Page 1 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Project Number: VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT Date: 11/18/2020

Project Name: Highway Improvements at Entrance to Fort 

Belvoir Kingman and Walker Gates

Location: US Army Fort Belvoir

Fairfax County, VA

CE Category 23 CFR 771.117 (c)(26): Modernization of a 

highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, 

reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding 

auxiliary lanes (including parking, weaving, 

turning, and climbing lanes), if the action meets 

the constraints in paragraph (e)[..]

See 23 CFR 771.117 for full description of CE categories, including additional requirements when applying (c)26-28.

Project Description

The Federal Highway Administration’s Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (FHWA), in 

cooperation with U.S. Army Fort Belvoir, proposes road improvements at Walker Gate and 

Kingman Gate in Fairfax County, Virginia.

Kingman Gate is located at the intersection of Kingman Road and Fairfax County Parkway 

(Route 286). The project purpose is to increase left turn lane queuing capacity along Route 286 

into Fort Belvoir’s Kingman Gate along Kingman Road to reduce the occurrence and queuing of 

left-turning vehicles into the main thru lane southbound along Route 286, in addition to 

reviewing any need for adjusting the traffic signal at Kingman Road for improving performance 

during rush hour, peak traffic. Currently, two left turn lanes exist along southbound Route 286 

for turning into the Fort at Kingman Road. These two lanes have insufficient length to store 

queuing vehicles for current and projected traffic.

Walker Gate is located at the intersection of Mount Vernon Memorial Highway (Route 235) and 

Mount Vernon Road. The project purpose is to increase left turn lane queuing capacity along 

Mount Vernon Highway into Fort Belvoir’s Walker Gate to reduce queuing of left turning 

vehicles into the main thru lane northbound along Mount Vernon Highway, in addition to 

reviewing any need for a traffic signal during rush hour peak traffic. Because of the required 

security checks at Fort Belvoir’s Walker Gate, cars sometimes need to wait within the left turn 

lane on Mount Vernon Highway northbound, until the queue decreases before turning into the 
Page 2 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Walker Gate entrance. The Mount Vernon Memorial Highway Trail Project, under development 

by Fairfax County, is being designed and constructed on the northern side of the road separately 

from this project. The project team has closely coordinated with the county, who is designing 

and constructing the Trail project.

This action is consistent with requirements listed in 23 CFR 771.117(e):

1. Exact right of way boundaries will be determined during final design. At most, this action would require 

sliver easements from Fort Belvoir along the project corridors to accommodate extended and added turn 

lanes. No residential or business displacements will occur.

2. Action does not need a U.S. Coast Guard Permit. If a 404, 401, or Section 10 permit is needed, this activity 

will meet terms and conditions of a nationwide or general permit. Permit needs will be finalized during 

final design. As of 40% design, FHWA is expecting 404/401 permit may be needed due to minor wetland 

impacts.

3. Action does not adversely affect historic properties, result in a 4(f) use greater than de minimis, and is not 

likely to adversely affect ESA species or critical habitats.

4. Construction impacts for this action are in line with typical intersection reconstruction projects. Any lane 

or road closures to accommodate construction will be brief and not result in major traffic disruptions.

5. No changes in interstate access control are triggered by this action

6. Floodplain encroachment other than functionally dependent uses not anticipated.

Environmental Commitments and Mitigation Measures

None identified at time of CE date. 

Summary of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act Compliance

FHWA obtained official species lists from the Fish and Wildlife Service’s IPaC service on 

10/16/2020. The Northern Long Eared Bat is the only species generated from our inquiry. 

FHWA received verification letters authorizing this action to continue under the January 5, 2016 

Programmatic Biological Opinion on Final 4(d) Rule for the Northern Long Eared Bat. In 

accordance with the 4(d) rule, this activity may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the 

Northern Long Eared Bat.

Summary of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Compliance

FHWA completed a Phase I cultural resources survey. FHWA’s consultant completed a report on 

October 1, 2020. FHWA consulted with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, which 

concurred with FHWA’s determination of no historic properties affected in a letter dated 

11/13/2020.
Page 3 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Additional Agency Coordination and Compliance

The US Army, in coordination with FHWA and the Virginia Department of Transportation, will 

complete a Record of Environmental Certification as part of the Army’s environmental 

compliance process.

FHWA is coordinating with state-level biological protection agencies as a courtesy. On 

10/20/2020, FHWA requested project review from the Virginia Department of Wildlife and 

Recreation. On 11/4/2020, DWR responded that they are unable to review the project due to 

staffing limitations. On 10/30/2020, FHWA requested project review from the Virginia 

Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). Consultation is ongoing and FHWA will 

consider all project recommendations received by Virginia DCR.

Project-level coordination with the NCPC is not required per direction from FHWA’s planning 

team.

FHWA has been coordinating this project design with Fairfax County, who is designing and 

constructing the Mount Vernon Memorial Highway Trail Project. The Mount Vernon Memorial 

Highway Trail Project is expected to move to construction before FHWA’s Kingman and Walker 

gates project. Although close in proximity to the Walker Gate entrance work, FHWA anticipates 

the projects will not be in conflict.

