities noted in section 5 of this chapter may send letters that include recommended measures to mitigate or offset those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor rejects any recommended mitigation or offsetting benefits, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was rejected. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. DOT Order 5610.2 requires FAA to attempt to resolve significant environmental justice impacts before the responsible FAA official can approve the preferred alternative. The EISs environmental justice analysis should describe efforts to achieve final resolution for impacts affecting low-income or minority populations. Environmental justice impacts and mitigation usually involve substantial coordination among the affected population, FAA, the airport sponsor, and local jurisdictional agencies and municipalities. The resolution may involve intense negotiations among these parties to clearly identify issues concerning FAA or the affected population. Negotiations assist in developing reasonable guidelines to design measures that satisfy both parties and meet FAA eligibility criteria. The goal of negotiating is to develop measures satisfactory to all parties involved. This would allow the preferred alternative to serve its intended purpose, while protecting the health, environmental, cultural, ethnic, and social context of the affected population group. b. Assessing further mitigation and practicable alternatives. Section 6.d of this chapter addresses mitigation. The EIS should explain any limits on mitigation involving regulatory or safety impacts such as major noise or access restrictions. If FAA concludes a

Chap. 10

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

preferred alternative would cause a disproportionately high and adverse effect to a lowincome or minority population, DOT Order 5610.2 requires FAA to determine if any mitigation or practicable alternatives that reduce or avoid environmental justice impacts exist. This is accomplished by consulting the entities mentioned in section 5 of this chapter and considering the following factors: (1) Do further mitigation measures exist that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects of the preferred alternative? If so, does such mitigation of the preferred alternatives impacts require extraordinary costs of a social, economic or environmental nature (are the measures practicable)? (2) Does an alternative that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects exist? If such an alternative exists, does the totality of its impacts in all resource categories exceed those of the preferred alternative or does the alternative entail extraordinary social, economic or environmental costs when compared to the preferred alternative (is the alternative practicable)? c. Mitigation and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. If the preferred alternative will have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on populations protected by Title VI (minority populations) and FAA determines no practicable alternative exists after completing Step 8.c, FAA must demonstrate that: (a) based on overall public interest, there is a great need for the preferred alternative; and (b) another alternative that would have less adverse effect on the protected population (and still meet purpose and need) would cause social, economic, environmental or human health effects more severe than the preferred alternative or would entail extraordinary costs. d. Further mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when agencies provide that information. FAA or the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106 (c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. The EIS should discuss and adopt mitigation measures to address environmental justice issues in accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B).

Chap. 10

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 10

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 11. FARMLANDS 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

FARMLANDS

a. General. Important farmlands include all pasturelands, croplands, and forests (even if zoned for development) considered to be prime, unique, or statewide or locally important lands as defined below: (1) Prime farmland. This is land having the best combination of physical and chemical characteristics for producing food, feed, fiber, forage, oilseed, and other agricultural crops with minimal use of fuel, fertilizer, pesticides, or products. (2) Unique farmland. This is land used for producing high-value food and fiber crops. It has the special combination of soil quality, location, growing season, and moisture necessary to produce high quality crops or high yields of them economically. (3) Statewide and locally important farmland. This is land that has been designated as important by either a state government (State Secretary of Agriculture or higher office) or by county commissioners or an equivalent elected body. The State Conservationist representing the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS)1 must agree with the designation. b. Important farmland designations. NRCS has the final authority for designating important farmlands and keeps lists of important farmlands for each state. Usually, the lands are defined by their soil types, but sometimes, the designations are made independent of soil types. Instead they are mapped according to existing ground cover and use. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

The Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA) of 1984 (7 USC Sections 4201-4209) as amended, provides the statutory framework for considering important farmlands in Federal decisions.).
APPLICABLE STATUTE AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS Farmland Protection Policy Act (FPPA), 7 USC 4201-4209 as amended by section 1255 of the Food Security Act of 1985, 16 USC 3801-3862 7 CFR Part 657, Prime and Unique Farmlands 7 CFR Part 658, Farmland Protection Policy SUMMARY DESCRIPTION The FPPA regulates actions with the potential to convert existing important farmlands to nonagricultural uses. Defines the purpose, general policy, and applicability of FPPA and provides guidelines for identifying important farmlands. Provides guidelines for using FPPA criteria; lists the criteria and identifies how Federal agencies can seek NRCS assistance through OVERSIGHT AGENCY NRCS

NRCS

NRCS

NRCS is an agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Chap. 11

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

formal consultation. APPLICABLE STATUTE AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS Council on Environmental Qualitys (CEQ) Memorandum on Analysis of impacts on Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands in Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). See 45 Federal Register 59189

FARMLANDS

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION CEQ sought information on existing and proposed regulations or directives the agency would use to preserve or mitigate effects of agency actions on prime and unique farmlands. CEQ also requested information on actions that would likely have significant impacts on these farmlands. Lastly, CEQ requested the names of officials responsible for carrying out an agencys agricultural land policies.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY NRCS

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. Any airport development action funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or subject to FAA approval that would permanently convert an existing designated important farmland to a non-agricultural use is subject to FPPA coordination. Typical actions, which could involve such coordination include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, airfield lighting, navigational aids, NAVAIDS, etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots, and any other actions that would result in important farmland conversion. FPPA does not apply to land already committed to "urban development or water storage" (i.e., airport developed areas), regardless of its importance as defined by NRCS. Therefore, when evaluating potential impacts on farmlands, evaluate only those areas designated as important and that are in active agricultural use or not yet developed. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. Evidence of proper compliance under FPPA requires receiving a completed Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form (AD-1006) or a completed Land Evaluation Site Assessment (LESA), if applicable. Either document must provide the numerical score of the proposed action as determined by an appropriate representative of the NRCS or state government. Sections 6 and 7 of this chapter provide more information on this form and its score. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. Airport development projects that would convert important farmland must be coordinated with the local NRCS field office. Consultation procedures involve the sponsors' preparation of appropriate portions of a USDA Farmland Conversion Impact Rating Form AD-1006 and submission to the NRCS field office for completion. Form AD-1006 contains a scoring system to determine the significance of potential project impacts. Scoring information should be supplied for each project alternative, if the alternative would involve important farmland.

Chap. 11

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

FARMLANDS

a. Completing Form AD 1006. The sponsor, acting on FAA's behalf, should complete the section of Form AD 1006 labeled, "To be completed by the Federal Agency." Besides completing Parts I and III, include a location map. The map should show the proposed action and/or any reasonable alternative involving important farmland. Include information about the proposed action in Part III under "Site A. As necessary, place information about reasonable alternatives under "Site B," "Site C," etc. The sponsor should send the Form to the appropriate NRCS office. b. NRCS Input. After receiving the sponsor's input to Form AD 1006, NRCS will provide "relative value" scores for sites under consideration. Scores range from 0 to 100 and represent the sites value for agricultural production. NRCS will complete Parts IV and V of the form. NRCS must respond to the sponsor within 10 days of receiving the Form, unless NRCS decides to visit the site. In that instance, NRCS will respond in 30 working days If NRCS determines the FPPA does not apply to the site, further analysis of project impacts on farmland is unnecessary. If NRCS fails to respond within the designated review periods, or if further delay would interfere with construction activities, the sponsor should inform FAA of that fact and continue as though the site were not farmland. c. Further Sponsor input. On receiving NRCS's input, the sponsor will perform more analysis. Using the site assessment criteria in 7 CFR Section 658.5(b), the sponsor, on FAA's behalf, will calculate the "site assessment" score to determine each site's fitness for protection as farmland.
Note: Many states and local governments have developed LESA systems to evaluate land productivity and suitability for conversion to non-agricultural uses. As a result, these governments may have evaluated a site's agricultural fitness by using criteria similar to those in 7 CFR Section 658.5(b). Contact the appropriate state agricultural agency to determine if the LESA may be substituted for the score that would be derived via the "site assessment" criteria in Form AD 1006. When NRCS points out a local LESA is available, the sponsor must evaluate the site using local criteria to complete Part VI of Form AD 1006 instead of Federal criteria in 7 CFR Section 658.5(b).

d. Environmental document information. If the action requires completion of Form AD 1006, include a copy of the completed Form in an appendix to the environmental document. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. The responsible FAA official should consider the following information in consultation with NRCS or the state agency having jurisdiction over important farmland potentially affected. Total the NRCS's "relative value" score (i.e., 0 - 100) and the sponsor's "site assessment" score (i.e., 0-160). Use this sum (Form AD 1006, Part VI) to determine the severity of the expected farmland impacts. Impact severity increases as the total, combined score approaches 260 points. Total, combined scores below 160 do not require further analysis. Total, combined scores between 161 and 200 may have the potential to adversely affect important farmlands. They require considering alternatives or measures, such as reducing the acreage of important farmland converted, or finding land having lower relative value, to avoid converting the farmland.

Chap. 11

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD When the total combined score on Form AD 1006 ranges between 200 and 260, a significant impact would likely occur. Try to find practical factors, methods, or alternatives to lower the score. Total scores continuing to range between 200 and 260 are significant impacts. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

FARMLANDS
FACTORS TO CONSIDER

None.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction or special use expertise about important farmland normally provide letters addressing this resource. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate project effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor did not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the significance threshold noted in section 7 of this chapter. When the responsible FAA official determines that a significant impact is likely, FAA must prepare an EIS addressing projectinduced farmland conversion impacts. The EIS must contain the following information as well as a copy of Form AD 1006 and the information discussed in preceding sections of this chapter. (1) Impacts. An assessment of the action's impacts on the area's agricultural production; (2) Compatibility. An analysis of the action's compatibility with state, local, and private farmland protection programs and policies; (3) Disruption. A description of any disruption of the farming community that directly results when the proposed action changes farmland to non-agricultural use; (4) Support services. An evaluation of how the farmland conversion will affect the viability of farm support activities. b. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when land use agencies provide that information. FAA should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. Provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. Explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation measures agencies recommend. Those measures may include reducing the area of land removed from production, keeping as much land as possible for agricultural use by incorporating it into airport compatible land use plans, or similar efforts.

Chap. 11

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 12. FLOODPLAINS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

FLOODPLAINS

a. Actions in floodplains. To meet Executive Order 11988, Floodplains, and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Order 5650.2, Floodplain Management and Protection, all airport development actions must avoid the floodplain, if a practicable alternative exists. If no practicable alternative exists, actions in a floodplain must be designed to minimize adverse impact to the floodplains natural and beneficial values. The design must also minimize the potential risks for flood-related property loss and impacts on human safety, health, and welfare. b. Floodplains or base floodplains. The Executive Order applies to floodplains, while DOTs Order applies to base floodplains. Review of the definitions for these terms suggests they are essentially the same. That is, floodplains or base floodplains are the lowlands and relatively flat areas adjoining inland and coastal waters including flood prone areas of offshore islands, at a minimum, that are prone to the 100-year flood. To determine if an action encroaches on the base floodplain, use the applicable FEMA-developed Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) or draft FIRM as the primary information source. FEMA publication No. 258, How to Use a Flood Map to Determine Flood Risk for a Property, provides information on interpreting FIRMs. If a FIRM is not available, use a Flood Hazard Boundary Map (FHBM) or contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), or State or local floodplain management agencies for help in determining floodplain involvement. c. The 100-year flood. This is a flood having a 1 percent chance of occurring in any given year. Zones A and V of a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) encompass the area comprising the 100-year floodplain. d. Encroachment. This is an action within the limits of the base floodplain. e. Significant encroachment. Based on DOT policy, a significant encroachment would occur when the encroachment would result in one or more of the following impacts: (1) a high likelihood of loss of human life; (2) substantial encroachment-associated costs or damage, including adversely affecting safe airport operations or interrupting aircraft services (e.g., interrupting runway or taxiway use, placing another facility such as a NAVAID out of service, placing utilities out of service, etc.); or (3) a notable adverse impact on the floodplains natural and beneficial floodplain values.

Chap. 12

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

f. Practicable alternative. This is an alternative that is capable of being built within natural, social, and economic constraints (DOT Order 5650.2, paragraph 4.m.). Selection of this alternative is the Federal agencys responsibility. Note that the practicable alternative outside a floodplain must be selected if it is practicable, but that decision must be made after considering other factors (see 5.f. of this chapter). Note that a practicable alternative may include conducting a proposed action outside the floodplain, using other means to accomplish the same purpose as the action, or doing nothing. If no alternatives exist outside the floodplain, other sites within the floodplain may be more desirable due to lesser impacts. The agency shall explain why the action must be in the floodplain. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION The objective of this Order is to preserve and restore the natural and beneficial values floodplains provide. The Order directs Federal agencies to take actions to reduce the risk of flood loss, minimize flood impacts on human safety, health, and welfare and restore and preserve floodplain natural and beneficial values. To do this, the Order bans approving activities in a floodplain unless: no practicable alternative exists; and measures to minimize unavoidable short-term and long-term impacts are included.

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, May 24, 1977 (42 Federal Register (FR) 26951)

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and FAA

DOT Order 5650.2, Floodplain Management and Protection Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Protecting Floodplain Resources: A Guidebook for Communities, 1996 Floodplain Management, Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988, dated February 10, 1978 (43 FR 6030)

Contains DOT policies and procedures for carrying out Executive Order 11988.

DOT/ FAA

Provides guidance on how communities can avoid and minimize impacts to floodplains.

FEMA

Provides guidance adopted by the Water Resources Council to assist agencies in preparing their regulations and procedures for implementing the Executive Order.

FEMA and the Interagency Task Force on Floodplain Management.

Chap. 12

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Further Advice on Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management1 [Note: Much of the information in this chapter is from this document. We include it as an aid in understanding the requirements of Executive Order 11988] Provides guidance to Federal agencies by discussing specific and commonly occurring issues related to Executive Order 11988. It provides broad guidance in interpreting and using the Order.

FLOODPLAINS

FEMA and the Interagency Task Force on Floodplain Management.

State and local construction statutes

Provides area-specific regulations governing floodplain protection.

State and local agencies

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. FEMA notes the more fiscal control an agency has over the disbursement of grants and loans the greater its responsibilities and involvement are in meeting the requirements of the Executive Order. In fact, strictest protection measures are often warranted for actions located directly in floodplains.2 As a result, the environmental analysis of a proposed airport development action must include discussions of potential floodplain impacts if they would occur in the base floodplain. Typical airport actions which could result in floodplain impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities and rental car lots; and significant amounts of construction/demolition activity. a. Applicability. Among other things, improperly designed or constructed facilities in floodplains can increase upstream flood elevations, increase downstream peak flood flow volumes, or increase flood flow velocities. All of these increases have the potential to adversely affect people, their properties, and the environment. Therefore, FAA must meet the requirements of Executive Order 11988 and DOT Order 5650.2 when an action it approves or funds would occur within or affect the base floodplain. FAA must also comply

http://www.gsa.gov/gsa/cm_attachments/GSA_BASIC/FEDERAL_EMERGENCY_MANAGEMENT_AGENCY_R2Fa8-k_0Z5RDZ-i34K-pR.pdf
2Further

Advice on Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management, pg. 26

Chap. 12

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

with these Orders when it approves a lease to a non-Federal entity for a facility either located in the floodplain or one that directly or indirectly affects that floodplain. Environmental documents prepared for those actions must contain the information this chapter requires. Compliance with this chapter is not required if: (1) The action and its reasonable alternatives would not occur in the base floodplain, or if applicable, its buffer areas; (2) The action and its reasonable alternatives would not directly or indirectly support floodplain development; or (3) The only part of the transportation action or a reasonable alternative involves relocating people to existing housing located in the base floodplain. Before moving people in these cases, FAA must inform the relocated people that the replacement housing is in the base floodplain and offer them alternative, comparable housing outside the base floodplain to anyone seeking it. Based on one or more of these factors, the environmental document should contain a Statement that the action and its reasonable alternatives will not be in the base floodplain. As a result, no further floodplain analysis is needed (per FAA Order 1050.1E, Appx. A, paragraph 9.2b). b. Land leases to a non-Federal entity. Paragraph 12.d of DOT Order 5650.2 requires FAA to meet certain terms when it leases or disposes of land located in a base floodplain to a non-Federal entity. As appropriate, the responsible FAA official should: (1) ensure the conveyance document identifies the uses that Federal, State, or local floodplain regulations restrict; (2) attach other restrictions to the conveyance document addressing the nonFederal partys and any successors proposed property uses to ensure those uses are consistent with the DOT Order, except as prohibited by law; and (3) withhold the transfer of the property. c. Applying Executive Order 11988 to major improvements or existing structures located in the base floodplain. Sometimes, an airport sponsor may wish to undertake major airport improvements or repair airport structures or facilities located in the floodplain that have sustained damage due to flood, fire, or other hazards. To meet applicable requirements of the Executive Order, the airport sponsor and responsible FAA official should coordinate early in project planning. In meeting the responsibility to apply the Orders requirements to existing structures, the approving FAA official should consider the following factors when deciding if it is prudent to undertake the proposed improvements or repairs: Chap. 12 Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

(1) would the proposed action increase the useful life of the damaged facility? (2) would the proposed action maintain the investment at risk or increase the exposure of lives to flood hazard? and (3) would the proposed action remove an opportunity to restore the natural and beneficial floodplain values? 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. Actions within a base floodplain (see 1.d. of this chapter) may require authorizations from the Corps, FEMA, and State or local agencies. Consultation with these agencies may be needed. These agencies are especially helpful in providing maps or other information delineating a floodplain of concern. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. General. As noted above, early consultation among FAA, the airport sponsor, FEMA and State and local governmental floodplain management agencies is important. It is often the most effective and efficient way to address floodplain issues or conflicts and develop ways to resolve them. The environmental document must identify the agencies responsible for floodplain protection, any Statements they make regarding an actions compliance with those regulations, and solutions developed to address floodplain issues. b. Map sources. FIRMs, FHBMs, and Flood Insurance Studies are available from FEMAs Map Service Center. If FIRMs or FHBMs are not available, contact one of the other agencies identified in section 5.a. for flood hazard data. c. When a sponsor selects a practicable alternative outside the floodplain after finding an encroachment would occur. Occasionally, an airport sponsor selects a location outside the floodplain after realizing the original location would encroach on the base floodplain. Here, the responsible FAA official must be sure the environmental document States the sponsor is no longer considering the original location because it encroached on the floodplain. In addition, the document should address the following information, as appropriate: (1) the action would not adversely affect a floodplains natural and beneficial values, property, or human life; and (2) the action would not indirectly support floodplain development. d. Factors to consider when evaluating practicable alternatives that avoid the floodplain. The responsible FAA official must ensure the practicable alternatives outside the base floodplain, including the No-Action Alternative, are evaluated. The policy in the DOT Order is to avoid, where practicable, encroachments by FAA actions. In considering site practicability, the responsible FAA official should address the following factors identified in

Chap. 12

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

Section 3.A3 of Floodplain Management, Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988: (1) compatibility for airport purposes (topography, wildlife habitat, aviation hazards, etc.); (2) social considerations, including aesthetics, historical or cultural importance, and land use patterns; (3) economic aspects, including the costs for buying the alternative site, the cost to complete the action there, and any associated relocation necessary for the action to proceed; and (4) legal requirements (e.g., deeds, leases, and other legal documents). e. Factors to consider when there is no practicable alternative outside the floodplain. When, after re-evaluating all impacts, factors, and public comments, the official determines that alternatives outside the base floodplain are not practicable, the environmental document must contain a discussion about the alternatives the official considered in reaching that determination. The discussion should State that FAA analyzed other alternatives and explain why locating the action in the floodplain is the only practicable alternative. The explanation should include how FAA balanced the environmental, social, economic and engineering factors when selecting the practicable alternative. When making this evaluation, the official may wish to use following information and include a discussion in the environmental documents floodplain section: (1) important factors FAA considered when selecting the proposed action as the practicable alternative; (2) reasons FAA intends to fund or approve an action in the base floodplain or in an area that would affect the floodplain; (3) each alternative considered and important factors that may make the alternative impractical; (4) how the proposed action would affect the floodplains natural values and proposed measures to minimize potential floodplain harm; and (5) if National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) criteria (44 CFR Part 60.3.) are applicable to the action.

43 FR at 6044.

Chap. 12

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

f. Early public review of a finding of encroachment. Section 2(a)(4) of Executive Order 11988 and paragraph 7 of DOT Order 5650.2 require agencies to provide the public an opportunity for early public review of any plan or proposal that would encroach on the base floodplain. This ensures the public has an early opportunity to review a proposal in the base floodplain, even if the proposal does not require an environmental impact statement (EIS). The following sections summarize how to provide information to the public. (1) an action encroaching on the base floodplain. FAA or the sponsor should tell the public the proposed action includes an encroachment by identifying the encroachment in a public hearing presentation (see section 1.d. of this chapter); (2) an action significantly encroaching on the base floodplain. If a proposed action or a reasonable alternative includes a significant floodplain encroachment (see section 1.e. of this chapter), any public notices, notices of opportunity for a public hearing, public hearing notices, or notices of environmental document availability shall tell the public the proposed alternative includes a significant floodplain encroachment. (3) Notice content. information:4 FEMA suggests that any notice contain the following

(a) the proposed actions purpose; (b) a description of the proposed action; (c) a Statement that the airport sponsor is seeking FAA funding or approval of an action occurring in the base floodplain or an action that would affect that floodplain; (d) the location of the proposed action (a map or another descriptor adequately defining the location is helpful); (e) if hazards to aircraft safety exist, describe the type and extent of the hazard the action would involve; (f) describe the affected floodplains existing natural and beneficial values; and (g) provide the name and telephone number of the responsible FAA official from whom the public may obtain information about the encroachment or to whom the public may send comments.

Further Advice on Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management, pg. 9

Chap. 12

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

g. Public notice of an agencys intent to authorize an action in the base floodplain. Paragraph 7(b) of the DOT Order requires that public notices identify significant encroachments. FEMA suggests that any final notice of an agencys intent to authorize an action in a floodplain (which could be the EIS, FONSI or ROD) include the following information 5: (1) a statement of the action; (2) a statement about why the agency decided to fund or approve the action in the floodplain or in an area affecting the floodplain; (3) a description of the important facts considered in arriving at the decision and the alternatives considered; (4) a statement about how the action would affect or be affected due to its location in the floodplain; (5) a list of measures that will be taken to minimize harm to the floodplain; and (6) a statement that the action would be taken in compliance with State and local flood protection standards; and (7) a map showing where the action would be located and where the map is available for review. h. Floodplain finding. The FAA shall not select or approve a preferred alternative involving a significant encroachment, unless the responsible FAA official can make a written finding that the proposed significant encroachment is the only practicable alternative. The official should use his or her discretion when determining the practicability of an action that would significantly encroach on the base floodplain. This requires a careful balancing and application of environmental, social, economic, and engineering considerations. However, the official should give special weight to floodplain management concerns. The environmental document must include the following information or present it as an attachment: (1) A description of why the proposed action must be located in the floodplain, including a discussion of reasonable alternatives and why they were not practicable; and (2) A Statement indicating that the action conforms to applicable State and/or local floodplain standards.

Further Advice on Executive Order 11988 Floodplain Management, pg. 10

Chap. 12

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

FAA must provide the above finding, within or together with a final EIS prepared for the proposed action, to State and area wide clearinghouses and other interested parties. i. Using NEPA documents to meet public notice requirements for an action encroaching on a floodplain. FAA may use the NEPA process to meet the public notification requirements for an action encroaching on a floodplain. (1) An actions involving a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The Notice of the FONSIs Availability (see Order 5050.4B, paragraph 807) as well as notification meeting the requirements described in sections 5.f.(1) & (2) of this chapter will meet the DOT Orders public notice requirements. The Notice should appear in a local newspaper of general circulation. (a) A FONSI for an action involving an encroachment. The Notice should note the action involves an encroachment. (b) A FONSI for an action involving a significant encroachment. The Notice should state the action involves an encroachment and contain the information noted in 5.f.(3)(a)-(g) of this chapter. (2) An action requiring an Environmental Impact Statement. An EIS as well as notification meeting the requirements described in sections 5.f(1) & (2) of this chapter will meet the public notice requirements. For significant encroachments, the EIS should contain the information noted in sections 5.f.(3)(a)-(g) of this chapter. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. When an airport action would occur in a base floodplain because there is no practicable alternative, the environmental document prepared for that action must address practicable alternatives considered, the actions direct and indirect floodplain impacts, and the actions potential to cumulatively affect the floodplain. The document must also name the State and/or local agencies having jurisdiction over the affected floodplain, summarize applicable local floodplain requirements, and briefly explain how the action would meet those requirements. The following sections consolidate information from DOT Order 5650.2 and provide information on how to assess floodplain effects. The environmental document must contain the appropriate information. (1) Determining if a significant encroachment would occur. After determining the action must occur in the floodplain because there is no practicable alternative, determine the intensity of the encroachment and its impacts on the floodplains natural and beneficial values. See section 1.e. of this chapter for more information about significant encroachments.

