Final EIS Appendix F

2,899 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,899
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Final EIS Appendix F

  1. 1. Appendix F This appendix provides information about the Record of Agency correspondence and coordination. June 2010 Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project Environmental Impact Statement 1
  2. 2. Here is the text for the opening of Appendix F to explain how it is set up.  I  ran the text through Faith once already.    Appendix F is organized by the following categories:    • Cooperating Agencies;  • Participating Agencies;  • Other Agencies; and,  • Section 106 Correspondence.    Cooperating and Participating Agencies include those identified in   Chapter 8 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as Cooperating  and/or Participating agencies. Additional correspondence from agencies  outside those identified as Cooperating or Participating are catalogued  under Other Agencies. Draft EIS comment letters from  Cooperating/Participating/Other agencies are included in Appendix A of  this document and not replicated in this appendix.    Section 106 correspondence contains letters and e‐mails pertaining to the  Section 106 process for this project. Correspondence from/to Consulting  and Participating Agencies are duplicated in this section. Consulting party  correspondence regarding the programmatic agreement has been placed  under one title; however, it also can be found under the Section 106  agency’s bookmark as well.      2
  3. 3. Appendix F Contents Delegation of Authority Letters pg. 4 FTA Correspondence pg. 7 Cooperating Agencies pg. 21 Participating Agencies pg. 116 Other Agency Correspondence pg. 438 Section 106 Consulting Parties pg. 465 3
  4. 4. Appendix F Delegation of Authority Letters June 2010 Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project Environmental Impact Statement 4
  5. 5. REGION IX 201 Mission Street U.S. Department Arizona, California, Suite 1650 of Transportation Hawaii, Nevada, Guam San Francisco, CA 94105-1839 415-744-3133 Federal Transit 415-744-2726 (fax) Administration JUN - 6 2006 Mr. Peter T. Young State Historic Preservation Officer and Chairperson Department of Land and Natural Resources State Historic Preservation Office k w - 4 Kakuhihewa Building, Room 555 x 73 > 601 Kamokila Blvd. ~ ' a -., . % . Kapolei, Hawaii 96707 - C3 t . r Re: Honolulu High-Capacity Transit ~o%dor % Delegation of Authority =X .-. .+ Dear Mr. Young: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is the lead Federal agency on the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Transportation Services (DTS) High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project. DTS is responsible for implementing activities associated with the project including compliance with historic preservation act regulations. FTA has delegated DTS the authority to work directly with your office on FTA's behalf, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.3-800.4. We understand that FTA remains legally responsible for all findings and determination pursuant to 36 CFR 800. We request your agreement with this delegation. If you have questions, please call Donna Turchie of the Office of Planning and Program Development at (415) 744-2737. Sincerely, g g f iLeslie T. Rogers i v Regional Administrator cc: Kenneth Harnayasu, DTS /' 5
  6. 6. PETER T. YOUNO LINDA LINGLE CHAiRPERSON GOVERNOR OF M W ~ I I BOARD OF LAND A&O NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSIONONWATER RESOURCE MANAOEMWT ROBERT K. MASUDA OfPUN DIRECTOR DEAN A, NAKANQ ACTNI#iD E P w DIRECTOR -WATER STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 July 24, 2006 LOG NO.: 2006.2536 r- - Sxs i DOC NO.: 0607MC02 w- b 2 Mr. Leslie T. Rogers Regional Administrator Region IX U.S. Department of Transfittation Federal Transit Administration 201 Mission Street, Suite 1850 San Francisco, CA 94105-1839 Dear Mr. Rogers: Subject: Honolulu Hiah-Capacltv Transit Corridor Deleaation of Authority This is in response to your June 6, 2006 letter regarding the Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Delegation of Authority. We agree with your delegation to authorize the City and County of Honolulu Department of Transportation Services (DTS) to work directly with our office on this project. Ifthere are any questions regarding this project, you may contact Ms. Melanie Chinen of the Historic Preservation Division at (808) 892-8015. / chairperson reservation Officer c: Kenneth Hamayasu, DTS 6
  7. 7. Appendix F FTA Correspondence June 2010 Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project Environmental Impact Statement 7
