INTRODUCTION TO FEMA’S ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & HISTORIC PRESERVATION

(EHP) COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS

FEMA’s EHP Review

• It is FEMA’s policy to integrate environmental and historic preservation considerations into its emergency preparedness, hazard mitigation, disaster planning, and response and recovery activities.

• This work is accomplished through FEMA’s Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (EHP) Compliance Requirements process.

What are potential EHP compliance considerations?• Endangered Species• Cultural Resources

• historic properties & districts

• archaeological sites• Air & water quality• Habitat• Fish & Wildlife• Floodplains• Wetlands• Coastal Zones• Agricultural Lands• Geology

• Environmental Justice• Land Use • Hazardous Materials• Traffic

Potential Environmental Impacts Potential Environmental Impacts

•New ground disturbance activities•Air/water pollution•Habitat destruction•Impacts to breeding &

feeding areas or patterns•Altered viewsheds•Alteration of historic properties & districts

•New ground disturbance activities•Air/water pollution•Habitat destruction•Impacts to breeding &

feeding areas or patterns•Altered viewsheds•Alteration of historic properties & districts

FEMA’s EHP Compliance Review

Overseen by FEMA’s Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (OEHP)– HQ office in Washington, DC– Ten Regional offices

• Regional Environmental Officer & some support staff

EHP compliance is the responsibility of FEMA Grant Programs; OEHP serves as a technical support office

Who is OEHP

• FEMA’s Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (OEHP) engages in a review process to ensure that FEMA-funded projects and activities comply with various Federal laws to include:– National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)– National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)– Endangered Species Act (ESA)– Clean Water Act (CWA)– Clean Air Act (CAA)– Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)– Coastal Barrier Resources Act (CBRA)– Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)– Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA)– Executive Order 11988 – Floodplains Management– Executive Order 11990 – Wetland Protection– Executive Order 12898 – Environmental Justice

EHP Laws and Executive Orders: The basis for FEMA’s EHP Review

NEPA

National Historic Preservation Act

Endangered Species Act

Resource Conservation & Recovery Act

Clean Water Act

Coastal Zone Management Act

Coastal Barrier Resources Act

Clean Air Act

Executive Orders:Environmental Justice

Floodplains Wetlands

FEMA’s EHP Compliance Review

• Is required by Federal laws, regulations and Executive Orders

• Ensures FEMA actions, including grant-funded projects, are in compliance with EHP requirements

• Review must be complete before work is initiated and any project is funded

• Grantee must comply with any conditions placed on project as result of EHP review

FEMA’s EHP Compliance Review

The goal of the environmental compliance requirements is to protect our nation’s water, air, coastal, fish and wildlife, agricultural, historical, and cultural resources, as well as to minimize potential adverse effects to children, low-income, and minority populations

Submitted environmental requests assists the federal government in making informed decisions

FEMA’s EHP Compliance Review

May require consultation with resource and regulatory agencies, including:

• State Historic Preservation Office• US Fish and Wildlife Service• US Army Corps of Engineers

FEMA’s EHP Review

May require preparation of written analyses or agreements required under EHP laws, including:

- Environmental Assessment (NEPA)- Biological Assessment (ESA)- Memorandum of Agreement (NHPA)

Some EHP laws and EOs require public involvement & a public comment period

Environmental Review Conditions

• An environmental review must be completed prior to the initiation or completion of any project work.

• Initiating work before an environmental review is completed may result in a non-compliance finding and the withholding of grant funds.

• All changes to the scope of work (SOW) of a project must be resubmitted for environmental review.

• If an approved project has a change in the SOW, the grantee must stop work and wait for the environmental review to be completed and approved on the new SOW before re-initiating work.

Consequences of Non-Compliance

• Project delays• Denial of funding • De-obligation of funding• Negative publicity• Civil penalties• Lawsuits

Environmental Review Process

• Grantee submits project request through the SAA/FA/Tribal Government/Private Entity

• SAA/FA/Tribal Government/Private Entity reviews project request and submits electronically to PA

• PA ensures all necessary documentation is included in grant application and submits a complete file to GPD/EHP liaison with EHP Documentation Memo

• GPD/EHP liaison reviews documentation and confirms likely environmental impact, if any

– If project/action does not require further environmental review (i.e equipment, training), grant will be approved as a Categorical Exclusion (CATEX) and PA is notified and given approval documentation or by email

– If project/action does require further environmental review it will be forwarded to EHP which will work with the REO’s.

• GPD/EHP liaison will notify applicant’s PA of EHP’s decision– If approved, PA will be given approval documentation for communication to grantee– If additional documentation is requested, grantee will be notified by PA

Projects that can be CATEX’d

• Project types/actions that are not likely to have any impact on the environment, barring extraordinary circumstances.

