FINAL 

PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL 

ASSESSMENT 

for the 

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE 

GRANTS PROGRAM 

PREPARED FOR 

THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

BY THE 

MANGI ENVIRONMENTAL GROUP, INC. 

MCLEAN, VIRGINIA

March 2010
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Executive Summary 

This Programmatic Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to address the effects of 

National Institute of Justice (NIJ) funded research, development, and evaluation relating to 

criminal justice nation-wide. The EA has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of 

the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) 

regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, 40 CFR Parts 1500 1508, and 

the National Institute of Justice Draft Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments. 

PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 

The purpose and need of the NIJ grants program is to disburse funding each year to educational 

institutions, States, units of local government, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, 

individuals, and profit-making organizations for projects addressing criminal justice through 

competitive, formula based, and need based solicitations. 

NIJ provides objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to enhance the 

administration of justice and public safety. NIJ solicits applications to inform its search for the 

knowledge and tools to guide policy and practice. 

PROPOSED ACTION 

The proposed action for this Programmatic EA is for NIJ to continue funding projects as in the 

past. That is, there would be no change to the grants program, which is required by law. 

However, instead of preparing an EA and FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact) for each 

project that requires NEPA documentation before funds are disbursed, projects that fall under the 

scope of this Programmatic EA would meet the requirements for NEPA compliance. Grantees 

would be required to submit a filled out checklist for OJP/NIJ review and approval. No NIJ 

grant funds would be disbursed to a grantee until determination of NEPA compliance can be 

made. Any projects deemed not to be covered for NEPA compliance by this Programmatic EA 

would need to have a separate EA and FONSI prepared. 

 

ALTERNATIVES 

The No Action Alternative is included as required by NEPA regulations to identify baseline 

conditions against which potential impacts of implementation alternatives are evaluated. The No 

Action Alternative represents the benchmark condition of the environment if the proposed action 

is not implemented. Under the No Action Alternative, no funds would be disbursed via grants to 

educational institutions, public agencies, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, 

individuals, and profit-making organizations. These organizations would have to find alternative 

funding sources for criminal justice projects, or the projects would have to be cancelled. No 

other alternatives are analyzed. 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Executive Summary i 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Executive Summary ii 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIOECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES 

Environmental resources may be affected by implementing the Proposed Action and these 

impacts are analyzed in this Programmatic EA. The environmental analysis is based upon the 

impacts of the activities in implementing project that receive NIJ grants, specifically projects 

involving the use of chemicals, fire testing, renovation, and construction. In the course of 

implementing such projects, there would be some impacts to environmental resources, but 

overall the impacts are considered less than significant. Most of the impacts are expected to be 

minimal, largely due to mitigation measures and federal, state and local requirements that would 

preemptively avoid potentially significant impacts. Mitigation measures are provided where 

applicable. 

CONCLUSION 

This Programmatic EA analyzes the environmental impacts of implementing projects funded by 

NIJ grants. The implementation of an NIJ granted project is not expected to result in significant 

adverse impacts on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not 

required and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. By verifying the items 

from the checklist, grantees can further ensure that impacts are minimized. 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... i

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................... v

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 BACKGROUND AND NIJ GRANTS PROGRAM OVERVIEW ..................................................... 1-1 

1.2 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ........................................................................................ 1-2 

1.3 TYPES OF PROJECTS ............................................................................................................ 1-2 

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .............................................................. 2-1

2.1 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................................. 2-1 

2.2 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE .................................................................................................. 2-2 

2.3 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED AND DISMISSED .................................................................... 2-2 

2.4 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................ 2-2 

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ......... 3-1

3.1 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................. 3-1 

3.1.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................. 3-1 

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................................... 3-2 

3.1.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 3-2 

3.2 AIR QUALITY ...................................................................................................................... 3-2 

3.2.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................. 3-2 

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................................... 3-4 

3.2.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 3-4 

3.3 GEOLOGY, TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS (INCLUDES FARMLAND PROTECTION) .............................. 3-4 

3.3.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................. 3-4 

3.3.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................................... 3-5 

3.3.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 3-6 

3.4 WATER RESOURCES (WATER QUALITY, SURFACE WATER, WETLANDS, FLOODPLAINS,

COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES, WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS) ................................................... 3-6 

3.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................................. 3-6 

3.4.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................................... 3-8 

3.4.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 3-9 

3.5 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT (WILDLIFE, WILDLIFE HABITAT, AND VEGETATION) ............... 3-10 

3.5.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................... 3-10 

3.5.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 3-11 

3.5.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 3-11 

3.6 ENDANGERED SPECIES ...................................................................................................... 3-12 

3.6.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................... 3-12 

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 3-13 

3.6.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 3-14 

3.7 HISTORIC PRESERVATION.................................................................................................. 3-14 

3.7.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................... 3-14 

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 3-15 

3.7.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 3-16 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Table of Contents iii 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.8 LAND USE ......................................................................................................................... 3-16

3.8.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................... 3-16 

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 3-16 

3.8.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 3-17 

3.9 HUMAN POPULATION (SOCIOECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE) ...................... 3-17 

3.9.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................... 3-17 

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................... 3-19 

3.9.3 Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................. 3-19 

3.10 NOISE .............................................................................................................................. 3-20 

3.10.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................. 3-20 

3.10.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................. 3-21 

3.10.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 3-22 

3.11 ENERGY IMPACTS ............................................................................................................ 3-22 

3.11.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................. 3-22 

3.11.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................. 3-23 

3.11.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 3-23 

3.12 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................... 3-24 

3.12.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................. 3-24 

3.12.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................. 3-24 

3.12.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 3-25 

3.13 TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................................................... 3-25 

3.13.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................................. 3-25 

3.13.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................................. 3-26 

3.13.3 Mitigation Measures ............................................................................................... 3-27 

3.14 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT ............................................................................ 3-27 

3.15 INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW AND OTHER FEDERAL AGENCY REACTION TO THE PROJECT

................................................................................................................................................ 3-27 

3.16 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ................................................................................................... 3-27 

3.17 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS ................................................................................. 3-28 

3.18 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 3-28 

4.0 REFERENCES CITED ....................................................................................................... 4-1

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ....................................................................................................... 5-1

APPENDIX A: CHECKLIST .................................................................................................. A-1

APPENDIX B: SAMPLE CHEMICAL LIST ........................................................................ B-1

APPENDIX C: CHECKLIST GLOSSARY ........................................................................... C-1

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1-1. Types of programs with projects potentially covered by the Programmatic EA......1-3 

Table 2-1. Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Alternatives..................................2-2 

Table 3-1. Common sounds and their levels...........................................................3-20 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Table of Contents iv 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

_____________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Table of Contents v 

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 

BMP Best Management Practice 

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CO carbon monoxide 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act 

dB decibel 

dBA a-weighted decibel 

DNA Deoxyribonucleic acid 

DNL day-night sound level 

DOJ Department of Justice 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EO Executive Order 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact 

FWS Fish and Wildlife Service 

ha hectare 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NIJ National Institute of Justice 

NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service 

NOx nitrous oxides 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

Hz hertz 

O3 ozone 

OJP Office of Justice Programs 

Pb lead 

PM2.5 particulate matter 

PM10 particulate matter 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

SEPA State Environmental Policy Act 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer 

SO2 sulfur dioxide 

T&E Threatened and Endangered 

TSCA Toxics Substances Control Act 

U.S. United States 

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers 

USC United States Code 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

This chapter provides background on the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), explains the purpose 

for the grants program, and identifies the types of projects that qualify for NIJ funding. 

1.1 Background and NIJ Grants Program Overview 

NIJ is the research, development and evaluation agency of the U.S. Department of Justice and a 

component of the Office of Justice Programs (OJP), and it is dedicated to researching crime 

control and justice issues. NIJ was created in 1969 and has been in the forefront of nearly every 

innovation in criminal justice research and policy ever since. NIJ provides objective, 

independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to meet the challenges of crime and justice, 

particularly at the state and local levels. NIJ has five operating offices: 

• Office of Research and Evaluation 

• Office of Science and Technology 

• Office of Investigative and Forensic Sciences 

• Office of Operations 

• Office of Communications. 

The Office of Research and Evaluation develops, conducts, directs, and supervises research and 

evaluation activities across a wide variety of issues. The Office of Science and Technology 

manages technology research and development, development of technical standards, testing, 

forensic sciences capacity building, and technology assistance to State and local law enforcement 

and corrections agencies. The Office of Communications disseminates information by 

integrating publishing, conferencing, marketing and outreach activities. The Office of 

Investigative and Forensic Sciences improves the quality and practice of forensic science through 

innovative solutions that support research and development, testing and evaluation, technology, 

information exchange, and the development of training resources for the criminal justice 

community. The Office of Operations manages NIJ’s budget, planning and administrative 

activities. 

NIJ funds research, development, and evaluation relating to criminal justice through competitive 

solicitations. Projects range from developing better safety equipment for police officers to 

providing funds that enable courts to free wrongfully convicted prisoners using modern DNA 

testing. The focus of the solicitations varies from year to year based on research priorities, 

available funding, and legislative mandates. NIJ provides funding to educational institutions, 

States, units of local government, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, and 

individuals. In fiscal year 2009, NIJ made more than 508 awards for a total of approximately 

$284 million. Awards were made in response to 38 solicitations (DOJ, 2010). 

Proposals received under a solicitation are reviewed by independent peer panels composed of 

one or more of the following: technologists from academia, industry, and government 

organizations, along with practitioners from federal, state, and local agencies. Formula and need 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Introduction 1-1 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

based awards are not peer-reviewed by external reviewers. Once reviewers have completed 

evaluations, NIJ Program Managers recommend individual proposals to the NIJ Director or other 

decision maker, who makes final award decisions. 

Because the disbursement of NIJ funds is a federal action, NIJ must comply with all applicable 

Federal environmental laws, Executive Orders, and regulations. This Environmental Assessment 

(EA) evaluates at the programmatic level the likely environmental effects of NIJ funded projects 

involving the use of chemicals, building renovation or construction, and fire testing. 