Public Outreach and Involvement

FHWA is generally following the VDOT procedures for Notice of Willingness. FHWA is 

sending letters to adjacent property owners. FHWA is placing legal notices in the Washington 

Post, El Tiempo Latino, and Belvoir Eagle; notices will run two times one week apart. 

Comments are due 12/31/2020.
Page 4 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Categorical Exclusion Recommendation:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with 

which I am familiar, I believe the project should be categorically excluded from further NEPA 

analysis.

____________________________________ ________________

Christopher P Hansen

Environmental Protection Specialist

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Federal Highway Administration

Date

Categorical Exclusion Determination:

On the basis of the environmental impact information in the statutory compliance file, with 

which I am familiar, I am categorically excluding the described project from further NEPA 

analysis. The project meets the 23 CFR 771.117(a) definition of a categorical exclusion. No 

unusual circumstances per 23 CFR 771.117(b) apply.

____________________________________ ________________

Kevin S. Rose

Environmental Team Leader

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

Federal Highway Administration

Date
Page 5 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

Appendix A: Environmental Checklist

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act:

• Are Federally-listed species potentially present in the study area? ☒Yes, see Notesi ☐No

If Yes, effects determination:

☐No Effect ☒May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect ☐May Affect, Likely to Adversely 

Affect 

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act:

• Are historic properties known to be present in the study area? ☒Yes ☐No

If Yes, will they be impacted by the project? ☐Yes ☒No

• Will previously undisturbed ground be disturbed?

☒Yes ☐No

• Effects determination:

☒No Historic Properties Affected ☐No Adverse Effect ☐Adverse Effect, MOA Executed

• Was tribal consultation completed? ☐Yes ☐No

Water and Wetlands:

• Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

Are impacts to Waters of the US anticipated? ☒Yes ☐No

If Yes, approval anticipated:

☒Nationwide Permit (NWP) ☐Regional General Permit ☐Individual Permit 

• Section 401 of the Clean Water Act

☒NWP certified by State ☐Individual Certification 

• Section 402 of the Clean Water Act (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System)

Will the land disturbance threshold likely be exceeded to require a permit and SWPPP?

☒Yes ☐ No

• Is post-construction stormwater management review/approval anticipated? ☐Yes ☒No 

• ☒Project is consistent with Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands

Floodplains:

• Is the project in a FEMA floodplain?

☐Yes ☒No ☐ Floodplain not mapped

• ☒ Project is consistent with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management

Section 4(f) of the USDOT Act:

• Does the project meet the Section 4(f) exemption for Federal lands transportation facilities under 

Section 1119(c)(2) of MAP-21, 23 U.S.C. 138(a)? ☐Yes ☒No

• Is there a use of a Section 4(f) property in the study area? ☒Yes ☐No
Page 6 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

If Yes, De Minimis Finding:☒ Programmatic:☐ Individual 4(f): ☐

Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund:

• Was the property purchased with grant funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund?

☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, was documentation of approval from National Park Service Director received for the 

conversion or replacement of 6(f) property? ☐Yes ☐No

Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972:

• Is the project in a Coastal Zone? ☐Yes ☒No

• If yes, will a Federal Consistency Review be completed? ☐Yes ☐No

Right of Way:

• Is the project completely within the transportation facility’s right-of-way? ☐Yes ☒No

• If no, will the project require relocations or easements? ☒Yes ☐No

[Easements expected. No relocations expected]

Hazardous Waste and Materials:

• Are hazardous materials or contamination exceeding regulatory thresholds (as set by U.S. EPA, 

County Environmental Health, etc.) present? ☐Yes ☒No

• If Yes, is the nature and extent of the hazardous materials or contamination fully 

known? ☐Yes ☐No, plan for securing information provided in Notes

Section 7(a) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act:

• Are there Wild and Scenic Rivers? ☐Yes ☒No ☐Eligible 

If Yes, has review by the river-administering agency been completed? ☐Yes ☐No 

Clean Air Act:

• Is the project in a non-attainment area? ☒Yes ☐No

If Yes, is the project on the Transportation Improvement Program(TIP)/State Implementation 

Plan(SIP)? ☒ Yes ☐No

Highway Traffic and Construction Noise Regulations:

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type I project (highway on a new location, substantial horizontal or 

vertical alteration, new through or auxiliary lanes). Noise analysis is required.

• ☐ The proposed project is a Type II project (retrofit for noise abatement).

• ☒ The proposed project is a Type III project (noise analysis not required).

• ☐ Does not apply. 

Environmental Justice and Title IV Act:

• Is an Environmental Justice population, as identified in Executive Order 12898, present?

☐Yes, explanation provided in Notes section ☒No 

• Will the project induce disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority, low income, or 

special groups? ☐Yes, additional analysis is needed ☐No 

Farmland Protection Policy Act for Highway Projects:
Page 7 of 7

EFLHD NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form EFL-TM-ENV-03(04)

VA ST FB KNGMNWLKR GT

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

NEPA Categorical Exclusion Form

• Does the project displace, require acquisition of, or require an easement from farmland?

☐Yes ☒No

Does the project affect any other resources not listed above? Explain below and list anticipated 

permits:

i Federally-listed species per U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s IPaC: Northern Long-Eared Bat