• Purchases of equipment including vehicles, boats, ID cards, hand-held or portable equipment, navigation or communication equipment, or other supplies for mobile units. (Note: Please provide information on how the equipment will be installed)

• Classroom and web-based training, conferences and workshops conducted within enclosed facilities.

• Personnel, administrative, fiscal and management activities that involve no resources other than manpower and/or funding.

CATEX’s (Continued)

• Installation of security measures on mobile units (buses, train cars, ferries, etc.) that are less than 50 years old and are not national landmarks.

• Development, revision, documentation, and/or distribution of regulations, directives, manuals, information bulletins, and other guidance documents.

• Technical assistance activities that involve no resources other than manpower and/or funding.

• Field-based training activities and exercises that use existing facilities, established and approved procedures, and conform with existing land use designations.

Projects requiring initial review then CATEX’dProject types/actions that are not likely to have any impact onthe environment, barring extraordinary circumstances, as long ascertain project conditions are met (i.e. no ground disturbance). Ifthose conditions are not met or extraordinary circumstances exist, thenthe project must be submitted for EHP review. General conditions arelisted below, followed by specific project types and their conditions.

– Project does not directly or indirectly involve any new ground disturbing activities such as utility/sewer/electric lines or other underground conduits, fencing, gates, poles, foundations, etc.;

– Project does not involve new construction (Emergency Operations Center [EOC], guard station, fire station, equipment shed, dock/wharf, communication tower, etc.).

Preparedness Project Types that Trigger EHP Review• Communication towers• New construction • New ground disturbance activities • Modification of buildings and structures 50+

years old & impacts on historic districts

Communication Towers

Consider all elements of project:

• Tower location, height and design

(lattice or guy wires)

• Use of aviation lighting

• Security fencing and lighting

• Equipment building

• Access road

• Equipment staging area

New Construction

Examples:

• Security guard building• Dock/pier• Boat house• Road• Towers

New ground disturbance activities

Examples:• Installation of physical security enhancements including

fencing, lighting, cameras, & pedestrian or vehicle barriers, etc.

• In particular:– Does the project involve new ground disturbance activities?

Modification of Buildings & Structures 50+ Years Old

Examples:

• Equipment installation (e.g. physical security/access controls) on, in, or in the vicinity of historic buildings, piers, bridges, ferries, rail cars, etc.

• Building renovation/hardening (e.g. doors, gates, windows)

Tips for a Timely EHP Review

Take EHP considerations into account during project planning and budgeting

• Easier to avoid or resolve issues if identified early• Reach out to state resource agencies early

Provide detailed project Statement of Work to FEMA • See Information Bulletin #271What work is being proposed, where will it take

place, and how will it be carried out?

Tips for a Timely EHP Review

Be aware that EHP review may increase timeline for project implementation

Grant funds may be used for preparation of EHP reports

Notify FEMA if Port’s Master Plan included previous environmental analysis or public involvement, and provide any such documentation to FEMA

Project Planning

The following factors affect the amount of time it takes to complete the EHP Review:• completeness of the project Statement of Work (SOW)• complexity of the project• project location & the types of resources affected• whether consultation with SHPO, FWS. etc. (required

under certain laws) is needed

Roles and Responsibilities

FEMA’s Grant Programs Directorate –

• Incorporates EHP compliance requirements into grant programs and processes

• Conducts initial screening of projects for EHP considerations (i.e. identification of potential impacts to natural or biological resources or historic properties)

• Submits complex projects to FEMA’s Office of Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation (OEHP) for further review, if appropriate

Roles and Responsibilities

FEMA’s Office of Environmental Planning & Historic Preservation –

• Conducts and documents the EHP compliance review of those GPD-funded projects with potential to impact the environment or historic properties

• Consults with resource and regulatory agencies

• Provides policy guidance and subject matter expertise to support GPD’s EHP compliance responsibilities

• Identifies opportunities to improve integration of EHP requirements into FEMA programs

EHP Review of Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) Projects

Since integration into FEMA in April 2007:

• 70 FY04-07 PSGP projects submitted to OEHP for review

• 45 reviews completed

Information Bulletin No. 271

 TO: All State Administrative Agency HeadsAll State Administrative Agency Points of Contact All State Homeland Security Directors Transit Security Chiefs  FROM: Tracey Trautman, Director

Grant Development and Administration, Grant Programs Directorate SUBJECT: Environmental Planning and Historic Preservation Requirements for Grants  This Information Bulletin (IB) provides general guidance to grantees on environmental planning and

historic preservation (EHP) requirements for grant funded projects involving communication towers, physical security enhancements, new construction, renovation, and modifications to buildings and structures that are 50 years old or older. This IB applies to all such projects (regardless of Fiscal Year award) funded by the Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP), the Infrastructure Protection Program (IPP), and the Emergency Management Performance Grants Program (EMPG). These projects have the potential to affect environmental resources and historic properties through ground disturbance, impact to wetlands, floodplains, coastal zones, and other water resources, alteration of historically-significant properties, and impact to threatened and endangered species and migratory birds. Consequently, FEMA engages in a compliance review process to ensure proposed projects comply with applicable federal EHP laws, regulations, and Executive Orders.