Additionally, it proposes a mechanism for future use by NIJ to determine if applicant proposals 

are covered by this programmatic EA. This EA develops a checklist to provide to grantees 

which would be submitted to NIJ at the time they request funding for proposed projects. In the 

past, grant funds were awarded for a specific proposal in conjunction with the completion of an 

Environmental Assessment and issuance of a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for that 

particular project. This programmatic EA will supplant this procedure for projects that fall under 

its purview. 

This EA has been prepared in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

of 1969 (42 United States Code (USC) 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) regulations (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1500 through 1508) for implementing 

NEPA, and NIJ Draft Guidance for Preparing Environmental Assessments. 

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action 

The purpose and need of the NIJ grants program is to disburse funding each year to educational 

institutions, States, units of local government, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, 

individuals, and profit-making organizations for research, development, and evaluation about 

criminal justice through competitive, formula based, and need based solicitations. 

NIJ provides objective, independent, evidence-based knowledge and tools to enhance the 

administration of justice and public safety. NIJ solicits applications to inform its search for the 

knowledge and tools to guide policy and practice. 

1.3 Types of Projects 

Table 1-1 provides a list of examples of current programs whose funded projects would fall 

under the scope of this programmatic EA. New programs in the future that would include 

similar activities to those typically occurring in the programs described in this section would also 

be eligible for consideration for NEPA compliance under this programmatic EA. Brief 

descriptions of some of the programs are provided below. 

The objective of the Convicted Offender/Arrestee DNA Backlog Reduction Program is to 

accelerate the analysis of convicted offender and/or arrestee DNA samples collected by States 

pursuant to applicable law for database purposes, in order to provide timely Combined DNA 

Index System compatible data for State and national DNA databases. Funds are used by a State's 

designated existing and accredited DNA database laboratory to reduce the number of DNA 

database samples pending DNA analysis. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Introduction 1-2 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Table 1-1. Types of programs with projects potentially covered by the Programmatic EA. 

Program Title Project Category 

Convicted Offender/Arrestee DNA Backlog 

Reduction Program 

Forensics, DNA, backlog reduction 

Forensic DNA Backlog Reduction Program Forensics, DNA, backlog reduction 

Forensic DNA Research and Development Forensics, DNA, research and development 

Forensic Science Training Development and 

Delivery Program 

Education and training, forensics, DNA 

Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement 

Grants Program 

Forensics, laboratory improvement 

Research and Development in the Forensic 

Analysis of Fire and Arson Evidence 

Forensics, fire/arson 

Research and Development in Forensic 

Anthropology and Forensic Odontology 

Forensics, anthropology 

Research and Development in Forensic 

Toxicology 

Forensics, toxicology 

Solving Cold Cases with DNA Forensics, DNA, solving cold cases 

Source: DOJ, 2010 

The Forensic DNA Backlog Reduction Program is a combination of two programs: the DNA 

Capacity Enhancement Program and the Forensic Casework DNA Backlog Reduction Program. 

Its goal is to assist eligible States and units of local government to reduce forensic DNA sample 

turnaround time, increase the throughput of public DNA laboratories, and reduce DNA forensic 

casework backlogs. These improvements are critical to preventing future DNA backlogs and to 

helping the criminal justice system use the full potential of DNA technology. 

The Forensic DNA Research and Development Program funds research and development that 

can enhance the forensic uses of DNA technology. For example, technologies that result in 

faster, more robust, more informative, less costly, or less labor-intensive identification, 

collection, preservation, and/or analysis of DNA evidence collected from crime scenes. 

The Forensic Science Training Development and Delivery Program funds training providers and 

other relevant entities to develop and/or deliver knowledge-based forensic science curricula at 

the State and/or local level to train forensic scientists and to inform other criminal justice 

practitioners and policymakers. 

The Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Grants Program (the Coverdell program) 

awards grants to States and units of local government to help improve the quality and timeliness 

of forensic science and medical examiner services. Among other things, funds may be used to 

eliminate a backlog in the analysis of forensic evidence and to train and employ forensic 

laboratory personnel, as needed, to eliminate such a backlog. States may apply for both “base” 

(formula) and competitive funds. Funds may be used for program expenses relating to facilities 

(i.e., renovation or construction), provided the expenses are directly attributable to improving the 

quality and/or timeliness of forensic science. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Introduction 1-3 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Introduction 1-4 

The Research and Development in the Forensic Analysis of Fire and Arson Evidence program 

funds research and development in fire and arson investigation for criminal justice purposes. The 

program is aimed at improving the ability of forensic analysts and investigators to locate and 

identify probative evidence from fire scenes and to enhance the ability of crime laboratories to 

analyze fire evidence. Areas of interest include new or improved tools and technologies to aid in 

interpreting a fire scene; improved understanding of chemical signatures found at fire scenes 

(e.g., burn pattern analysis); improvements in the laboratory analysis of fire debris. 

The Research and Development in Forensic Anthropology and Forensic Odontology Program 

funds research and development that can enhance anthropological and odontological methods 

and/or tools for forensic applications. Priority areas include identification of remains in mass 

fatality events; age and sex determination; forensic artistry and facial/body reconstruction; 

methods for detection of human remains; identification of ethnicity and/or cultural origins; novel 

methods that can enhance forensic tools available for odontologists and dental anthropologists; 

biogeochemical markers that can provide information about the origins of skeletal remains. 

The Solving Cold Cases with DNA program funds projects to identify, review, and investigate 

“violent crime cold cases” that have the potential to be solved using DNA analysis and to locate 

and analyze biological evidence associated with these cases. Experience has shown that cold case 

programs can solve a substantial number of violent crime cold cases, including homicides and 

sexual assaults. Advances in DNA technologies have substantially increased the successful DNA 

analysis of aged, degraded, limited, or otherwise compromised biological evidence. As a result, 

crime scene samples once thought to be unsuitable for testing may now yield DNA profiles. 

Additionally, samples that previously generated inconclusive DNA results may now be 

successfully analyzed using newer methods. 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

2.0 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 

This chapter describes the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative, as required by 

Council on Environmental Quality regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy 

Act. Alternatives that were considered and dismissed from further analysis are identified as well. 

2.1 Proposed Action 

As described in Section 1.1, above, NIJ funds research, development, and evaluation about 

criminal justice through competitive solicitations and formula and need based awards. The 

purpose for the NIJ grants program and the types of projects funded are summarized in Sections 

1.2 and 1.3, respectively. Examples of actions undertaken by past funded projects for which 

NEPA compliance was conducted include: 

• Reduction of the number of cold cases through the successful application of DNA testing in 

the identification of missing and unidentified persons and perpetrators of violent crimes. 

Chemicals are involved in DNA extraction and analysis 

• Research involving fabrication and testing of microfluidic devices, which use the materials 

required for fabrication of the devices and the chemicals and biological materials used for 

separations and DNA extractions. 

• Research and development of a device that enables more efficient and rapid initial 

preparation of rape kit samples for DNA analysis, involving the use of chemical reagents. 

• DNA analysis from homicides, sexual assault and property crime cases using chemical 

reagents. 

• Acquisition of a Genetic Analyzer and use of DNA analysis kits consisting of chemical 

reagents. 

• Forensic DNA laboratory training, including the use of chemicals and reagents needed to 

train forensic scientists in the latest DNA technologies. 

• Evaluate soil samples associated with human decomposition for microbial community 

structure, involving use of chemicals for DNA extraction, amplification, and sequencing of 

microorganisms. 

• Installation of a modular structure for the purpose of evidence processing. 

• Fire training exercises to test a set of fatal fire scene processing protocols and postprocessing of burned animal carcasses. 

• Laboratory small-scale fire tests conducted to characterize the ignition and burning behavior 

of common materials. These tests include fire reconstruction tests, bench scale spontaneous 

ignition tests of common materials, and bench scale flammability tests. 

The proposed action for this Programmatic EA is for NIJ to continue funding projects as in the 

past. That is, there would be no change to the grants program, which is required by law. 

However, instead of preparing an EA and FONSI (Finding of No Significant Impact) for each 

project that requires NEPA documentation before funds are disbursed, projects that fall under the 

scope of this programmatic EA would meet the requirements for NEPA compliance. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-1 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

To ensure the programmatic EA adequately addresses all issues for each proposed project, 

grantees would be required to complete and submit a checklist (see Appendix A) for OJP/NIJ 

review and approval for each proposal. The completed checklist would identify any issues that 

require additional analysis. No NIJ grant funds would be disbursed to a grantee until 

determination of NEPA compliance can be made. Any projects deemed not to be fully covered 

for NEPA compliance by this Programmatic EA would need to have a separate EA and FONSI 

prepared. 

2.2 No Action Alternative 

The No Action Alternative is included as required by NEPA regulations to identify baseline 

conditions against which potential impacts of implementation alternatives are evaluated. The No 

Action Alternative represents the benchmark condition of the environment if the proposed action 

is not implemented. 

The no action would be that no funds would be disbursed via grants to educational institutions, 

public agencies, nonprofit organizations, faith-based organizations, individuals, and profitmaking organizations. These organizations would have to find alternative funding sources for 

criminal justice projects, or the projects would have to be cancelled. However, NIJ is mandated 

by law to administer the grants program. 

2.3 Alternatives Considered and Dismissed 

There are no alternatives that have been considered and dismissed. 

2.4 Comparison of Alternatives 

Table 2-1 illustrates a summary of the impacts resulting from each of the alternatives. This table 

was constructed using broad, programmatic impacts and is subsequently very general in its 

assessment of the impacts. Site-specific details will determine the extent and severity of the 

localized impacts in each resource area. 

Table 2-1. Comparison of Environmental Impacts of Alternatives. 

