LTD W Eugene EmX Ext Project. Amazon Alignment Alternative

New Search

Questions and Answers on the Application of the Section 4(0 De Minimis Impact Criteria... Page 5 of 7 3. The public has been afforded an opportunity to review and comment on the effects of the project on the protected activities, features, and attributes of the Section 4(f) resource. Question C. What officials are considered to be "officials with jurisdiction" over a park, recreation area, or wildlife or waterfowl refuge for the purposes of the de minimis impact finding? Answer: The officials with jurisdiction are the officials of an agency or agencies that own or administer a Section 4(f) property and who are empowered to represent that agency on related matters. In some cases, the agency that owns or administers the land has either delegated or relinquished its authority to another agency. In those cases, FHWA or FTA should review the applicable agreements to determine which agency or agencies have the authority to concur in the assessment of impacts to the property. Question D. How should Section 6(0 of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act (LWCFA) or other U.S. Department of Interior (DOI) grants -in -aid programs be treated in de minimis impact findings? Answer: De minimis impact findings will satisfy Section 4(f) requirements only. For projects that propose the use of land from a property or site purchased or improved with funds under the LWCFA, the Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act (Dingell- Johnson Act), the Federal Aid in Wildlife Act (Pittman - Robertson Act), or other similar law, or the lands are otherwise encumbered with a Federal interest, coordination with the appropriate Federal agency is required to ascertain the agency's position on the land conversion or transfer. Other federal requirements that may apply to the Section 4(f) land should be determined through consultation with the officials with jurisdiction or appropriate DOI or other federal official. These federal agencies may have regulatory or other requirements for converting land to a different use. These requirements are independent of the de minimis impact finding and must be satisfied. Question E. Is consultation with DOI routinely required for de minimis impact findings? Answer: No. As a routine matter, FHWA and FTA do not need to consult with the DOI on de minimis impact findings. Where the Section 4(f) resource involved is owned or administered by the DOI, FHWA or FTA will need the written concurrence of the appropriate DOI official as the official with jurisdiction. If the Section 4(f) resource is encumbered with a Federal interest as a result of a DOI grant, then the answer to Question D applies. Question F. Does the concurrence of the official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource need to be in writing? Answer: Yes. The concurrence of the official(s) with jurisdiction that the protected activities, features, and attributes of the resource are not adversely affected must be in writing. The written concurrence can be in the form of a signed letter on agency letterhead, signatures in concurrence blocks on transportation agency documents, agreements provided via e -mail or other method deemed acceptable by the FHWA Division Administrator or FTA Regional Administrator. Obtaining these agreements in writing is consistent with effective practices related to preparing project administrative records. Question G. What constitutes compliance with the public notice, review and comment requirements related to de minimis impact findings? Answer: Information supporting a de minimis impact finding should be included in the appropriate NEPA document prepared for the project. This information includes, at a minimum, a description of the involved Section 4(f) resource(s), the impact(s) to the resources and any impact avoidance, minimization, and mitigation or enhancement measures that are included in the project as part of the de minimis impact finding. The public involvement requirements related to the specific NEPA document and process will, in most cases, be sufficient to satisfy the public notice and comment requirements for the de minimis impact finding. In general, for highway projects, the public notice and comment process related to de minimis impact findings will be accomplished through the State DOT's approved public involvement process[15j. For those actions that do not routinely require public review and comment (e.g., certain categorical exclusions and reevaluations) but for which a de minimis impact finding will be made, a separate public notice and opportunity for review and comment will be necessary. In these cases, appropriate public involvement should be based on the specifics of the situation and commensurate with the type and location of the Section 4(f) resource http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/qasdeminimus.htm 3/12/2009