Chap. 12

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

(2) Assessing impacts on human life and transportation facilities. Part of the significant encroachment definition in DOT Order 5650.2 includes impacts on human life and substantial encroachment-related costs or damage. This includes interruption of service on or loss of a vital transportation facility (e.g., runway, taxiway, NAVAID damage, etc.). Although these factors are parts of the definition, their involvement alone does not trigger a significant impact for NEPA purposes. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations at 40 CFR 1508.14 State that economic or social effects, are not intended by themselves [emphasis added] to require preparation of an environmental impact Statement. As a result, FAA need not prepare an EIS for any action significantly encroaching on a floodplain but that does not have significant environmental effects. When a significant encroachment involves only a high likelihood of loss of human life or substantial encroachment-related costs or damage (see section 1.e.(2) of this chapter for examples), the responsible FAA official should ensure the environmental evaluation includes specific information addressing the proposed actions floodplain aspects. The document should include information showing that the approving FAA official has thoroughly considered the effects on human life and substantial encroachment-related costs and damage that would occur due to the actions floodplain location. The document should answer the following questions: (a) Would flooding affect airport access roads thereby preventing passenger, visitor, or airport personnel from entering or exiting the airport? (b) Would flooding affect aviation safety and the airports use? To make this determination, address the loss or temporary shutdown of an airport facility (e.g., lighting, hangars, runways, taxiways, etc.). This discussion might address flood effects on the airports ability to serve regional or national aviation demands, and the economic well-being of aviation-related businesses. For example, flood-induced closing of or damage to a runway at a major hub could disrupt regional passenger or cargo movements and adversely affect the areas economy. (c) Would flooding cause flood-induced spills of hazardous material stored at the airport and their effects on human populations? (3) Impacts to a floodplain's natural and beneficial values. Floodplains often support important ecological values benefiting the human and natural environment. Examples include a floodplains capacity to: carry and store floodwaters; sustain agriculture, aquaculture, or aquatic or terrestrial organisms; provide for groundwater recharge; provide recreation opportunities; or maintain water quality. Note that secondary action-induced impacts on floodplains could also substantially reduce the floodplains capacity to sustain these values. (4) Factors to consider when assessing action impacts on a floodplains natural and beneficial values. The responsible FAA official should use the following information in conjunction with other information in the environmental document addressing specific Chap. 12 Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

resources when determining the intensity of impacts. Review section 7.a. of this chapter to decide the intensity of impacts. (a) Agricultural activities. Floodplains are often valued due to their level topography and their fertile substrates. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative erode or contaminate floodplain substrate, thereby reducing the floodplains agricultural value? (b) Aquacultural activities. Due to their need for constant water supplies and specific water quality requirements, aquacultural activities often occur in or near floodplains. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative disrupt any of these activities? (c) Aquatic or terrestrial organisms. Numerous aquatic and terrestrial species occupy floodplains due to their food, cover, and water. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative disrupt the floodplains ability to provide needed food, cover, or water requirements needed to sustain the organisms? (d) Flood control. Due to their expanse and obstructions, floodplains often slow flows or retain water, thereby lessening the probability of upstream or downstream flooding. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative cause flow alterations that result in unacceptable upstream or downstream flooding? (e) Groundwater recharge. Waters flowing through floodplains often flow more slowly allowing water to seep through surface cracks and recharge aquifers. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative adversely affect aquifer recharge capabilities? (f) Water quality. The natural flow of water over rough surfaces, through vegetation, and the natural biological and chemical processes found in floodplains reduce pollutant loads helping to maintain water quality. Would the proposed action or a reasonable alternative disrupt the floodplains capacity to maintain desired water quality standards? (5) Airport actions outside the base floodplain. Airport actions outside the base floodplain may adversely affect the floodplains natural and beneficial values. As a result, FAA needs to assess those impacts as well. For example, action-related water quality impacts due to increased runoff from impermeable surfaces or changes in hydrologic patterns outside the floodplain may still affect aquatic or terrestrial populations using the floodplain. Review other chapters in the NEPA document to determine if an airport action outside a base floodplain would affect the floodplains resources. b. Floodplain protection standards. The environmental document should identify any State or local floodplain regulations and standards that must be met. This step is needed to provide information regarding whether the proposed action would conform to

Chap. 12

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

applicable State or local floodplain regulations and standards. Identify the State and local agencies having jurisdiction. This is done normally via letters from FEMA, the Corps, or State or local agencies having jurisdiction for floodplain issues. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the analysis discussed in this chapter, use the findings to determine the degree of action-related, floodplain impacts. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about land use in the affected area.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER For NEPA purposes, a significant impact would occur only when an action would cause notable adverse effects on the affected floodplains natural and beneficial values (see last bullet below and section 6.a.(4) of this chapter). When notable adverse impacts on natural and beneficial floodplain values would occur. For transportation purposes, the responsible FAA official must decide if a significant encroachment would occur to comply with DOT Order 5650.2, paragraphs 7.b and 9. To do so, the official must decide if the action would cause: a considerable probability of the loss of human life; future, extensive damage or costs, including damage that would interrupt airport service or use of the proposed runway or other proposed airport facility; or a notable, adverse effect on the affected floodplains natural and beneficial values. Note: When a significant impact would not occur under NEPA, the responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental document discloses action-induced effects on human life, NAVAIDS, and transportation facilities. The official should ensure the document clearly states that those effects do not trigger a significant impact under NEPA.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

Chap. 12

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

b. Mitigation. If no practicable alternative outside the base floodplain exists, Executive Order 11988 and DOT Order 5650.2 require FAA to minimize action-induced impacts on the base floodplain and, where practicable, to restore and preserve natural and beneficial floodplain values that are adversely affected by the action. A FONSI or EIS prepared for an action that would encroach on the base floodplain should contain measures that would minimize the actions impacts on floodplains. During the environmental review process, agencies having floodplain jurisdiction or expertise normally provide letters addressing floodplain effects. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in the appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly provide reasons why the mitigation was not adopted. In most cases, conceptual design as opposed to detailed engineering will be sufficient to help establish the adequacy of mitigation measures. (1) Mitigation, in general. Mitigation measures may include: (a) construction controls to minimize erosion and sedimentation; (b) designing the facility to allow adequate flow circulation and preserve free, natural drainage; (c) using pervious surfaces where practicable; (d) controlling runoff; (e) controlling waste and spoils disposal to prevent contaminating ground and surface water (e.g., control the use of pesticides, herbicides; maintain vegetative buffers to reduce sedimentation and delivery of chemical pollutants to the water body); (f) employing land use controls (Executive Order 11988 directs Federal agencies to take floodplain management into account in evaluating land use plans and to require land and water resource use appropriate to the degree of hazard involved.).
Note: Any selected mitigation should not pose a wildlife hazard, see FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports.

(2) Mitigation for human safety and substantial encroachment-related damages and costs. Mitigation measures should be developed to minimize impacts on human safety and minimize future damages or costs, including damages or costs to equipment, facilities, or structures. For example, if a proposed runway's elevation is below or at the 100-year flood elevation, consider raising the runway's elevation above the 100-year flood elevation to allow runway use during flooding.

Chap. 12

Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

(a) When building in the base floodplain, National Flood Insurance Program rules and regulations must be followed. This protects structures or facilities from flooding. It also minimizes changes in flood elevations that could harm the existing floodplain or upstream development. Measures such as building structures on piers are discussed in 44 CFR Section 60.3. (b) When building in the base floodplain or repairing a facility already there, try to minimize flood damage to the proposed or existing facility. Include measures to protect the facilities or utilities from flood damage or to lessen potential flood damage. Design sufficient drainage to prevent flooding upstream or downstream structures and facilities. (3) Mitigation for impacts to natural and beneficial floodplain values. Developing mitigation for such impacts requires understanding natural floodplain values and systems. Consulting with expertise agencies may be helpful. Here are a few examples of natural floodplain values and related mitigation. (a) Agriculture. Reduce soil erosion in cultivated floodplains. herbicide, pesticide, or petroleum runoff from the airport. Control

(b) Aquaculture. Avoid planting non-native species that could compete with existing natural floodplain vegetation or attract wildlife hazardous to aviation. See FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports. (c) Aquatic or terrestrial organisms. To reduce effects on organisms using the floodplain, minimize disturbing floodplain vegetation or design floodgates to allow natural tide changes or natural stream flows. (d) Flood control. Reduce fill volumes in floodplains. Design structures to preserve existing flows and water surface elevations. Minimize soil compaction. Restore natural contour elevations provided they do not raise existing water surface elevations. (e) Groundwater recharge. Use porous surface material where possible. Remove loose soil and waste material to avoid contaminating ground or surface waters that may feed recharge areas.

Chap. 12

Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

FLOODPLAINS

(f) Water quality. Preserve floodplain or wetland buffers. Reduce fertilizer or pesticide runoff. Control discharges from pipes or sheet flow. Use erosion control measures, including construction control measures to minimize erosion. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the significance threshold noted in section 7 of this chapter. FAAs EIS must analyze any actioninduced significant impacts on a floodplains natural and beneficial values. When FAA prepares an EIS to address significant floodplain impacts, the responsible FAA official should consider inviting Federal, State, or local agencies having floodplain expertise or jurisdiction to be a cooperating agency. As needed, the EIS should contain the information in items 8.bd as well as that already discussed in this chapter. b. Other impact areas. Normally, when a significant floodplain impact would occur, impacts to the floodplains natural and beneficial values and induced development are involved. To avoid repeating information presented in other EIS chapters, the floodplain chapter should summarize those impacts and refer the reader to the specific pages of the EIS addressing the affected resources that provide more detail on the impact. Accurate cross-referencing is a must. For example, the floodplain chapter would note how changes to a wetland affects the wetlands flood storage capacity. As a result, water the wetland would normally retain for a given period would move more quickly to the floodplain. The EIS would note that action-induced changes to the wetlands flood storage would cause downstream flooding. c. Practicability of alternatives. Discuss other considerations about the practicability of alternatives, if any were considered. d. Mitigation. Include measures to minimize harm to the floodplain and, where practicable, to restore or preserve affected natural and beneficial floodplain values not previously considered. Include sponsor commitments to comply with special flood-related design criteria or protective conditions FAA, resource, or floodplain agencies determine necessary. e. Floodplain finding. See section 5.h. of this chapter.

Chap. 12

Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 13. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

a. General. Federal, State, and local laws regulate hazardous materials use, storage, transport, or disposal. These laws may extend to past and future landowners of properties containing these materials. In addition, disrupting sites containing hazardous materials or contaminates may cause significant impacts to soil, surface water, groundwater, air quality and the organisms using these resources. Therefore, airport sponsors purchasing or developing land for airport purposes may encounter hazardous materials contamination. The environmental document should disclose and analyze information about hazardous materials. b. Terms and definitions. Generally, the terms "hazardous materials," "hazardous waste," and "hazardous substances" are associated with industrial wastes, petroleum products, dangerous goods or other contaminates. But these terms have very precise and technical meanings that are used for consistency and legal purposes (1) Hazardous wastes. Regulations developed pursuant to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) at 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C, define this term. Hazardous wastes are solid wastes that are ignitable, corrosive, reactive, or toxic (sometimes called characteristic wastes). In addition, Subpart D contains a list of specific types of solid wastes that the EPA has deemed hazardous (sometimes called listed wastes). (2) Hazardous substances. Section 101(14) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 U.S.C. 9601(14)) defines this term broadly. It includes hazardous waste, hazardous air pollutants, hazardous substances designated as such pursuant to the Clean Water Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act and elements, compounds, mixtures, solutions, or substances listed in 40 CFR Part 302 that pose substantial harm to human health or environmental resources. It should be noted that, pursuant to CERCLA, hazardous substances do not include any petroleum or natural gas substances and materials. (3) Hazardous materials. According to 49 CFR Part 172, Table 172.101, these are any substances or materials commercially transported that pose unreasonable risk to public health, safety, and property. They include hazardous wastes and hazardous substances as well as petroleum and natural gas substances and materials. As a result, the term "hazardous materials" represents hazardous wastes and substances in this Desk Reference. c. Environmental Due Diligence Audit (EDDA). An EDDA is a systematic investigation of real property to determine if activities involving hazardous materials have occurred at a site or resulted in environmental contamination. An EDDA is also a form of pre-acquisition protection against CERCLA/RCRA liability and a defense in lawsuits addressing contaminated lands. If the Phase I EDDA indicates that the land is, was, or has the potential for such activities or occurrences, a Phase II EDDA attempts to verify and identify the existence of the materials. If necessary, a Phase III EDDA will delineate the amounts or Chap. 13 Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

limits of hazardous materials or contamination and provide preliminary clean-up plans and cost estimates, if applicable. Personnel specializing in performing EDDAs should conduct the investigations due to the potential liabilities and risks associated with these assessments. FAA Order 1050.19, Environmental Due Diligence Audits in the Conduct of FAA Real Property Transactions, provides more information on EDDAs. . 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTENTING REGULATIONS.

The statutory framework related to hazardous materials in Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) actions, projects, and decisions is mainly contained in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), and the Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act (CERFA). This table summarizes these laws.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS OVERSIGHT AGENCY

CERCLA, 42 USC Section 9601, et. seq. In particular, see Sections 101, 102, 103, 105, 107, 120.

CERFA [P.L. 102426](amended portions of CERCLA) Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 USC, Section 2701 et seq. RCRA, 42 USC Section 6901 et seq., [P.L. 94-580] Sections 3001, 3010 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) [15 USC, Sections 26012692]

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Defines hazardous substances. Requires notifying the public about hazardous substance releases exceeding reportable quantities. Establishes criteria for recovery, clean-up, and response plans. Defines individual and joint liabilities of potentially responsible parties. Limits liability under the innocent landowner and due diligence provisions if a landowner: has not contributed to the contamination of a property; uses the property in accordance with good commercial or customary practices; and has conducted all appropriate inquiry into the previous ownership. Requires Federal agencies to comply with CERCLA at facilities they own. As conditions of a sale, release, or transfer of Federal lands or facilities used to store hazardous materials or where a release or disposal of hazardous materials has occurred, Federal agencies must: identify those lands or facilities; and complete waste or contaminate clean-up of these lands or facilities. Provides for recoupment of removal costs and damages for discharges of oil and other petroleum products. Defines hazardous wastes. Establishes procedures hazardous materials manufacturers must follow regarding hazardous material production, use, and disposal. These are called the cradle to grave provisions. The Act regulates the introduction of new chemicals or those that already exist. Subchapters 2 through 4 address asbestos, indoor radon, and lead exposure. 15 USC Section 2605 addresses polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

FAA

EPA

EPA

EPA

Chap. 13

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND

IMPLEMENTING
REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION 40 CFR Part 761 This CFR section addresses the use and disposal of PCB products and items containing that chemical.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY EPA

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. Federal actions funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or any airport project subject to FAA approval has the potential to involve or affect hazardous materials. Typical actions which could incur impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots; and significant changes in aircraft operations or construction activity. b. RCRA and CERCLA. The passage of RCRA and CERCLA generally focused attention on the use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and the environmental threats caused by mishandling these materials. At times, hazardous materials may be used or stored on an airport. As a result, an airport may be included in the universe of facilities to which RCRA and CERCLA apply. However, for environmental analysis purposes, the primary objectives are to identify and evaluate sites, facilities, or properties where hazardous materials (including environmental contamination) could hinder or affect an airport project. Doing so allows FAA to disclose compliance with RCRA, CERCLA, and other related laws and regulations. c. Airport sponsor responsibilities. An airport sponsor should, to the extent possible, avoid hazardous waste sites and environmentally contaminated property. If avoidance isnt possible, the sponsor should minimize the use of contaminated property as much as possible. Doing so avoids or lessens the potentially excessive clean-up costs and legal liabilities. To help protect the sponsor from the costs or the liability associated with hazardous materials or contamination, the sponsor should hire a competent specialist to complete an EDDA before acquiring any land for airport purposes. FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5100-17, Land Acquisition and Relocation Assistance for Airport Improvement Program Assisted Projects, and FAA Order 1050.19, Environmental Due Diligence Audits in the Conduct of FAA Real Property Transactions, provide FAA guidance on this. d. FAA responsibilities. Before authorizing any airport development action involving land disturbance or land ownership changes, FAA should ensure the airport sponsor has completed the appropriate level EDDA or other similar investigation. This helps to verify if the action would involve a hazardous waste site or contaminated property. Operators at FAA facilities must also comply with all applicable regulations pertaining to the use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials as outlined in FAA Order 1050.10B, Prevention, Control and Abatement of Environmental Pollution at FAA Facilities; 1050.14A, Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB) in the National Airspace System; Order 1050.15A, Underground Storage Tanks at FAA Facilities; Order 1050.18, Chlorofluorocarbons and Halon Use at FAA Facilities; and AC 150/5320-15, Management of Airport Industrial Wastes.

Chap. 13

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. The environmental document prepared for an airport project should disclose required CERCLA or RCRA permits, certifications, or regulatory approvals as appropriate. This information helps to inform the decision maker and public about possible construction concerns, the extent of analyses needed, or the types of necessary mitigation. Examples of that information include all or some of the following items: a. Requirements. A description of the applicable requirements and a summary of the regulatory processes applicable to the project. b. Conflicts. Issues that may cause potential conflicts or that may delay the regulatory processes noted in section 4.a. of this chapter. c. Timeframes for obtaining approvals needed to develop sites containing hazardous materials or contamination. These times should include authorizations, prerequisites, and permits for disturbing, transporting, or processing hazardous materials and other regulated substances. d. Commitment. A statement from the sponsor verifying that it commits to addressing hazardous material issues in accordance with applicable Federal and state requirements. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. A number of Federal and state agencies is involved in regulating hazardous materials and contamination. Early consultation with these agencies during the NEPA process aids in collecting necessary data and promotes compliance with applicable laws. (1) EPA. Regional EPA offices have information on hazardous substances. EPA's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS) is a computer database. It identifies sites on the National Priority List (NPL) and other areas used to, store, transport, or dispose hazardous materials. Other EPA-managed databases include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System (RCRIS) and the Emergency Response Notification System (ERNS). (2) United States Coast Guard (USCG). The USCG operates the National Response Center (NRC) to help in or conduct hazardous spill clean-ups throughout the United States. In being the nation's single reporting point for all spills, the NRC maintains a comprehensive list of those mishaps. (3) United States Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS has aerial photographs that may be helpful in determining past land uses that occurred at a particular site. (4) United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA has extensively mapped and gathered data on the nations regional geological features and soil types. This information is useful in determining soil types, soil characteristics, or past land uses.

Chap. 13

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

(5) State agencies. RCRA encourages individual states to manage hazardous wastes within their borders. To promote this, EPA has delegated hazardous waste-related management responsibilities to EPA-certified state and local governments. FAA urges airport sponsors and operators planning land purchases or transfers to contact the appropriate state agency early in the planning process to determine the extent of state requirements that must be met regarding hazardous materials and/or environmental contamination. (6) Local government agencies. Information at the local level is valuable when tracing past uses of real property. Local soil conservation offices may provide historical photographs and information on soil types at a desired site. Local fire departments or fire districts often have data on hazardous materials that have been used at a specific location. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. The environmental evaluation should include the level of analysis needed to disclose the likely use of hazardous materials or contamination associated with the action. This information is useful in evaluating potential conflicts between the proposed airport action and these laws. In this way, applicable permits, certifications, and approvals are identified, the necessary clean-up and remediation measures are noted, and unresolved problems or issues are disclosed. Determining an impact can be done by using information contained in available FAA publications, collected by trained and experienced personnel following standard investigatory procedures, or revealed in EDDAs and similar examinations of the project site. b. FAA publications and materials. FAA has issued useful information to help airport sponsors and others address hazardous materials issues. (1) To identify and characterize airport projects likely to involve the use of hazardous materials and other regulated substances see: (a) FAA Order 1050.10B, Environmental Pollution at FAA Facilities; or Prevention, Control and Abatement of

(b) FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5320-15, Management of Airport Industrial Wastes. (2) To assess real property for signs of hazardous materials and contamination see: (a) FAA Order 1050.19, Environmental Due Diligence Audits in the Conduct of FAA Real Property Transactions; or (b) FAA AC 150/5100-17, Land Acquisition and Relocation Assistance for Airport Improvement Program Assisted Projects. c. Site investigation. Due to dangers of exposure, liability issues, and other factors, personnel trained and experienced in evaluating hazardous material or contaminated sites Chap. 13 Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

should conduct this investigation. These specialists can determine if hazardous materials or contamination exists or has existed on the proposed site. At a minimum, these evaluations should consist of a review of the following information sources concerning a propertys current and previous uses: (1) a detailed search of Federal, State, and local records addressing the use, storage, disposal, or discharge of hazardous materials, petroleum products, or other regulated substances on the property or any adjacent properties; (2) aerial photographs, maps, and other current or historic documents that could reveal earlier uses on the subject property or adjacent facilities; (3) visual, on-site inspections of the property, including any buildings, structures, or equipment and a similar visual inspection of adjacent properties; (4) interviews of owners, employees, tenants, and knowledgeable about the current and former uses of the property; other individuals

(5) reviews and evaluations of contamination assessments, remedial action plans, sampling and test results of physical or environmental media (i.e., soil, surface water, ground water, building materials), and any other environmental investigations that the owners, operators, or regulatory agencies have conducted. d. Contents of environmental documents. NEPA documents prepared for an airport action requiring FAA approval and/or AIP funding and that would occupy hazardous sites or use hazardous materials and generate hazardous wastes should include the following information. The amount of emphasis placed on each topic should be commensurate with the proposed actions scope. (1) If a contaminated site is adjacent to or on the proposed airport site. Identify known, suspected, or potential contaminated sites on or adjacent to the proposed action. (a) provide the name, location, and owner/operator of the site or facility; (b) provide the type and extent of contamination at the location(s); (c) provide the distance and direction of the contaminated site from the proposed action; (d) provide the regulatory status of the project site including the contamination assessment process and clean-up activities; or (e) if the planned airport action would occupy a contaminated site, describe the impact and the resolution of the problem or conflict. Indicate how the corrective actions comply with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. (2) If a proposed project would involve hazardous materials. Airport sponsors and their contractors are responsible for the appropriate management and use of hazardous

Chap. 13

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

materials and wastes. Environmental documents that involve airport actions that may use these materials should include the following sponsor provisions: (a) users and those who handle hazardous materials will do so according to applicable regulations; and (b) the person or entity responsible for handling the hazardous material will take immediate corrective action, including notifying the National Response Center, if there is an accidental release or other incident that can endanger people or environmental resources. (3) Dealing with potential spills. If the proposed action would involve hazardous materials, briefly describe the methods that would be used to ensure compliance with RCRA, CERCLA, and other applicable Federal and State regulations. If needed, describe the methods that would be employed to control spills and other unauthorized releases of hazardous materials during construction and operational of the proposed action. As necessary, see FAA AC 150/5320-15, Management of Airport Industrial Wastes for detailed information on dealing with hazardous wastes and industrial chemicals typically used on airports. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the investigations, evaluations, and analyses noted earlier, and after considering the use of hazardous materials or contamination associated with the project, use the following guidelines to determine the level and significance of impact.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER

The action involves a property on or eligible for the National Priority List (NPL).

Not all property within an NPL site is contaminated. Therefore, there may be areas within the NPLs boundaries that are clean. The project requires extraordinary measures (i.e., connection to new water supplies, relocation of residents, etc.) to mitigate project-related disturbances of contaminates that would endanger the health and/or safety of citizens or their air and/or water supply(ies). The action would affect a site known or suspected to be contaminated. Consequently, the impacts of that contamination may not be fully revealed and necessary corrective actions may be needed.

The sponsor would have difficulty meeting applicable local, state, or Federal laws and regulations on hazardous materials.

There is an unresolved issue regarding hazardous materials.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B

Chap. 13

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having special expertise on hazardous materials in the airport-affected area may provide letters addressing those materials or their effects. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate the effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, the environmental document should include an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. (1) The EA or EIS should describe the measures, the benefits and requirements, the responsible parties, the process for implementing and enforcing required measures, and a schedule for carrying out those measures. Those measures may include spill response plans, clean-up and remedial actions, pollution prevention initiatives, and any other activities that are intended or designed to meet the requirements of Federal and state laws. (2) The environmental document should include a provision that all necessary corrective actions and reporting requirements will be fulfilled if previously unknown contaminants are discovered during construction or a spill occurs during construction. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. Section 7 of this chapter describes the conditions and criteria by which an airport development action involving hazardous materials or environmental contamination may cause a significant impact. When FAA determines that a significant impact is likely, it must prepare an EIS further addressing the potential impacts associated with the proposed action. b. EIS content. The EIS should contain the following information in addition to the materials developed and presented in other sections of this Chapter: (1) the results of interagency consultations undertaken to more precisely define any unresolved issues and the necessary steps, analyses, and/or actions required to address them. (2) the results of additional investigations, clean-up, or remedial actions or other initiatives required to insure that the action is implemented, constructed, and/or operated in compliance with Federal and state regulations. (3) evidence verifying the airport sponsor has undertaken all necessary actions and precautions needed to obtain regulatory approval of the action; and (4) evidence that the airport sponsor commits to implement all necessary actions and precautions noted in section 8.b.(3) of this chapter. c. Mitigation. Any mitigation measures agencies having special expertise on hazardous materials in the airport-affected area should be discussed. FAA or the sponsor

Chap. 13

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS

should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). In accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), an EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures recommended by agencies having special expertise on hazardous materials in the airport-affected area. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 13

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 14. HISTORIC PROPERTIES

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

a. General. This chapter summarizes the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) for ease of reference. In case of doubt concerning the proper interpretation of Section 106 as implemented by 36 CFR Part 800, the responsible FAA official should contact the Planning and Environmental Division, APP-400, the Airports & Environmental Law Division in the Office of Chief Counsel (AGC-600), or Regional Counsel. 1 b. Historic property. A historic property is, any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) maintained by the Secretary of the Interior (36 CFR Section 800.16(l)). Properties or sites having traditional religious or cultural importance to Native American Tribes and Hawaiian organizations may qualify. To qualify, a property must meet the criteria for eligibility under 36 CFR Section 60.4. c. Consultation. Section 106 of the NHPA, as implemented through 36 CFR Part 800, is intended to require Federal agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. In doing so, FAA must consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) if one exists.2 The regulations protecting historic and cultural properties also require consultation and information exchanges with interested parties. As a result, the identification of historic resources, analysis of potential effects, and consultation is often a "critical path" element in managing the environmental review project. Starting consultation early in the environmental review process is a best management practice for an airport action that may affect historic properties. d. Undertaking. This is a project or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency (36 CFR Section 800.16(y)). An undertaking is an activity that: (1) the agency carries out;

1 Notably, the regulations have been amended three times in the past several years (1999, 2001, and 2004), with the current regulations having taken effect on August 5, 2004. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) amended the regulations due to both changes in the underlying law (1992) and court challenges to the validity of the regulations. For instance, in National Mining Assn v. Slater, 167 F. Supp. 2d (D.D.C. 2001), the role of the ACHP was challenged. This resulted in a determination that ACHPs role is only advisory. The current regulations reflect the courts decision; however, there may be other new provisions that require legal interpretation. For more information on Section 106 case law, please see the Federal Historic Preservation Case Law, 1966-2000 at www.achp.gov/pubs-caselaw.html. 2

A THPO is the tribal officer who assumes the responsibility of the SHPO for purposes of Section 106 compliance on tribal lands per Section 101(d)(2) of the NHPA. The THPO is appointed by the tribes chief governing authority or is designated by tribal ordinance or preservation program.

Chap. 14

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (2) is carried out by or on behalf of a Federal agency; (3) is carried out with Federal assistance; or (4) requires a Federal permit, license, or approval.

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

For purposes of the Airports program, an undertaking is an action that constitutes a Federal action for purposes of NEPA as defined in FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 9.g. These actions include, but are not limited to, any airport development project funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or Passenger Facility Charge Program (PFC) or subject to unconditional FAA approval to be depicted on an airport layout plan (ALP). e. Integrating the Section 106 and NEPA processes. Title 36 CFR Section 800.8 encourages Federal agencies to integrate the Section 106 and NEPA processes. This integration is intended to streamline these procedurally rich processes, reduce paperwork, avoid repeating information, and coordinate public input. Section 7 of this chapter provides more information on this. .2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

a. General. The primary Federal law protecting nationally important historic properties is the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (NHPA). NHPA establishes the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) and the NRHP. Sections 106 and 110 are two sections of this law having the greatest bearing on airport actions. The following table outlines these sections and other laws and regulations that apply to historic or archeological resources.
Note: Paragraphs 3.b.(1) and (2) of this chapter provide more information on Sections 106 and 110 of the NHPA. The chapter does not discuss other sections of the NHRP because airport actions do not normally involve those sections. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Requires Federal agencies having direct or indirect jurisdiction over proposed undertakings to consider the undertakings effects on properties listed in or eligible for listing in the NRHP. The agencies must consult with the SHPO or THPO when deciding if an undertaking has the potential to affect NRHP resources. If an undertaking has the potential to do so, further consultation is needed to determine if the effects would be adverse. When a Federal agency determines an undertaking has the potential to adversely affect NRHP resources, the agency must notify the ACHP of that finding. For Federal airport actions, FAA is responsible for meeting the requirements of Section 106 and 36 CFR, Part 800. The project sponsor or an environmental contractor acting on FAA's behalf may aid FAA during the Section 106 review process, but OVERSIGHT AGENCY

Section 106 of the NHPA

ACHP

Chap. 14

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

36 CFR, Part 800 implementing Section 106

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION FAA is responsible for meeting Section 106 and the regulations implementing it. The regulations implementing Section 106 are at 36 CFR, Part 800. Among other things, these regulations describe the procedures for consulting, analyzing effects, and documenting those effects. Section 110(f): This section requires that Federal agencies plan and impose measures necessary to minimize the direct or indirect effects of undertakings on National Historic Landmarks (NHLs). NHLs are buildings, sites, districts, or structures that the Secretary of the Interior designates as historically significant.3 When undertakings would adversely affect NHLs, agencies shall invite the ACHP to participate in consultation.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

ACHP

Sections 110(f) and 110(k) of the NHPA

Section 110(k): Some applicants seeking Federal approval or funding have intentionally caused adverse effects on NHRP-listed or eligible properties to avoid Section 106 requirements in the past. Section 110(k) prevents Federal agencies from issuing grants or approving undertakings to parties who have intentionally harmed protected resources. Agencies facing such situations may approve or fund actions involving parties causing the damage only if the agencies, after consulting with the ACHP, determine circumstances justify the destructive actions.