Information Bulletin No. 271 Continued: Statement of WorkStatement of Work

A Statement of Work (SOW) is required to be developed and submitted to FEMA prior to the initiation of projects referenced in this IB. Essential elements and information to include in the SOW are:

• Basic project information (name of project, name of grant and grantee, grant award number, fiscal year, overall purpose and scope of the project, estimated cost, etc.).

• Precise location of the project (street address, city, and state, or latitude and longitude coordinates).

• Visual documentation (site/structure photographs; plans/drawings that define the size and precise location of proposed work; US Geological Survey topographic, flood and wetlands maps; aerial photographs, etc.).

• Description of the project, including (as applicable): • Dimensions/acreage/square footage of structure and/or land affected, with height and

structural support information for all communication towers.• Extent and depth of ground disturbance for new construction and structure

modification, including trenching for utility lines, installation of fencing and light posts, tower footings and pads, etc.

• Special elements of the project, including: • Special equipment that will be used, staging areas, access roads, easements, etc. • Extent of structural modification.

Information Bulletin No. 271 Continued: Statement of Work• Year affected building/structure was built (if applicable). • Information about features, resources, and potential adverse impacts at

or near the site, including: • Water bodies (rivers, lakes, streams, wetlands, etc.).• Floodplains.• Historic and cultural resources (historic districts, buildings, landscapes, bridges,

piers, dams, archaeological sites, etc.).• Migratory birds.• Threatened and endangered species and/or critical habitat.• Vegetation, including general types of plants, trees, or lack thereof.• Geologic features.• Tribal cultural and religious sites.• Special areas (forests, wildlife refuges, reserves, etc.).

– Any recent or relevant studies, reports, or surveys that were prepared for other agencies or purposes and provide information on environmental resources and/or historic properties in the project area.

Information Bulletin No. 271 Continued: EHP Requirements

Site selection is a key factor that can affect the number and complexity of EHP issues that may need to be addressed for a project. Grantees are responsible for identifying environmental resources and historic properties in the project area, which may require coordination with appropriate local, State and/or Federal resource agencies. This information should be included in the SOW and submitted to FEMA in the initial stage of project formulation.Based on the review of the SOW, FEMA may determine that projects with the potential to have significant adverse impacts to EHP resources and/or public controversy require additional evaluation and documentation, and FEMA will notify the grantee accordingly. Documents required to fulfill compliance responsibilities under Federal EHP laws must be prepared by qualified professionals with EHP expertise and may require a public comment period. Grantees are responsible for the preparation of such documents as well as for the implementation of any mitigation measures identified during FEMA’s EHP review that are necessary to address potential adverse impacts. Costs associated with the preparation of EHP documents are allowable grant expenditures.Inadequate project descriptions and/or documentation of the presence of environmental resources and historic properties in a project area may cause significant delays in the timeliness of the review and affect the project’s implementation. Failure of the grantee to meet all Federal, State and local EHP requirements, comply with project conditions established during FEMA’s EHP review, and/or obtain applicable permits and approvals may result in project delays or the denial of funding.

Information Bulletin No. 271 Continued: FEMA EHP Review Process

Grantees must submit SOWs electronically through their authorized State SAA (or designee) to their FEMA preparedness officer. Preferred submission formats are those supported by Microsoft Office (doc files), and Adobe Acrobat (pdf files). JPEG is the preferred picture format but other widely supported file types may be used. Project reviews may take several weeks or months to complete, so sufficient time and resources must be incorporated into the project planning process to accommodate EHP requirements. Grantees must receive written approval from FEMA prior to the use of grant funds for project implementation.Additional information regarding EHP compliance requirements for FEMA-funded grant projects is available on the FEMA website at:

http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp/ehp-applicant-help.shtm. Questions may be directed to your designated preparedness officer or to the Centralized Scheduling and Information Desk at 1-800-368-6498 or via email at askcsid@dhs.gov.

Sources of EHP Guidance

A variety of information is available at:

http://www.fema.gov/plan/ehp

Helpful Resources

• Questions?

• For more information contact:

Jeff Hall (202) 786-9778 or jeffrey.hall1@dhs.gov