  8. 8. REGION D ( 201 Mission Street U S.Department Arizona, California Suite 1650 of Transportation Hawaii, Nevada, Guam San Francisco, CA 94105-1839 Federal Transit American Samoa, 415-744-3133 Northern Mariana Islands 415-744-2726 (fax) Administration Mr..Wayne Yoshioka Directol, Depatment of'Transpoxtation Services City and County of'Honolulu 650 South King Street, 31d Floo~ Honolulu, ?XI 96813 Re: Appt oval of 'Preliminary Enginee~ing for the Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Co~ridor Project Dea.hk Yoshioka: The Federal ~ r m s iAdministlation (FTA) is pleased to infolm you that F TA has approved t the request by the City and County of'Honolulu (the City) to advance the Honolulu High- Capacity Transit Corridox.Project into Preliminary Engineering (PE) . This approval is a requirement of' Federal Qansit laws govelning the New Starts program (49 U..S.C..Section 5.309(e)(6)) This PE approval is for an appraximately 20-mile alignment extending fiom East Kapolei thsough the Akport to Ala Moana Center,. The project includes 21 stations, 4 pak-and- lide facilities with 4 100 total spaces, and approximately '76 1ai1vehicles Nearly all of the rail line and its stations will be elevated structure The total expected Full Funding Grait Ageement (FFGA) project cost including finance chtuges in Yem 0f'Expenditm.e (YOE) dollms is $5,348 million. The City is seeking $1,550 million in Section 5.309New Starts funds The 1 . dline is expected to c a r y 116,000 txips on the average weekday by 2030. With this approval, the City has pre-awad authority to incur costs prior to grant app~oval for PE activities while r.etainingeligibility for.future FTA grant assistance for the jncuxxed costs. As with any pre-award authority, all Federal requirements must be met prior to incurling costs in oldex to retain eligibility of'the costs fot k t u e FTA grant assistance. This pre-award authority does not constitute an FTA commitment that fedexal funds will be approved for the project in the future., FTA's apploval of'PE is not a commitment to appxove or fund any final design or construction activities Such decisions must await the outcome of'PE, including completion of'the environmental plocess.. In addition, per FTA's Final Policy Guidance on New Starts and Small Sta-xtspublished September 2,2009, the City will have pre-award autho~ity pxocue vehicles, acquire real to property and real property rights, and perfoim utility relocations upon completion of'the National Environmental Policy Act W P A ) process. F PA ~erninds City that the the procutement of' vehicles must comply with all. Federal requirements including, but not 8
  9. 9. limited to, competitive procurement practices, the American with Disabilities Act, and Buy America.. FTA encourages the City to discuss the p~ocwement of'vehicles with FTA prio~ to exercising the pre-award authority. F TA is required by law to evaluate a p~oposed project against a number ofNew Stats criteria and ensure that prospective grant recipients demonstrate the technical, legal, and financial capability to implement the project. Based on an evaluation of'the project against these critexia, F TA has assigned to the project an ove1al11,atingof'Medium. The project must maintain at least a Medium New Starts lating at the completion of'PE for it to be eligible to advance into final design FTA has also conducted detaiIed xeviews (1) of the project, with the help of p~oject management oversight (PMO) contractors; (2) of the financial plan, with the help of a financial managemen.t oversight (FMO) cont~actor,and (3) of the environmental documents prepared in compliance with NEPA Based on these reviews, FTA has identified a number of items that the City must address as part of PI3 The City must work with F TA during PE to address these items as well'as any othel issues that may emerge in the course of PE The objectives of this collaborative effort are to ensure that: All environmental impacts are identified and adequate provisions are made fox their mitigation in acco~dance with the requi~ements 49 U .S,C. 5324(b); of All majo~ critical project elements are designed to a level that no significant and unknown impacts remain in their costs; and * All cost estimating is advanced to the level of'confidence necessaty for,the City to implement the financial plan for.the project before entry into fmal design. Further, the City should be aware that F TA's standards for the financial rating ar,ehigher for entry into find design than for enby into PE The higher standa~d fmal design for includes an assessment of'the robustness of'the financial pIan against increases in costs, shortfalls in levenue streams, and competing demands on funding sauces. Some elements of'the curlent fi~ancial may not f a ~ well in the stress tests that F TA will apply to plan e evaluate robustness.. These elements include the projected revenue stream fiom the General Excise