ACHP

Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (ARPA)

Archeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (AHPA)

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)

This Act requires Federal agencies to obtain a special permit to excavate or remove any archaeological resources that are located on U.S.-owned public lands or lands that Federally-recognized Native American tribes control. This Act protects all archaeological resources, including those that are not historic properties. This Act requires the survey, recovery, and preservation of significant archaeological, historical, and scientific data when a Federally-approved or Federally-funded action may destroy or cause irreparable loss of such data. The discovery of human remains or cultural items on Federal or tribal lands triggers this Act. The Act provides for the inventory, protection, and return of cultural items to affiliated Native American groups.

Individual Federal land management agencies

Individual Federal land management agencies National Park Service (NPS)

There are over 2500 NHLs in the nation. More than half are privately owned. See http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/ and 36 CFR Part 65 for more information.
3

Chap. 14

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

49 U.S.C, Section 303.c, formerly Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation Act.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Note that NAGPRA applies only to Native American human remains and cultural materials on Federal or Native American lands. Though not a historic preservation law, Section 4(f) of the DOT Act (recodified as 49 USC Sections 303.c and d) may apply to FAA actions adversely affecting NRHP-listed or eligible properties. Section 4(f) does not allow the approving FAA official to approve a transportation program or project that would use a historic site of national, state, or local significance, unless: the official finds there is no prudent or feasible alternative that avoids using the historic site; and the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm to the site resulting from the use. (Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference provides information on Section 4(f)).

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

FAA

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. Typical airside actions that could affect NRHP-listed or eligible resources include building or expanding terminal and hangar facilities, runways and taxiways, and installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS). Landside actions that may affect these resources include building or moving access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots, or other types of activities requiring any other construction. b. Timing. The responsible FAA official should start the Section 106 process as early as possible in the environmental review for major airport development projects. An early start of the 106 process is usually needed to effectively and efficiently complete Section 106s procedures, consultation, and analyses. Early knowledge about the presence of historic properties in an undertakings area of potential effect (APE) (see paragraph 5.d of this chapter) and prompt consultation are critical. Doing so helps the sponsor and FAA identify and consider the widest range of alternatives or measures to avoid or lessen the undertakings possible adverse effects on NRHP-listed or eligible properties. Most importantly, the responsible FAA official must ensure FAA has started and is well into completing the requirements of 36 CFR Part 800 when it issues a draft EA or EIS. The official must do so to ensure the final EA or EIS proves FAA has met Section 106 requirements. (1) Grant awards or ALP approvals. FAA cannot award a grant for an airport action or unconditionally approve an ALP or an ALP revision until it completes the Section 106 process. However, FAA may authorize or issue funds for non-destructive planning activities related to an undertaking before completing the Section 106 process. (2) Leasing airport property. Before an airport sponsor may convert land dedicated to airport use (i.e. aeronautical activities and airline services) to non-aeronautical, revenue producing use (e.g., concessions, providing public shelter, ground transportation, Chap. 14 Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

food, or personal service businesses) under a long-term lease, the sponsor must obtain ARP approval. In addition, ARP must release the sponsor from its federal grant assurance obligations addressing the uses of the land. FAA may not approve leases for airport properties to a non-Federal party until FAA completes the Section 106 review process. This ensures leases protect or preserve historic properties that may be present on the property to be leased. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Section 106. This section does not require formal permits, certifications, or approvals. However, FAA documentation should demonstrate it has completed all of the following requirements. (1) FAA has consulted with the parties noted in 36 CFR Section 800.2; (2) FAA has notified or provided ACHP the opportunity to participate in consultation as appropriate under 36 CFR Part 800;4 and (3) FAA has conducted the process in a reasonable and good faith manner. b. Archaeological concerns on Federal or Native American lands. The Archaeological Resources Protection Act (16 USC Sections 470aa 470mm) requires that a person wishing to exhume or remove archeological resources from Federal or Native American lands must first obtain a permit from the relevant land management agency or tribe. Therefore, a sponsor whose project requires removing buried archeological resources from units of the national park system, the national wildlife refuge system, or the national forest system must obtain a permit before removing or excavating those resources. See 43 CFR Part 7 for more details. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Starting the process. The first step in the Section 106 process requires the responsible FAA official to determine if the proposed action is an undertaking as defined in 36 CFR Section 800.16(y) (see Section 1.d. of this chapter). If the official determines the action is not an undertaking, then Section 106 does not apply. If the official determines an undertaking exists and that it may affect properties on or eligible for inclusion in the NRHP, the responsible FAA official must determine if an undertaking: (1) does not have the potential to affect protected historic properties; (2) would not adversely affect NRHP-listed or eligible historic properties; or (3) would adversely affect NRHP-listed or eligible historic properties.

The criteria ACHP uses to determine if it will become involved address undertakings that: a) have substantial impacts on important historic properties; b) present important questions of policy or interpretation; c) have the potential for presenting procedural problems; or d) present issues of concern to Indian tribes or organizations or Native Hawaiian organizations.

Chap. 14

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

b. Section 106 consultation. If the responsible FAA official determines the undertaking has the potential to affect an NRHP-listed or eligible property, the official must begin consulting with various parties having critical roles in the Section 106 process. Agency consultation must include: (1) the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO); (2) Native Americans or Native Hawaiian organizations if resources important to them may be in the project area. Contact with a Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) may be needed; (3) the airport sponsor; (4) representatives of local governments having jurisdiction over the area involved in the undertaking; (5) individuals and organizations having legal or economic interests in the historic properties the undertaking may affect; or (6) the public in the APE having an interest in historic properties (see section 5.d. of this chapter). Section 106 requires the FAA to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on undertakings (36 CFR Section 800.1). FAA must take into account ACHPs opinions in reaching a final decision. Although FAA must present evidence that it considered ACHPs opinion, FAA is not bound to that opinion and may or may not revise its initial finding. c. Area of potential effect (APE). If an undertaking has the potential to affect NRHPlisted or eligible historic properties, then FAA, in consultation with the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate), identifies the APE. The APE is the geographic area or areas in which an undertaking may directly or indirectly affect the character of historic resources. Note that it is not necessary to know if any historic properties occur in the APE to describe it. d. Identifying properties. After defining the APE, FAA reviews the NRHP to determine if properties already listed in the NRHP occur in the APE. FAA must also determine if the APE contains any properties that may be eligible for NRHP listing. Historical research, archaeological or historic architectural surveys, and consultation with the SHPO, tribes, other traditional communities, and local historic groups are methods used to identify NRHP-eligible properties. Once FAA through this consultation identifies these properties, the responsible FAA official, through more consultation with the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate), evaluates the eligibility of properties using NRHPs criteria at 36 CFR Section 60.4. If any property meets one or more of these criteria, the responsible FAA official, in consultation with the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate), determines if the property is eligible for listing in the NRHP. If the SHPO or THPO do not concur with FAAs eligibility determination, FAA must seek a formal eligibility determination from the Keeper of the NRHP at the NPS. NPS Bulletin 15, How to Apply National Register Eligibility Criteria,

Chap. 14

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

and 36 CFR Section 800.4(c) provide more guidance on how agency personnel evaluate NRHP eligibility. e. Tribal and Hawaiian consultation. FAA must make a reasonable and good faith effort to consult with Native American tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations when defining the APE and identifying properties within it. This helps to identify historic properties in areas located off tribal lands that may have religious and cultural significance to tribal members. Due to the sovereignty of Federally-recognized tribes,5 consultation with these tribes must occur in a government-to-government manner. That consultation is needed to comply with Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, and FAA Order 1210.20, American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Consultation Policy and Procedures. FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 303, provides more information on this issue. (1) The APE. The responsible FAA official must consult tribal or Hawaiian officials to determine if the APE contains resources important to Native American tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations. This is a critical step because an APE may contain religious or cultural resources important to these peoples, even if they do not live within APE. (2) Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). TCPs are import to a communitys history, cultural practices, and beliefs and help maintain the continual cultural identity of Native American tribes, Hawaiian organizations, and other traditional communities. TCPs are normally, but not always, eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. NPS Bulletin 38, Identifying Traditional Cultural Places, provides guidance on NRHP criteria to determine if a TCP qualifies as a Section 106-protected TCP. FAA must consider an undertaking's effects on NRHP-eligible or listed TCPs. f. No Properties Affected determination. FAA is responsible for determining if the undertaking would or would not affect any historic properties. An effect would occur when an undertaking would change the characteristics qualifying a historic resource for inclusion in or its eligibility for the NRHP. To make a No Properties Affected Determination, the responsible FAA official, in consultation with the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate), must determine the undertaking would not affect NRHP-listed or eligible historic resources properties in the APE. Here, FAA must notify the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) of that finding. To do so, the responsible FAA official must send to the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) the following documentation noted in 36 CFR Section 800.11 (d) and provided here for convenience. A description of the undertaking. Specify the Federal involvement and its APE. As necessary, include photographs, maps and drawings; a description of the steps taken to identify historic properties, including efforts to seek information as discussed in 36 CFR Section 800.4(b); and

See Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 134, pgs. 46327 46333, dated July 12, 2002 for a list of Federally-recognized tribes. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is responsible for revising the list.

Chap. 14

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

the basis for determining that there are no properties present or affected.

Note: National Park Service Bulletin 44, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Historic Aviation Properties, may be helpful in assessing impacts on historic aviation facilities.

(1) When the SHPO (or THPO) agrees with the finding. If the responsible FAA official finds no historic properties affected, the official must send the documentation noted above to the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate). FAA must notify other consulting parties of the finding, including Native American tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, when appropriate. The responsible FAA official must make the documentation it sent to the SHPO/THPO on the finding available to the public. The SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) has 30 days to review the finding, provided FAA has provided the required documentation to them. If the SHPO (or THPO) does not object, or does not respond, FAA has fulfilled its Section 106 responsibilities. The environmental document prepared for the undertaking should contain the finding, proof of consultation, and the documentation supporting this finding. (2) When the SHPO (or THPO) objects to the finding. If the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) objects to FAAs finding within 30 days of receiving it, FAA will consult with the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) to resolve the disagreement or send the findings documentation (see 36 Section 800.11(d)) to the ACHP for its review and comment. The ACHP must respond within 30 days of receiving the documentation. If ACHP does not respond in 30 days after receiving the documentation, FAA has fulfilled its Section 106 responsibilities. (a) If ACHP objects to FAAs finding, but FAA and the sponsor alter the undertaking to address ACHPs concerns, FAA has met its Section 106 responsibilities. (b) If FAA does not alter its original finding, FAA can proceed with the project but only after sending the ACHP, the SHPO (or THPO) and the consulting parties documentation on FAAs final decision. This documentation shows how FAA considered the ACHPs opinion. (3) To the fullest extent possible draft environmental assessments and impact statements should summarize the FAAs NHPA Section 106 finding and cross-reference the pages of the appendix containing the supporting evidence and documentation reflecting consultation. See 40 CFR section 1502.25. g. Assessing adverse effects. The responsible FAA official applies the adverse effect criteria in 36 CFR Section 800.5 to the historic properties in the projects APE. The official must do this in consultation with the SHPO (or THPO) and other consulting parties, including Native American tribes and Native Hawaiian organizations, as appropriate. If FAA finds an undertaking would affect an NRHP-listed or eligible property, the responsible FAA official must notify the consulting parties. (1) Criteria of adverse effect. An undertaking would adversely affect a property if it changes the characteristics of the historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the NRHP. Diminishing the integrity of the historic propertys location, setting, design,

Chap. 14

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

workmanship, feeling, or association could cause these effects. Per 36 CFR Sections 800.5(a)(1) and (2), an undertaking causing any of the following would adversely affect a historic property. (a) Physical destruction or damage to all or part of the property; (b) Alteration of a property in ways that is not consistent with the Secretary of the Interiors standards for treating historic properties (see 36 CFR Part 68). This criterion applies to activities: (1) involving restoring, rehabilitating, repairing, maintaining, or stabilizing the property; (2) providing handicap access to the property; or (3) remediating hazardous materials; (c) isolating the property from its surrounding settings or altering the characteristics of those settings, when those characteristics contribute to qualifying the property for the NRHP; (d) moving a property from its historic location; (e) introducing visual, audio, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the property or that would diminish the integrity of the propertys setting when the setting contributes to the propertys historical significance.
Note: For noise-related impacts, a quiet setting (i.e., DNL below 60 dB) must be one of the recognized characteristics making the property eligible for or listed on the NRHP.

(f) neglecting property to a level that destroys the property or allows it to deteriorate; or (g) approving the transfer, lease, or sale of a property without including contract assurances to preserve the property's historically significant features. (2) Results of applying the criteria of adverse effect. After applying the criteria of adverse effect, the responsible FAA official, in consultation with the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) makes one of these determinations. (a) No Adverse Effect determination. The responsible FAA official makes this determination when the analysis shows the undertaking would not trigger any of the adverse effect criterion noted in Sections 5.g(1)(a)(g) of this chapter. The official may also determine that imposing certain conditions on the undertaking would avoid those effects. (1) SHPO/THPO agrees with the finding. The responsible FAA official must send documentation on the determination as described in 36 CFR Section 800.11(e)) (presented here for convenience) to the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate). The official

Chap. 14

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

must also send the information to consulting parties, unless the information must remain confidential (see Section 5.h of this chapter). a description of the undertaking by specifying the Federal undertaking. Include the APE and photographs, maps, and drawings as necessary; a description of steps taken to identify historic properties;

a description of the affected historic properties, including information on the properties characteristics that make them eligible for the NRHP; a description of the undertakings effects on historic properties;

an explanation of why the criteria of adverse effect did not apply to the undertaking, including any conditions or future actions to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects; and provided. (2) Distributing the information to the SHPO (or THPO) and consulting parties. These entities have 30 days from the date they receive the documentation to review FAAs determination. After the 30-day review period, FAA can proceed with the project if the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) agrees with the Determination or if no consulting party has objected to it. (3) When the SHPO (or THPO) or a consulting party object to a No Adverse Effect Determination. If the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) or a consulting party disagrees with FAAs determination within the allotted period, FAA must either consult with the party to resolve the disagreement or ask the ACHP to review the finding. The ACHP has 15 days to respond. During this period ACHP may issue an opinion to FAA. That opinion is advisory in nature. FAA must consider the opinion and determine if it will include the opinion in the undertaking. If the ACHP does not respond within the 15-day review period, then FAA has fulfilled its Section 106 responsibilities. (4) To the fullest extent possible, draft environmental documents should summarize the NHPA Section 106 finding and cross-reference supporting materials and evidence contained in an appendix to the environmental document. See 40 CFR Section 1502.25. (b) Adverse Effect Determination. The responsible FAA official would make this Determination if information and consultation suggest the undertaking would trigger one of the adverse effect criterion in Sections 5.g(1)(a)(g) of this chapter. (1) Notifying the SHPO/THPO and consulting parties. The responsible FAA official must notify the SHPO/THPO and consulting parties of an Adverse Effect Determination. To do so, the official must send information described in 36 CFR copies of summaries of views that the public and consulting parties

Chap. 14

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

Section 800.11(e) (presented in Section 5.g(2)(a)(1)of this chapter for convenience) to those entities unless the information must remain confidential (see paragraph 5.h of this chapter). (2) Notifying the ACHP. FAA must also notify the ACHP of an Adverse Effect Determination. To do so FAA must send documentation described in 36 CFR Section 800.11(e) to the ACHP (see Section 5.g(2)(a)(1) of this chapter). Failure to do so is a serious procedural flaw because it denies the ACHP an opportunity to take part in the resolution of adverse effects and forecloses ACHP participation in consultation (36 CFR Section 800.16(j)). Failure to complete this step may provide ACHP with good cause to annul the Memorandum of Agreement addressing the adverse effects. (3) Inviting or requesting ACHP consultation. Besides providing the documentation 36 CFR Section 800.11(e) requires, the responsible FAA official must invite the ACHP to participate in the 106 process in the following circumstances (36 CFR Section 800.6(1): (a) when the agency official wishes the Council to participate (36 CFR Section 800.6(a)(1)(i)(A));. (b) when an undertaking would adversely affect a National Historic Landmark (36 CFR Section 800.6(a)(1)(i)(B)); (c) when FAA will prepare a Programmatic Agreement (36 CFR Section 800.6(a)(1)(i)(C)); or
Note: If any of the above scenarios occur, ACHP must tell FAA if it will take part in the 106 process within 15 days of receiving the FAAs documentation and invitation to participate (36 CFR Section 800.6(a)(1)(iii)).

(d) if the responsible FAA official and SHPO/THPO cannot agree on how to resolve adverse effects, the responsible FAA official shall request the ACHP to join the consultation (36 CFR Section 800.6(b)(v)). In this case, the responsible FAA official must provide the information noted in 36 CFR Section 800.11(g). (4) ACHP decision to enter consultation. As noted above, the ACHP may choose to enter the consultation process. When the ACHP decides to do so, it must notify the responsible FAA official or the FAA Administrator, and consulting parties. Appendix A of 36 CFR Part 800 has more information about the ACHPs participation in the consultation process. (5) If FAA and the SHPO (or THPO), and/or ACHP fail to resolve adverse effects. FAA, the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate), and/or ACHP may decide further consultation will not be productive. In this case, consultation may be terminated (36 CFR Section 800.7(a)). This Desk Reference does not provide information on this rare situation. If termination is seriously being considered, the responsible FAA official should review carefully 36 CFR Section 800.7 for specific instructions. The official should also immediately notify APP-400 and Regional Counsel if the approving FAA official is considering this procedure.

Chap. 14

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

h. Confidentiality. Section 304 of the NHPA, as amended, allows the FAA Administrator to withhold information from the public, if the Secretary of the Interior and the Administrator decide disclosing the information would cause any of the following events. Review 36 CFR Section 800.11(c) for more details on this special procedure. (1) cause a significant invasion of privacy. (2) risk harm to the historic resource. or (3) impede use of a traditional religious site. i. Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). If FAA and the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) agree on how to resolve adverse effects, FAA and SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) will prepare and sign an MOA. The MOA clearly specifies the conditions that will allow the proposed action to proceed. The MOA describes ways to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the undertakings adverse effects on NRHP properties (Table 1 of this chapter provides helpful information on MOA content). The MOA becomes effective when the signatories discussed below sign it. However, the sponsor (or another party listed in the MOA) who is responsible for implementing any of the measures in the MOA need not begin carrying out those measures until the approving FAA official issues a decision on the undertaking. This is because FAA cannot unconditionally approve an ALP depicting an undertaking or approve a grant to construct the undertaking until FAA completes the Section 106 process (36 CFR 800.1(c)).6 It is only then that the sponsor has received FAA authorization to begin the undertaking the ALP depicts. Per FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 202.c(2), the sponsor may begin the project after those approvals occur. The sponsor may not begin any undertaking that would adversely affect historic resources until FAA unconditionally approves a new or revised ALP or it approves a grant to construct the undertaking.
Note: Table 1 of this chapter provides information on preparing the MOA.

(1) Signatories. As signatories, FAA, the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate), and ACHP (when it participates) have sole authority to execute, amend, or terminate an MOA (36 CFR Section 800.6(c)(1)). (a) The approving FAA official and the SHPO (or THPO) must sign the MOA for the MOA to meet 106 requirements; (b) If a SHPO terminates consultation, ACHP may enter into an MOA with FAA (36 CFR 800.7(a)(2)); (c) If the undertaking is on tribal land, the THPO must sign the MOA in lieu of the SHPO. However the SHPO will sign the MOA if a tribe does not have a THPO and the undertaking would affect tribal land; and/or

FAA may issue those approvals only after it completes the environmental review process (issuing an EA and its Finding of No Significant Impact or an EIS and its Record of Decision).

Chap. 14

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (d) ACHP, if it is participating in the process.

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

(2) Invited signatories. The approving FAA official may invite other parties to sign the MOA. Typically, these parties would be representatives of Native American tribes or Native Hawaiian organization who attach religious or cultural significance to the affected historic resources off tribal lands. An invited signatory may also be a party having a role in carrying out the MOAs terms and conditions (i.e., airport sponsor). Invited signatories have the same rights as the signatories (may amend or terminate the MOA). However, their refusal to sign the MOA does not prevent the MOA from being finalized (36 CFR Section 800.6(c)(2)(iv)). (3) Concurring parties. The approving FAA official may invite any of the consulting parties to sign the MOA. These parties do not have any of the signatories rights, and their refusal to sign the MOA does not prevent the MOA from being finalized. j. ACHP must receive a copy of the MOA or final EIS. FAA must send to the ACHP a copy of the signed MOA or final EIS, if FAA is using the procedures in 36 CFR Section 800.8 (see Section 7 of this chapter). It must also send any substantive changes or additions to the documentation noted in 36 CFR Section 800.11(e) if needed. FAA must do so before it approves a proposed undertaking having an adverse effect on historic properties (36 CFR Section 800.6(b)(1)(iv)). Failure to do so could prompt the ACHP to determine FAA has foreclosed ACHPs opportunity to comment on an undertaking. A determination that foreclosure has occurred is significant because that signifies the ACHP has concluded the agency failed to comply with Section 106 (36 CFR Section 800.16(j)). k. Programmatic Agreement (PA). A PA is a special type of agreement. It presents the terms and condition FAA and the ACHP have agreed upon to resolve adverse effects due to complex situations or multiple undertakings. Sections 5.k(1)(a)-(c) of this chapter identify situations where a PA may be useful.7 (1) Consider using a PA when: (a) an undertakings effects would be similar and repetitive; (b) an undertaking is complex, wide in scope, and FAA is unable to fully determine an undertakings effects before approving it; or (c) other circumstances warrant a departure from the normal Section 106 process. (2) Preparing the PA. For airport undertakings having characteristics noted in Sections 5.k(1)(a)(c) of this chapter, FAA may develop and negotiate a PA with the ACHP (36 CFR Section 800.4(b)). When preparing the PA, the responsible FAA official must consult with the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate), responsible for protecting historic

Other situations not associated with typical airport actions may be suitable for a PA. See 36 CFR 800.14(b)(iii) or (iv)

Chap. 14

Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

resources in the state where the undertaking would occur. FAA and the ACHP may agree to invite other parties to be consulting parties because a PA uses the same consultation process noted earlier for an MOA. Those parties may sign the PA as consulting parties. If an agency cannot develop a PA for complex or multiple undertakings, follow the provisions in 36 CFR Part 800 subpart B for each individual undertaking.8 l. FAAs post-approval Section 106 responsibilities. An MOA is a legally binding document. It commits an agency by statute and regulation to carry out an undertaking according to the terms and conditions set forth in the MOA (36 CFR Section 800.6(c)). Therefore, FAA must ensure the airport sponsor (or any other party the MOA or PA specifically names) fulfills the measures in the MOA (36 CFR 800.6(c)). Failure to do so means FAA has not met its Section 106 responsibilities for the undertaking. m. Phasing the Section 106 process. FAA may phase the identification of historic properties in some instances. Normally, phasing would occur when a project includes reasonable alternatives encompassing large land areas or where property access is restricted (see 36 CFR Part 800.4(b)(2)). FAA may also phase identification of historic properties if it does not have adequate information to evaluate the potential effects of project alternatives on historic properties. (1) Undertakings encompassing large areas. Here, the responsible FAA official evaluates each reasonable alternatives potential to affect NRHP-listed or eligible properties. The official does this based on background research, consultation with the SHPO/THPO and other parties, or results of field investigations. FAA must identify NRHP-listed or eligible properties, evaluate the proposed project's effects on them, and resolve any adverse effects on those properties. FAA should complete this part of the Section 106 review process before issuing an EA and its Finding of No Significant Impact, or an EIS and its Record of Decision. (2) Undertakings involving restricted access. Sometimes, owners of land where project-affected resources occur deny access to their land. In this instance, FAA may delay final identification of historic properties and project effects on them until after the EA or EIS is completed. In these cases, the MOA or PA must clearly stipulate the delay in final identification and impact evaluation. The MOA or PA must describe how FAA will complete its identification of NRHP properties and how it will evaluate project effects on those properties. FAA or the SHPO/THPO must sign the MOA (or PA), before issuing a Finding of No Significant Impact or a Record of Decision. 6. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE. After considering the analysis of effects on historic properties, including intensity and context, FAA will determine if an EIS is appropriate. Advice from the SHPO (or THPO, when appropriate) and ACHP may help the

This Desk Reference does not discuss preparing PAs for national or regional agency programs because airport projects rarely involve these programs. Consultation for national or regional agency programs involves the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, Indian tribes, or Hawaiian organizations. See 36 CFR Section 800.14(b)(2) for more information.

Chap. 14

Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

responsible FAA official make this determination, but the ultimate decision to prepare an EIS is FAAs responsibility.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER

Regulations at 36 CFR Section 800.8(a) state that an adverse effect determination does not automatically trigger a finding of significant impact. Therefore, an EIS is not always required.

When an action adversely affects a protected property, the responsible FAA official should consult with and seek more input from the SHPO (or THPO). Consider alternatives that would avoid adverse effects on NRHP listed or eligible property. Also, consider mitigation that will lessen the adverse effects.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

7. INTEGRATING SECTION 106 and NEPA. Title 36 CFR Section 800.8 encourages Federal agencies to integrate Section 106 and NEPA. This is intended to: streamline requirements; reduce paperwork; avoid redundant information; and coordinate public input. To integrate the processes, the responsible FAA official must closely follow the instructions at 36 CFR Section 800.8. In addition, FAA consultation with the SHPO, (or THPO, when appropriate), consulting parties, the public, and perhaps the ACHP is critical. The steps below summarize the steps for integrating Section 106 and NEPA. a. Environmental assessment content. An EA prepared for an undertaking must contain specific information to verify that FAA has completed the Section 106 process. Depending on the level of effect, the EA must contain the documentation noted in Sections 5.f, 5.g(2)(a)(1), and 5.g(2)(b) of this chapter. Besides that documentation, the EA must contain the following information, as appropriate. If needed, follow the steps in 36 CFR Sections 800.8(c)(2) and (3) addressing review of the EA and resolution of objections, if any. (1) Correspondence showing the responsible FAA official consulted with the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate) to define the APE. The EA must include information showing that FAA conferred with consulting parties or members of the public having knowledge of resources in the APE or concerns about the undertakings effects. (2) Correspondence from the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate) addressing FAAs finding that no properties are in the APE, or the undertaking would not affect existing properties in the APE. Include proof that FAA notified the consulting parties of this finding. (3) Correspondence from the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate) and other consulting parties on the FAAs No Effect or No Adverse Effect Determination. Provide input from consulting parties and ACHP, if it is participating. (4) Correspondence from the SHPO, (or THPO when appropriate), other consulting parties, and the ACHP, if it is taking part in project consultation, showing their concurrence on FAAs efforts to resolve the undertakings adverse effects on historic properties.