Impact Topic Proposed Action No Action Alternative 

Air Quality Negligible emissions from fire 

testing activities; short-term 

emissions during construction 

projects; no impacts from use of 

chemicals 

No impacts on air quality 

Geology, 

Topography, Soils 

Soil disturbance and compaction 

and possible erosion from 

construction projects; no impacts 

from use of chemicals or fire 

No impacts on geology, 

topography, and soils 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-2 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Impact Topic Proposed Action No Action Alternative 

testing activities 

Water Resources Erosion leading to sedimentation 

from construction projects; 

possible water contamination 

from fuel spills from heavy 

equipment during construction; 

impacts to wetlands and 

floodplains should be avoided; 

no impacts from use of 

chemicals or fire testing due to 

proper disposal of wastes 

No impacts on water resources 

Natural 

Environment 

Disturbance and clearing of 

vegetation, possible introduction 

of non-native plants, temporary 

disturbance and displacement of 

wildlife and habitat from 

construction projects; no impacts 

from use of chemicals or fire 

testing activities 

No impacts on the natural 

environment 

Endangered Species Similar effects as for non-listed 

species from construction 

projects, but impacts could be 

avoided via consultation with 

FWS as to mitigation; no 

impacts from use of chemicals or 

fire testing activities 

No impacts on endangered 

species 

Historic 

Preservation 

Ground disturbance during 

construction can impact cultural 

resources; no impacts from use 

of chemicals or fire testing 

activities 

No impacts on historic 

preservation 

Land Use Potential for conflict with 

existing uses with new 

construction projects; no impacts 

from use of chemicals or fire 

testing activities 

No impacts on land use 

Human Population Temporary new jobs during 

construction and renovation 

projects; possible new jobs with 

operation of new facilities; no 

impacts from use of chemicals or 

fire testing activities which 

would likely use an existing 

work force; no expected impacts 

on Environmental Justice 

No impacts on the human 

population 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-3 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 2-4 

Impact Topic Proposed Action No Action Alternative 

Noise Short-term noise increases 

during construction and 

renovation projects; no impacts 

from use of chemicals or fire 

testing activities 

No noise impacts 

Energy Minimal increases in energy use 

and demand from construction 

and renovation projects; 

insignificant additional energy 

requirements from projects 

involving use of chemicals or 

fire testing activities 

No impacts on energy 

Solid Waste 

Management 

Minimal increases in waste 

generation in projects involving 

chemicals, fire testing, 

construction, and renovation 

No impacts on transportation 

Transportation Temporary traffic impacts 

during construction projects and 

possibly during operation of a 

new facility; no impacts from 

use of chemicals or fire testing 

activities 

No impacts on transportation 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL 

CONSEQUENCES 

3.1 Methodology 

This section will present the impacts associated with the Proposed Action, as well as those 

associated with the No Action Alternative. Projects to be funded under the Proposed Action may 

lead to some environmental impacts, specifically, those involving chemical use, those renovating 

or constructing facilities, and those conducting fire testing. 

The descriptions of the environment in this chapter are intended to provide a broad overview of 

the natural and human environments of projects participating in the NIJ grants program. Detailed 

descriptions of the all resources and issues that could be affected by the many projects that could 

be funded are beyond the scope of this programmatic EA. 

The impact analyses have been conducted by gathering data of the affected resource areas in 

relation to the implementation of the Proposed Action. Using this data, potential impacts and the 

significance levels have been assessed. Potential mitigation measures have also been identified 

to minimize impact levels. 

Each resource section has the following structure: 

3.1.1 Affected Environment 

This section describes the relevant aspects of the current condition of that resource. Normally, 

this description provides a set of baseline conditions that help assess how and what impacts will 

occur as a result of the Proposed Action. However, given the programmatic nature of this 

analysis, site-specific information is not available. NIJ funded projects may be occur in a wide 

variety of environments: urban areas, rural areas, tribal lands, coastal areas, mountainous areas, 

and so forth. It is unnecessary to discuss the programmatic impacts in such detail, as this would 

greatly increase the volume of the document without adding an equivalent amount of detailed 

impact analysis. 

Instead, the affected environment is portrayed as a general overview and in a programmatic 

checklist that summarizes the typical concerns that grantees can expect to encounter in 

implementing their projects, as exemplified below: 

Checklist Items

• The checklist identifies the issues that are likely to surface in implementing a project and 

allows the grantee some flexibility in ensuring that the impacts are minimal or that proper 

mitigation is performed. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-1 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

• As stated above, funded projects may be located in any type of environment, but by 

proceeding through the checklist, grantees can customize the information therein with the 

applicable details at the local level. 

• Grantees can then systematically account for the environmental impacts of implementing a 

project. 

This section also includes the significance criteria for each resource area, displayed as follows: 

These criteria can be used to determine if the impacts of implementing a project are significant 

and merit further study under an environmental impact statement. 

3.1.2 Environmental Consequences 

This section provides a listing of potential impacts associated with the alternatives and the 

analytical conclusion as to the nature and intensity of these potential impacts. Generally, a 

project involving the use of chemicals, renovating or constructing facilities, and conducting fire 

testing would have some impacts and these impacts will be listed. However, by following the 

checklist and performing any necessary mitigation, grantees are likely to avoid significant 

impacts. 

The analysis of these impacts will be divided into discussions regarding each alternative, 

clarifying which alternatives may lead to which impacts. The application process and funding 

allocation process have no direct environmental impacts, thus will not be considered. 

3.1.3 Mitigation Measures 

This section includes recommendations, as needed, to minimize potential impacts of the 

Proposed Action. 

Mitigation Measures: 

• Some mitigation may be required by law or applicable permits and regulations. 

• Others may simply be recommended strategies to minimize environmental impacts. 

3.2 Air Quality 

3.2.1 Affected Environment 

The Clean Air Act (42 USC 7401-7671q), as amended, gives the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) the responsibility to establish the primary and secondary National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) (40 CFR Part 50) that set acceptable concentration levels for seven 

criteria pollutants: particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 

micrometers (PM10), particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 

micrometers (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx), ozone 

(O3), and lead (Pb) (EPA, 2009a). Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including 

the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary 

standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-2 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. Short-term NAAQS (1-, 8-, and 24-hour 

periods) have been established for pollutants contributing to acute health effects, while long-term 

NAAQS (annual averages) have been established for pollutants contributing to chronic health 

effects. Each state has the authority to adopt standards stricter than those established under the 

federal program; however, many states accept the federal standards. 

Federal regulations designate regions in violation of the NAAQS as non-attainment areas. 

Federal regulations designate regions with levels below the NAAQS as attainment areas. 

Maintenance regions are areas that have previously been designated non-attainment and have 

been re-designated to attainment for a probationary period through the implementation of 

maintenance plans. 

For this Proposed Action, the relevant regulatory requirement is that federal agencies are not 

allowed to take any action that would interfere with a state’s implementation plan to maintain or 

to achieve compliance with those air quality standards. Federal action must be “in conformity” 

with whatever restrictions or limitations the State has established for air emissions necessary to 

attain compliance with NAAQS. 

Since the Proposed Action does not fall within the categories of an advisory, emergency, or 

excluded activity, screening techniques are used to evaluate a project. EPA has established the 

protocols for a screening process to verify whether a conformity determination is necessary for 

both attainment and non-attainment areas. 

The Clean Air Act contains the legislation that mandates the general conformity rule to ensure 

that federal actions in non-attainment and maintenance areas do not interfere with a state’s timely 

attainment of the NAAQS. The general conformity process requires a determination of whether 

an action would increase emissions of criteria pollutants above preset threshold levels (40 CFR 

93.153). The thresholds are referred to as de minimis criteria, and vary depending upon the 

pollutant. The term de minimis means “so small as to be negligible or insignificant.” If an action 

is below the de minimis emission threshold, then a conformity determination is not required. The 

thresholds established are 100 tons per year or less for each pollutant in order to qualify for de 

minimis. If the de minimis criteria are exceeded, then a conformity determination must be made. 

In addition, the general conformity rule applies if the emissions are regionally significant. 

Regionally significant emissions are defined as the total direct and indirect emissions of a federal 

action that represents 10 percent or more of an area's total emissions for a criteria pollutant. 

Checklist Items

• Does the project comply with state air quality standards for all criteria pollutants? 

• Is the project located in an area designated by the EPA as in attainment for the seven criteria 

pollutants? 

• Would the action produce minimal emissions (100 tons per year or less for each of the seven 

criteria pollutants and/or does not exceed 10% of an area’s total emissions)? 

• Would potential exposure to chemical emissions in a laboratory be controlled through the use 

of a biological hood? 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-3 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

• Would the project only produce emissions that do not impede the area’s conformity with the 

State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act? 

Significance Criteria: 

An impact would be considered significant if pollutant emissions result in exposure of people, 

wildlife, or vegetation to ambient air that does not meet the standards established under the 

Clean Air Act, or interfere with state ambient air quality standards. 

3.2.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Each state has different ambient air quality standards for the various air pollutants, and EPA has 

determined the attainment or non-attainment designation for all areas in the United States. 

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals would not be expected to have any 

impacts on air quality as there would not likely be any criteria pollutant emissions or they would 

be controlled with a biological hood inside a laboratory. The burn activities in projects involving 

fire tests are generally small scale and of short duration and emissions would also be controlled 

in a laboratory setting, thus air quality impacts would likely be negligible. 

Construction or renovation activities normally involve heavy equipment use and a certain level 

of air emissions. Emissions generated during construction would be short-term only for the 

duration of the project. Operation of a new facility could produce some air emissions as well, 

the amount of which would depend on the size and uses of the facility. It is highly unlikely, 

however, that either construction or operation of new facilities would approach de minimis

levels, thus resulting in minimal impacts to air quality. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on air quality under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the Proposed 

Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are not 

otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, then there would be no impacts on air quality. 

3.2.3 Mitigation Measures 

All state, local, and tribal regulations pertaining to emissions would be followed, thus 

minimizing impacts to air quality. 

3.3 Geology, Topography, Soils (includes Farmland Protection) 

3.3.1 Affected Environment 

Site topography, geology, and soils will vary among project locations. Topography is defined as 

the relief or terrain; the three-dimensional quality of the surface; specific landforms. Geology, 

the structure of a specific region of the earth's crust, is often described or mapped by geologic 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-4 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

formations. Geologic materials consist of rock (there are three major types of rock: igneous, 

sedimentary, and metamorphic) and unconsolidated material (such as sediments and soils). 

Soil is a collective term for the inorganic and organic substrate covering bedrock in which 

vegetation grows and a multitude of organisms reside. Soils are surveyed nationwide by county. 

Soil resources provide a foundation for both plant and animal communities by establishing a 

substrate for plant growth and vegetative cover for animal habitat and feeding. These resources 

are equally important in both terrestrial and aquatic environments. Soils can be degraded 

through three processes: (1) physical degradation, such as wind and water erosion, and 

compaction; (2) chemical degradation such as toxification, salinization, and acidification; and (3) 

biological degradation, which includes declines in organic matter, carbon, and the activity and 

diversity of soil fauna. While there are few applicable regulations regarding soils, proper 

conservation principles can reduce erosion, decrease turbidity, and generally improve water 

quality. 

