Transcript Document

Environmental
Review Process for
Responsible Entities
24 CFR Part 58
Presenters
Danielle Schopp, Office of
Environment and Energy
Joe Devlin, Office of
General Counsel
Why?
 They ensure a quality project by:
– Assuring a safe, decent and sanitary
environment for people occupying or residing there
– Taking impacts on the environment into account
– Ensuring the project site is suitable for the activity
being proposed
 They prevent time delays and cost overruns that
might otherwise occur because of unknown
environmental conditions
National Environmental
Policy Act 1969
NEPA:
Protect, Restore
and Enhance
the Human
Environment
NEPA
• Environmental Study
 Public Document
 Ensures that envt’l information
is available to the public BEFORE
decisions are made and BEFORE
actions are taken
 Helps public officials make decisions
with an understanding of environmental
consequences
HUD Environmental
Regulations
• 24 CFR Part 58 Procedure for REs
• 24 CFR Part 51 Noise & Hazards
• 24 CFR Part 55 Floodplains
HUD environmental review –
Part 58
 Chief Elected Official of the jurisdiction
assumes responsibility for environmental
review and must sign the Request for
Release of Funds and Certification (58.10,
58.13)
 Chief Elected Official accepts the jurisdiction
of the Federal Courts for the responsible
entity for the environmental review (58.13(a))
Laws and Authorities 58.5











Historic Preservation Act
Floodplain Management & Wetlands Protection: Executive Orders
Coastal Zone Management Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Endangered Species Act
Wild & Scenic Rivers Act
Clean Air Act
Environmental Justice: Executive Order
Aquifers
Farmland Protection Act
HUD Environmental Criteria & Standards
 Noise Abatement and Control
 Near Explosives or Flammable Sites
 Near Airport Runway Protection Zones
 Toxic Hazards
Laws and Authorities 58.5
 Historic Preservation
 Floodplain & Wetlands
Laws and Authorities 58.6
OTHER
 Flood Insurance
When do you need it?
If project is located within a Special Flood
Hazard Area – 100 year FP
How much coverage?

For loans – outstanding principal balance of
the loans

For grants – equal to the development or
project cost (less estimated land cost, if any) or to
the maximum limit of coverage made available by
the Act
Laws and Authorities 58.6
OTHER
 Coastal Barriers
 Clear Zones
Steps










Define the project
Aggregate activities
Study Alternatives
Determine Level of Review
Conduct Review
Publish or Post When required
Request Release of Funds (RROF)
Receive Authority To Use Grant Funds
Commit Funds and Implement Project
Monitor Mitigation
Environmental Review
Process and Restrictions
 Once applicant applies for HUD assistance,
the project becomes “federal” and HUD’s
restrictions at §58.22 apply.
 §58.22 prohibits recipient and any other
partners in the development process from
committing or expending HUD or non-HUD
funds on the project if the activity would have
an adverse environmental impact or limit the
choice of reasonable alternatives
Commitment of Funds

Funds are committed
when:
Sign a legally binding Contract
Choice Limiting Actions
 Must oversee actions of sub-recipient
 Choice-limiting actions will reduce or
eliminate your opportunity to choose
alternatives
 Examples: property acquisition, leasing,
demolition, rehabilitation, construction and
site improvements (including site clearance)
Commitment of Funds
24 CFR 58.22

Conditional Commitment
 Subject to the ER & any mitigating
conditions
 See HOME Program Notice 01-11
Section IV Item C
 Legally Binding Document
 Must prevent construction by 3rd
party prior to RROF

Option agreements are
allowed
Commitment of Funds
Notice to third Party
 24 CFR Part 58.22(a) and (c)
 Upon receipt of the Application
the State must:
 notify applicants in writing
 no choice limiting actions
 prior to receiving HUD 7015.16
Identify the Project
 What is the scope?
 What Activities will be included?
 What is the location?
Get Maps
Planning Area Map
Wetlands Map
Floodplain Map
Historical Districts Map
Identify the Project:
Aggregation 24 CFR 58.32
 Local grantees must group together and
evaluate, as a single project, all individual
activities that are related either
geographically, functionally, or are logical
parts of a composite of contemplated actions
 In projects with multiple or groups of
activities, the environmental review must be
completed utilizing the highest level of review
relative to the groups included in the project
Importance of Early Start
 Begin environmental review process as early
as possible 58.30(b)
 Typical times required to complete range
from 1 to 120 days
 Allow time for periods of public comment on
environmental notices, including Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) and the
Notice of Intent to Request Release of Funds
(NOI-RROF)
Level of Review
• Full Assessment
• Categorically Excluded
• Categorically Excluded NOT
Subject to 58.5
• Exempt
Exempt Activities
24 CFR Part 58.34(a)