Chap. 14

Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

(5) A copy of the signed MOA or PA clearly describing how FAA will resolve the adverse effects on historic properties. b. Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) content for Section 106 purposes. The FONSI prepared for the undertaking should include the MOA or PA as an attachment. The FONSI should summarize the measures noted in the MOA or PA to avoid, minimize, or mitigate the effects. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT. FAA makes the final decision to prepare an EIS for airport actions. When FAA prepares an EIS to address significant impacts on historic properties, the responsible FAA official should consider inviting ACHP to be a cooperating agency. Information developed for and during the Section 106 consultation process should be sufficient for EIS purposes. During the EIS process, FAA may determine the undertaking would adversely affect Section 106-protected properties. After consulting the SHPO (or THPO when appropriate) and agreeing on ways to resolve the adverse effects, FAA may or may not need to prepare an MOA (see sections 8.a and b of this chapter). In addition, follow the steps in 36 CFR Sections 800.8(c)(2) and (3) addressing review of draft or final EISs and resolution of objections, if any. a. An MOA is needed. If FAA is not using the NEPA process as described in 36 CFR Section 800.8, the final EIS should contain a copy of the signed MOA to meet Section 106 requirements. b. An MOA is not needed. If FAA is using the process described in 36 CFR Section 800.8, FAAs EIS and its Record of Decision must contain measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate the adverse effects the undertaking would cause. FAA need not prepare a MOA (36 CFR Section 800.8.c.(4)(i)(A) in this case.

TABLE 1. SOME USEFUL INFORMATION FOR PREPARING AN MOA.

1. 2. 3. Think ahead to ensure the MOA addresses all of the undertakings foreseeable impacts. Describe the undertakings physical location and clearly state where it will physically disturb existing conditions. Make sure the MOA addresses the entire undertaking. A resources noise or visual setting may be one of the recognized characteristics making the resource eligible for the NRHP. An undertaking may alter that setting. Therefore, when appropriate, the Area of Potential Effect may extend beyond an undertakings area of physical disturbance. For most airport projects, identify FAA as the lead agency responsible for ensuring the MOAs provisions are met. Assign duties to signatories and invited signatories. Use active voice. Passive voice does not clearly convey the party responsible for completing the MOAs requirements.

4. 5. 6.

Chap. 14

Page 16

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Include provisions to which the signatories have agreed. Structure the MOA logically. Write the MOA so any reader may understand it.

HISTORIC PROPERTIES

Provide complete citations for all laws, regulations or references. Include all statutory authorities. Use consistent terminology. Use terms consistent with statutory or regulatory definitions. Define terms specific to the undertaking that the applicable statutes or regulations do not define. Provide the date the MOA would become effective.

Adapted from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the Univ. of Nevada, Reno, Introduction to Section 106, Participants Handbook, March 2001, page. 67.

Chap. 14

Page 17

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC

CHAPTER 15. INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

a. General. FAA must evaluate a proposed airport project to determine the project's potential to cause induced or secondary socioeconomic impacts on surrounding communities. When FAA determines a potential for such impacts exists, the environmental document should describe how the proposed project would affect communities by addressing the following factors, as needed. (1) shifts in patterns of population movement and growth; (2) public service demands; (3) changes in business and economic activities; or (4) other factors identified by the public. b. Examples of the induced socioeconomic impacts due to airport development. Certain airport development projects could have impacts on an affected areas socioeconomic characteristics. Socioeconomic impacts are linked to impacts to other resource categories through cause-and-effect relationships. Induced socioeconomic impacts can be significant when significant impacts in resource categories linked to socioeconomic impacts occur. For example, airport projects causing noise changes or requiring more land could cause local land use changes. As a result, the changes in the distribution of residents and their housing requirements could occur. These changes could, in turn, cause impacts that alter demands on fire and police protection, educational or utility services, businesses, and job opportunities in the airport area and other areas to which the residents relocate. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Section 1508.27(b) requires Federal agencies to consider a proposed action's impact significance by considering the impact's intensity and context. Section 1508.8 addresses indirect impacts (effects), which are caused by the action and are later in time or farther removed in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. Indirect effects may include growth inducing effects and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density or growth rate, and related effects on air and water OVERSIGHT AGENCY

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing NEPA, 40 CFR Part 1500 et seq.

CEQ

Chap. 15

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

and other natural systems, including ecosystems.

INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. Typical airport actions which could cause direct or indirect social and economic impacts include: airside/landside expansion such as new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities; new or extended runways and taxiways; navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviationrelated use; new or relocated access roadways; remote parking facilities; rental car lots; a significant increase or change in aircraft operations; and significant amounts of construction/demolition activity. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

This impact category does not require Federal permits, certifications, or approvals. But the environmental document should contain evidence of coordination with potentially-affected jurisdictions and other interested parties located in the affected area. The evidence should provide information, substantive comments, or opinions concerning the existing and projected socioeconomic environment in the affected area. It should provide meaningful data on existing local population distributions, infrastructure, utilities, and economic factors that will form the basis for analysis. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. When preparing an environmental document for an airport project having the potential to cause social and economic effects, the following entities often provide important information that facilitates socioeconomic evaluations. a. Local planning commissions housing departments and business organizations. Examples include the Chamber of Commerce and Economic Development Agency. b. Public service utilities or local departments responsible for maintaining water, gas, and electrical supplies and infrastructure improvements. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. Airport projects may require the acquisition of land or cause effects that alter existing land uses. For example, noise effects may cause the relocation of housing or other noncompatible land uses. Effects due to that relocation may cause substantial changes in the areas tax base and the relocation of businesses due to reduced sales levels. In addition, increases in utility demands may occur in the areas to which the displaced families move. b. Document content. If needed, the environmental assessment should contain a chapter addressing induced socioeconomic impacts. It should focus on project-induced shifts in population movement patterns, public service demands, and business and Chap. 15 Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC

economic activities. Often, impacts discussed in chapters addressing noise impacts, changes in land uses, and social impacts lead to induced socioeconomic impacts. As a result, the induced socioeconomic impacts chapter should summarize information in chapters on other resource categories linked to socioeconomic impacts. The socioeconomic chapter should also summarize information from the entities noted in sections 5.a. and b. of this chapter and contain an appendix providing the correspondence from them. Determining project-induced secondary impacts will typically require the following steps: (a) identifying effects due to changed land use, noise levels, and direct social impacts (see Chapters 5, 17, and 18, respectively, of this Desk Reference); (b) setting up the geographic scope and time frame for the analysis; (c) identifying and characterizing project-induced effects and affected people, businesses, or other entities (i.e. neighborhoods, services, businesses and other economic activities). (d) defining a baseline condition for those affected. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. Environmental document chapters addressing noise, land use, and social impacts are useful in determining the severity of induced socioeconomic impacts. If those chapters identify significant impacts, significant induced socioeconomic impacts could also occur. Determining the significance of induced impacts will typically require the following steps:
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER Induced impacts will normally not be significant, except where there are also significant impacts in other categories, especially noise, land use, or direct social impacts. In such instances an EIS may be needed.

None.

From Table 7-1, Order 5050.4B

b. Potential mitigation measures. During the environmental review process, Federal, state, or local agencies may provide letters recommending measures to mitigate induced socioeconomic impacts. Potential mitigation may include: (1) working with local officials to promote the economic vitality of the area; (2) assisting local businesses with relocations; or

Chap. 15

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (3) helping to meet changed public service demands.

INDUCED SOCIOECONOMIC

FAA and the sponsor should fully consider mitigation recommendations and balance their benefits against those of the proposed action. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any mitigation recommended, the environmental assessment (EA) should explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, the EA should provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. Refer to the information analyzed in completing other sections of this chapter. In addition, evaluate the respective chapters dealing with noise, land use, social impacts, or other impacts causing induced socioeconomic effects. If a significant impact in one or more of these areas occurs, discuss how these impacts would affect the project areas economic and social characteristics. For example, if airport operations would cause noise impacts requiring the relocation of residential areas, describe how changes in the neighborhood would affect local businesses, public services and taxes in the area where people now live and the area(s) to which they will move. b. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when agencies provide that information. FAA and the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any mitigation recommended, the EIS should explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106 (c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). The EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures agencies recommend in accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B). If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 15

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 16. LIGHT EMISSIONS AND VISUAL EFFECTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

LIGHT EMISSIONS

a. Light emissions. Airport-related lighting facilities and activities could visually affect surrounding residents and other nearby light-sensitive areas such as homes, parks or recreational areas. If there is a potential for airport lighting to disturb these sensitive land uses, the responsible FAA official should ensure the environmental document examines those effects. If potential light emissions or visual effects exist, the official should evaluate measures to lessen those as well. This helps promote a good-neighbor policy while protecting the resource. b. Visual effects. Visual, or aesthetic, effects are inherently more difficult to define and assess because they involve subjectivity. Visual effects deal broadly with the extent to which airport development contrasts with the existing environment, architecture, historic or cultural setting, or land use planning. It is important to determine if a community or a jurisdictional agency considers visual effects from the proposed action objectionable. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION No Federal regulations govern light emissions or visual intrusions. However, FAA will consider potential effects to properties, and peoples use of properties, covered by Section 4(f) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Act, Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCF), and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). See Chapters 7 and 14 of this Desk Reference, respectively, for more information. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

There are no Federal statutory or regulatory requirements for adverse effects. State, regional, or local requirements may apply to airport-related light emissions or visual effects.

None

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. Light emissions. Airport facilities and operations cause light emissions that can affect visually sensitive land uses in an airport area. The characteristics of many runway lighting systems create potential sources of annoyance to nearby residents in the airport vicinity if light is directed towards light-sensitive land uses. Disturbing emissions may emanate from the following sources associated with a proposed action: airfield and apron lighting, visual navigational aids (NAVAIDS), terminal lighting, employee/customer parking lighting, both airborne and ground-based aircraft operations, and roadway lighting.

Chap. 16

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

LIGHT EMISSIONS

b. Visual effects. The appearance and other visual qualities of airport development projects are largely related to an actions purpose or size, and locations of needed facilities or equipment on the airfield. Consistency with FAA and other relevant design standards and compatibility with existing structures are also important factors. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. No permits, certifications, or approvals from Federal agencies are needed for light emissions or visual effects. However, State, regional, local agency and Tribe approvals may be needed. If this is the case, the environmental document should identify the necessary approvals and summarize any issues that may delay or bar any approval. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Light emissions. When potential lighting effects exist, airport sponsors should consult local residents and the owners or operators of potential light-sensitive sites. As part of these discussions, airport operators should discuss possible lighting effects and ways to minimize these effects without risking aviation safety or efficiency. The environmental document should contain records of all relevant communications with consulted parties. b. Visual effects. Early consultation with State, regional, or local art or architecture councils, tribes, or other organizations having an interest in airport-associated visual effects may be helpful. For example, the visual sighting of aircraft or aircraft lights at night, particularly at a distance that is not normally intrusive, may cause an adverse visual effect. The environmental document should contain records of all relevant communications with consulted parties. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. General and specialized lighting systems are essential parts of airport operations. General lighting is needed for safe ground movement of aircraft and vehicles. Special lighting systems, like lead-in lights, beacons, approach lights, and omni-directional lights, are needed for safe, efficient aircraft navigation and operations. The responsible FAA official should give special consideration to light emissions and visual effects to historic properties, national or state parks, recreation areas or other visually sensitive areas. To the extent light emissions and visual effects are relevant to other resource categories covered by DOT Section 4(f), the LWCF Section 6(f), and NHPA Section 106 (see chapters 7 and 14, respectively), those effects should be discussed in the relevant sections of an EA or EIS. b. Information needs to determine lighting and visual effects. If there is a potential for airport-related lighting or visual effects on nearby residents or other light sensitive areas, the environmental document should evaluate those effects. This assessment should provide the following information as necessary. (1) Light emissions.

Chap. 16

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

LIGHT EMISSIONS

(a) A brief description of proposed airport-related lighting. Include the purpose of the lighting, installation method (pole or ground-mounted), beam angle, intensity, flashing sequence, color of lighting, and any other important information. (b) A map showing the locations of homes or other light-sensitive sites in the airport vicinity relative to the proposed lighting system. (c) A description of lighting system effects on residents and light-sensitive sites in the airport area. The responsible FAA official should give attention to lighting systems emitting flashing, white light such as strobes. These systems often cause the greatest annoyance to surrounding residents and other light-sensitive areas. (d) Any measures proposed to minimize light intrusion on nearby residents and light-sensitive sites. Measures include shielding, baffles, making angular adjustments, or other fixes. (2) Visual effects. FAA encourages airport sponsors to consider design arts in a project's preliminary design stage. The environmental document should contain this information to the extent it is available. As practical, highlight design factors that will complement and support establishing functional, efficient, and safe airport operations while meeting local, cultural, and architectural heritage considerations. Examples of design art and architecture at airports include the following measures. (a) Design considerations that would reduce the adverse effects of visual encroachments into residential or recreational areas or that disrupt scenic vistas. Architectural treatments of facilities that reflect light so the light blends in with nearby architectural styles. Painting or shielding structures, such as landing aid supports, reduce visual impact. (b) Actions involving extensive earthmoving may visually disrupt the landscape. Standard design and engineering principles often lessen erosion or provides acceptable drainage or prevents other landscape effects. Extra care in slope design and plantings (that do not attract hazardous wildlife) would help minimize adverse visual and other environmental effects. (c) Moving streams or other waters into channels designed to reflect the natural characteristics of the existing stream. This is often more aesthetically pleasing and less costly than installing concrete sluiceways. Bank stabilization with plantings that do not attract hazardous wildlife may improve the appearance of disturbed areas and control erosion. (d) New facilities or major terminal expansion may provide excellent ways to recognize and reflect an areas notable architectural, cultural, or ethnic assets. Consider

Chap. 16

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

LIGHT EMISSIONS

these assets when developing outside designs, landscaping, or architectural treatments for facilities or terminals 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. In some airport actions, airport lighting or visual effects may disturb natural resources or add unwanted aesthetic effects on man-made, historic, or cultural resources. After completing the analysis discussed in earlier sections of this chapter, apply the following information to determine the degree of effect on nearby residents or other light-sensitive areas or habitats. The visual impact discussion will normally address design, art, architecture, or landscape architecture to mitigate adverse visual effects or encourage enhancement of the environment. Consultation with expertise agencies is important when determining the level of light-related or visual effects. The environmental document should contain a record of any relevant communications.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER For light emissions: When an actions light emissions create annoyance to or interfere with normal activities. For visual effects: When consultation with Federal, State, or local agencies, tribes, or the public shows these effects contrast with existing environments and the agencies state the effect is objectionable. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

None established.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction or special use expertise on various light-sensitive resources (i.e., natural, man-made, historic, or cultural resources, parklands, etc.) may provide letters addressing lighting or visual effects on those resources. Those letters may include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. c. Examples of mitigation measures. In addition to the recommendations agencies make, the following mitigation measures may be useful. (1) Light emissions. Potential mitigation may include the following measures to lessen light emissions on surrounding light-sensitive land uses:

Chap. 16

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (a) shielding lighting fixtures with top visors; (b) angling fixtures toward the base of the mounting poles; (c) Directional lighting; or; (d) using minimal pole heights or reduced wattage bulbs.

LIGHT EMISSIONS

(2) Visual effects. FAA encourages airport sponsors to use the principles of good design, art, and architectural treatment to blend airport facilities with surrounding areas. FAA Order 5100.38C, Airport Improvement Program Handbook, paragraph 304, provides guidelines for treating and promoting design, art, and architectural objectives in airport aid projects. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce light emissions or visual effects to levels that do not significantly affect man-made, historic, or cultural resources. Further agency consideration may focus on previously unconsidered mitigation measures and alternatives. To avoid repeating information that another section of the EIS provides on light emissions, the EIS Light Emissions section should refer the reader to the chapter(s), if those chapters discuss lighting or visual intrusions on a on a particular resource. If those chapters do not address those lighting or visual effects, that information must appear in the EISs Light Emissions chapter. b. Light emissions. It is possible the responsible FAA official will decide that a special lighting study is necessary. The study may be appropriate in locales where high intensity strobe lights shine directly into homes or other sensitive areas or habitats. Those studies should assess lighting systems, alternative light locations, or mitigation measures not considered previously. c. Visual effects. This impact discussion will normally address the use of design, art, architecture, or landscape architecture principles. These principles help lessen projectinduced visual effects or enhance the visual environment. The responsible FAA official may encourage, but not require, an airport sponsor to use design, art, or architectural principles to reduce project-related visual effects. Because FAA cannot force the sponsor to do so, the FAA official must discuss the need for more information with the sponsor, when appropriate. The sponsor must agree that more analysis is needed. The responsible FAA official should note extensive, detailed design concepts are not usually developed until the EA or EIS is completed.

Chap. 16

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

LIGHT EMISSIONS

d. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when expertise agencies provide that information. FAA and the airport sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106 (c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). The EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures recommended by agencies having expertise in accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B). If needed, the EIS should explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation the public agency authorized by the state to plan for the areas surrounding the airport land use agencies recommend. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 16

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 17. NOISE

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

NOISE

a. Airport noise. When evaluating proposed airport projects, airport noise is often the most controversial environmental impact FAA examines. Airport development actions that change airport runway configurations, aircraft operations and/or movements, aircraft types using the airport, or aircraft flight characteristics may affect existing and future noise levels. FAAs noise analysis primarily focuses on how proposed airport actions would change the cumulative noise exposure of individuals to aircraft noise in areas surrounding the airport. Besides using noise levels to determine compatible land use, airport noise may be a concern when determining potential effects on several other environmental resources as well. As noted later in this chapter, these resources may include, but are not limited to, Section 4(f)-protected resources and historic and cultural sites. Therefore, the supplemental noise analysis may be appropriate on a case-by-case basis depending upon resource affected. Use the noise results from this chapter, and instructions in the chapter specifically addressing a particular resource to determine the severity of noise impacts on the resource of concern. b. Day Night Average Sound Level (DNL). DNL is the standard Federal metric for determining cumulative exposure of individuals to noise. In 1981, FAA formally adopted DNL as its primary metric to evaluate cumulative noise effects on people due to aviation activities. (1) Past and present research by the Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON) verified that the DNL metric provides an excellent correlation between the noise level an aircraft generates and community annoyance to that noise level;1 (2) DNL is the 24-hour average sound level in decibels (dB). This average is derived from all aircraft operations during a 24-hour period that represents an airports average annual operational day; (3) It is important to note that due to the logarithmic nature of noise, the loudest noise levels control the 24-hour average; and (4) DNL adds a 10 dB noise penalty to each aircraft operation occurring during nighttime hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.). DNL includes that penalty to compensate for peoples

Federal Interagency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, 1992, page 3-1.

Chap. 17

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

heightened sensitivity to noise during this period. 2 This penalty contributes heavily to an airports overall noise profile. c. Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). While DNL is the primary metric FAA uses to determine noise impacts. FAA accepts the CNEL when a state requires that metric to assess noise effects. (1) Only California requires use of CNEL; (2) Like DNL, CNEL adds a 10 dB penalty to each aircraft operation between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.; and (3) CNEL adds a 5 dB penalty for each aircraft operation during evening hours (7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.). This evening noise penalty accounts for peoples sensitivity to noise during evening hours when they may be outside and fewer noise producing activities occur. d. The Schultz Curve. The Schultz Curve relates specific DNL levels to the percent of people in a community whom those noise levels highly annoy. The Curve provides a widelyaccepted dose-response relationship between cumulative environmental noise and a health and welfare parameter, annoyance (Federal Interagency Committee on Noise FICON, 1992). Like other Federal agencies that have established Federal land use guidelines for noise, FAA used the Schultz curve, when it designated the DNL 65 dB contour as the cumulative noise exposure level above which residential land uses are not compatible. e. Supplemental metrics. FAA uses supplemental metrics chiefly in EISs to help describe noise impacts for specific noise sensitive locations or situations. Section 8.d. of this chapter describes supplemental metrics. f. 14 CFR Part 150 land use compatibility guidelines. FAA established land use compatibility guidelines relative to certain DNL noise levels in 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 150. Chapter 5, Table 1 of this Desk Reference provides a copy of the Part 150 Land Use Compatibility guidelines. (1) Different local land use compatibility standards. Although residential land uses are considered compatible with noise exposure levels below DNL 65 dB under 14 CFR Part 150:
The responsibility for determining the acceptable and permissible land uses rests with the local authorities...Part 150 is not intended to substitute federally determined land uses for

The 10 dB penalty in the Integrated Noise Model means that noise from 1 aircraft operating between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. counts as 10 operations.
2

Chap. 17

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

those determined to be appropriate by local authorities in response to locally determined needs and values in achieving noise compatible land uses. -14 CFR Part 150, Table 1.

NOISE

As a result, environmental documents may include noise contours below DNL 65 dB in addition to the required contours of DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB resulting from aircraft operations. Lower noise contours may be included for purposes of identifying proposed mitigation measures, provided the local land use planning jurisdiction has adopted a land use compatibility standard less than DNL 65 dB. (An airport sponsors action to adopt such standards is sufficient where the sponsor has land use control jurisdiction). Absent a local standard, these contours may be included in the environmental document for informational/disclosure purposes, if the airport sponsor desires. (2) Additional analysis under 1992 Federal Interagency Committee on noise recommendations. Where an airport development project has a potentially significant impact on noise sensitive areas in the DNL 65 dB and greater noise contours, the EIS noise analysis must also consider the DNL 60 dB contour. Further analysis is required in these circumstances to evaluate potential increases of DNL 3 dB and greater over noise sensitive areas between DNL 65 and 60 dB and potential mitigation measures. See, paragraph 8(b)(2), below for more details. (3) Use of supplemental noise analysis. When planning and conducting the noise analysis for an airport development action, environmental specialists must consider the full context in which the airport action is occurring. Environmental specialists must be cognizant that Part 150 guidelines are not relevant and supplemental noise analysis is appropriate in the following circumstances. (a) Areas within a historic site or national park or wildlife refuge where nonaircraft noise is very low and a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature or attribute of the sites significance. The DNL 65 dB level at which residential land uses are compatible does not adequately address noise impacts on visitors to unique areas characterized by low ambient noise levels and where quiet settings are a generally recognized feature and attribute of their significance. As a result, supplemental noise analysis is appropriate in certain circumstances. For example, environmental specialists must be cognizant that Part 150 guidelines do not adequately address the effects of noise on visitors to areas within a historic site or national park or wildlife refuge protected under Section 4(f) of the DOT Act where non-aircraft noise is very low and a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature or attribute of the sites significance. See Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference for information on Section 4(f), recodified as 49 USC Section 303. (b) Aviation effects on wildlife. The responsible FAA officials should not use Part 150 guidelines to determine aviation noise impacts on wildlife. This is because those guidelines focus on human responses to noise. Instead, the officials, whenever possible, should use available, published information that addresses the effects of noise on the species of concern. Chap. 17 Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATION 49 USC Section 44715, Controlling Aircraft Noise and Sonic Boom SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Authorizes FAA, after consulting with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to prescribe standards and regulations to measure, control, and reduce aircraft noise. Establishes a national policy to minimize current and projected noise impacts on nearby communities resulting from building and operating aviation facilities. This section also states it is in the public interest to recognize the effects of airport capacity expansion projects on aircraft noise and to reduce noncompatible land uses around airports. This section also requires the Secretary of Transportation to consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the EPA Administrator about projects involving new airports, new runways or major runway extensions that may cause significant environmental impacts. Requires the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations establishing a system for measuring and assessing noise impacts on individuals near airports. The regulations must also identify land uses normally compatible with various exposures of individuals to noise. FAA published these regulations at 14 CFR Part 150.

NOISE

OVERSIGHT AGENCY FAA and EPA

49 USC Sections 47101 (a)(2), (c) and (h), Airport Improvement Policies.

FAA

49 USC Sections 47501-47510, Noise Abatement

FAA

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. A proposed airport development actions environmental analysis normally addresses potential noise impacts. Typical airport actions that could cause noise impacts include: new or extended runways and taxiways; navigational aid (NAVAID) installation; land purchases for airport-related uses; substantial amounts of airport construction or demolition activities; and substantial changes in aircraft operations involving numbers of aircraft, aircraft types, new or revised approach or departure profiles or tracks; or new or relocated airport access roadways. a. Applicability. Research has shown aircraft noise may exceed levels that make certain noise sensitive land uses noncompatible with airport operations (e.g., residences, schools, churches, hospitals, etc.; (see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 9.n)). As a result, FAA assesses the effects of airport development that has the potential to cause aircraft noise outside an airports boundaries. For most actions, FAA need not do a noise analysis for airport actions whose DNL 65 dB contour lies entirely within airport boundaries. However, as noted above, context should be considered in determining what type of noise

Chap. 17

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

analysis is appropriate. In these instances, the responsible FAA Official should contact the Planning and Environmental Division (APP-400) for further guidance. b. Airport actions FAA must assess. airport actions listed below.3 FAA must conduct a noise analysis for the

(1) General aviation-related actions. Projects that would involve more than: (a) 90,000 annual (247 average daily operations) piston-powered aircraft operations in Approach Categories A through D (i.e., landing speed < 166 knots); or (b) 700 annual jet-powered aircraft operations (about 2 average daily operations) during the period the environmental document covers.
Note: These levels of piston-powered or jet-powered general aviation operations have been shown to produce a DNL 60 dB contour less than 1.1 square miles in area and extending no more than 12,500 feet from the start of takeoff roll. The resulting maximum DNL 65 dB contour would be 0.5 square mile and would not extend more than 10,000 feet from the start of takeoff roll. The Cessna Citation 500 and other jet aircraft producing noise levels less than or equal to the Beech Baron 58P may be counted as propeller aircraft, not jets.

(2) Actions involving a new airport location, a new runway, a major runway extension, or runway strengthening. A noise analysis is needed for these projects when they would: (a) serve Airplane Design Groups I and II, if forecast operations exceed those noted in section 3.b(1) of this chapter; (b) serve Airplane Design Groups III through VI; (c) be highly controversial because of noise; or (d) would serve special aircraft (e.g., helicopters) and those aircraft would fly over noise sensitive areas. (3) Actions at existing heliports or airports. A noise analysis is needed at these facilities when forecasted helicopter operations for the period the analysis covers would exceed 10 operations per day (annual basis) and hover times exceed 2 minutes.
Note: Helicopter operations typically cause a DNL 60 dB contour having an area less than 0.10 square mile and not extending more than 1,000 feet from the helicopter pad. This finding applies to Sikorsky S-70 models having a maximum gross takeoff weight of 20,244 pounds, or any other helicopter of less weight or causing equal or lower noise levels.