In August 1980, the CEQ directed that Federal agencies must assess the effects of their actions 

on farmland soils classified by the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources 

Conservation Service as prime or unique. Prime or unique farmland, as stated in Title 7, Chapter 

73, Section 4201 (c)(1) of the Farmland Protection Policy Act, is defined as soil that particularly 

produces general crops, such as common foods, forage, fiber, and oil seed; unique farmland 

produces specialty crops, such as fruits, vegetables, and nuts. 

Checklist Items

• Would there be compliance with local soil erosion mitigation measures in construction and 

renovation projects? 

• Would the project avoid erosion and deposition, compacting soils in fragile environments, or 

altering the character of soils over a large area? 

• Would the project comply with the Farmland Protection Policy Act? 

Significance Criteria

An action would cause a significant impact if soil erosion produced gullying, damage to 

vegetation, or a sustained increase in sedimentation in streams. This includes a substantial loss 

of soil, and/or a substantial decrease in soil stability and permeability. Also, significant impacts 

can occur when soils are substantially disrupted, displaced, compacted or covered over. An 

action would also constitute a significant impact if the action caused ground fracturing, folding, 

subsidence, or instability. Impacts associated with soil contamination would be significant if the 

affected area was no longer able to support its current function or vegetative cover. 

3.3.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals would not be expected to have any 

impacts on geology, topography, or soils as there would not be any ground disturbance. The burn 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-5 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

activities in projects involving laboratory fire tests likewise would not disturb the ground or 

impact geology, topography, or soils. 

Renovation projects would not likely result in any impacts to soils as activities would likely 

occur inside existing buildings. Construction projects, however, normally involve heavy 

equipment use and would likely entail disturbing and compacting soils from activities such as 

grading, excavating, and filling. Impacts to soils from erosion and compaction would vary 

between regions throughout the U.S., dependent largely upon the types of soils and rainfall 

amounts. Some regions are more susceptible to erosion due to soils with high clay content and 

large amounts of rain. Impacts can be mitigated through local regulations requiring measures 

such as sediment fencing, detention and retention ponds, and ground meshing cover. Thus, after 

employing local mitigation measures, impacts would be non-significant. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on geology, topography, and soils under the No Action Alternative would be the same as 

under the Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. If projects 

are cancelled, no ground disturbing activity would occur and the No Action Alternative would 

not impact the current geologic, topographic, or soil conditions at a project site or in the 

surrounding area. 

3.3.3 Mitigation Measures 

Adhering to federal, state, and local regulations, ordinances, and permitting systems is one way 

to minimize impacts to geology and soils using site-specific guidelines. Erosion prevention 

practices could include using silt screening around any disturbed areas, mulching all exposed 

slopes, placing staked hay bales in drainages, and sprinkling exposed soil to prevent wind 

erosion. In addition, limiting the area of disturbance, revegetating disturbed soils upon 

completion of construction, restoring areas to natural contours, and avoiding construction during 

periods of high erosion can reduce impacts. 

3.4 Water Resources (Water Quality, Surface Water, Wetlands, Floodplains, 

Coastal Barrier Resources, Wild and Scenic Rivers) 

3.4.1 Affected Environment 

Water is a central component of any community for both the natural and human inhabitants. The 

availability of water, including surface water and groundwater, and the quality of those waters, 

play a critical role in determining the natural community structure and in supporting human 

activity. There are numerous laws and regulations that protect both hydrology and water quality 

on the Federal level and on the State and regional levels. On the Federal level, the primary law 

protecting the "chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters" is the Clean 

Water Act (CWA). State-issued 401 Certifications under the CWA protect water quality, and the 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) issued Section 404 Permit under the CWA protects 

waters and wetlands of the United States. The Safe Drinking Water Act protects the quality of 

the nation's drinking water and provides limited protection of groundwater resources. The River 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-6 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

and Harbor Act and the Water Resources Development Act assign to the USACE the 

responsibility for ensuring the navigability of the nation's rivers and harbors and providing flood 

protection. The Water Resources Development Act also provides funding for various water 

resource development projects that meet those objectives as well as for coastal erosion and levee 

construction projects. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA), 

and numerous fish and wildlife protection, federal land management, and energy laws, also 

protect water resources. Though the above mentioned laws and regulations are by no means 

exhaustive, they are some of the more commonly cited regulations protecting water resources. 

Projects that require consideration and/or permitting under any of the above mentioned laws and 

regulations could result in impacts to water resources. 

Executive Order (E.O.) 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long 

and short-term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains 

and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a 

practicable alternative (EPA, 2009b). In accomplishing this objective, "each agency shall provide 

leadership and shall take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, to minimize the impact of floods 

on human safety, health, and welfare, and to restore and preserve the natural and beneficial 

values served by flood plains in carrying out its responsibilities" for the following actions: 

• acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities; 

• providing federally-undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and improvements; 

• conducting federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to 

water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing activities. 

E.O. 11990 directs federal agencies to "minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands 

and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands" (EPA, 2009c). To 

meet these objectives, federal agencies, in planning their actions, must consider alternatives to 

wetland sites and limit potential damage if an activity affecting a wetland cannot be avoided. The 

Order applies to: 

• acquisition, management, and disposition of federal lands and facilities construction and 

improvement projects which are undertaken, financed or assisted by federal agencies; 

• federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and 

related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing activities. 

The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System was created by Congress in 1968 (Public Law 90-

542; 16 U.S.C. 1271 et seq.) to preserve certain rivers with outstanding natural, cultural, and 

recreational values in a free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future 

generations. The Act is notable for safeguarding the special character of these rivers, while also 

recognizing the potential for their appropriate use and development. It encourages river 

management that crosses political boundaries and promotes public participation in developing 

goals for river protection. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-7 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Checklist Items

• Would project activities avoid contamination, sedimentation, or otherwise significantly 

affecting the water quality or hydrology of a nearby surface water body? 

• Would changes to surface water quality or hydrology be confined to the immediate project 

area? 

• Does the project ensure that local and state regulations concerning stormwater runoff are 

followed? 

• During construction activities, would all state, local, and tribal regulations concerning 

erosion controls, runoff abatement, and vegetation removal be followed? 

• During construction activities, would proper hazardous spill procedures be in place to 

minimize impacts of spills on water quality? 

• Would the project avoid affecting a designated Wild and Scenic River in any manner? 

• Would the project avoid affecting any portion of a 100-year or 500-year floodplain or 

jurisdictional wetland? 

Significance Criteria

Impacts on water resources would be considered significant if effluent or pollutant emissions 

result in exposure of people, wildlife, or vegetation to surface or ground waters that do not meet 

the standards established under the Clean Water Act, or interfere with state water quality 

standards. 

An action would cause a significant impact on wetlands and floodplains if the soil structure, 

hydrology or the vegetation of more than 1⁄4 acre (1/10 ha) of a wetland would be altered, or a 

floodplain area is altered enough to present a reasonable flood danger to the area, causes the 

degradation or loss of habitat for populations indigenous to the floodplain area, or prohibits 

farming activities.

3.4.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Projects involving a research or testing action within an existing facility may generate wastes 

that have the potential to affect water resources. However, any wastes generated from research 

using chemicals or fire testing would be disposed of in accordance with all applicable state, 

federal, and local regulations and would not impact water resources. 

Projects involving new construction, and to some extent renovation, should avoid sites where the 

activities may alter the function of an adjacent waterbody. For example, sites within the 

floodplain of a river would be avoided, so as to minimize impacts to natural floodplain function, 

as well as preventing flood damages to the facility. Similarly, sites should tend to avoid affecting 

wetlands, stream channels, stream banks, lakeshores, or other waterbodies, as construction and 

operation of the facility may inhibit natural flows and degrade water quality. While development 

of wetlands is certainly possible, grantees should avoid sites where filling or draining of 

wetlands or other activities would be required. The permitting process to fill a wetland could be 

lengthy and is best to be avoided assuming equivalent sites are readily available. Additionally, 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-8 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

some developments may require wetland mitigation banking, where constructed wetlands would 

be created in an alternate site. 

Stormwater control measures can serve as additional planned erosion control measures. Rural 

areas would be likely to rely on gutters and downspouts to direct rainfall away from erodable 

areas, whereas urban areas would utilize storm sewer systems. Design and construction should 

include measures to properly handle excessive rainfall and stormwater flows. 

Most localities would have requirements for mitigation activities during construction. The extent 

and type of mitigations would vary across the country, but most would be likely to contain 

provisions for preserving water quality. Clearing and vegetation removal makes soils more 

vulnerable to erosion, potentially affecting sediment levels in nearby water. Soil compaction 

from the use of heavy equipment reduces the rate of infiltration of rainwater, creating greater 

overland flows and increasing erosion. Construction activities such as building a foundation may 

involve substantial amounts of earth moving, digging, and storage of soil on-site, possibly 

leading to additional erosion, as natural vegetation and soil structure is disturbed. Generally, 

following mitigation measures as described below should minimize impacts to water quality. 

Heavy equipment used in construction and renovation work often use materials that are classified 

as hazardous, such as petroleum, oils, and lubricants. Incidental spills during refueling or simple 

mechanical leaks may introduce hazardous materials to nearby water sources. Additional sources 

of hazardous materials may include portable restrooms and personal vehicles. Spill containment 

and cleanup procedures should be established to minimize these impacts. Readily available 

materials for cleanup and recovery would further minimize impacts. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on water resources under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the 

Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are 

not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on water resources. 

3.4.3 Mitigation Measures 

Avoidance of impacts to water resources should always be the chief goal of any project. When 

avoidance is not possible, mitigation measures should always be implemented in order to reduce 

impacts. Several standard mitigation measures that would be effective in avoiding or reducing 

impacts to water resources include strict adherence to all permit requirements for the project and 

implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs). BMPs at construction sites typically 

consist of various erosion and sediment control measures. Silt fences, straw bales, and other 

temporary measures should be placed in ditches and along portions of site perimeters to control 

erosion during construction activities. These temporary erosion prevention measures should be 

maintained in place until the site vegetation is firmly established and soil has stabilized. 