Tax, the diversion of'FTA Section 5307 funds fiom ongoing capital needs of'the bus system, and the inueasing share of'the City's annual budget that is required to fund the transit system.. We1.ethis plan submitted today in support of'a request to advance the project into final design, its weaknesses would likely cause F TA to deny the request. Therefore, continued development and str.engthening of the financial plan will be a c~ucial part of'the PE effort. The City should also be aware of'cextain realities as they elate to the anticipated publication of'the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) f o the project As you ~ know, very detailed negotiations with the Advisory Council for Histo1.i~ Px.eservation are proceeding towads a Programmatic Agr,eernent (PA) that address that several histo~ical preservation issues that have surfaced dwing the consultation process. That Programmatic Agreement must be executed by all signatories before F TA publishes the FEIS Commitment to the PA by the City and County of' Honolulu must also come though 9
  10. 10. legislative action by the City Council before the FEIS is published. In addition, the Feder.al Aviation Administration must provide written ageement legaxding the scope of' mitigations proposed at the Honolulu International Aizport before the FEIS is published. Given these and other requirements, F TA now anticipates that publication of'the FEIS is likely to occur in late November. at the earliest.. As such, the co'mpletion of'a Reco~dof' Decision f o the project is very likely to extend into next year, F TA believes this schedule ~ is necessary to achieve om~mutual goal of'conducting an envi1,onmentalreview that is consistent with all Federal requirements and that will withstand judicial sc~utiny . The following items are detailed findings from FTA's PMO co:!ltractors that FTA has determined to be crucial for the City to address as part of'PE: P~oiectScope, Design, and Development 0 Identify any third party ag~eements necessar,yfor project completion, including utility agreements wt private and public owneis and the militay; ih * Resolve the specifics regaxding proximity ofthe guideway to runways 22R14.L and 22L14R at the Honolulu International Ailport with the Hawaii Department of Txansportation and the Fedelal Aviation Administration; Fully develop vehicle basis of' design and functional sizing; Determine rail fleet size requirement; Fully develop scope fox the administration building and operations control center; Determine the final location of the maintenance and storage facility; Finalize a contracting packaging plan which includes a soluce selection plan(s) and contract specific work plans; Develop skategies to stt.earnline the City's process to award cont~acts to ente~ and into grant agreements, especially as applicable to F TA grants; Develop a preliminary opezation plan; and * Enswe the service velocity does not elode over the next course of'design changes.. Proiect Sclledule P~ovide baseline of'the Master Prqject Schedule (MPS) ealy in PE which will be a used for monthly pIogress updates and tracking schedule va~iances; Address the utilization manpowex and equipment resource loading and budget and cost loading; 0 Include critical activities in the MPS: utility activities, real estate acquisitions, system integration, starting and testing, operational commissioning and training, vehicle procurement, major construction material procurements, FTA review and comment, detail activities fox eady construction packages; Develop a right-of-way schedule; and Modify the Work Breakdown Structure to cross over with the project budget and cost b~eakdown structure.. - Cost Project 0 Develop a detailed bottoms-up-style ploject cosi. estimate to Standard Cost Category format.. The estimate should be detailed sufficiently to dete~mine 10
  11. 11. distributions of'matesials, labor, equipment and genelal conditions elements at a minimum. The soft cost estimates should be based on staffing plans, force account plans, contracts, ahd so forth rather than solely on percentages.. The estimate should eliminate parameoic-style values, cost estimating elationsh ships, and lump sums as much as possible during PE; 0 Escalate the cost estlmate in accoidance with the W S ; and Provide justification and backup documents to suppo~t quantification and the assumptions for. the "soft costs" and related general conditions of'tile project., Technical Capacity i 0 Update tlie Project Management Plan to bring it into full conformance with F TA requirements, and implement the configuration management and change cont~ol mechanism; Develop detailed staffing plans for all remaining phases of'the ploject to enswe adequate technical capacity.. The plans should include the dates by which the Cit,y will fill each key