FAA Order 1050.1E, Appendix A, paragraph 14.6a

Chap. 17

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATES, AND APPROVALS. No permits, certificates, or approvals are needed. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. As needed, the responsible FAA official should ensure consultation with the entities noted below occurs. An appendix to the environmental document should include proof of that coordination. (1) Federal or state agencies, Federally-recognized tribes or Native Hawaiian organizations that have expressed noise concerns; (2) local governments having jurisdiction over land uses and having concerns about project-related noise. (3) aviation entities (e.g., airport users, pilots, owners of on-airport businesses, etc.) who have expressed concerns about noise due to project-related changes in airport operations or flight procedures; (4) citizen groups having an interest in aircraft noise issues and who have expressed concerns about airport development (see Community Involvement Manual, FAAAEE-90-03, August 1990, if needed); or (5) the National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), as needed, to coordinate the issue of project-related noise over resources these agencies manage. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. The responsible FAA official needs to consider how airport actions may change future operations and the levels of aircraft noise affecting communities in areas surrounding the airport. The official must also consider noise from non-aviation sources for purposes of cumulative impacts analyses. Those noise sources include, but are not limited to, project-related construction activities and/or surface transportation, other projects in the area. To determine surface transportation impacts, the Federal Highway Administrations (FHWA) Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR Part 772) or a method a state transportation agency recommends may be used. a. Aircraft noise. FAA has established a standard process to evaluate aircraft noise impacts. The responsible FAA official must use that process to assess an airport action meeting one of the criterion in section 3.b.(1)-(3) of this chapter. This process includes noise models, land use compatibility, noise impact thresholds, and supplemental noise analysis. The following sections discuss those issues. b. Noise screening models. FAA has identified the following two noise screening models to help determine if a detailed noise analysis using the Integrated Noise Model Chap. 17 Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

(INM) is needed to properly assess a proposed actions noise effects (see section 6.c of this chapter). (1) Area Equivalent Method (AEM). The AEM is a mathematical process that estimates changes in the area of the existing DNL 65 dB contour. It is a screening tool used to determine if further analysis using the more detailed INM is needed. Review the following information to determine if using the AEM is appropriate for a proposed action. (a) The AEM may be used for proposed actions that would change the area, but not the shape of the DNL 65 dB contour. Such actions typically include those that would not require: (1) a change in existing air traffic ground tracks or flight profiles; (2) an increase numbers of daily operations; (3) changes in fleet mix; or (4) changes in operation times. (b) Do not use the AEM for actions that would change the shape of the noise contour that would result from changes to existing air traffic flight tracks or flight profiles. (c) If the AEM is appropriate for use, the AEM analysis should compare the future condition without the proposed action (i.e., no action/no build alternatives) to the future condition with the proposed action and reasonable alternatives. (d) If the AEM calculation shows an increase of 17 percent or more in the area within the DNL 65 dB contour, or if the proposed action or reasonable alternative is not suitable for AEM, then the proposed action or reasonable alternative must be analyzed using the INM to determine if significant noise impacts would result. (2) Air Traffic Noise Screening Model (ATNS). When the AEM is not appropriate, the ATNS may be a usable screening tool to quantify project-related changes in noise exposure that air traffic changes above 3,000 feet above ground level (AGL) would cause. Air traffic changes above this altitude are normally categorically excluded, but when they occur over noise sensitive areas they may be highly controversial on environmental grounds. That controversy may constitute an extraordinary circumstance requiring FAA to prepare an environmental assessment (EA). ATNS results showing noise sensitive areas receiving a 5 dB change due to a proposed action or reasonable alternative are helpful in determining the magnitude of change over those areas when use of the AEM is not allowed. Contact the Office of Environment and Energy (AEE) for ATNS software and user manuals.

Chap. 17

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

c. The Integrated Noise Model, the model for detailed noise analysis. FAA requires the use of the Integrated Noise Model (INM) for airport development actions requiring a detailed noise analysis. INM is an average-value-model designed to estimate long-term average effects using average annual input conditions. It also provides information on other, pre-defined supplemental noise metrics (see sections 8.d.(1)-(4) of this chapter). (1) INM input. INM model input data vary by project. Airport-specific data are needed to accurately represent factors that are critical to a proposed actions noise analysis (i.e., project-specific flight tracks, aircraft fleet mix, standard and user defined aircraft profiles, and terrain characteristics). AEE manages the INM. Therefore, AEE must provide written approval for requested changes to INM input files, procedures, aircraft substitutes, any standard, or default data (see footnote 6 for further information). (2) INM, the required model. INM is FAAs required noise model for assessing airport development] projects when: (a) the AEM or ATNS shows more detailed information is needed; or (b) based on experience, the responsible FAA official knows that a particular airport project requires a detailed noise analysis (i.e., new airport, new runway, changed runway configurations, highly controversial). (3) Model version. The INM is the model FAA requires for all noise analysis. The data and model version used should be the latest and most currently available when the responsible FAA official begins preparing the analysis for a proposed action. If FAA issues a new version of INM after a projects noise analysis has begun, the updated version may be used to provide additional disclosure concerning noise, but use of the new model version is not required. However, the official should carefully consider using the new version when there is a major revision or addition to the analysis or project (e.g., if baseline and/or forecast years are updated, thereby creating the potential for different impacts). (4) INM output. The INM produces noise contours used to prepare noise graphics for NEPA analyses.4 The INM program includes tools for comparing contours and commercial Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to show various land uses relative to current, future no action, and future project noise levels. (5) Grid points. INM calculates project-induced noise changes at a specific site or grid point. Grid points help the responsible FAA official determine if project noise at a specific location would occur over noise sensitive land uses (e.g., hospitals, schools,

INM is also used to generate noise exposure maps for Noise Compatibility Programs under 49 USC Section 47503, which addresses those maps.

Chap. 17

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

churches, etc.) and the level of that noise impact. Such information is often helpful in designing mitigation or improving the publics understanding of a projects noise effect.
Note: The Noise Integrated Routing System (NIRS) is a model that provides information to evaluate aviation noise changes over large areas that result from regional air traffic changes. Those changes affect expansive areas and are not normally due to an airport project. Do not use NIRS for airport projects.

f. Noise analysis. The responsible FAA official should determine the data needed to accurately predict a projects noise impacts. The following sections address the information needed to accurately estimate those impacts. (1) Study years. FAA should coordinate appropriate timeframes for the noise study with the airport sponsor before the noise analysis begins. The study years must be consistent with the timeframes FAA will examine for other environmental impact categories in the NEPA study. Sometimes those study years may be the same as those used in available a Noise Compatibility study conducted under Part 150 or in the airport sponsors planning document (e.g., Master Plan). Normally, time frames assessed in NEPA documents include: (a) The existing condition (normally the last 12 consecutive months of available data); (b) Future year without the proposed project (i.e., no action/no build alternative); (c) The future year of anticipated project implementation (project opening year); (d) Another future year, normally, 5 to 10 years beyond the projected year of project implementation. In some cases, this may be the outer year of an airport sponsors Master Plan. Additional timeframes may be desirable for a particular project. (2) Noise contours analyzed. Use the INM to develop the DNL 65, 70, and 75- dB noise contours. Normally, the following noise contour sets are needed as discussed below: (a) the existing DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB contours; (b) the future DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB contours without the proposed action (i.e., the no action/no build alternative); (c) the future DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB contours for the proposed action; and (d) the future DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB contours for each reasonable alternative.
Note: In some circumstances, additional contours may be shown

Chap. 17

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

(3) Noise compatibility evaluation. The noise contours developed should be compared to land use information and population data. This provides information on potential noise levels people in the affected area would experience. Normally, the following information should be quantified for each set of contours described above. The contours should be depicted on maps to show noise sensitive areas and other land uses within the actions noise impact area. (a) The number of residences or people living within each noise contour at or above DNL 65 dB. Per FICON, in some circumstances, an evaluation of the 60 DNL may be needed as discussed in section 6.f.(4) of this chapter. This includes the net increase or decrease in the number of residences or people exposed to that noise level. (b) The locations and numbers of noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., schools, churches, hospitals, and parks) within each contour at or above DNL 65 dB. (c) The area (square miles or acres) of general land use classifications within each of the above noise contours (optional). (d) Mitigation measures in effect or proposed and their relationship to the alternatives analyzed. g. Noise monitoring. Noise monitoring data may be included in an EA or EIS at the discretion of the responsible FAA official for information or disclosure purposes only. Noise monitoring is not required for FAA NEPA noise evaluations. FAA does not use monitoring data to calibrate the INM. h. Surface transportation noise. Some airport development has the potential to cause surface transportation noise impacts. Those impacts may result from: (1) new, expanded, or re-aligned airport access roads; (2) increased airport automobile or truck activity; (3) increased vehicle speeds; or (4) other surface-transportation related actions. Therefore, a proposed actions surface transportation plan should be reviewed to determine if it would change traffic noise in the affected area. If any of surface transportation impacts potentially exist, conduct a noise analysis using accepted highway noise methodologies (i.e., FHWAs Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise (23 CFR Part 772)). i. Construction noise. Review the proposed airport development to determine if potential construction noise impacts would occur. Activities that may cause construction noise impacts include blasting, demolition, construction equipment operation, use of

Chap. 17

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

temporary haul routes, and temporary re-routing of vehicles. If a construction noise analysis is needed, the FHWA method noted in paragraph 6.h. of this chapter may be appropriate. j. Environmental document information. The environmental document must contain information to enable reviewers to understand the basic assumptions and results of the noise analysis. Use tables and figures to help summarize information. Place the details about the analysis (model input detailed assumptions, etc.) in an appendix to the EA or EIS. Generally, the environmental documents text should include the following information: (1) Forecast activity data. Airport sponsors provide these data. They address forecast aircraft activity, for the alternatives being analyzed. (a) The data must be for the periods noted in section 6.f.(1)(a)-(d) of this chapter; (b) The sponsors forecast must be consistent with the Terminal Area Forecast (TAF). To be consistent with the TAF, the sponsors 5-year forecast should be within 10% of the TAF. A 10-year forecast should be within 15% of the TAF (per FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 706.b.(3)); and (c) FAA must approve the forecasts. (2) Base maps. These maps show the existing airport, the proposed airport developments runway alignments and designations, and the area near the airport. Usually, the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is sufficient, but a 7.5-minute quadrangle map overlain with the airports facilities provides a useful base map. This information should also include a noise and land use inventory that satisfies the FAA guidelines in Program Guidance Letter 03-02, Determining Justification of Projects for the Noise Set-Aside Based on Currency of Noise Exposure Maps.5 (3) Flight track maps. These maps show generalized arrival and departure tracks on noise contour maps. They depict aircraft positions relative to land uses or other features in the airport vicinity. (4) Noise exposure maps. These maps show DNL contours superimposed on land uses in the airport vicinity. The maps must clearly and prominently show noise sensitive land uses such as residences, schools, hospitals, churches, etc., relative to the DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB contours. The environmental documents should provide separate maps for each of the following airport layouts: (a) the existing airport;

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/airports/aip/guidance_letters/media/PGL_03-02.doc

Chap. 17

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (b) the future airport without the proposed action; (c) the future airport with the proposed action; and (d) the future airport for each reasonable alternative.

NOISE

ARP recommends using data that are no more than 3 years old to ensure model input data accurately reflect conditions at the airport. The responsible FAA official must independently and periodically review these files during the environmental review process to verify they accurately reflect the airports current and forecast: activity, aircraft fleet mix, runway use, and flight track use. Sensitivity analyses may be necessary to assure the accuracy and validity of the data used. (5) Noise exposure data tables. These tables describe land uses and provide the number of noise sensitive land uses in each contour (DNL 65, 70, and 75 dB) for the scenarios mentioned in sections 6.j.(4)(a)(d) of this chapter. The responsible FAA official uses these data and data concerning the level of projected noise increase to determine if any alternative would cause a significant noise increase (DNL 1.5 dB or greater) over noise sensitive land uses.
Note: Due to the physics of sound energy, a clearly perceptible noise change normally occurs when a DNL 3 dB increase occurs within the DNL 60 to 65 dB contour or a DNL 5 dB increase occurs in the DNL 4560 dB contour.

k. Noise analysis duties of the responsible FAA official. The responsible FAA official must complete the following duties to provide an acceptable noise analysis: (1) Ensure AEE approves changes to INM input data files or changes in flight profiles for noise abatement departure procedures (NADPs). The environmental document must include a copy of AEEs approval if the sponsor proposes use of modifications to the INM.6 If noise abatement take-off procedures are proposed, the two recognized noise abatement departure profiles (NADPs) are the Close-in Community NADP and Distant Community NADP. FAA Advisory Circular 91-53A, Noise Abatement Departure Profiles, provides information on these NADPs. (2) Ensure the administrative record includes an electronic copy of model input files and input documentation.

INM users should review Appendix B of the INM Users Guide for detailed instructions on submitting requests to modify INM input files, flight profiles, or other factors. Users should send their requests to the responsible FAA official in the regional Airports Division Office or the Airports Planning and Programming Division, APP-400. The official or APP-400 will forward the request to AEE. AEE will send its response to the FAA office (the regional Airports office or APP-400) that sent the request. This ensures proper coordination occurs between the model user and FAA.
6

Chap. 17

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

NOISE

a. Significant impact. Use the information obtained during the analysis completed to meet other sections of this chapter and the thresholds in the following table to determine if an action would cause a significant effect. Local land use compatibility standards do not alter this threshold for NEPA purposes.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD - For most areas: When an action, compared to the no action alternative for the same timeframe, would cause noise sensitive areas located at or above DNL 65 dB to experience a noise increase of at least DNL 1.5 dB. An increase from DNL 63.5 dB to DNL 65 dB over a noise sensitive area is a significant impact. FACTORS TO CONSIDER ARP reminds the responsible FAA official that for NEPA purposes, DNL 3 dB impacts over residential areas between the DNL 60 and 65 dB contours do not cause significant adverse noise impacts. However, the potential for mitigating noise in those areas should be weighed, including consideration of the same range of mitigation options available at DNL 65 dB and higher and eligibility for Federal funding.

- For national parks, national wildlife refuges and historic sites, including traditional cultural properties where a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature: The DNL 65 dB level at which residential land uses are compatible does not adequately address noise impacts on visitors to these areas. As a result, relevant and/or supplemental noise analysis is appropriate in certain circumstances. Responsible FAA officials must be cognizant that Part 150 guidelines do not adequately address the effects of noise on visitors to areas within a historic site or national park or wildlife refuge protected under Section 4(f) of the DOT Act (see Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference for information on Section 4(f), recodified as 49 USC Section 303) and where non-aircraft noise is very low and a quiet setting is a generally recognized feature or attribute of the sites significance.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B

b. Mitigated Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). If sufficient mitigation that would reduce all potentially significant noise impacts below threshold levels measures is included as part of a project and the sponsor has made binding commitments to carry out those measures within its authority, then an EIS is not necessary (absent significant impacts in other categories). In such cases, FAA may conclude the action by issuing a FONSI. The FONSI or FONSI/Record of Decision (ROD) must list the measures FAA has made a condition

Chap. 17

Page 13

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

of project approval, including those the sponsor will be required to carry out through grant assurances or other means. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. A potentially significant noise impact often has corresponding impacts on land uses. FAA must prepare an EIS, if mitigation will not reduce impacts below the noise thresholds in section 7 of this chapter. Preparers should avoid repeating information presented in the EISs Compatible Land Use chapter. As appropriate, preparers should refer the reader to either the EISs Noise chapter or the Compatible Land Use chapter, depending on how the preparers have addressed noise and compatible land use issues. b. Information needed when FAA determines a significant noise impact. The EIS should include information discussed in earlier sections of this chapter in the EIS. It should also include the following information as needed. (1) Refined information. If the sponsor prepared an EA, revise the text and graphics as needed to meet EIS requirements. The EIS must thoroughly explain significant noise impacts. Sometimes, a more complete description of the noise events contributing to the DNL contours with added tables charts, aerial photographs, maps, or metrics is sufficient. In other cases, supplemental analyses may include using metrics other than DNL (see section 8.d of this chapter for supplemental analysis information). (2) The DNL 60 dB contour. Where an airport development project has a potentially significant impact on noise sensitive areas (i.e., a DNL 1.5 dB or more noise increase within the DNL 65 dB noise contour), the EIS noise analysis must depict the DNL 60 dB contour as well. Further analysis is required in this circumstance to evaluate potential increases of DNL 3 dB and greater between DNL 65 and 60 dB and potential mitigation measures. This information helps to further disclose potential project-related noise changes in the airport area.7 Additional contours are optional, as discussed in paragraph 1f, above. Provide figures showing noise sensitive land uses within the DNL 60 dB contour and the DNL exposure level for each of the following scenarios.

FAA has adopted the recommendation of FICON to examine DNL 3 dB or greater noise increases within the DNL 60-65 dB contour where a project has significant impacts. A DNL 3 dB increase in this contour causes a 3 percent increase in the percentage of people highly annoyed (FICON, 1992, Technical Report, Section 3, pg. 3-17.

Chap. 17

Page 14

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (a) the future no action alternative; (b) the proposed action; and (c) each reasonable alternative.

NOISE

Information on addressing the following items for each of the scenarios noted above is helpful. (1) The locations and numbers of other noise-sensitive land uses such as homes, schools, churches, hospitals, or public parks in the DNL 60 to 65 dB contour where a DNL 3 dB noise increase could occur. [Also include the number of residences or people living within the DNL 60-65 dB contour where the project would cause a DNL 3 dB increase. (2) To the extent appropriate and practicable FAA should consider the same range of mitigation options that are potentially available at DNL 65 dB, including eligibility for federal funding for mitigation. Where possible, FAA and the airport sponsor should consider operational noise abatement measures. The environmental document should describe the operational noise abatement measures and their benefits. An airport sponsors or FAAs consideration of measures to mitigate impacts within the DNL 60 to 65 dB contour does not mean either party is committing to carrying out that mitigation. (3) Impacts on people. As needed, discuss designated land uses that might contribute noise impacts higher than airport-related noise, on the affected population. (a) include information on climate and how it affects the types of housing construction in the affected area and how that construction affects the housings sound insulation capabilities; (b) include information on lifestyles of affected populations and how projected airport-induced noise would affect their indoor and outdoor activities (i.e., would noise interfere with speech or sleep). (c) include information on background or ambient noise levels that may be helpful when addressing noise in rural areas. (4) Non-aviation noise. Include an analysis of non-aviation noise sources such as project-related construction or roadway noise. Give special attention to construction noise near noise sensitive areas. c. Supplemental noise analysis. FICON (1992) noted that supplemental metrics are useful in addressing various public concerns and to help the public better understand noise impacts. As a result, FAA sometimes uses supplemental noise information to describe aircraft noise impacts for specific noise-sensitive locations or situations. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors when developing a supplemental noise

Chap. 17

Page 15

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

analysis. However, before making a decision about the supplemental metrics or the analysis, the responsible FAA official must consult the Office of Environment and Energy (AEE) and obtain AEEs approval on the appropriate supplemental noise analysis. (1) Community concerns. When designing a supplemental noise analysis, consider community concerns and the types and nature of community activities potentially affected. Tailor the analysis to enhance reader understanding of important facts concerning noise affecting populations. The analysis designed depends on the circumstances for each project. No single supplemental analysis is preferred. Based on prior analyses, the following issues may concern a community. (a) Sleep disturbance. FICON's 1992 report focused on a dose-response relationship the U.S. Air Force's Armstrong Laboratories developed. The following equation provides an estimated percentage of people awakened at a particular SEL.8
% awakening = 0.0087 X (SEL 30)1.79 Note: SEL is the sound exposure level. See section 8.d.(1) of this chapter for more information.

(b) Speech interference. FICON recommends using a cumulative A-weighted metric limited to the affected time period (Leq) or time-above (TA) (see section 8.d.(2) of this chapter). FICON also provides a table addressing noise levels and speech interference (see FICON, 1992, Technical Appendix, Section 3, pg. 3-9). (c) Parks, wildlife refuges, and historic properties. The responsible FAA official should, in consultation with appropriate land management agencies, consider using a supplemental noise analysis for locations within a proposed actions study area. Such locations may include segments of or entire reaches of a national park, a national wildlife refuge, and a historic property (including traditional cultural properties) that is characterized by a low noise setting and where a quiet setting is a generally recognized purpose and attribute of the resource of concern. (2) Data to use. The INM provides supplemental metric data. When the responsible FAA official determines supplemental analyses are needed, use the same database and INM model version used to develop DNL contours. d. Supplemental noise metrics. FAA uses supplemental metrics chiefly in EISs to help further describe aircraft noise impacts for specific noise-sensitive locations or situations experiencing a significant noise effect. The metrics are also helpful in developing

Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN). 1997. Effects of Aviation Noise on Sleep Disturbance.

Chap. 17

Page 16

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

mitigation for that effect. FAA also uses supplemental metrics to aid the publics understanding of significant noise impacts. The following metrics may be used to provide more information to help the public understand project noise on issues of community concern (see section 8.c.(a)-(c) of this chapter). Review Table 17.1 at the end of this chapter for guidance on the metric to use when evaluating the activity or response of concern. (1) SEL (sound exposure level). This is a measure of a noise events physical energy. It takes into account the noises level and duration and is referenced to a standard duration of one second. (2) TA (Time Above). This is a single event metric. It provides the number of minutes an aircraft's noise level is louder than another noise level during a given period, Examples include the duration an aircraft is louder than the ambient noise or louder than the level above which speech interference may occur. TA may include information ranging from time above a specific noise level at a specific point, to the time above multiple levels (in 10 dB increments) throughout an area at specified grid points. (3) Lmax (maximum sound level). This is the loudest sound measured at a location during an aircrafts operation. It is useful for determining detectable noise changes. A 3 dB increase in Lmax is barely perceptible, while a 5dB increase in Lmax is clearly perceptible. Lmax may also be used to assess noise on animals.9 (4) Leq (equivalent sound level). This is the average noise level during a designated period (normally less than 24 hours). For example, Leq8 is used to determine the level of total noise during an 8-hour school day. It is helpful in determining if aircraft noise would or would not disturb classroom instruction, and, consequently, a need to include noise level reduction measures as project mitigation. (5) Audibility. This is a time-based metric developed the National Park Service developed to evaluate effects of aircraft noise on natural quiet in Grand Canyon National Park and other units of the National Park System. The Integrated Noise Model now has the capability to model audibility. b. Mitigation. Any mitigation measures to be taken in addition to those associated with other land use controls should be discussed. FAA Advisory Circular 150/5020-1, Noise Control and Compatibility Planning for Airports, presents guidance for airport operators and planners to help achieve compatibility between airports and their surrounding areas. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when land management agencies provide that

Federal Interagency Committee on Noise (FICON), 1992, Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, Technical Appendix B, page B-10.

Chap. 17

Page 17

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

information. FAA or the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that that the agency has fairly evaluated environmental consequences (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). In accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), an EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures recommended by the agencies that a State authorizes to plan for the area surrounding the airport. Sections 8.b(1)-(3) of this chapter provide examples of noise mitigation measures for a proposed airport action. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. Where there is a DNL 1.5 dB or more increase in noise over noise sensitive areas within the DNL 65 dB or greater noise level, there should be further analysis. This analysis is needed to determine whether there noise increase of DNL 3 dB or higher over noise sensitive areas within the DNL 6065 dB noise contour. Measures to mitigate these impacts should be considered for purposes of NEPA, including: (1) Operational measures. Some common operational mitigation measures include: (a) changes in flight tracks or runway usage;
Note: New or revised flight procedure changes at less than 3,000 feet AGL may route air traffic over noisesensitive areas not previously overflown. These procedures must be examined, even if they affect fewer people than the no action. This analysis is needed to determine if the proposed procedures would cause a significant impact to the newly affected community. Mitigation to the area newly affected should be included where appropriate. Be sure to assess impacts due to the mitigation. This analysis is needed to ensure mitigation does cause more severe impacts than unmitigated impacts.

(b) voluntary noise abatement procedures; or (c) changes in airport operations acceptable to airport users that do not interfere with interstate commerce. (2) Land-use related measures. include: (a) Buying land or land interests such as air rights, easements, and development rights. These measures establish airport-compatible uses of the affected properties; Some common land use mitigation measures

Chap. 17

Page 18

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

(b) Building noise barriers or acoustic shielding that does not attract wildlife hazardous to aviation. (See FAA Advisory Circular 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports; or. (c) Sound insulating affected structures having noise sensitive uses (i.e., private residences, hospitals, churches, public buildings, or other structures accommodating those uses) (3) Construction measures. Common construction mitigation measures include: (a) limiting the time of day when machinery may operate, blasting may occur, or trucks operate on streets traversing noise sensitive areas; or (b) recommending the use of muffled heavy equipment.

Chap. 17

Page 19

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

NOISE

TABLE 17.1 Suggested Metrics to Determine or Describe Noise Impacts. This table is intended to guide analysts who evaluate a projects noise effects. In addition to DNL, the table provides information on other metrics that may further disclose and explain those effects.

POSSIBLE HUMAN RESPONSE

CORRESPONDING AVERAGE, CUMULATIVE NOISE METRIC

CORRESPONDING SINGLE EVENT METRIC

TIME AIRCRAFT HEARD ABOVE A PARTICULAR NOISE LEVEL

THE NUMBER OF EVENTS THAT WILL OCCUR ABOVE PARTICULAR NOISE METRIC *Nx Numbers of events specified at each sound level.

Community annoyance How people psychologically respond to a given noise.

DNL - Average DayNight Sound Level.

*Lmax Maximum Sound Level.

*Leq - Equivalent Sound Level.

*SEL - Single Exposure Level.

*Time Above Typically, 60 or 65 dB. Above these levels, noise would interfere with normal conversational levels.

Sleep disturbance Sound levels causing sleep arousal.

*Nighttime Leq (10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m.= typical sleeping hours)

*SEL - (Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise (FICAN), 1997, uses SEL to predict the percentage of people an SEL would awaken.

Speech interference Intruding noise levels that may mask normal conversational speech levels and reduces listener understanding. School learning Noise level and that could adversely affect classroom activities. This information is used to determine the level of noise level reduction needed to reduce or

*Leq daytime (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. = typical activity hours)

*Lmax or SEL

*School hour Leq (vary)

*Leq - 45 dB interior sound level goal.

*SEL used to determine the interior noise level reduction (NLR). The minimum standard is 5 dB SEL. SEL is favored for analytical

Chap. 17

Page 20

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

eliminate that interference. goal. purposes over Preferred Speech Interference Level2 Lmax TAA Time Above Ambient sound levels.3

NOISE

Park visitor annoyance Noise level that would interfere with visitor enjoyment and appreciation of natural quiet. May vary by season or time of day.

*Leq (based on of park operation or visitor hours. (varies)

* = Supplemental metrics used to further explain and disclose noise impacts. See section 8.d. of this chapter for more information.
1

No required supplemental metrics. Selecting supplemental metrics is done case-by-case is arithmetic average sound pressure levels for the 500, 1,000, and 2,000-hertz octave bands.

2 PSIL 3

Often, local ambient (background) measurements are helpful.