Any land disturbance should be planned according to seasonal and climactic characteristics of 

the region where the project is located in order to minimize impacts; for instance, whenever 

possible, disturbance should be planned during dry (low precipitation) seasons. Vegetation 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-9 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

removal during land disturbance activities should be minimized and all disturbed areas should be 

stabilized and revegetated with native plant vegetation immediately following commencement of 

land disturbance to reduce site outflows of stormwater. Any development of floodplains or 

wetlands should be mitigated in full either on site or as close to the project site as possible, to 

minimize regional effects of development. Pollution prevention and waste minimization should 

also be incorporated. 

3.5 Natural Environment (Wildlife, Wildlife Habitat, and Vegetation) 

3.5.1 Affected Environment 

Vegetation and wildlife communities are an integral part of any ecosystem and vary greatly 

among project locations across the country. There can be numerous regulatory requirements 

involved when a proposed action has impacts upon vegetation, wildlife, and habitat including the 

Endangered Species Act (see Section 3.6 below), the Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. These laws and 

others provide a framework for conservation of vegetation and wildlife resources and can be 

supplemented with sound conservation principles to minimize impacts to these communities. 

Checklist Items

• Would the project avoid causing more than a short-term change in the composition, structure, 

or density of vegetation? 

• Would the project avoid causing more than temporary disturbance or relocation of wildlife? 

• Would the project avoid impacting current or future wildlife or vegetation biodiversity or 

species composition? 

• Would the project insure that the potential for the establishment of non-native plant species 

within disturbed areas created by this project would be minimal? 

• Would project construction occur in an area other than a unique or sensitive plant 

community? 

• Would the project avoid extirpating any plants or animals from the project area? 

Significance Criteria

An action would cause a significant impact if any changes to native vegetation extend beyond a 

small area and affect the viability of a plant species population or vegetation community. Full 

recovery would not occur in a reasonable time, considering the size of the project and the 

affected resource’s natural state. 

An action would cause a significant impact if any changes affect a large portion of a wildlife 

population and the viability of that population. Full recovery would not occur in a reasonable 

time, considering the size of the project and the affected species’ natural state. 

An action would cause a significant impact if the degradation or loss of habitat is sufficient to 

cause native wildlife populations to leave or avoid the area. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-10 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.5.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any impacts on vegetation or 

wildlife as they would occur within a research facility. 

Renovation or construction projects involve noise, fugitive dust, waste materials, and impacts to 

water and air quality which may affect vegetation and wildlife at or near the site. Construction 

activities often necessitate removal of plants located at the project site, including possible 

removal of trees and ground cover for site preparation. Repeated disturbance of vegetation (i.e., 

due to vehicle passes or foot traffic) during construction in areas where plants are not cleared 

would cause damage to plants and destruction of the vegetation mat. Any changes to native 

vegetation would likely be limited to a small area and would not affect the viability of the 

resources, and full recovery would be expected to occur in a reasonable time. 

Exotic plants or seeds could be brought to the site with fill material or topsoil. New introductions 

could allow for exotic plants to become established and spread, especially in areas where the 

ground is disturbed by construction activities. Exotic plants currently growing in the area can 

also become established and spread on newly disturbed substrates. However, mitigation to ensure 

that imported material does not contain exotic plant material should be implemented to reduce 

this impact. 

Construction activities and human presence could cause temporary displacement and disturbance 

of resident wildlife for the duration of construction. Species, however, often return to the area 

after construction is completed. Some species may be prevented from using the resources on the 

project site due to habitat alteration or destruction. These impacts are expected to be localized 

and limited to the immediate area of the project site. Activities that affect wildlife habitat often 

impact component resources such as vegetation, soil, and water. 

In urban settings, renovation and construction projects should have fewer impacts as wildlife and 

vegetation is already in a disturbed condition. Overall, construction and renovations projects 

would be expected to have less than significant impacts on the natural environment. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on vegetation and wildlife under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under 

the Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds 

are not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on vegetation 

and wildlife. 

3.5.3 Mitigation Measures 

The area of vegetation disturbance should be limited. For example, heavy construction 

equipment should be kept on road surfaces to the extent possible. Construction areas should be 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-11 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

identified by and fenced with construction tape, snow fencing, or some similar material prior to 

any construction activity. The fencing defines the construction zone and confines activity to the 

minimum area required for construction. Construction materials should be stored in previously 

disturbed areas. Disturbed areas should be restored to natural contours to the extent possible to 

reduce the potential for erosion and revegetated with native plant species, or with plants 

previously removed from the construction area whenever possible. Project sites would be 

surveyed prior to ground disturbance for the presence of rare plant species. Gravel and fill for 

construction or maintenance should be obtained from certified noxious weed-free sources. 

Subsequent to project completion, monitor for non-native plants and remove any invasive 

species observed. 

Where wildlife habitat is lost, habitat enhancement or replacement measures should be taken, for 

example, facilitating understory growth to provide shelter for wildlife, establishing grassed 

meadows for foraging, or replacing roosting areas. Trees and other native vegetation could be 

planted to improve wildlife habitat and restore functionality. Measures could be developed to 

minimize any noise disturbance by heavy machinery during construction or, when possible, 

construction should be conducted to avoid sensitive periods for wildlife, such as during breeding 

season. 

3.6 Endangered Species 

3.6.1 Affected Environment 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) establishes a national program for the conservation of 

threatened and endangered species (T&E species) of fish, wildlife, and plants, and the 

ecosystems upon which they depend (EPA, 2009d). It is administered by the Interior 

Department’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the Commerce Department’s National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). The FWS has primary responsibility for terrestrial and 

freshwater organisms, while the responsibilities of NMFS are mainly marine species such as 

salmon and whales. 

Under the ESA, species may be listed as either “endangered” or “threatened.” Endangered means 

a species is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Threatened 

means a species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a 

significant portion of its range. The ESA makes it unlawful for a person to take a listed animal 

without a permit. Take is defined as “to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, 

capture, or collect or attempt to engage in any such conduct.” The term “harm” is defined as “an 

act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat 

modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing 

essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.” Listed plants are not 

protected from take, although it is illegal to collect or maliciously harm them on federal lands. 

Section 7 of the ESA requires federal agencies to consult with the FWS or NMFS to ensure that 

actions they authorize, fund, or carry out will not jeopardize listed species or destroy or 

adversely modify the critical habitat of a listed species. Critical habitat includes geographic areas 

that contain the physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the species and 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-12 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

that may need special management or protection. Critical habitat designations affect only federal 

agency actions or federally funded or permitted activities. Critical habitat may include areas not 

occupied by the species at the time of listing but that are essential to its conservation. 

Most consultations are conducted informally with the Federal agency or a designated nonFederal representative. Informal consultations determine: (1) whether listed species and critical 

habitat are in the area, (2) whether they may be affected and, if so, how the action could be 

modified to avoid adverse effects, and (3) whether a formal consultation is required. As part of a 

formal consultation, FWS or NMFS provide a threshold examination and a biological opinion on 

the likelihood that the proposed activity will or will not jeopardize the continued existence of the 

resource and on the effect of the proposed activity on the endangered species. The biological 

opinion may include recommendations for modification of the proposed activity. The FWS or 

NMFS may require the Federal agency to provide additional information or conduct appropriate 

biological studies if there is insufficient information to conclude that the proposed activity is not 

likely to jeopardize the species or its habitat. In the relatively few cases where the FWS or 

NMFS determines that the proposed action will jeopardize the species, they must offer 

“reasonable and prudent alternatives” about how the proposed action could be modified to avoid 

jeopardy. 

In addition to the ESA, individual states maintain their own lists of threatened and endangered 

species. Federal agencies are responsible for ensuring no adverse impacts to these species as 

well. 

Checklist Items

• Would the project avoid impacts on T&E species or critical habitat? 

• Is the project area free of any Federal or state listed T&E species or critical habitat, as 

determined by consultation with FWS or NMFS? 

• Would the project avoid impacting any areas in or adjacent to habitat for rare, threatened, or 

endangered species? 

• If the project is expected to adversely affect a listed species, would mitigation measures be 

employed that would successfully avoid such effects? 

Significance Criteria

Any effect to a federally listed species or its critical habitat would be so small that it would not 

be of any measurable or perceptible consequence to the protected individual or its population. 

This effect would equate to a “no effect” or “not likely to adversely affect” determination in U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service terms. Anything else would be considered significant. 

3.6.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any impacts on endangered species 

as these projects would occur within a research facility. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-13 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Renovation or construction projects involve noise, fugitive dust, waste materials, and impacts to 

water and air quality which may affect endangered species at or near the site. Threatened and 

endangered species would be subject to the same temporary displacement and disturbance as 

other wildlife species from activities associated with a proposed action, as discussed in Section 

3.5; however, if any of these species are actually found in the vicinity of the project area, 

mitigation measures would be in place to minimize such disturbance. By consulting with the 

FWS (or a state fish and game department), grantees could develop mitigations that would 

minimize or avoid impacts to listed species. Therefore, adverse impacts on threatened or 

endangered species could occur, but would be minimized. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on endangered species under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the 

Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are 

not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on endangered 

species. 

3.6.3 Mitigation Measures 

Mitigation measures would be similar to those described for vegetation and wildlife in Section 

3.5. Consultation with FWS and NMFS could also reveal mitigation or avoidance 

recommendations for specific plants or animals in the project area. Additionally, field 

reconnaissance surveys for protected species could be conducted in those areas where there is a 

reasonable probability of the occurrence of federal or state listed endangered and threatened 

species. 