position.. All key City management positions should be filled during PE; Work with the State of Hawaii to establish a State Safety Oversight Agency office to oversee the project; Submit a filly developed Rail Fleet Management Plan; Have quantifiable met~ics measwing the real status of wolk, both cost and for. schedule of' all p~ofessional se~vice contracts, and any inter-local agreements for. participatory services; * Develop a Contingency Management Plan which will indentifjr the specific risks, and implement the anticipated mitigation measures; * Develop an Envi~onmental Mitigation Plan that identifies ~equired environmental mitigation actions and the paty responsible for the mitigation, and that will eventually become the basis fox quate11-y mitigation monitoring and quarterly mitigation ~eports; and Update and implement the Real Estate and Acquisition Plan, the Bus Fleet Management Plan, the Safety and Security Management Plan, and the Quality Management Plan as the project progresses.. As PE p~oceeds, TA may provide more detail to the City regading othe~ F deliverables that should be completed prior to requestiug approval to entel final design 11
  12. 12. Finally, FTA is committed to woxking closely with the City to identify the next steps in the project development process and to establishing a timeline f o ~ achieving these steps based on the current status of the project. JVe look foxward to working closely with the City during the development of the High-Capacity Transit Coz~idor Project. We are ready to w o k with you and you staff'to achieve the milestones necessary for successful completion of'PE. If you have any questions regading this lettex, please contact me at (415) 744-3 1.33. V ~ e s l i e Rogers 7.. Regional Admini cc: Advisoxy Council for Histo~ic Presexvation T Hamayasu, City and County of' Honolulu 12
  13. 13. REGION IX 201 Mission Street U.S. Department Arizona, California, Suite 1650 o Transportation f Hawaii, Nevada, Guam San Francisco, CA 94105-1839 American Samoa, 415-744-3133 Federal Transit Northern Mariana Islands 415-744-2726 (fax) Administration Mr. John M. Fowler, Executive Director Attention: Ms. Blythe Semmer, Program Analyst Advisoly Council on Historic Preservation 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 803 Washington, DC 20004 Ms. Laura H. Thielen, State Historic Preservation Officer Attention: Ms. Nancy McMahon, Deputy State Historic Prese~vation Officer State Historic Preservation Division Department of Laud and Natural Resources Kakuhihewa Building 601 Kamokila Blvd., Suite 555 Kapolei, Hawai'i 96707 RE: Honolulu High-Capacity Transit Corridor Project - Section 4(f) de nzinilnis Determination Dear Mr. Fowler and Ms. Thielen: Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 138 and 49 U.S.C. 303 (hereinafter, "Section 4(f)") and its implementing regulations codified at 23 C.F.R. part 774, the Federal Transit Administration ("FTA") is transmitting this letter to notify your agency of its intent to make the Section 4(f) de minimis impact determinations identified below. Section 4(f) implementing regulations are codified at 23 C.F.R. part 774. Implementing regulations for Section 106 of the National Historic Presel-vation Act of 1966 are codifiedat 36 C.F.R. part 800. Under 23 C.F.R. § 774.5(b)(l)(i), if the FTA intends to make a de minimis impact determination, the FTA must consult with consulting parties identified in accordance with 36 C.F.R. part 800. Under 23 C.F.R. § 774.5(b)(l)(ii), the FTA must obtain written concurrence from the State Historic Preservation Officer ("SHPO") and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ("ACHP") in a finding of "no adverse effect" or "no historic properties affected" in accordance with 36 C.F.R, part 800. The FTA must inform SHPO and ACHP of its intent to make a de mininlis impact determination based on their concurrence in the finding of "no adverse effect" or "no historic properties affected." According to 23 C.F.R. 3 774.5(b)(l)(iii), "public notice and comment, beyond that required by 36 C.F.R. part 800, is not required." 13
  14. 14. SHPO's tinding of "no adverse effect" or "no historic properties affected" was memorialized in its correspondence to the City and County of Honolulu Department of Transportation Services on July 22,2009 (hereinafter, "SHPO's Letter"). The FTA hereby ~lotifies SHPO and ACHP of its intent to lliake Section 4(Q de minimis impact determinations on the following two historic properties that were determined by SHPO's Letter to have a no adverse effect under Section 106: Boulevard Saimin O'ahu Railway & Land Co. Basalt Paving Blocks and Former Filling Station Please contact Mr. Ted Matley at (415) 744-2590 should you have any questions. Sincerely, Leslie T. ~ o ~ *,.-,' / erd Regional Administrator 14