Chap. 17

Page 21

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 18. SOCIAL IMPACTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

SOCIAL IMPACTS

a. General. FAA must evaluate proposed airport development actions to determine if they would cause social impacts. This evaluation should include effects on health and safety risks to children, and socioeconomic impacts. Those impacts include moving homes or businesses; dividing or disrupting established communities; changing surface transportation patterns; disrupting orderly, planned development; or creating a notable change in employment. b. The human environment. CEQ regulations at 40 CFR 1508.14 state that the "human environment addresses the relationship of people with their natural and physical environments. Since changes to either of those environments typically do not occur without affecting people, Section 1508.14 requires that environmental documents prepared for Federal actions address social impacts. c. Childrens Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks, defines the risks to childrens safety that are attributable to products or substances that the child is likely to touch or ingest. Examples include the air we breathe, the food we eat, the water we drink or use for recreation, and the soil we use to grow food. Environmental documents should assess project-related impacts with the potential to have a disproportionate effect on children's environmental health or safety. d. Socioeconomic impacts. The principal impacts to consider are associated with relocating or disrupting a residential or business community, transportation capability, planned development, or employment. Environmental documents should provide information on: (1) The individuals and families (e.g., numbers and characteristics) an action would displace. (2) The effects of that displacement on the neighborhood and housing to which the displaced people are likely to move, including information on the capability of the neighborhood to provide adequate relocation housing for the families the action would displace. If needed, the environmental document should describe any special relocation advisory services available for interpreting benefits or other assistance available for affected non-English speaking minorities. (3) The businesses an action would displace. (4) The effects of moving the businesses to other areas. Include information on the areas abilities to provide replacement or new buildings or other features associated

Chap. 18

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

with the affected businesses. If needed, the environmental document should describe any special relocation advisory services available for interpreting benefits or other assistance available for affected non-English speaking minorities.
Note: Chapter 10 presents information on Environmental Justice impacts.

2.

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Section 1502.1 states that the Federal government must fully and fairly discuss significant environmental impacts and the reasonable alternatives that avoid or minimize those effects on the human environment. Section 1508.27 requires Federal agencies to consider the significance of the impacts from a proposed action by considering the intensity and context of the impacts OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing NEPA (40 CFR Section 1500 et. seq.)

CEQ

Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 USC Section 4601, et. seq.) (PL 91-646 amended by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Act Amendments of 1987, Title IV of PL 100-17, and PL 105-117) and 49 CFR Part 24 (Implementing the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970)

FAA must meet 49 CFR Part 24 requirements if an airport action involving FAA approval or funding would require purchasing real property or displacing people or businesses.

FAA

Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

Children may suffer disproportionately from health risks and safety risks. As a result, consistent with their missions and as practicable, Federal agencies must make child protection a high priority. To do so, they must assess projectrelated impacts disproportionately affecting children's environmental health or safety. The Secretary of Transportation is a member of the Task Force responsible for carrying out this Executive Order. This group provides the President with strategies and recommendations to protect child health and safety.

Task Force on Health Risks and Safety to Children

Chap. 18

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

SOCIAL IMPACTS

a. Airport actions. The environmental analysis of a proposed airport projects must include discussions of potential social impacts. Typical airport actions that could cause social impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities and rental car lots; a significant increase or change in aircraft operations; and significant amounts of construction/demolition activity. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATES, AND APPROVALS.

a. Coordination evidence. Typically, FAA needs no formal Federal permits, certifications, or approvals when social impacts occur. The environmental document should contain evidence showing the airport sponsor has coordinated with affected municipal jurisdictions or appropriate social and/or transportation agencies located in the affected area. b. Documented information. The environmental document should provide the following information and any substantive comments or opinions addressing these issues as needed: (1) the availability of comparable replacement housing; (2) the proposed actions consistency with local land-use and transportation
planning objectives;
(3) the capacities of existing public service providers, infrastructure, utilities, and local economics sustaining an affected area's quality of life; or (4) project-related impacts having the potential to have a disproportionate effect
on children's environmental health or safety.
5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. Consultation with the following entities, as necessary, is

often important when addressing an affected communitys concerns about childrens
environmental health and safety and other socioeconomic effects.
(1) Local governments with jurisdiction over lands the action would physically or audibly affect. FAAs current 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 150 criteria are helpful in determining land uses compatible with project-related noise levels. (2) Local planning commissions and housing departments.

Chap. 18

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

(3) Local business organizations and agencies such as the Chamber of Commerce or Economic Development Agency. (4) Local agencies responsible for administering employment programs. (5) Local transportation agencies. Contact these agencies when an airport action has the potential to affect the Level of Service (LOS) rating of local roads. (6) Aviation groups, fixed base operators, and other on-airport businesses the proposed action would displace. (7) Citizen groups having an interest in airport development (see FAA Advisory Circular 150/5050-4, Citizen Participation in Airport Planning). or (8) Local public health agencies with jurisdiction over the affected area. b. More information. The following Federal offices may also provide information. (1) the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Developments (HUD) Office of Community Planning Development provides information on local or regional social resources; (2) the Sustainable Community Task Force provides information to local organizations on sustainable community development. (3) the Task Force on Health and Safety Risks to Children provides recommendations to protect child health. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. The environmental document should evaluate the proposed developments effects on the social and economic characteristics of affected communities. Focus on evaluating shifts in population, public service demands, roadway capacity, businesses, and economics. The environmental document should include information in sections 8.b-e of this chapter, as appropriate. b. Housing. If the action would affect residential areas, include the following information. (1) Provide the estimated number of households the action would displace. Include information such as owner/tenant status, estimated housing values, and rental rates of properties to be acquired. (2) Provide the characteristics of the displaced households. As fitting, report the number of residents per household, the number of elderly or disabled people affected, family income levels, and race. Chap. 18 Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

(3) Describe special relocation advisory services that will be provided to help elderly, disabled, minority, and/or low-income populations. (4) Describe the physical and social impacts on the neighborhood(s) abandoned because of the proposed action and the reasonable alternatives. (5) Include a survey addressing the estimated number of comparable replacement housing units in the area where displaced people would move. The information would provide data on the comparable replacement housing needed for the families the action would displace. Include the following information as necessary. (a) Available price ranges and rental rates. This information is helpful in determining if affordable housing prices exist in area to which displaced residents would likely move. (b) Identify the lack of available, acceptable replacement housing. If adequate supplies of comparable replacement housing are not available, consider starting housing of last resort procedures. (d) Clearly state if the sponsor has the authority and is prepared to implement any necessary last resort housing provisions. (6) In areas that would provide comparable replacement housing, describe the effects of project-related relocation residential influxes on the areas' neighborhoods. Also, discuss the abilities of those neighborhoods to meet increased service demands the proposed action would cause. Examples include the abilities to meet demands due to increased school populations, increased utility use, or demand placed on fire or police departments. (7) Describe the benefits and services to which the displaced residents are entitled under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, 49 CFR Part 24. See FAA Order 5100.37A Land Acquisition and Relocation Assistance for Airport Projects (or subsequent revisions), (8) Estimate the cost and time required to relocate displaced residents in an orderly, humane manner. (9) Include information on social issues obtained during public hearings conducted for the proposed action. (10) Estimate changes in residential real estate taxes due to changes in the make up of neighborhoods in the areas residents leave and to which they move. c. Business effects. If an action would affect businesses, include the following information as needed. Chap. 18 Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

(1) Estimate the numbers, types, and sizes of businesses, farms, or non-profit organizations the proposed airport action would displace. Estimate the number of jobs and the income levels lost due to relocating or permanently closing those businesses. (2) Identify the relocations effects on the local economy and neighborhoods supporting the relocated or closed businesses. A survey and evaluation of the availability of replacement commercial or industrial sites able to accommodate the displaced businesses or organizations would be helpful. Identify those businesses or organizations occupying property that would remain adjacent to the real property acquired for the project. Determine if the businesses or organizations would experience substantial economic injury due to relocating or closing other businesses. (3) Discuss the ability of local agencies and the sponsor to provide adequate relocation services for displaced businesses. As needed, describe special services that the agencies or sponsor would provide to aid relocated business owners. Also, if FAA determines the remaining business owners would suffer economic injury because of projectrelated acquisition of adjacent real property, discuss the airport sponsors intent to provide services to businesses that are not displaced. (4) Estimate expected costs and the time frames needed to relocate displaced businesses. (5) Describe the benefits and services to which the displaced residents are entitled under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. See 49 CFR Part 24 and FAA Order 5100.37A (or subsequent revisions). d. Transportation effects. Project-related changes to the local transportation system may cause social impacts. Provide information on the action's potential to reduce the LOS of airport access roads or of roads in the areas immediately surrounding the airport. Discuss any unacceptable changes in roadway LOS. Contact local, state, and Federal transportation management agencies for information on LOS. (1) Estimate the number of daily vehicular trips that would occur on primary roads serving the airport. (2) Describe the ability of the existing road network to meet estimated traffic demand. Describe changes to the system needed to accommodate traffic demands the action would cause. Include traffic re-routing, changes to street configurations or dimensions, and changes to land use patterns resulting from effects on traffic systems. (3) Provide substantive comments from local, state, or Federal traffic management agencies. Summarize objections or concerns the agencies provide and describe how the sponsor will address those concerns.

Chap. 18

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

(4) If project-related traffic patterns would cause air quality effects, refer the reader to the environmental documents Air Quality chapter addressing those patterns. e. Childrens health and safety risks. Environmental documents should identify and assess environmental health and safety risks that could disproportionately affect children. (1) The Environmental Protection Agencys website provides information on the Presidents Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety to Children.1 The website includes information on asthma, unintentional injuries, lead-based developmental disorders, childhood cancer, and building and retrofitting schools. The Task Force has produced the National Childrens Study, which examines the influence of environmental factors on childrens health and development. Consult these sources as needed. (2) Identify risks to child health or to safety that are attributable to products or substances that a child is likely to touch or ingest (e.g., air, food, drinking water, recreational waters, soil, or products they might use or to which they may be exposed). (3) Provide substantive comments from local public health agencies about those risks or other substantive objections or concerns social agencies provide. Describe how the sponsor will address those concerns. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about land use in the airport-affected area.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD For socioeconomic issues: When an action would cause: Extensive relocation, but sufficient
replacement housing is unavailable.
Extensive relocation of community businesses that would cause severe economic hardship for affected communities. FACTORS TO CONSIDER

A significant impact would not occur when controversy exists because property or business owner are dissatisfied with the amount of money an owner would receive due to relocation.

http://yosemite.epa.gov/ochp/ochpweb.nsf/content/whatwe_tf_proj.htm#1

Chap. 18

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

Disruption of local traffic patterns that substantially reduce the Levels of Service of roads serving the airport and its surrounding communities. A substantial loss in community tax base. For Childrens Health & Safety Risks: An action causing disproportionate health and safety risks to children may indicate a significant impact. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

SOCIAL IMPACTS

b. Potential mitigation measures. The environmental assessment (EA) should describe proposed mitigation when state and/or local agencies provide that information to address social impacts. FAA and the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any mitigation recommended, the EA should explain why. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. (1) Relocation impacts. The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (as amended), and 49 CFR Part 24 provide guidance on mitigation. (2) Surface transportation. Surface transportation mitigation often includes roadway design changes to provide adequate LOS and roadway connections. FAA and the sponsor should work with appropriate traffic management agencies to develop the means to maintain acceptable LOS on those roadways that the project would affect. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a Federal agency need not prepare an EIS when a proposed action does not affect the physical environment, but causes only social or socioeconomic impacts.2 However, when FAA must prepare an EIS to assess impacts on the physical environmental, the EIS prepared for that action must address social impacts. The EIS should contain the following information in addition to that discussed in other sections of this chapter. b. Housing impacts. Fragmenting neighborhoods or communities is likely to cause stress to affected people. As noted above, the EIS should mention this, while pointing out that such stress is not considered a significant impact for NEPA purposes. If sufficient

Metropolitan Edison Company v. PANE, People Against Nuclear Energy; 460 U.S. 766 (1983).

Chap. 18

Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOCIAL IMPACTS

decent, safe, and sanitary housing is not available, provide an analysis of efforts made to address this issue. If needed, include housing of last resort provisions required in Section 206(a) of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. If relocation would substantially disrupt a community, provide reasons why the project cannot avoid the disruption. c. Business impacts. For business relocations causing substantial economic hardships, explain these effects and the reasons why the project cannot avoid them. When business relocation causes a loss of local jobs, explain the effects on the local economy resulting from job losses. Explain why those losses cannot be avoided. d. Controversy. Disclose controversy arising because of inadequate replacement housing. e. Secondary effects. Refer the reader to the EIS chapter on Induced Socioeconomic Effects (see Chapter 15) for detailed analysis of any secondary or induced effects the project would cause. f. Environmental Justice. Refer the reader to the EIS Chapter on Environmental Justice for discussions on this topic (see Chapter 10). g. Potential mitigation measures. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when State or local agencies provide that information to address social impacts. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when land management agencies provide that information. FAA or the sponsor should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. NEPA requires a Federal agency preparing an EIS to discuss mitigation in sufficient detail to disclose that environmental consequences have been fairly evaluated (Robertson vs. Methow Valley, 490 U.S. 332 (1989)). In addition, under 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), FAA may not approve a Federal funding for major airport development projects, unless the agency determines that no possible and prudent alternative to the project exists and that every reasonable step has been taken to minimize the adverse effect. Major airport development projects are those that involve the location of a runway, new airport, or major runway extension. For more information about the mitigation required, see FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 1203(b)(4). In accordance with NEPA and 49 USC Section 47106(c)(1)(B), an EIS must discuss and adopt mitigation measures recommended by State or local agencies. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 18

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 19. SOLID WASTE 1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

SOLID WASTE

a. General. Construction, renovation, or demolition of most airside projects produces debris (e.g., dirt, concrete, asphalt) that must be properly disposed. In addition, new or renovated terminal, cargo, or maintenance facilities may involve construction, renovation, or demolition that produces other types of solid waste (bricks, steel, wood, gypsum, glass). Therefore, airport sponsors should follow Federal, state, or local regulations that address solid waste. Doing so reduces the environmental effects of airport-related construction or operation. This chapter provides information on how alternatives under consideration could increase solid waste in an area. It also discusses how to address the effects of any increased waste volume and ways to mitigate those effects. b. Solid waste defined. The Solid Waste Disposal Act notes the term solid waste includes garbage, refuse, or sludge from a waste treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or an air pollution control facility (42 USC Section 6903(27)). According to that Act, solid waste also includes solid, liquid, semisolid or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, agricultural, or community activities. See 42 USC Section 6903 for more detailed information. When using this Desk Reference, notice the term, solid waste does not include hazardous waste. Please see Chapter 13 of this Desk Reference for information on addressing hazardous waste or materials. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS The Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDA) of 1965 (42 USC Sections 6901 et Seq.) (now stated in subtitle D of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA))

Section 6901(b)(2) states the disposal of solid waste in or on the land without careful planning and management can present a danger to human health and to the environment. The Act provides safeguards to reduce that danger.

State or local agencies responsible for managing solid waste.

40 CFR, Part 258.10, Solid Wastes - Airport Safety

Addresses restrictions on municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLF) relative to airports. Declares that a sanitary landfill located within 10,000 feet of a runway serving turbo-powered aircraft or within 5,000 feet of a runway serving piston-powered aircraft is incompatible with airports.

EPA

FAA AC 150/5200-33, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports

FAA

Chap. 19

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOLID WASTE

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. Airside development (e.g., building or rehabilitating runways, taxiways, and their associated items) typically produces construction debris. Terminal development often produces similar streams. Refuse can also result from construction workers, passengers, and airport workers using the terminal building. Personnel and activities in air cargo facilities may produce solid waste as well. In addition, solid waste may also occur during construction and operations of access roadways, parking facilities, rental car lots, or because of other on-airport activities. Activities needed to maintain airside and landside facilities produce yet other sources of waste. As a result, when a proposed airport project would cause or change a solid waste stream, the environmental analysis section of the Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should discuss how the potential, associated solid waste would be handled and disposed properly to minimize environmental effects. This analysis should also determine whether local disposal facilities have the capacities to hold solid waste volumes the proposed airport facilities would produce during their construction or operation. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. State and local agencies are often responsible for and have the most knowledge about solid waste issues in an airport area. The airport sponsor should consult those officials for information on potential impacts the solid waste would cause and how to handle waste to minimize those impacts. Those agencies also provide valuable information on how to handle and dispose of airportgenerated solid waste in an environmentally-safe manner. The agencies would also indicate if the alternatives under consideration would produce material that municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLF) would not accept or if the waste volume would exceed the capacities of planned or existing disposal facilities that are being considered for use. The sponsor should provide assurances that it will meet applicable solid waste disposal requirements. Environmental documents should contain records of all relevant communications with the consulted agencies. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Environmental documents prepared for airport actions involving airfield, terminal, or cargo facility development may require consideration of solid waste resulting from building or operating the facilities. As appropriate, analysts should consider the following factors for each reasonable alternative and include the information in the environmental document. This information helps the decision maker determine if local disposal facilities will accept the potential types or volumes of solid waste the alternatives under consideration would produce. b. Quantity. As needed, the environmental document should: (1) Provide estimated quantities of solid waste each reasonable alternative would likely cause during its construction or operation. Base those quantities on existing design plans. Be aware that some airport projects produce more solid waste during construction than during operation or maintenance activities. Chap. 19 Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

SOLID WASTE

(2) Summarize disposal methods that will be used to handle the reported volumes of solid waste products. and (3) Disclose if airfield or landside construction or terminal construction or operation would overload receiving solid waste facilities. c. Compliance. As needed, the environmental document should (1) describe how the sponsor would control project-related solid waste to comply with applicable regulations; (2) summarize how the sponsor would transport, contain, and control projectrelated solid waste; or (3) indicate if the disposal of solid waste from any reasonable alternative would violate any local, state, or Federal regulations. d. Other. As needed, the environmental document should summarize critical information gleaned from consulting with responsible solid waste agencies. For example, the environmental document should note if current, available MSWLF capacity is lacking. If it is, point out whether planned MSWLF expansion or construction would be timely and provide the needed capacity to handle solid waste the alternatives under consideration would generate. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS. After completing the consultation and analysis discussed above, use the information to determine the potential level of solid waste impacts the alternatives under consideration would cause. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE. Use the following information to determine if a significant impact could occur. Consider the factors in the right-hand column when determining if an action would cause a condition calling for more information or analysis as part of an environmental document.

Chap. 19

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD

SOLID WASTE

FACTORS TO CONSIDER The responsible FAA official should determine if an alternative under consideration would cause any of the following conditions: Project-generated solid waste would exceed available landfill (MSWLF) or incineration capacities or require extraordinary effort to meet applicable solid waste permit conditions or regulations. Local, State, or Federal agencies determine that substantial unresolved waste disposal issues exist and may require more analyses.

None.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

a. Indirect effects. If solid waste would adversely affect another resource, refer the reader to the section of the environmental document discussing the affected resource. For example, solid waste disposal could contaminate water quality. The environmental documents water quality section would discuss that impact in detail. b. Potential mitigation measures. During the environmental review process, agencies having responsibility for solid waste disposal in the affected area may provide letters addressing the projects effects on waste disposal. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. The mitigation should focus on measures that would most effectively reduce demands on existing or proposed waste storage facilities. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. Potential mitigation measures may include the sponsor working with on-airport businesses and waste handlers to develop and complete the following measures to reduce projectrelated solid waste demand on MSWLF receiving that waste: (1) source reduction strategies such as recovering, recycling, or composting; (2) building or modifying source recovery facilities; or (3) finding markets for recovered, recycled, or composted products or other wastes that are usable for producing energy or other activities.

Chap. 19

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

SOLID WASTE

a. General. In rare instances, FAA may need to prepare an EIS to address significant solid waste impacts. Generally, more information or analysis is needed as part of an EIS only if problems are anticipated with respect to meeting the applicable local, State, Tribal, or Federal laws and regulations on solid waste management. The decision to do so would occur after FAA and the airport sponsor consult with the agencies responsible for managing solid waste in the affected area and evaluating project-induced environmental impacts (using information from section 6 of this chapter). In addition to the information presented about other affected resources, the EIS should include: (1) information that may result from extra consultation with the responsible solid waste management agencies; (2) extra measures that would minimize solid waste impacts and enable solid waste agencies to give their approval to the project; or (3) the sponsors agreement with or acceptance of required mitigation measures to show resolution of conflict involving solid waste. b. Mitigation. FAA and the airport sponsor should fully consider mitigation agencies recommend and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action and explain why the sponsor or FAA does not adopt any recommended mitigation. If feasible, the EIS should also provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 19

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 20. WATER QUALITY

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

WATER QUALITY

a. General. Many of the nations airports are located near waterways. This is because years ago when many airports were built, the cheapest, flattest, and most desirable lands suitable for airports were located near waterways. As a consequence, todays airport activities may cause water quality impacts due to their proximity to waterways. In particular, construction activities or seasonal airport anti-icing/deicing activities are major concerns. Construction often causes sediment-laden runoff to enter waterways. Biological and chemical breakdown of deicing chemicals in airport runoff can cause severe dissolved oxygen demands on receiving waters. Operations or maintenance are other activities that may affect water quality. Airport-related water quality impacts can occur from both point and non-point sources at airports. If not properly controlled, the resultant water quality impacts may adversely affect animal, plant, or human populations. Therefore, FAA must evaluate project-related discharges, especially those having the potential to affect navigable waterways, municipal drinking water supplies, important sole-source aquifers, or protected groundwater supplies. b. Point sources. These are stormwater or other types of discharges from wastewater treatment plants, sanitary sewer systems, collection basins, or other water collection devices that flow through a conveyance (pipe) and discharge to a waterway. The states and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issue National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits authorizing point source discharges into navigable waters of the United States under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC Section 1342). c. Non-point sources. These include stormwater runoff from runways, taxiways, aprons, outdoor storage areas, or construction areas that do not flow through conveyance systems. Federal permits are not necessary for non-point source discharges. d. Runoff pollutants. Point source and non-point source runoff may contain pollutants such as metals, oils, greases, hazardous materials, solids, hydrocarbons, pesticides, and herbicides. During dry weather, pollutants can accumulate on impermeable surfaces, but during storms they are washed into creeks, streams, lakes, or other waters causing potential water quality impacts. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

a. General. The principal statutory framework for considering water quality in Federal decisions is contained in the CWA. The following chart provides information on this and other important laws that protect surface water, groundwater, and aquatic systems:

Chap. 20

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WATER QUALITY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Clean Water Floodplains and Floodways Act of 1977 (CWA), 33 USC Chapter 26

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Chapter 26 provides Congress mandate for developing comprehensive solutions to prevent, reduce, or remove pollution in waters of the United States. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC Section 1341, addresses state issuance of water quality certificates. Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, 33 USC Section 1342, addresses issuance of NDPES permits, while Section 404 of the Act, 33 USC Section 1344, focuses on dredge and fill permits in navigable waterways including wetlands. Requires owners or operators of above ground facilities storing oil or oil-based products to prepare spill response plans.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY

EPA or State or tribal water quality agencies

CWA, Section 311, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, 33 USC Section 1252 et seq.

EPA

Safe Drinking Water Act, as amended (SDWA), 42 USC Section 300.f, et seq., also known as the Public Health Service Act

Prohibits Federal agencies from funding actions that would contaminate a sole source aquifer or its recharge area. Part 142 provides regulations addressing national primary drinking water supplies. Part 149 provides regulations addressing sole source aquifers. Requires Federal agencies to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for any action that would alter (impound, divert, drain, or control) a stream or other body of water.

EPA

40 CFR Parts 142 and 149

EPA

Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1980, 16 USC Section 661, et seq.

FWS

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. Building airport facilities may temporarily or permanently affect surface waters, groundwater, or drinking water supplies. As a result, when an airport sponsor requests FAA action to support an airport development project, FAA must evaluate the proposed projects potential water quality impacts. Examples of airside airfield development projects that may cause water quality impacts include building or expanding terminals or hangars, building new or extended runways and taxiways, and installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS). Landside development that may alter water quality includes building or moving airport access roads, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots.

Chap. 20

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

WATER QUALITY

a. General. There are various water quality permits, certifications, and approvals that may be required to build and operate airport projects. The responsible FAA official must ensure the water quality chapter of the environmental document discloses any known problems in obtaining them. b. Water quality certificates (WQC). Airport sponsors needing the authorizations or permits noted in subsections 4.b(1) and (2) below must obtain a water quality certificate (WQC). The responsible FAA official must ensure the environmental document prepared for any action involving those authorizations or permits contains information about the status of, and any known problems in obtaining, the WQC. That information is an indicator of potential concerns about WQC issuance that may require further airport sponsor and/or FAA effort to mitigate adverse water quality effects to obtain the certificate. A WQC is required for: (1) An airport sponsor seeking an NPDES permit from the EPA or a state under Section 402 of the CWA; and (2) An airport sponsor seeking a permit under Section 404 of the CWA from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) or a state authorized to issue this permit for filling or dredging navigable waters, including jurisdictional wetlands (See Chapter 21 of this Desk Reference. c. NPDES permits. The environmental document prepared for any proposed airport action having a point source discharge to a navigable waterway or that would disturb at least 1 acre should include information on the status of the NPDES permit needed for that action, as described above in section 4.a of this chapter. It should also include any comments the permit-issuing agency provides. A copy of the NPDES permit is not needed for FAAs approval of an airport layout plan or grant, but the environmental document prepared for the action should discuss any difficulties the issuing agency may have noted about permit issuance. An appendix to the environmental document should contain a copy of the letter from the permit agency or a copy of the permit, if the permit is issued before the document is completed.
Note: 40 CFR Sections 122 through 124 provide more details on NPDES stormwater permits. See Chapter 6, of this Desk Reference (Construction Impacts) for a discussion on stormwater permits and construction activity.

d. Agency opinions on safe drinking water supplies. An airport action has the potential to affect a public drinking water supply, a sole source aquifer, or a Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Program (CSGWPP). To comply with Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the approving FAA official may not approve funds for any action if the EPA Administrator determines the action would contaminate a sole source aquifer. As a result, the environmental document should summarize important opinions from EPA and the state, local, or tribal water quality agencies regarding these impacts and cross-reference the appendix containing the correspondence the agencies or tribe provide.

Chap. 20

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WATER QUALITY

e. Oil response plan. Environmental documents addressing airport actions having above ground facilities to store or handle oil or oil-based products should include information on the status of an oil recovery response plan. See Section 112(a)(2) of the Oil Pollution Act) for more information, if needed. f. Other information. The environmental document should contain information from agencies having expertise on water quality issues. This includes comments on the adequacy of proposed mitigation measures, best available technologies (BATs), and best management practices (BMPs). The environmental document should summarize important information these letters contain and cross-reference the appendix and pages where the letters discussing the particular information may be found.
Note: BATs and BMPs typically are parts of the NPDES permit process. BATs refer to the best technology available to minimize water quality impacts resulting from point source discharges. Bacterial decomposition of glycol in stormwater runoff is an example of a BAT. BMPs are schedules of activities, maintenance procedures, and management practices implemented to minimize point source discharge impacts. Examples include using good housekeeping procedures, training personnel in the proper use and handling of chemicals, or using highpressure water to remove paint from an aircraft instead of solvent-based paint removers.