3.7 Historic Preservation 

3.7.1 Affected Environment 

Historic preservation of cultural resources includes archeological resources, paleontological 

resources, historic resources, and cultural landscapes. An archeological resource refers to any 

material remains or physical evidence of past human life or activities that are of archeological 

interest, including the record of the effects of human activities on the environment. An 

archeological resource is capable of revealing scientific or humanistic information through 

archeological research. A historic resource is a district, site, building, structure, or object 

significant in the history of American archeology, architecture, culture, engineering, or politics at 

the national, state, or local level. Historic resources may be included in or eligible for inclusion 

on the National Register of Historic Places, including artifacts, records, and material remains 

related to such a property or resource. Paleontological resources are fossilized plants, animals, 

or their traces, including both organic and mineralized remains in body or trace form. A cultural 

landscape is a geographic area, including cultural and natural resources and the wildlife or 

domestic animals therein, associated with a historic event, activity, or person, or exhibiting other 

cultural or esthetic values. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-14 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, and as 

implemented in 36 CFR 800, requires federal agencies to: (1) consider the effects of federally 

funded, regulated, or licensed undertakings on cultural resources listed on or eligible for 

inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); (2) consult with the State Historic 

Preservation Officer (SHPO) and other interested parties; and (3) afford the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation (ACHP) the opportunity to comment (ACHP, 2009). For the purposes of 

this EA, cultural resources are defined as either recorded or potential historic archaeological 

sites, prehistoric sites, and standing architectural structures or historic districts. 

Checklist Items

• Is the project site free of any historic structures, archeological concerns, or other cultural 

resource issues, as determined by consultation with the SHPO? 

• Would the project avoid affecting any NRHP listed properties, or properties that are eligible 

for listing? 

• Would the project occur within an existing facility that is not considered historic, as 

determined by consultation with the SHPO? 

• If project activities are determined to impact cultural resources as defined by Section 106, 

would mitigation steps as outlined in Section 106 be followed? 

• Would renovation projects exclude historic buildings? 

Significance Criteria

An impact would be significant if an effect occurs that may diminish the integrity of, cause a 

substantial adverse change in the significance of, or directly or indirectly destroy a cultural 

resource. This effect would equate to an “adverse effect” determination for purposes of Section 

106. 

3.7.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any impacts on historic 

preservation as these projects would occur within a research facility. 

Projects involving new construction, and to some extent renovation, would ideally avoid sites 

where cultural resources are known to occur or have the potential to occur. Construction and 

renovation projects involving ground disturbance in previously undisturbed areas can have the 

potential to result in impacts to cultural resources. During the renovation and/or construction 

process, buried cultural artifacts may be found. In urban settings, renovation and construction 

projects should have few if any impacts on historic preservation as sites would already occur in 

areas with disturbed conditions. Consultation with applicable agencies and other consulting 

parties is required under Section 106 of the NHPA. Consultation and evaluation of the project 

must take place prior to carrying out any proposed actions. Mitigation measures and 

contingency plans for halting activities in the event a cultural artifact is discovered would result 

in less than significant impacts on historic preservation. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-15 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

No Action Alternative

Impacts on historic preservation under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the 

Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are 

not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on historic 

preservation. 

3.7.3 Mitigation Measures 

Common mitigation measures for all projects involving land disturbance include archaeological 

monitoring during initial excavation activities and implementation of a contingency plan in the 

event that any culturally or historically significant materials are unearthed, which would include 

such steps as halting all activities immediately upon discovery of the resource and initiating 

immediate consultation with the applicable SHPO office. 

3.8 Land Use 

3.8.1 Affected Environment 

Land use patterns within communities form the structure of the built environment. The 

relationships of land uses to one another can result in community harmony or discord. Local, 

state, and tribal land use plans exist in many areas of the country, guiding future land use 

patterns based upon the vision of the local community and leaders. 

Checklist Items

• Would the project comply with local zoning and development ordinances (apply for rezoning 

if needed)? 

• Would the project comply with local comprehensive and development plans? 

• Would the project obtain necessary building and occupancy permits from local authorities? 

Significance Criteria

An impact would be significant if a proposed action conflicts with any federal, regional, state, or 

local land use plans. If land use patterns are changed in the immediate project area due to a 

proposed action, the impact would also be considered significant. 

3.8.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any impacts on land use as these 

projects would occur within an existing research facility. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-16 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

It is possible that construction projects could have land use impacts that would occur on a 

localized level at each individual site. Compliance of the grantee with local regulations would 

ensure that many potential conflicts are solved through the site selection process. Potential 

impacts mitigated through the local planning process include non-permitted uses within a zone, 

proposed land use and comprehensive plan conflict, local historic ordinance conflicts, and 

building code discrepancies. 

Most urban areas have established planning structures; however, some rural jurisdictions do not. 

The nature of land use decisions in areas without local planning tends to be based on individual 

decisions and motivations. In areas such as this, conflicts can arise between neighboring uses, 

and development of the community often lacks a guided vision. Construction in a location 

lacking a formal planning structure could lead to further expansion of a community into its 

surrounding open space, requiring the provision of utilities into areas formally undeveloped. The 

size and scale of the specific development would determine the exact level of impact. 

Renovations on existing buildings would not have any impacts on land use. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on land use under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the Proposed 

Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are not 

otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on land use. 

3.8.3 Mitigation Measures 

None; all state, local, and tribal regulations regarding zoning and land use planning would be 

followed, thus minimizing or avoiding impacts to land use. 

3.9 Human Population (Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice) 

3.9.1 Affected Environment 

Socioeconomics encompasses the areas of demographics, economic development, and housing. 

Demographics are the physical characteristics of a population such as age, sex, marital status, 

family size, education, geographic location, and occupation. Economic development 

encompasses the economic well-being and quality of life for a community, including 

employment, local spending, and economic sectors. 

On 11 February 1994, President Clinton issued EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations (EPA, 2009e). EO 

12898 directs agencies to address environmental and human health conditions in minority and 

low-income communities so as to avoid the disproportionate placement of any adverse effects 

from federal policies and actions on these populations. The general purposes of this EO are as 

follows: 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-17 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

• To focus the attention of federal agencies on human health and environmental conditions in 

minority communities and low-income communities with the goal of achieving 

environmental justice. 

• To foster nondiscrimination in federal programs that substantially affect human health or the 

environment. 

• To give minority communities and low-income communities greater opportunities for public 

participation in, and access to, public information on matters relating to human health and the 

environment. 

As defined by the “Environmental Justice Guidance Under NEPA” (CEQ, 1997), “minority 

populations” includes persons who identify themselves as Asian or Pacific Islander, Native 

American or Alaskan Native, black (not of Hispanic origin), or Hispanic. Race refers to Census 

respondents’ self-identification of racial background. Hispanic origin refers to ethnicity and 

language, not race, and may include persons whose heritage is Puerto Rican, Cuban, Mexican, 

and Central or South American. 

A minority population exists where the percentage of minorities in an affected area either exceed 

50 percent or is meaningfully greater than in the general population. Low-income populations 

are identified using the Census Bureau’s statistical poverty threshold, which is based on income 

and family size. The Census Bureau defines a “poverty area” as a census tract with 20 percent or 

more of its residents below the poverty threshold and an “extreme poverty area” as one with 40 

percent or more below the poverty level. 

Checklist Items

• Would the project avoid appreciably changing the total population or demographics of the 

population, housing demand or employment levels, or property values? 

• Would the project avoid increasing human infrastructure requirements (i.e., new workers 

need housing and consume additional community resources such as water, electricity, 

roadways, open space, etc.)? 

• Would the project avoid displacing existing residents or workers from their homes and 

communities? 

• Would the action avoid areas that have a high proportion of minority residents or residents 

living below the poverty level? 

• If it does occur in such an area, would the grantee ensure that low-income households are not 

adversely impacted by the project? 

• Would environmentally unsafe, unpleasant, or noxious conditions for nearby populations, 

including release of contaminants into air or water, increased levels of traffic or noise occur 

only during the period of construction? 

Significance Criteria

A change of more than 2 percent of the previously projected level of local employment, 

population, or gross domestic product would be considered a significant impact on 

socioeconomics. Also, if school populations decrease by more than 2 percent, revenues decrease 

by more than 2 percent, and if vacancy rate increases by more than 2 percent, that would 

constitute a significant impact. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-18 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

A significant impact on environmental justice would occur if a disproportionate amount of 

minority and/or low-income populations were adversely affected by the project. 

3.9.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would be expected to employ an existing workforce in an existing 

organization and would not have any impacts on socioeconomics or environmental justice. 

Construction and renovation projects could provide temporary new jobs for the duration of the 

project. These jobs would likely be filled by local citizens, thus there would not be any effects 

on demographics, local spending, or housing. Operation of new facilities may involve job 

opportunities for local or out-of-area employees. However, it is also possible that the new 

facilities would be operated by an existing workforce. Overall, there may be temporary to longterm changes in employment, but this change would be expected to be insignificant. Impacts on 

other socioeconomic factors would be minimal or non-existent. Renovation, or the construction 

of a new facility, although it may occur in a low-income or minority neighborhood, would be 

implemented and mitigated in such a way as not to have any environmental justice impacts. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on the human population under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under 

the Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds 

are not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on the human 

population. 

3.9.3 Mitigation Measures 

Mitigation for human population impacts such as those described above could include the 

following: 

• Public outreach and education: a project communications strategy that aims to generate 

awareness and support for the action, understanding of the nature and timing of its impacts, 

and strategies for avoiding, minimizing or mitigating them. 

• Direct compensation: funds to directly compensate individual entities who endure social and 

economic impacts that rise above a certain pre-defined level. Indirect compensation: 

programs that allow businesses or individuals to avoid, absorb or adapt to impacts. Examples 

would include providing alternate transportation routes to alleviate traffic disruptions, 

supporting temporary housing sites if appropriate, and low or no-interest loans. 

• Project design that addresses: 

o Fairness – by spreading the impacts as fairly as possible, with any disproportionate 

impacts being unavoidable (and perceived as such). 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-19 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

o Limiting impacts – by building-in efforts to limit the magnitude, duration, intensity, 

and likelihood of impacts. 

3.10 Noise 

3.10.1 Affected Environment 

Noise is defined as any sound that is undesirable because it interferes with communication, is 

intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise intrusive. Human response to noise varies 

depending on the type and characteristics of the noise, the distance between the noise source and 

the receptor, receptor sensitivity, and time of day. 

Sound varies by both intensity and frequency. Sound pressure level, described in decibels (dB), 

is used to quantify sound intensity. The dB is a logarithmic unit that expresses the ratio of a 

sound pressure level to a standard reference level. Hertz (Hz) are used to quantify sound 

frequency. The human ear responds differently to different frequencies. A-weighing, described in 

a-weighted decibels (dBA), approximates this frequency response to express accurately the 

perception of sound by humans. Sounds encountered in daily life and their approximate levels in 

dBA are provided in Table 3-1. 