Environmental, planning & design costs
Information & financial services
Administrative/management activities
Public services (no physical impact)
Inspections
Purchase of tools/insurance
Technical assistance & training
Temporary assist. for imminent threats
Payment of principal and interest
Categorically Excluded Activities
not subject to 58.524 CFR 58.35(b)






Tenant-based Rental assistance
Supportive Services
Operating costs (utilities, supplies)
ED costs (non-construction)
Pre-development costs
Supplemental Assistance
Categorically Excluded subject to 58.5
24 CFR 58.35(a)




Public Facilities < 20% increase
Projects for accessibility and mobility
Rehab of SF no increase in FP or WL
Minor Rehab of Multi-family (no change in use
- < 20% change in density)
 Rehab of Nonresidential (no change in use
- < 20% change in density)
 Acquisition/Disposition no change in use
Environmental Assessment
24 CFR Part 58.36
Projects that are not Categorically
Excluded or Exempt
Require a Full Assessment
Environmental Assessment
NEPA portion of the review:
 Designed to determine if an EIS is
required
 Requires analysis of alternatives
 Requires early consultation
 Broad Interdisciplinary study
Environmental Impact Statement
“EIS” 24 CFR Part 37
Completed for:
 Findings of Significant Impacts (FOSI)
 Large projects (2,500 or more units)
 Unless regulations are the only reason
Public Notification
 EA:
Combined Notice (FONSI and NOI)
 CE that “triggers” compliance:
NOI/RROF only
 CE No Compliance Triggered
None
 CE Not Subject to 58.5 :
None
 Exempt:
None
Public Comment Periods
24 CFR part 58.45
 NOI/FONSI - 15 days from Publication
18 days from Posting
 NOI - 7 days from Publication
10 days from Posting
 RE must consider comments prior to
submitting its RROF to HUD/State
 HUD/State Comment Period 15 days
January 28, 2009
Certifying
Official
Environmental Review
Record
 Written record of review
 Must be available for public inspections
 Let the file tell the story – include project
description, maps, photographs, studies,
correspondence, public notices, etc.
Tiering 24 CFR 58.15
 Why use tiering?
- efficiency – review those matters ripe for
review and decision in broad review, and
evaluate strategy and process for site
specific reviews
- cost effective – pay for one public notice
Example – use tiering for citywide single family
rehabilitation program
Tiering – How?
 Broad Review
- Describe the program
- Describe the process or strategy for sitespecific review
- Evaluate environmental factors
Rehab Program – broad review include
compliance with many of the related laws at
§58.5 – such as Sect. 106 Programmatic
Agreement for Historic Preservation.
Tiering – How?
Rehab Program – need to identify the process
for the site-specific review.
For instance, each property needs Floodplain
Map, Historic Preservation review, Toxic
review
Important – file tells the story, including the strategy,
process and supporting documentation
Tiering – How?
 The FONSI must include summary of the
assessment and identify the significant
issues to be considered in the site-specific
reviews.
 For site-specific reviews, subsequent notices
are only needed when the Chief Elected
Official determines unanticipated impacts or
impacts not adequately addressed in prior
review
Tiering - Considerations
 Always need site-specific review
 Consider the intent of NEPA to provide public
input – does your broad review and
publication adequately describe the project?
 Reconsider broad level review when
circumstances change, 58.32(d)(2), 58.47
Conclusion - Important Tips
 Recognize the additional time that will be required
if the project is in the Floodplain or has historic
implications
 Responsible for ensuring flood insurance is
maintained
 DON’T SPEND A DIME – until the environmental
review is complete and you have received an
approved Request for Release of Funds
 When in doubt, contact your local
environmental officer!
Field Environmental Contacts
Questions
Contact Information
Danielle Schopp 202.402.4442 or
[email protected]
Joe Devlin 202.402.5117 or
[email protected]