5. PROCEDURES FOR COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY, REGULATORY AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. a. Required consultation. Congress has delegated to each state the primary responsibility for protecting and managing water quality within a states legal boundaries. Early consultation concerning the topics noted below will improve FAAs evaluation of an action's water quality impacts and identify any additional information necessary to make judgments about the significance of impacts. It will also ensure the environmental document addresses agency concerns and avoid delays due to the lack of that information. The environmental documents water quality chapter shall reflect the results of consultation with regulating and permitting agencies and with agencies that must review permit applications, such as the FWS, which may have specific concerns. It should also summarize and appropriately address agency concerns or comments and cross reference pertinent material in the appendix. (1) Water quality standard concerns. Contact the state agency having the authority to enforce water quality standards and/or issue WQCs. (2) NPDES permit concerns. When an airport action would involve a point source discharge, a point source stormwater discharge, or disturb at least 1 acre, contact the state agency or EPA regional office responsible for issuing NPDES permits. (3) Groundwater protection. When an action may affect a sole source aquifer, contact the state, tribal and local government agencies responsible for developing and managing a Comprehensive State Groundwater Protection Program (CSGWPP) and the EPA regional office responsible for reviewing that program. (4) Aquatic populations or communities. When an action would affect fish, shellfish, or wildlife populations, contact the FWS and the respective state fishery or wildlife agency. Page 4

Chap. 20

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WATER QUALITY

Note: Consult the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) regional office for actions that may affect anadromous fish or marine mammals. Anadromous fish are fish that live in the ocean but spawn in freshwater (e.g., salmon, shad).

6.

DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. Determine if building, operating, or maintaining the proposed airport development action would affect project area surface water, groundwater, or drinking water sources. The responsible FAA official should pay particular attention to potential physical (e.g., temperature changes, siltation, and turbidity) and chemical (e.g., changes in oxygen or nitrogen levels, pH, etc.) impacts associated with the proposed action. b. Potential impacts. Actions, such as aircraft and runway deicing/anti-icing, storage tank operation, or firefighting training activities have the potential to chemically affect the project areas water quality. As needed, describe impacts addressing the following issues: (1) violations of conditions or terms contained in an existing WQC or existing NPDES permit; (2) adverse effects on the water quality of sensitive aquatic habitats, including but not limited to, wetlands or critical habitats for Federally or state-protected species; (3) threats to the integrity of public drinking water supplies; and (4) other areas of concern that water quality agencies identify. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the analysis discussed in earlier paragraphs, use the findings to determine the proposed actions degree of impact. For most airport actions, significant impacts can be avoided by design considerations, controls during construction, and other mitigation measures. When the environmental document and appropriate consultation demonstrate that water quality standards can be met, no special water quality problem exists, and no difficulty is anticipated in obtaining permits, it may be assumed that there would be no significant impact on water quality. The responsible FAA official should consider the following factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise on water quality effects.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD When an action has the potential to exceed water quality standards, there are water quality problems that cannot be avoided or satisfactorily mitigated, or there would be difficulty in obtaining a permit or authorization, there may be a significant impact. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B. FACTORS TO CONSIDER The responsible FAA official should also consider if a proposed action or a reasonable alternative would adversely affect a public drinking water supply, sole source aquifer, or waters of national significance (e.g., wild and scenic rivers, national refuges, etc.).

Chap. 20

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WATER QUALITY

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, Federal, state, tribal, or local agencies having permitting or regulatory authority over water quality issues sometimes provide letters addressing those issues. Those letters include measures recommended to mitigate water quality effects for purposes of NEPA that are not required for the certificate or permit. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA of the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why. In addition, the environmental document should clearly describe the measures the sponsor will carry out to: (1) meet WQC terms or the conditions of any applicable NPDES permits; (2) protect public drinking water supplies or comply with applicable CSGWPPs; (3) develop oil response plans designed to contain any potential spills of oil or oilbased products associated with the proposed action; (4) meet any other substantial water quality concerns that water quality agencies identify; or (5) use BMPs or BATs.
Note: 40 CFR Section 112 and 40 CFR Section 112.20(h) present regulations for oil pollution prevention and the contents of a facility response plan, respectively.

8.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. FAA must prepare an EIS if mitigation will not reduce water quality impacts below the significance impact threshold in paragraph 7 above. In addition to the information discussed above, to the extent possible the EIS should contain the following information. (1) The results of added, project-specific, water quality studies FAA and Federal, state, or local water quality agencies agree on during EIS scoping or during the EIS process. (2) A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Department of the Army (Army) contains a provision for elevating disputes concerning dredge and fill permit applications (Section 404 permit applications) with the Army. Use of this provision typically occurs when an Army District Engineer is considering denial of a Section 404 permit or requiring conditions that would cause substantial, unacceptable conditions to DOT agencies (e.g., habitat attractive to wildlife hazardous to aviation). Therefore, if an airport action involves a Section 404 permit process that requires the responsible FAA official to elevate permit decisions to Army headquarters, contact the Airport Planning and Environmental Division (APP-400). APP-400 will help the responsible FAA official comply with the provisions of the MOA. APP-400 will also provide the follow-up actions that may be needed at the Washington, D.C., headquarters level to resolve differences. The EIS should contain the results of any dispute resolution process.

Chap. 20

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WATER QUALITY

b. Mitigation. The EIS should identify and describe any mitigation measures that Federal, state, tribal, or local agencies having permitting or regulatory authority over water quality issues recommend for purposes of NEPA in addition to those required as a condition on any water quality permit or license. FAA and the airport sponsor should fully consider the recommended mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action. The document should explain why the sponsor or FAA has not adopted any mitigation agencies have recommended. If feasible, the EIS should include an estimated schedule for the airport sponsor to undertake accepted mitigation.

Chap. 20

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 21. WETLANDS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

WETLANDS

a. Nonjurisdictional wetlands. Nonjurisdictional wetlands do not involve navigable waters because they are not connected to or adjacent to navigable waters of the United States (U.S.). Dredge and fill activities in these wetlands do not require U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) approvals, but these wetlands are natural resources FAA must assess under NEPA. In addition, two other documents provide direction and instruction on assessing impacts of Federal actions on these nonjurisdictional wetlands. Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, sets the standard for a Federal agency action involving any wetland. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) developed and issued DOT Order 5660.1A, Preservation of the Nation's Wetlands to provide more guidance to DOT agencies regarding their actions in wetlands. The DOT Order governs the Federal Aviation Administrations (FAAs) actions. The Order defines wetlands as:
Lowlands covered with shallow and sometimes temporary or intermittent waters. This includes, but is not limited to, swamps, marshes, bogs, sloughs, potholes, wet meadows, river overflows, tidal overflows, estuarine areas, and shallow lakes and ponds with emergent vegetation. Areas covered with water for such a short time that there is no effect on moist-soil vegetation are not included in the definition, nor are the permanent waters of streams, reservoirs, and deep lakes. The wetlands ecosystem includes those areas which affect or are affected by the wetland area itself; e.g., adjacent uplands or regions up and down stream. An activity may affect the wetlands indirectly by impacting regions up or down stream from the wetland or by disturbing the water table of the area in which the wetland lies.

b. Jurisdictional wetlands. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) governs the dredging and filling of navigable waters of the U.S. The term, navigable waters of the U.S. includes wetlands connected or adjacent to navigable waters of the U.S. Navigable waters of the U.S. are those waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide and/or are used, have been used in the past, or may be susceptible to use to transport interstate or foreign commerce (see 33 CFR Section 329.4). In carrying out Section 404, the Corps uses 33 CFR Parts 320 through 330 to define wetlands under its jurisdiction. To conduct dredge or fill activities in these wetlands, the Corps must issue a permit authorizing those activities. Wetlands under the Corps jurisdiction are:
[A]reas that surface or groundwater inundate or saturate at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.

c. Wetland delineation standards. The definitions presented above include three basic elements: hydrology, vegetation, and soil type. A qualified wetland delineation specialist should evaluate the proposed sites characteristics to determine if an airport development action affects an area meeting either of the above definitions. The delineation must follow the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Technical Report Y-87-1). The Corps, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other Federal agencies use this manual to standardize wetland delineations and to govern the procedures for Federal actions affecting those ecosystems.

Chap. 21

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

d. Practicable alternative. Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, and DOT Order 5660.1A, Preservation of Wetlands, requires Federal agencies to avoid wetlands when a practicable alternative avoiding a wetland exists (See section 2 of this chapter). A practicable alternative is an alternative that is possible (i.e., feasible), after considering the alternatives: (1) safety aspects; (2) ability to meet the actions transportation objectives; and (3) ability to meet accepted design, engineering, environmental, economic, or any other applicable factors. Note: Some additional cost alone does not necessarily make an alternative [or minimization measure] impractical, since such cost may be recognized as necessary and justified to meet national wetlands policy objectives. e. New construction. This term includes any draining, dredging, channelizing, filling, diking, impounding, and related activities, any structures or facilities. According to DOT Order 5660.1A, Preservation of the Nations Wetlands, paragraph 4.b, this term does not include routine repairs and maintenance of existing facilities. For new construction in wetlands, FAA should provide the public and agencies with special interest in wetlands appropriate opportunity for early review of the proposal. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.
SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Requires Federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long-term and short-term adverse impacts associated with the destruction or modification of wetlands and to avoid direct or indirect support of new construction in wetlands wherever there is a practicable alternative. Provides DOT agencies with instructions on how to carry out Executive Order 11990. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS Executive Order 11990 Protection of Wetlands, (42 FR 26961, 1977) DOT Order 5660.1A Preservation of the Nations Wetlands, dated August 24, 1978 Clean Water Act (Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 USC 1251, et seq. (P.L. 92-500)). See 40 CFR Parts 110-112, 116, 117, 122, 125, 129, 130, 131, 136, and 403 for regulations implementing this Act CWA Section 404, 33 USC 1344. See 33 CFR Parts 320330 for Corps regulations implementing the Act. See 40 CFR Part 230 for Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA)

DOT

DOT

Maintains and restores the physical, biological, and chemical integrity of the nations waters.

EPA/Corps

States the Corps or those states delegated authority to run the Section 404 permit program are responsible for regulating placing dredged or fill material in U.S. waters, including jurisdictional wetlands.

Corps/State Environmental Agencies

Chap. 21

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS 404(b)(1) guidelines. Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 USC 401, et seq., 30 Stat. 1151

WETLANDS

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION This law protects the navigability of waters used for commerce.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY Corps

Regulates building any obstacle (i.e., jetty, breakwater, wharf pier, boom, bulkhead, etc.) in Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, Corps any port, harbor, canal, navigable water, or other Section 10, 33 USC 403 U.S. waters located outside fixed harbor lines or in areas where no harbor line exists. When processing requests for Federal approval of or financing actions in wetlands or waterways, this Act requires Federal agencies to consider Fish and Wildlife Coordination FWS/State Wildlife U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and state Act, as amended, 16 USC 661, Agencies wildlife agency comments on action impacts on et seq. wildlife. For purposes of the Act, the term wildlife includes birds, fish, mammals, etc. and vegetation on which they depend. Note: Regulations for Section 404 permitting are at 33 CFR Part 323. Regulations on dams and dikes in navigable waters are at 33 CFR Part 321. Regulations for other work affecting navigable waters are at 33 CFR Part 322. Regulations addressing seaplane operations are at 33 CFR Section 322.5(j).

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. If a proposed airport development action involves wetlands, the environmental document prepared for that action must include discussions of potential wetland impacts. Examples of airport actions that could cause wetland impacts include: airside development associated with new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities; new or extended runways and taxiways; and installing navigational aids (NAVAIDS). Examples of landside activities include new or relocated airport access roadways or on-airport remote parking or rental car facilities. b. Actions affecting wetlands. An airport action affects a wetland if it: (1) requires building a structure, facility, or other development in a wetland; (2) requires dredging, filling, draining, channelizing, diking, impounding, or other direct effects on a wetland; (3) requires disturbing the water table of an area in which a wetland is located; or (4) indirectly affects a wetland because it impacts areas upstream or downstream of the wetland or it introduces secondary development that would affect a wetland.
Note: Contact the Corps, FWS, or State or local natural resource agency if uncertainty exists about whether an area is a wetland.

c. Actions not affecting wetlands. If an action would not involve wetlands, the environmental document need not meet the requirements of this chapter. The document should simply state the action would not affect a wetland. Chap. 21 Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

d. FAA alternatives analysis. To comply with Section 404 guidelines, Executive Order 11990, and DOT Order 5660.1A, the responsible FAA official must consider practicable alternatives that would avoid affecting wetlands. If the sponsor proposes an action in a wetland, but later the sponsor decides to select an alternative that avoids the wetland or FAA will approve a location that avoids the wetland, the environmental document should explain how the location achieves the purpose and need while avoiding wetland impacts. e. Determining if FAA may categorically exclude an airport action involving a wetland. If an airport action that is normally categorically excluded (Order 5050.4B, Tables 6-1 and 6-2) involves wetland dredging or filling, the responsible FAA official must determine if an action affects a nonjurisdictional or jurisdictional wetland. If the action involves a nonjurisdictional wetland, the actions design must meet the design standards defined in a General Permit (General Permits include Nationwide Permits (NWP), Regional General Permits and State Program General Permits) that would have applied had the action involved a jurisdictional wetland. If the action involves a jurisdictional wetland, the actions design must meet the design standards that would qualify the action for a General Permit. Whether the action involves a nonjurisdictional or jurisdictional wetland, the responsible FAA official must determine if the action involves an extraordinary circumstance (see Paragraph 304 of FAA Order 1050.1E or Table 6-3 of FAA Order 5050.4B). The official must then decide if the action still qualifies as a categorical exclusion. If the action qualifies for a categorical exclusion, an EA or EIS is not needed.
Note: In some areas, such as FAAs Great Lakes Region, state agencies have assumed some of the Corps general permit program responsibilities. Contact the appropriate Corps office for information about similar state programs to ensure the sponsor completes the applicable permit process.

4.

PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Sponsor's statement. To satisfy the Orders protecting wetlands, the responsible FAA official should ensure there are no practicable alternatives that would avoid placing the airport action in a wetland (see section 1.d of this chapter). For example, many airport development actions require construction of a facility at a specific location to ensure safe, efficient airport or aircraft operations. In other instances, airport design criteria such as runway wind coverage are essential for safe aircraft operations. In both cases, avoiding a wetland may not be practicable. As a result, when a sponsor proposes an action that would unavoidably involve a wetland, the sponsor should provide the FAA with an analysis explaining why the wetland is the only practicable location for the proposed action. FAA will consider this information in its independent evaluation of alternatives (see 40 CFR Section 1506.5). b. Sponsor's assurance. When the sponsor determines the action must occur in a wetland, it should also provide FAA information on how the action's design would include all practicable measures to minimize unavoidable wetland impacts. FAA will consider this information in its independent evaluation of the measures that will be used to minimize harm to wetlands (See 40 CFR Section 1506.5).

Chap. 21

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

c. Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit. Issuance of this permit is not needed to complete the environmental document, but the environmental document must contain information on the status of the sponsors Section 404 permit application. To approve an airport action in wetlands or waterways that does not qualify for a General Permit, the responsible FAA official must have reasonable assurance from the Corps verifying that the requirements can be met. The reasonable assurance could be made via a statement, memo, letter, or other correspondence. The environmental document should contain information verifying the sponsor has started consulting with the Corps. The NEPA document must report the status of the Section 404 permit application process. FAAs approval of the action does not remove a sponsors need to get a Section 404 permit.
Note: Some states require the sponsor to get state permits authorizing work in wetlands. Permit issuance is not needed to complete the environmental document, but that document must contain information on the status of the sponsors state wetland permit application. FAA approval does not remove a sponsors need to get a state permit from the proper state agency.

d. Agency letters. An appendix to the environmental document should contain any correspondence containing Federal or State agency opinions on action-related wetland impacts. Correspondence often can identify potential issues the environmental document should address. (1) The responsible FAA official or sponsor should forward to the Corps copies of comments about wetland impacts received during the NEPA process. (2) As part of the NEPA and 404 processes, the responsible FAA official should ensure that any comments about 404 permit issues are addressed during consultations with the Corps District Engineer responsible for the affected wetland. (3) As part of the NEPA process addressing wetland impacts, the responsible FAA official should ensure the environmental document includes the concerns of the state agency responsible for permitting actions affecting wetlands and a discussion on how the sponsor will address those concerns.
Note: See Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference for Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requirements (16 USC Section 662(a)) when an action affects water resources, which include wetlands.

e. Wetland banking. If the sponsor, FAA, and the permitting agency agree that wetland banking is suitable mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts, the environmental document should contain a copy of any agreement on the use of a wetland bank. To comply with FAAs Wetland Banking Strategy of July 1996, this agreement should verify the following facts about the specific number of credits bought in the bank: (1) the bank will meet defined wetland success criteria; (2) a specific number of credits will be withdrawn from the banks total credit allotment to compensate for action-related impacts; (3) the sponsors purchase of these credits satisfies some or all of its wetland mitigation requirements for the proposed action; and

Chap. 21

Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (4) the mitigation will not create or worsen wildlife hazards to aviation.

WETLANDS

Note: For further information about mitigation banking, see the Federal Guidance for the Establishment, Use and Operation of Mitigation Banks, 60 FR 58605 (November. 28, 1995).

g. FAA's finding under Executive Order 11990 and DOT Order 5660.1A. For new construction actions located in wetlands, the approving FAA official should make a written finding in an EA, its FONSI, the Final EIS, or the ROD. In summary, the environmental document should contain information verifying the following facts: (1) There is no practicable alternative to the construction; and (2) The action includes all practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands that construction would cause. In considering practicable measures, FAA may take into account economic, environmental, transportation, and other pertinent factors.
Note: See section 6.e of this chapter for information on the extent of mitigation the NEPA document should contain.

5.

ENVIRONMENT COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. Required consultation. Early consultation with the agencies listed below during the environmental review process may provide the sponsor with an opportunity to consider other locations that do not involve wetlands or waterways. This effort also alerts the sponsor and FAA to problems the consulted agencies may have regarding a proposed actions design. If there is no practicable alternative to avoiding an action affecting a wetland, consultation allows the sponsor to: (1) notify the agencies of that fact and explain why other alternatives are not practicable; (2) try to resolve issues about the actions use of the wetland; and (3) include ways to minimize the proposed actions unavoidable impacts. Failing to address and resolve these issues may alter the start of the action and its completion because the necessary permits could be either denied or delayed. As noted earlier, NEPA documents for airport actions requiring wetland dredging or filling should provide reasonable assurances that the sponsor consulted with Federal and state agencies responsible for permitting actions affecting wetlands. These reasonable assurances should be included in an appendix to the environmental document as a memo, letter, or other correspondence.
Note: See Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference for Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requirements (16 USC Section 662(a)) when an action affects water resources, which include wetlands. Often agencies having concerns for aquatic organisms in wetlands will provide comments. If another section of the environmental document addresses impacts on a resource occurring in the affected wetland, the environmental documents wetlands chapter should summarize those effects and provide the page numbers of the document or the appendices where the reader would find the detailed information on the affected resource.

Chap. 21

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

b. Roles of various agencies and the public during wetland consultation. Besides the Corps, various agencies often have jurisdiction over wetlands. The following information identifies different entities and their areas of concern: (1) The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). As noted earlier, compliance with the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act requires consultation with FWS when an action would affect a wetland or water body. This consultation focuses on how the action would affect habitats and the corresponding environmental consequences to wildlife. See Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference for more information. (2) The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). NMFS is responsible for protecting wetlands or waters that sustain marine mammal and marine fish communities. Contact NMFS when an action would affect tidal wetlands, estuaries, or marine ecosystems. Chapter 2 of this Desk Reference presents information on the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, as amended (16 USC Section 1801, et seq.). (3) The Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS). NRCS (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) delineates agricultural wetlands. The Food Security Act Manual is to be used to delineate agricultural wetlands whereas delineation of non-agricultural wetlands follows the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Contact NRCS for actions that would affect agricultural wetlands. (4) EPA. Under Section 404(b) of the CWA, EPA may object to the Corps issuance of a 404 permit. Consultation with EPA is important to ensure the sponsors proposal addresses EPAs concerns. (5) Other Federal agencies. Besides the agencies noted above, contact with other agencies may be needed. Ask the agencies discussed above if they know of other Federal agencies that may have an interest in a proposed actions effect on wetlands. (6) State wetland agencies and State wildlife agencies. Besides complying with Federal wetland laws and regulations, compliance with state wetland requirements is often necessary to get state approval of a proposed action. In addition, under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, FAA needs to consult with the state agency having administration over the wildlife resources. Contact the state agency having jurisdiction over the affected wetlands and the agency having administration over the states affected wildlife. Use the procedures in Executive Order 12372 (this replaces A-95 Clearinghouse instructions) if you need information about contacting appropriate state agencies. (7) Public involvement. Public involvement helps FAA recognize the issues concerning the public and resource agencies. Such involvement promotes efficient environmental review processes and avoids delays in completing the processes that would occur when those processes omit evaluating wetland impacts or other information needed for wetland-related approvals or permits. If FAA is not preparing an EIS for an action involving a wetland, the responsible FAA official should ensure the public has an early opportunity to review the action (Executive Order 11990, section 2(b)).

Chap. 21

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

c. Timely permit issuance. The Corps, EPA, FWS, NRCS, and NMFS are Federal agencies that might have wetlands concerns. In addition, most states have at least one agency responsible for protecting wetlands. There are local natural resource agencies that may have responsibility or concern for protecting wetlands. Also, the public may have concerns. These interested parties often have conflicting missions or differing ideas on how to minimize wetland impacts. Addressing any concerns early in the planning and environmental processes may avoid delays in action approval or construction. Experience shows that substantial interaction among sponsors and these agencies facilitates permitting or approval processes. d. Integrating Section 404 permitting and NEPA. Integrating Section 404 permitting and NEPA increases the likelihood that one NEPA document will contain the information and findings needed for Corps and FAA decisions (40 CFR Section 1500.5(h)). It also strengthens efficient and consistent consideration of public concerns. In addition, integrating these processes increases the likelihood the agencies will make their respective decisions on the proposed action at similar times. To properly integrate the 404 and NEPA processes, it is essential the sponsor meet early with the Corps FAA, and other parties interested in the actions effects on wetlands.
Note: For guidance on integrating these processes, review the following as needed: 33 CFR Part 320, General Regulatory Policies; 33 CFR Part 25, Appendix B, the NEPA implementing procedures for the regulatory program; Corps Pamphlet EP 1145-2-1, dated May 1985, and 40 CFR Part 1500.

e. Actions involving leases, easements, right-of-ways, or disposal. When Federally-owned wetlands or portions of them are proposed for lease, easement, right-ofway, or disposal to a non-Federal public or private party, FAA should do the following to comply with DOT Order 5660.1A, paragraph 7.e and FAA Order 1050.1E, Appx. A, paragraph 18.4c: (1) ensure the conveyance references those uses restricted by relevant Federal, State, or local wetland regulations; (2) attach other appropriate restrictions on how the grantee or property purchaser and any successor may use the properties, except where prohibited by law; or (3) withhold the properties from disposal. 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. After determining there are no practicable alternatives that avoid a wetland, unavoidable wetland impacts should be analyzed. Various wetland models have been developed to assess effects on wetland hydrology, vegetation, or soil. Analysts use the results of these models as aids in determining an actions impacts on wetland functions and values. Consult the local Corps district office to determine the methods to assess wetland functions and values. b. Information needed to determine wetland effects. If the proposed action would affect a wetland, and no practicable alternative that avoids the wetland exists, the environmental document must provide the following information. Chap. 21 Page 8

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

(1) A description of the location, types, and extent of wetlands the action and its alternatives would affect. Contact the FWS, Corps, or State or local agencies responsible for wetlands in the affected area for information, if needed. (2) A description of potential impacts on the following wetland resources as appropriate. (a) water quality; (b) effects on water supply and the capability to recharge that supply; (c) interference with surface or subsurface water flows; (d) the levels of siltation or sedimentation the action would cause; (e) the disruption of the affected wetlands biotic community; or (f) the effects of storm hazards, floods, or the ability to store storm runoff or storm flows.
Note: If another section of the environmental document addresses impacts on a resource occurring in the affected wetland (for example, secondary or induced impacts, construction, etc.), the wetlands chapter should summarize those effects and provide the page numbers of the document or the appendices where the reader would find the detailed information on the affected resource.

c. A wetland in coastal zones. A wetland in or adjacent to a coastal area may be subject to state coastal zone management program. Therefore, if this situation applies to the proposed action or a reasonable alternative, the environmental documents wetlands chapter should summarize information about coastal wetland resources and refer the reader to the coastal zone resources chapter for more details. See Chapter 4 of this Desk Reference for information on assessing impacts on coastal zone resources. d. Section 4(f) Applicability to wetlands. Section 4(f) of the DOT Act may apply if wetlands are publicly owned lands. See Chapter 7 of this Desk Reference for information on assessing impacts to Section 4(f) resources. e. Mitigation. The environmental document should include a description of conceptual measures the sponsor proposes to mitigate unavoidable wetland impacts. A comprehensive, completed mitigation plan is not necessary for FAAs purposes. However, sponsors should note that, as the Section 404 permitee, it will likely be required to develop a detailed plan satisfactory to the Corps to comply with the applicable Section 404 permit including both individual and General Permits. Mitigation may include some of the following measures:

Chap. 21

Page 9

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE (1) changes to action design, construction, or operation;

WETLANDS

(2) pavement runoff collection to prevent direct discharges to sensitive wetland areas; (3) provisions to treat waste; (4) special construction controls; or (5) compatible land use development. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. The responsible FAA official should consider the following thresholds and factors in consultation with agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise on wetlands.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD When an action would: Adversely affect a wetlands function to protect the
quality or quantity of a municipal water supply, including
sole source aquifers and a potable water aquifer.
Substantially alter the hydrology needed to sustain the
affected wetlands values and functions or those of a
wetland to which it is connected.
Substantially reduce the affected wetlands ability to
retain floodwaters or storm runoff, thereby threatening
public health, safety or welfare. The last term includes
cultural, recreational, and scientific public resources or property important to the public. Adversely affect the maintenance of natural systems
supporting wildlife and fish habitat or economically
important timber, food, or fiber resources of the affected or
surrounding wetlands.
Promote development of secondary activities or services
that would affect the above functions.
Be inconsistent with applicable State wetland strategies. From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B. FACTORS TO CONSIDER

None.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction of or expertise on wetlands normally provide letters addressing an actions effects on those resources. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters

Chap. 21

Page 10

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the mitigation was not adopted. (1) The NEPA document should include a description of conceptual measures the sponsor proposes to mitigate unavoidable wetland impacts. A comprehensive, completed mitigation plan is not necessary for FAAs purposes. However, sponsors should note that, as the Section 404 permitee, they will likely be required to develop a detailed plan satisfactory to the Corps to comply with a Section 404 permit or the applicable NWP. (2) The responsible FAA official, in cooperation with Airports Certification Officers and Wildlife Services staff, should review the mitigation plan to ensure it does not create or worsen wildlife hazards to aviation. See Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33A, Wildlife Hazards on and near Airports, for more information about this important safety concern. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. When FAA prepares an EIS addressing significant wetland impacts, the responsible FAA official should consider inviting the Corps and State wetland agency as cooperating agencies due to their permitting authority and expertise on wetlands. In addition, the responsible FAA official should ensure the EIS contains the information in this section (Section 8).b-e as well as the information discussed in other sections of this chapter. b. Review the practicability of alternatives. Review all alternatives to ensure there is no practicable alternative that avoids the wetland. c. Further considerations. Review the information the NEPA document provides to address the issues noted in other parts of this chapter. As needed, include new information specific to the proposed action that FAA and the appropriate resource agency or agencies determine necessary to correct any deficiencies in the EIS section addressing wetland impacts. Some of that new information may include the following, if it applies to the proposed action: (1) Added information. As appropriate, the information may address some or all of the following factors listed in Executive Order 11990: (a) Public health, safety, and welfare. This may include: water supply, water quality, and water supply recharge (surface and/or aquifer) and discharge; pollution control; flood and storm water control; or sediment and erosion control. (b) Natural system maintenance. This may include conservation measures needed to sustain: long-term productivity of existing wetland fauna (fish, wildlife, birds) and flora (timber, food and fiber resources); species and habitat diversity; species and habitat stability; or hydrologic utility. (c) Other public interest wetland uses. These uses may include recreational, scientific, or cultural wetland use.