Table 3-1. Common sounds and their levels

Outdoor 

Sound level 

(dBA) Indoor 

Snowmobile 100 Subway train 

Tractor 90 Garbage disposal 

Noisy restaurant 85 Blender 

Downtown (large city) 80 Ringing telephone 

Freeway traffic 70 TV audio 

Normal conversation 60 Sewing machine 

Rainfall 50 Refrigerator 

Quiet residential area 40 Library 

The dBA noise metric describes steady noise levels. Very few noises are in fact constant, so a 

noise metric, day-night sound level (DNL) has been developed. DNL is defined as the average 

sound energy in a 24-hour period with a 10-dB penalty added to nighttime levels (10 p.m. to 7 

a.m.). DNL is a useful descriptor for noise because it averages ongoing yet intermittent noise, 

and it measures total sound energy over a 24-hour period. 

The Noise Control Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-574) directs federal agencies to comply with 

applicable federal, state, interstate, and local noise control regulations (EPA, 2007). In 1974, the 

EPA provided information suggesting that continuous and long-term noise levels in excess of 

DNL 65 dBA are normally unacceptable for noise-sensitive land uses such as residences, 

schools, churches, and hospitals. Other “sensitive receptors” include retirement homes, 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-20 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

campgrounds, wilderness areas, hiking trails, and certain species of threatened or endangered 

wildlife. 

Checklist Items

• Would project activities avoid noise impacts to sensitive receptors? 

• If noise levels during construction projects exceed existing background sounds temporarily, 

would the project insure that they do not exceed applicable noise standards? 

• Would operation of a newly constructed facility avoid producing noise levels that would 

disturb people or displace wildlife? 

Significance Criteria

Sounds levels of 65 dBA are considered annoying to most individuals, while constant or repeated 

exposure to sounds of 90 dBA or higher can lead to significant impacts. Noise levels are 

significant if they exceed ambient noise level standards determined by the federal, state, and/or 

local governments. An impact would be considered significant if there is sustained exposure of 

sensitive receptors to a DNL of greater than 65 dBA. 

3.10.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any noise impacts as these projects 

would occur within an existing research facility. 

Machinery and activities during construction and renovation can generate noise. Individual 

pieces of heavy equipment typically generate noise levels of 80 to 90 dBA at a distance of 50 

feet. Such elevated noise levels would be likely to be of short duration. Heavy equipment use 

tends to be the noisiest phase of construction, but lasts only a short time. If there are sensitive 

receptors within several hundred feet of the construction site, they could be adversely affected 

temporarily during construction activities. 

Under the Noise Control Act of 1972, urban areas may have drafted noise regulations, and 

grantees should ensure construction will follow these regulations, minimizing any impacts due to 

noise generation. In rural areas, these regulations likely do not exist. Zoning and land use plans 

may dictate what types of activities may be allowable in certain sites, indirectly controlling the 

noise generation levels. Similarly, state, local, and tribal regulations would be likely to govern 

noise levels for normal, day-to-day operations. 

No Action Alternative

Noise impacts under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the Proposed Action 

Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are not otherwise 

obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no noise impacts. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-21 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.10.3 Mitigation Measures 

Construction and renovation activities should be limited to occur only during normal weekday 

business hours. Noise restrictions are generally more stringent at night and on weekends. 

Properly maintain equipment mufflers. Noise effects on workers could be limited by ensuring 

that all personnel wear adequate personal hearing protection to limit exposure and ensuring 

compliance with federal health and safety regulations. Comply with state, local, and tribal noise 

regulations. 

3.11 Energy Impacts 

3.11.1 Affected Environment 

Federal and state agencies regulate energy consumption through various policies and programs. 

Federal guidelines such as The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 and the Energy 

Independence and Security Act of 2007 require minimum fuels consumption efficiency standards 

for new automobiles sold in the United States. The Corporate Average Fuel Economy Program 

was created to help manufacturers adhere to the efficiency standards. The Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Act: A Legacy for Users was passed in 2005 and promotes 

the reduction of traffic congestion, improving safety, and protecting air quality and the 

environment. The 1980 Energy Conservation by Recipients of Federal Financial Assistance sets 

forth the general policy requirements for energy analysis and conservation that are to be 

incorporated by the Federal Aid Highway System. 

The CEQ has issued regulations implementing NEPA which specifically require the 

consideration of direct and indirect energy requirements of various projects and mitigation 

measures to conserve energy. Direct energy impacts refer to the impacts of operating a facility 

after it is constructed, and include the energy consumed by vehicles using the facility. Indirect 

energy impacts include the energy required to construct and maintain the facility, changes in 

energy consumption likely to result from project-induced land use changes, and any substantial 

changes associated with vehicle operation, manufacturing, or maintenance due to increased or 

decreased automobile use. 

Checklist Items

• Would the demand on the region’s energy supply be negligible (for projects occurring within 

existing facilities that may require additional energy)? 

• Would the project comply with regulations for electricity and gas provisions? 

• Would the project avoid the wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy? 

Significance Criteria

Significant impacts to energy would occur if a proposed project were to create a substantial 

increase in the level of demand for energy supplies and/or use energy in a wasteful, inefficient, 

excessive or unnecessary manner. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-22 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.11.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests could have some additional energy requirements, but as these 

projects would occur within an existing research facility, these requirements would likely be 

insignificant. 

Projects involving renovation or construction would consume energy during the production of 

construction materials, by operating and maintaining construction equipment, and when 

transporting materials to the site. The incremental increase in the use of energy bound in 

construction materials such as asphalt, steel, concrete, pipes and manufactured or processed 

materials such as lumber and gas would not substantially increase demand for energy compared 

to overall local and regional demand for construction materials. Construction materials would 

not be used in a wasteful manner. Construction equipment and construction worker vehicles 

operated during construction would use fossil fuels. Fuel energy consumed by vehicles during 

construction or transporting materials would not be wasted through unnecessary idling or 

through the operation of poorly maintained equipment. Increases in fuel consumption would be 

temporary, would cease at the end of the construction activity, and would not have a residual 

requirement for additional energy input. The marginal increases in fossil fuel use resulting from 

project construction or renovation are not expected to have appreciable impacts on energy 

resources. 

Energy used during operation of a new facility would have ongoing energy required for such 

functions as interior and exterior lighting, heating/ventilating/air conditioning, computers, 

laboratory equipment, and security systems. However, it is not likely that these energy 

requirements would substantially increase the level of demand for energy supplies, especially 

when compared to overall local and regional demand. 

No Action Alternative

Energy impacts under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the Proposed 

Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are not 

otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no new energy impacts. 

3.11.3 Mitigation Measures 

Design newly constructed or renovated buildings to meet or exceed the requirements of energy 

codes. Provide heating and cooling in an energy efficient manner and so that they conform to 

local and state energy codes. Reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of 

energy during construction, operation, and maintenance. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-23 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.12 Solid Waste Management 

3.12.1 Affected Environment 

Waste is generated by virtually all activities and is a standard consideration in managing 

resources. Waste is defined as any byproduct of an action, including chemicals and other 

hazardous materials and construction debris. Hazardous waste is defined as liquid, solid, 

contained gas, or sludge wastes that contain properties that are dangerous or potentially harmful 

to human health or the environment. Hazardous materials may be classified in a number of 

different categories based on laws and regulations that define their characteristics and use. Waste 

is considered hazardous if it is on a list of specific chemical substances developed by the EPA 

(EPA, 2009f). The lists include the F-list (wastes from common manufacturing and industrial 

processes), K-list (wastes from specific industries), and P- and U-lists (wastes from commercial 

chemical products). Wastes that do not meet any of the listings above but that exhibit 

ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity are also considered hazardous. Other universal 

wastes include batteries, pesticides, mercury-containing equipment (e.g., thermostats) and lamps 

(e.g., fluorescent bulbs). Appendix B contains a sample list of chemicals used by previous NIJ 

grantees. 

Applicable laws and regulations include the following: 

• Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) (42 

U.S.C. 9601, et seq.) 

• Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act (SARA) 

• Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 6901, et 

seq.) 

• Toxics Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601-2629) 

Proper waste disposal may be conducted by a licensed hazardous waste contractor or other 

authorized waste pickups. 

Checklist Items

• Would any solid (or liquid) waste that is created by the project, including hazardous waste 

and construction debris, be disposed of properly? 

• Would laboratories maintain safe and adequate storage and disposal procedures for 

hazardous waste and chemicals? 

Significance Criteria

An action would cause a significant impact if it would increase the generation of solid or 

hazardous waste beyond the capacity to safely handle and dispose of that waste. 

3.12.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-24 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Projects involving the use of chemicals would generate minimal hazardous waste. Such waste 

would be disposed of in biohazard containers, by a licensed hazardous waste contractor, by 

authorized waste pickups, or the equivalent. All hazardous waste generated within a laboratory 

would be stored in containers identified as hazardous waste. Waste management procedures 

would function in the same manner as those procedures currently in use by the laboratory. 

Projects involving fire testing may generate a minimal amount of burned remains which would 

be processed and disposed of properly at an existing facility if not hazardous, or by following 

approved existing hazard disposal procedures. Thus there would not be any impacts on waste 

management from either type of project. 

Construction and renovation projects would generate minimal to moderate amount of waste 

depending on the size of the project. Wastes, ranging from hazardous materials such as paint and 

other wastes such as scrap wood, would be disposed of properly. Potential construction impacts 

could result from accidental release of hazardous substances (such as lubricants and fuels needed 

for heavy equipment), a hazard common to all construction projects. Spills of any size if not 

contained could harm water quality, vegetation, and wildlife in the immediate area and 

downstream; large spills could require emergency response. However, adhering to state, local, 

and tribal regulations regarding construction sites would likely minimizing any impacts. 

Operations of a new facility would generate waste such as described above for laboratories and 

fire testing, as well as regular trash. New waste disposal procedures would need to be put in 

place, after which minimal impacts due to the generation of waste would be expected. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on solid waste management under the No Action Alternative would be the same as 

under the Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, 

if funds are not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on 

solid waste management. 