Chap. 21

Page 11

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WETLANDS

(2) Input from expertise agencies. Include input of wetland agencies addressing the survival and quality of the action-affected wetland resources. (3) Other Considerations. Include information addressing aeronautical safety, transportation objectives, economics and other factors that may affect or are related to the action. d. Wildlife hazard information. Include information to determine if the proposed mitigation would make existing habitats attractive or more attractive to wildlife that would be hazardous to aviation. Review FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 150/5200-33A, Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near Airports, for more information about this. e. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed practicable, conceptual mitigation. This includes mitigation that agencies with jurisdiction or expertise on wetlands recommend. FAA should evaluate the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed action, including the mitigations effects on aviation safety. Include sponsor commitments to carry out the mitigation. Explain why the sponsor or FAA rejected any mitigation or land uses the agencies recommend. Provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation. g. Finding under Executive Order 11990 and DOT Order 5660.1A. When an EIS addresses a new construction action located in a wetland, the approving FAA official should make a written finding to comply with Executive Order 11990 and DOT Order 5660.1A. The EIS or its accompanying Record of Decision should contain information verifying the facts listed in sections 4.g.(1) and (2) of this chapter.

Chap. 21

Page 12

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

CHAPTER 22. WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

a. General. "Wild and scenic rivers are those rivers having remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish, wildlife, historic, or cultural values. Federal land management agencies in the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture manage the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (Act).1 The National Park Service (NPS) has the primary role in maintaining the National Rivers Inventory discussed in section 1.b. of this chapter. The Wild and Scenic Rivers program is more commonly referred to as the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (WSRS). b. The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System (WSRS). This is a list of rivers the Secretaries of the Interior or Agriculture have determined have the special values mentioned above. The primary purpose of the WSRS is to protect the rivers free-flowing characteristics. Toward that end, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission cannot license activities that affect the free-flowing nature of these rivers. Further, other Federal agencies, like FAA, may not assist, by loan, grant, or license or other authorizations, a water resources action that would have a direct or adverse effect on the values for which the river was designed. As a result, FAA must analyze the adverse effects a proposed water resources action may have on the free-flowing nature of these rivers or their natural, cultural, or recreational values. This chapter discusses how to examine an actions potential impacts on river segments designated or eligible to be included in the WSRS. c. The National Rivers Inventory (NRI). The NRI lists more than 3,400 free-flowing river segments having at least one outstanding scenic, natural or cultural feature. It also provides information on statewide river assessments or Federal agencies involved in those assessments. Listing on the NRI means the Federal government is protecting these rivers and streams while agencies are considering the river for designation to the WSRS. The NPS, through The Rivers and Trails Conservation Assistance Program, maintains the NRI. d. Water resource action. This definition includes construction or development that would affect the free-flowing characteristics of a Wild and Scenic River or a Study River. e. Study river area. This is a river and the bordering area (located within a -mile area of the ordinary high watermark on each side of the river) designated for study or

The Department of the Interior agencies are: the National Park Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Department of Agriculture agency is the U.S. Forest Service. This chapter refers to these agencies as managing agencies.

Chap. 22

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

potential addition to the WSRS.2 The corridor is established to protect the free-flowing nature, water quality, and outstandingly remarkable values of a river.3 Evaluation of the study area is needed to determine if the river has the characteristics that qualify it for inclusion in the WSRS.
Note: The corridor could be wider if needed to protect the resource.

f. Free-flowing characteristics. These are the existing or natural flowing conditions of a river in the WSRS or NRI. Typically, these natural flows exist because no diversions, impoundments, or rip-rap have been installed nor has man altered the waterways natural course. 2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS.

APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION This Act: selects certain rivers of the nation having remarkable scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife, historic, cultural, or other similar values; preserves the rivers free-flowing conditions and protects the areas in their immediate areas; and strives to balance river development with permanent protection of the countrys most outstanding freeflowing rivers. Regulations here apply to Federal assistance used in building water resources actions that affect the Wild and Scenic Rivers System or Study Rivers the Secretary of Agriculture manages in whole or in part.

OVERSIGHT AGENCY Department of the Interior (National Park Service (NPS); U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS); or Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and The Department of Agriculture (U.S. Forest Service (USFS).

The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, 16 USC 1271-1287

36 CFR, Part 297, Subpart A, Water Resources Actions

NPS, FWS, BLM, and USFS

Title 16 USC, Section 1275.(d). As a policy matter, we have decided to use the -mile standard noted in Section 1275.(d) for study rivers as the limit of our impact analysis for both WSRS and NRI rivers. This will ensure we properly assess potential impacts on these important river reaches.
2 3

Source: 36 CFR Part 297.3(c) and the Interagency Wild & Scenic Rivers Council.

Chap. 22

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

Underscores the need to strengthen the WSRS by directing Federal agencies to set an example of sound management for State, local and private landowners. To do so, Federal agencies are to take an aggressive role in protecting Wild and Scenic Rivers flowing through public lands. These agency efforts include all rivers and segments listed in the NRI. This document provides information on determining if a stream or river has the characteristics that would qualify it for designation. CEQ issued this guidance because development outpaces the Federal governments ability to protect rivers having characteristics qualifying them for the WSRS. Failure to assess and avoid effects could foreclose a rivers eligibility for that System. Therefore, Federal agencies must: determine if their actions would adversely affect the characteristics of an NRI river that would qualify it for the System; and. study and develop reasonable alternatives that would avoid or mitigate impacts.

Presidential Memorandum to the Heads of Departments and Agencies on National Rivers Inventory, dated August 2, 1979

FAA

Wild and Scenic River Guidelines for Eligibility, Classification and Management of River Areas, dated 47 Federal Register (FR) 39454, dated September 7, 1982

Departments of the Interior and Agriculture

CEQ Procedures for Interagency Consultation to Avoid or Mitigate Adverse Effects on Rivers of the Nationwide Inventory, dated, 45 FR 59190, dated September 8, 1980

CEQ

3. APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS. The environmental analysis of a proposed airport action that involves a water resource action (see section 1.d of this chapter) that may affect a WSRS or NRI river must include discussions of potential impacts to the river. Typical airport actions that could result in impacts to these rivers include: airfield/landside expansion into a river (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated access roadways, remote parking facilities, and rental car lots; or a significant increase or change in aircraft operations. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS.

a. Notifying the appropriate agency. Before approving a water resource action on or adjacent to a WSRS river and a river that Congress designated for study, the responsible FAA official must ensure the sponsor obtains a Section 7 Consent Determination (see section 4.b of this chapter). No less than 60 days before FAA makes a decision on a water resources action, the responsible FAA official must send a notice to the Secretary of Agriculture about

Chap. 22

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE FAAs intent to approve the proposed action. information per 36 CFR Section 297.4: (1) action name and location; (2) name of the affected river;

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS FAAs notice must contain the following

(3) the nature of FAAs authorization (e.g., an unconditional ALP approval); (4) a description of the proposed action; and (5) any relevant information such as plans, maps, and environmental analyses. b. Section 7 Consent Determination. When a water resources action involves a WSRS river, the responsible FAA official must ensure the airport sponsor obtains a Section 7 Determination from the Secretary of Agriculture (36 CFR Section 297.5). The Secretary will not consent to the proposed water resources action, if that action would: (1) directly or adversely affect the values for which a Wild and Scenic River or Study River was designated when any part of the water resource action is within the rivers boundaries; (2) invade or unreasonably diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish or wildlife values of the Wild and Scenic River if any portion of the water resource action is located above, below, or outside this water body; or (3) invade or diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish and wildlife values of a Study River if the water resource is located above, below, or outside the Study River during the study period. c. Denial of a Section 7 Consent Determination. FAA may not approve the water resource action if the Secretary of Agriculture denies the Consent Determination. However, the Secretary may recommend measures to eliminate the adverse effects. FAA may encourage the airport sponsor to file revised plans based on those recommendations for further consideration. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. General. The Airport sponsor or responsible FAA official must determine if their proposed water resource action would occur near a designated WSRS River or Study River. The sponsor should consult the NPS, USFS, USFWS, or BLM. If this consultation indicates that the action is within -mile from the ordinary high water mark on each side of a WSRS or NRI river (-mile boundary) the sponsor should notify the responsible FAA official. This ensures the FAA official or the sponsor completes the steps needed to comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act in a timely manner. Although not required, FAA also recommends Chap. 22 Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

considering impacts to rivers that may be eligible for a state program comparable to the Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers System. This helps to ensure the environmental process addresses water resource action impacts on those protected rivers. b. Wild and Scenic and Congressionally-designated rivers. EAs or EISs prepared for proposed water resource actions that involve WSRS or Congressionally-designated rivers must summarize measures needed to avoid or reduce unavoidable, adverse effects on the river. Analyses should address water resource action impacts to the river or the corridor extending -mile from the ordinary high water mark on each side of the affected river. c. NRI rivers. EAs or EISs prepared that involve these rivers must address effects on these rivers as well. If an agency noted in section 5.a. determines the proposed water resource action could affect an NRI river, refer to CEQ's August 1980 Procedures for Interagency Consultation to Avoid or Mitigate Adverse Effects on Rivers in the National Inventory and its attached Guide for Identifying Potential Adverse Effects for guidance. That publication states Federal agencies should study, develop, and describe reasonable alternatives before making a decision on a water resource action that could alter the characteristics that may qualify the river for the WSRS. Analyses should address water resource action impacts to the river or within its -mile boundary. Agencies must do so to avoid and mitigate adverse effects on those characteristics. The responsible FAA official should ensure consultation with the agency managing the river (i.e., USFS, FWS, NPS, or BLM) has occurred. The responsible FAA official should also ensure the managing agency receives the environmental document for review and comment. The EA or EIS should summarize important comments form the managing agency. It should crossreference the appendix containing documentation of consultation and agency comment letters summarized in the body of the EA or EIS. A proposed water resource action on NRI rivers does not require a Section 7 Determination (see section 4.b. of this chapter). 6. DETERMINING IMPACTS.

a. General. As described in section 4.b. of this chapter, different levels of impact analysis must be conducted for Designated or Study rivers, depending on the proposed water resource actions location. If the proposed water resource action is within the -mile boundaries of a WSRS or NRI river, an evaluation of action effects on the river is needed. The evaluation must determine if the action would directly or adversely affect the values cited for designation or study or that no part of the proposed water resource action is within the river or its -mile boundaries. If the action is located within these boundaries an analysis is needed. That analysis must determine whether the water resource action would not invade or diminish the scenic, recreational, and fish or wildlife values of the Wild and Scenic river or a Study river. b. The evaluation. As noted earlier, the EA or EIS must include documentation of agency coordination. That coordination may be needed to determine if any designated or Chap. 22 Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

Study or NRI river is within the -mile boundary noted in section 6.a of this chapter. If coordination suggests that a designated or eligible river is within that zone, the airport sponsor or responsible FAA official, as appropriate, should conduct an evaluation to determine if the proposed water resource action would adversely affect the river by: (1) destroying or altering the river's free-flowing nature; (2) introducing a visual, audible, or other type of intrusion that is out of character with the river or that would alter outstanding features of the rivers setting; (3) causing the rivers water quality to deteriorate; or (4) allowing the transfer or sale of property interests without restrictions needed to protect the river or its -mile-wide boundaries. 7. DETERMINING IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE.

a. General. After completing the consultation and analyses discussed in other sections of this chapter, use the information in the following table to determine the severity of water resource action impacts on a protected river.
ORDER 1050.1E THRESHOLD FACTORS TO CONSIDER None for determining a significant impact, since FAA does not have a threshold for this resource. Use information in section 6.b. of this chapter when determining if a water resource action would cause an adverse effect.

None.

From: Table 7-1, FAA Order 5050.4B.

b. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, NPS, BLM, FWS, or USFS would normally provide letters addressing action effects on the affected river. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate those effects. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. For Wild and Scenic or Study rivers. When consultation with NPS, BLM, USFWS, or USFS leads FAA to determine that water resource action would preclude the inclusion of a Study river in the WSRS, the responsible FAA official should invite one or more of those

Chap. 22

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS

agencies to be a cooperating agency. The Record of Decision must adopt suitable avoidance and mitigation measures and a monitoring and enforcement program. b. For NRI rivers. If a water resource action requiring an EIS would adversely affect an NRI river, the responsible FAA official should request the agency managing the river be a cooperating agency. If that agency does not respond to such requests for support within 30 days, FAA may proceed, but is should use care to avoid or minimize significant effects on the NRI river. c. Mitigation. The EIS should describe proposed mitigation when NPS, BLM, USFWS, or USFS provide that information. FAA should fully consider the mitigation and balance its benefits against those of the proposed water resource action. Explain why the sponsor or FAA did not adopt any mitigation agencies recommend. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 22

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE CHAPTER 23. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

a. General. This chapter discusses how to consider a proposed actions cumulative impacts. It supplements the information in Chapters 4 and 5 of Order 1050.1E. Cumulative impacts are impacts the proposed action would have on a particular resource when added to impacts on that resource due to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within a defined time and geographical area. Note that this range of actions includes actions FAA itself undertakes as well as those for which any other public or private entity is responsible. According to the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), cumulative impacts represent the:
impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over time.

b. Past actions. When determining how a cumulative impact analysis will assess past activities, the availability of data will determine how to analyze past FAA and non-FAA actions. Due to poor recordkeeping or simply the scarcity of information going back in time, the analysis of some actions may be more qualitative than quantitative. Scoping or consultation is useful in determining the extent of past actions for a cumulative analysis. Information on past actions (i.e., within the past 3 to 5 year) may be available from agencies, tribes, and developers responsible for those actions, but obtaining these data may require close coordination among agencies and other parties. c. Present actions. The cumulative impact analysis should include information on FAA and non-FAA actions within the geographic area and time frame that affect environmental resources the proposed action would affect. Scoping or consultation is useful in determining the extent of present actions for a cumulative analysis. Information on present actions is available from agencies, tribes, and developers responsible for those actions, but obtaining these data may require close coordination among agencies and other parties. d. Reasonably foreseeable actions.1 These are actions that occur on or off-airport. They have been developed with enough specificity to provide useful information to a decision maker and the interested public. Use the following table to help determine if an action is reasonably foreseeable.

From FAA Order 5050.4B, paragraph 9.q.

Chap. 23

Page 1

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

OFF-AIRPORT ACTION.

ON-AIRPORT ACTION. The action is included on an unconditionally approved ALP and the proponent has:

The proponent has committed to completing the proposed action. As a result, the action is or will be the subject of a NEPA document, or a Federal, State, local, or Tribal government permit application or approval and would occur within the same time frames as those evaluated for the proposed airport action.

committed to complete the proposed action depicted on the unconditionally approved ALP; and/or developed preliminary design plans for an action in an Airport Capital Improvement Plan and those plans are available for review by interested parties.

Would affect all, some, or one of the environmental resources the proposed action would affect. Would occur within the same time frames as the time frames analyzed for the proposed airport action.

Would affect all, some, or one of the environmental resources that the proposed action would affect. Would occur within the same time frames as the time frames analyzed for the proposed airport action.

2. APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended contains the statutory framework for consideration of cumulative effects in Federal decisions. The CEQ regulations implementing NEPAs cumulative effects requirements are at 40 CFR Sections 1508.7 and 1508.25(a)(2) and (3).
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS SUMMARY DESCRIPTION Defines cumulative effects. These effects are the incremental adding of a proposed actions effects on an environmental resource to impacts on the same resource due to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions, regardless of the agency or entity undertaking those actions. Individually minor impacts due to actions occurring over time may cause significant impacts when those impacts are collectively evaluated. OVERSIGHT AGENCY

40 CFR Section 1508.7

CEQ

Chap. 23

Page 2

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

This section requires Federal environmental documents to address cumulative actions which, when viewed with other proposed actions, have cumulatively significant impacts. Therefore, those actions and their impacts should be discussed in the same EIS. This document provides CEQ guidance specifically addressing cumulative impacts and the regulations at 40 CFR 1500 et seq. Based on scoping, agencies have the discretion to determine whether and to what extent information about specific past actions is useful when conducting a cumulative impact analysis. The guidance discusses how to determine the past actions needed for agency decision making. Among other things, the guidance notes that agencies may focus on the current aggregate effects of past actions. Agencies need not delve into each individual past actions historical details.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

40 CFR Section 1508.25(a)(2)

CEQ

CEQs Considering Cumulative Effects, January 19972

CEQ

CEQs Guidance on the Consideration of Past Actions in Cumulative Effects Analysis, dated June 24, 2005.3

FAA

3.

APPLICABILITY TO AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS.

a. General. FAA must evaluate any airport development action funded under the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) or subject to FAA approval under NEPA (See Order 5050.4B, paragraph 9.g.(1)-(11)). Part of that evaluation requires FAA to assess a proposed actions direct and indirect impacts on a particular resource. The other part of the NEPA evaluation requires FAA to consider those effects in combination with the effects on the same resource due to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. NEPA requires this to determine if a proposed action would cause any significant cumulative effects. Actions that could cause such impacts include: airside/landside expansion (new or expanded terminal and hangar facilities, new or extended runways and taxiways, navigational aids [NAVAIDS], etc.); land acquisition for aviation-related use, new or relocated

http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/ccenepa/ccenepa.htm

3http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/Guidance_on_CE.pdf

Chap. 23

Page 3

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

access roadways, remote parking facilities and rental car lots; significant changes in aircraft operations; and significant amounts of construction activity. b. Applicability. A cumulative impact analysis is an integral part of an EA or EIS.4 This analysis provides FAA officials with information on impacts resulting from other actions that have occurred or that will occur within a defined time and geographic area. The responsible FAA official uses this information to decide if a proposed airport projects impact to a specific resource would cause a significant impact on that resource when added to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions within a specific geographic area or designated time frame. Applications for permits and licenses under the scopes of other Federal, State, or local agencies are excellent sources of information for defining the scope of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions. (1) Where? This is a specific geographic area. It is that geographical area containing environmental resources the proposed action would affect. Consultation with resource agencies in the affected area is important when defining this area. (2) When? This is a designated time period. Typically, it is the cycle during which the project is expected to affect a resource, ecosystem, or human community. FAA or the sponsor should determine this time period after consulting with agencies having knowledge of other actions in the area the proposed action would affect. See section 6.b. of this chapter (3) What? These are the actions considered in a proposed projects cumulative impact analysis. They include the proposed FAA action and past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions of FAA and/or other entities or individuals. See sections 1.b.-1.d. of this chapter. 4. PERMITS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND APPROVALS. No specific permits, certifications, or approvals are required. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS.

a. General. A cumulative impact analysis is resource specific and generally addresses environmental resources the proposed action would affect (40 CFR Section 1508.7).

4FAA

must also consider cumulative impacts to determine whether there are extraordinary circumstances surrounding a normally categorically excluded action. If such circumstances would occur, FAA must determine if they warrant preparation of an environmental assessment. See FAA Order 5050.4B, Table 6-3; FAA Order 1050.1E, paragraph 304k, and 40 CFR section 1508.7

Chap. 23

Page 4

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

b. Consultation and cooperation are useful tools when developing a cumulative impact analysis. As already noted, information on past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions of other agencies and persons is necessary to properly evaluate cumulative impacts. Gathering this information is critical. Yet, it can be difficult because it typically involves checking with a host of sources. In addition, defining the geographic and temporal boundaries of a cumulative impact analysis adds more difficulty to this effort. If either boundary is too narrow, significant impacts may be missed. If they are too wide, the cumulative impact analysis can be unwieldy and the uncertainty and remoteness of the impacts will be of little benefit to the analysis. Consultation and cooperation are useful tools in completing this step. (1) Federal, State, or local agencies, tribes, private developers, and citizen organizations are excellent sources for information vital in establishing these boundaries. (2) They often provide information on pending permit applications or other documents prepared for actions. Because those applications or documents contain information on past, present, or reasonably foreseeable projects, they are often excellent sources of information necessary for use in the cumulative effects analysis. (3) Therefore, the geographical reach, timing, and information critical to the cumulative analysis should be developed based on information gleaned through consultation and cooperation. Often, scoping or scoping principles are excellent ways to accomplish these tasks. 6. DETERMINING CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. a. General. As noted earlier, cumulative effects may occur when the impacts of an FAA action are considered with the actions of other agencies, tribes, private developers, or FAA. The key question is:
Do the effects of FAAs proposed action on a particular environmental resource, when added to the effects on the same resource due to FAA and non-FAA actions, adversely impact that resource?

Therefore, the cumulative analysis should focus on meaningful impacts, not inconsequential or irrelevant ones. Doing this allows the analysis to focus only on those environmental resources the proposed action (40 CFR Section 1508.7) would affect and the impacts it would cause. b. Affected environment. In addition to characterizing the resources and human communities, defining the affected environment also requires describing the baseline conditions of project-affected resources. Consultation, cooperation, and scoping, once again, play vital roles here. This is because data used to describe the defined affected Chap. 23 Page 5

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

environment depend on information from other governmental or non-governmental sources. Note that the geographic and temporal boundaries for a cumulative analysis are larger than those defined for the project alone. (1) Setting the baseline. The historical context of commonly affected resources included in a cumulative analysis geographic area or time frame are critical in setting the baseline for a cumulative analysis. This is because baseline conditions provide the context for evaluating those impacts. (2) Setting geographic boundaries. To set geographic boundaries, the agency must first determine the area that the proposed action would affect. Then, based upon the resources in the project area and the geographic areas the affected resources occupy, the cumulative impact analysis geographic boundaries are expanded beyond the proposed projects impact area. Examples of geographic boundaries include airsheds, river basins, regional boundaries (e.g., forest or ecological classification), or socioeconomic zones. (3) Setting the time frame. The time frame is the time period during which the project is expected to affect a resource, ecosystem, or human community. The time frame for cumulative effects is not necessarily the life of the project because it includes reasonably foreseeable actions. For example, a cumulative impact analysis focusing on sedimentation impacts during an airport projects 2-year construction period would address the effects of sedimentation on affected water quality and fish populations. Therefore, the analysis would examine sedimentation effects: (a) due to past actions, proposed actions, and any reasonably foreseeable within the 2-year period; and (b) any other reasonably foreseeable action that would occur beyond that 2year period, if that action would affect the same waters and fish populations the proposed action would affect. Again, consultation with resource agencies is critically important in obtaining information to determine the range of actions the cumulative analysis should include. (4) Tools. In addition to the geographic boundaries and time frame, there are other useful aids when defining the affected environment. Examples include the Nature Conservancys Natural Heritage and Conservation Data Programs, the U.S. Geological Surveys (USGS) Biological Resources Divisions, National Biodiversity Information Infrastructure, or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys (EPA) Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program.

Chap. 23

Page 6

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

(a) The Nature Conservancys Natural Heritage and Conservation Data Programs provide current, comprehensive data on the abundance and distribution of rare species and communities. (b) USGS Biological Resources Division consolidates and distributes biological research, inventory, and monitoring data that seven Department of Interior (DOI) agencies collect. The data are used to support management of the nations resources. Its National Biodiversity Information Infrastructure provides a source of comprehensive biological data. (c) The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program identifies the extent and size of regional and national environmental problems. It is useful in identifying the effectiveness or success of various environmental programs and policies. e. Determining environmental effects in the cumulative impact analysis. The complex nature of cumulative impacts means there may be different methods for conducting the analysis. As noted often in this chapter, analysts should broaden their thinking beyond project-specific impacts. Cause and effect relationship tools are generally useful in determining the extent of effects resulting from actions included in this analysis. (1) Broaden the scope. When determining cumulative effects, the agency must go beyond a projects specific effects on a resource. For example, the cumulative impact analysis of an airport expansion projects effect on roadway traffic would consider the increase in passengers, extending roadways that provide terminal access, and other actions planned in the area that add traffic or that would require roadway work. If the associated roadways would reduce a wetland whose primary function is retaining floodwaters, the individual resource analysis would focus on direct impacts to that wetland. The cumulative wetland analysis would assess how project-caused wetland losses added to past, present, and reasonably foreseeable wetland losses would affect flooding potential within the geographic boundaries set for the cumulative impact analysis. (2) Additive effects. The cumulative impact analysis addresses the additive or synergistic effects on resources, ecosystems, or human communities resulting from the proposed actions and other actions included in that analysis. (3) Sustainability. Consider if the cumulative effects would adversely affect the sustainability of the resources, ecosystems, or human communities. In this instance, a qualitative presentation is likely more useful because quantitative data may not be available or difficult to obtain.

Chap. 23

Page 7

AIRPORTS DESK REFERENCE 7. DETERMINING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

a. General. The significance threshold for cumulative impacts varies according to the affected resource. However, after completing the cumulative effects analysis, compare the cumulative impacts against the applicable significance threshold for the resource analyzed. The responsible FAA official should determine if project impacts added to those of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions trigger the significance threshold for the resource analyzed. b. Potential mitigation measures. The Environmental Consequences analysis should address the cumulative effects causing the greatest impact to the affected resources within the time frame and geographical area established for the cumulative impact analysis. c. Mitigation. During the environmental review process, agencies having jurisdiction or special expertise about project-affected resources may provide letters addressing the effects. Often, those letters include recommended measures to mitigate effects. The mitigation should focus on measures that would most effectively reduce cumulative impacts to affected resources. An appendix to the environmental document should include copies of those letters. The environmental document should summarize the most important information in those letters and accurately cross-reference the appendix and pages in that appendix for further information. If the FAA or the sponsor does not adopt any recommended mitigation, the environmental document should clearly explain why the recommendation was not adopted. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CONTENT.

a. General. Preparers may present cumulative analysis information in a separate chapter addressing cumulative effects. Logically, that chapter would follow those chapters discussing environmental consequences, because information in those chapters focuses on resources the project alone would affect. As an alternative, preparers may include a cumulative impact analysis in the documents Environmental Consequences section discussing each project-affected environmental resource. That analysis should be in a clearly marked Cumulative Analysis subsection at the end of the discussion on a particular resource. b. Mitigation. Describe proposed mitigation when FWS or other consulted agencies provide such recommendations. FAA should fully consider those measures and balance their benefits against those of the proposed action. Explain why FAA or the sponsor did not adopt any recommended measure. If feasible, provide an estimated schedule for undertaking accepted mitigation.

Chap. 23

Page 8