3.12.3 Mitigation Measures 

Hazardous or dangerous substances should always be stored and used in accordance with all 

federal, State, and local regulations and policies. Where possible, wastes generated by projects 

should be managed in accordance with the waste hierarchy of minimisation, reuse, recycling, 

reprocessing and disposal. Proper procedures would be used to address the receipt, handling, 

transfer, storage, disposal, and use of chemicals and biohazardous materials. Hazardous materials 

utilized in laboratory testing activities would be purchased in the smallest quantities necessary in 

order to reduce the volume of hazardous chemical waste. 

3.13 Transportation 

3.13.1 Affected Environment 

A local transportation network provides the means for moving throughout a community. This 

network includes major roads such as freeways and highways, as well as local roads in 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-25 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

neighborhoods. Analysis of transportation includes traffic and parking. Traffic is affected by the 

size, location, and type of construction project. Other factors that can be considered in an 

analysis are public transportation and pedestrian routes which often alleviate impacts on roads 

from automobiles through providing alternate means of moving around an area. 

Checklist Items

• Would the project avoid generating new traffic over the long-term? 

• Would the project avoid creating an additional need for parking? 

• Would the project avoid short- or long-term decreases in the level of service of a roadway? 

• Would the project ensure unrestrained movement of emergency vehicles? 

• Would the project avoid conflicts with planned transportation projects or adopted public 

transportation policies? 

• Would the project avoid causing noticeable deterioration of local roadway surfaces? 

Significance Criteria

A significant impact to transportation would be a traffic increase which is predicted to upset the 

normal flow of traffic, create the need for major road repair as a result of the action, or generate 

traffic levels requiring the expansion of existing roadways or facilities. 

3.13.2 Environmental Consequences 

Proposed Action Alternative

Research or other activities involving the use of chemicals and burn activities in projects 

involving laboratory fire tests would not be expected to have any impacts on transportation as 

these projects would occur within an existing research facility and would not substantially 

increase the number of personnel commuting to the project location. 

Renovation and construction projects could result in short-term transportation impacts. Local 

and state regulations would guide the transport of machinery and autos around the construction 

site. Temporary traffic impacts may occur on the local road network as large trucks transport 

materials to the site and machinery maneuvers into the roadway and around a site. Construction 

workers commuting to the project area could also cause localized traffic congestion. However, 

these would last only for the duration of the project, impacting the local roads to a negligible 

degree. Additional traffic and parking needs related to operation of a new facility might also 

occur on a localized basis. Depending on the magnitude of the renovation or construction 

project, the intensity and duration of transportation impacts could vary, but they are not expected 

to be significant. 

No Action Alternative

Impacts on transportation under the No Action Alternative would be the same as under the 

Proposed Action Alternative if grantees obtain funding from other sources. However, if funds are 

not otherwise obtained and projects are cancelled, there would be no impacts on transportation. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-26 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

3.13.3 Mitigation Measures 

During construction activities, traffic flows would be maintained by keeping construction 

equipment as far off the road as possible and by providing flag bearers to assist traffic 

negotiating through construction areas. 

3.14 State Environmental Policy Act 

A number of states have laws patterned after NEPA. Just as NEPA requires federal agencies to 

prepare an environmental analysis document for actions that will affect the environment, state 

environmental policy acts (SEPAs) may impose similar obligations on state or local government 

agencies, and even private organizations. States, when passing their SEPAs, modeled their laws 

substantially after NEPA and CEQ regulations. State laws do have their differences, such as the 

California Environmental Quality Act, which has more detailed regulations than CEQ 

regulations, or the Michigan Environmental Quality Act, which emphasizes substantive rather 

than procedural requirements. Seventeen states, the District of Columbia, Guam, and Puerto 

Rico have environmental policy acts (CEQ, 2009). 

Projects awarded grants from NIJ occurring in Arkansas, California, Connecticut, District of 

Columbia, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, 

Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Dakota, Virginia, 

Washington, and Wisconsin are subject to and must comply with a state environmental policy 

act. 

3.15 Intergovernmental Review and Other Federal Agency Reaction to the 

Project 

Intergovernmental review has not been conducted for this Programmatic EA. However, grantees 

may initiate this process for specific projects with state, regional, or local agencies (if this review 

process is required for the project). Other federal agencies may participate in a project either 

through the provision of additional funds, a companion project, or a permit review authority. 

Grantees partnering with other federal agencies, or whose project may affect another federal 

agency should consult and coordinate with that entity. 

3.16 Cumulative Impacts 

The CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1500-1508) implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA of 

1969, as amended (42 USC 4321) defines cumulative effects as: 

“the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when 

added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency 

(Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other action (40 CFR 1508.7)” 

This section goes on to note “such impacts can result from individually minor but collectively 

significant actions taking place over a period of time.” 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-27 

Environmental Consequences 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Affected Environment and 3-28 

Environmental Consequences 

 

It was not feasible to evaluate cumulative impacts in every location where a project funded by 

NIJ may occur. It is difficult to ascertain potential impacts caused by past, present or future 

actions when the affected environment is not well defined, such as in this Programmatic EA. 

Grantees should consider the cumulative impacts specific to their projects and determine if such 

impacts would be significant for any resources. 

3.17 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 

Examples of unavoidable effects that could occur as a result of NIJ granted projects would 

primarily be associated with construction and renovation activities, including: 

• Removal of vegetation and wildlife habitat at upland sites during construction 

• Temporary disturbance to wildlife during construction 

• Short-term degradation of water quality during site grading and construction 

• Possible long-term alteration of site drainage from facility construction or site restoration 

• Short-term degradation of air quality from heavy equipment during construction 

• Possible long-term increase in air emissions and/or water discharges from new facilities 

• Short-term increase in employment during construction 

Impacts from projects that involve the use of chemicals and fire testing activities could involve 

adverse effects from hazardous waste disposal and emission of air pollutants; however, these 

impacts are likely avoidable. 

3.18 Conclusion 

This Programmatic EA analyzes the environmental impacts of implementing projects funded by 

NIJ grants. The implementation of an NIJ granted project is not expected to result in significant 

adverse impacts on the environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not 

required and a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. By verifying the items 

from the checklist, grantees can further ensure that impacts are minimized. 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

4.0 REFERENCES CITED 

(ACHP, 2009). Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. 2009. The National Historic 

Preservation Act of 1966, As Amended. Accessed August 2009 at: 

http://www.achp.gov/nhpa.html 

(CEQ, 1997). Council on Environmental Quality. 1997. Council on Environmental Quality 

Environmental Justice Guidance Under the National Environmental Policy Act. December 10. 

(CEQ, 2009). Council on Environmental Quality. 2009. State Environmental Planning 

Information. Accessed August 2009 at: http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/NEPA/regs/states/states.cfm 

(DOJ, 2010). Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. 2010. Fiscal Year 2009 

Awards. Accessed January 2010 at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/awards/2009.htm 

(EPA, 2007). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Noise Control Act. 

Accessed August 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/nca/index.htm 

(EPA, 2009a). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). Accessed July 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html 

(EPA, 2009b). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Floodplain Management. 

Accessed July 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/regs/eo11988.html 

(EPA, 2009c). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Protection of Wetlands. 

Accessed July 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/wetlands/regs/eo11990.html 

(EPA, 2009d). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Summary of the 

Endangered Species Act. Accessed August 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/esa.html 

(EPA, 2009e). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Summary of Executive 

Order 12898 - Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations. Accessed August 2009 at: 

http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/laws/eo12898.html 

(EPA, 2009f). United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Wastes – Hazardous 

Waste. Accessed August 2009 at: http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/index.htm 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

References 4-1 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 

Mangi Environmental Group 

Eveline Martin, Project Manager, 802-246-5689 

Richard Wildermann, Senior Environmental Analyst, 703-760-4801 

National Institute of Justice 

Minh Nguyen, Physical Scientist, 202- 305-2664 

Alan Spanbauer, Physical Scientist, 202- 305-2436 

Sherran D. Thomas, Senior Research & Development Procurement Analyst, 202-616-4577 

Patricia Kashtan, Program Operations Specialist, 202- 353-1856 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

List of Preparers 5-1 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

APPENDIX A: CHECKLIST 

The following is a checklist that summarizes the typical concerns that grantees can expect to 

encounter, as introduced in Section 3.1. Each resource area is listed separately, with the 

significance criteria for that resource also shown for reference. 

Other Federal, state, local, or tribal regulations may apply in any given case for any given 

resource. The grantee should ensure that the appropriate measures are taken to adhere with 

applicable regulations or policies. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices A-1 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

National Institute of Justice Grants Program Checklist 

Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Air Quality Does the project comply with state air quality standards 

for all criteria pollutants? Is the project located in an area designated by the EPA as in attainment for the seven criteria pollutants? Would the action produce minimal emissions (100 tons per year or less for each of the seven criteria pollutants and/or does not exceed 10% of an area’s total emissions)? Would potential exposure to chemical emissions in a laboratory be controlled through the use of a biological hood? Would the project only produce emissions that do not impede the area’s conformity with the State Implementation Plan under the Clean Air Act? 

Significance Criteria An impact would be considered significant if pollutant emissions result in exposure of people, wildlife, or vegetation to amb

meet the standards established under the Clean Air Act, or interfere with state ambient air quality standards. 

Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Geology, Topography, Soils (includes Farmland Protection)

Would there be compliance with local soil erosion mitigation measures in construction and renovation projects? Would the project avoid erosion and deposition, compacting soils in fragile environments, or altering the character of soils over a large area? Would the project comply with the Farmland Protection Policy Act? 

Significance Criteria An action would cause a significant impact if soil erosion produced gullying, damage to vegetation, or a sustained increase 

streams. This includes a substantial loss of soil, and/or a substantial decrease in soil stability and permeability. Also, signoccur when soils are substantially disrupted, displaced, compacted or covered over. An action would also constitute a sign

action caused ground fracturing, folding, subsidence, or instability. Impacts associated with soil contamination would be s

affected area was no longer able to support its current function or vegetative cover.

______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-1 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-2 Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Water Resources (Water Quality, Surface Water, Wetlands, Floodplains, Coastal Barrier Resources, Wild and Scenic Rivers)

Would project activities avoid contamination, sedimentation, or otherwise significantly affecting the water quality or hydrology of a nearby surface water body? Would changes to surface water quality or hydrology be confined to the immediate project area? Does the project ensure that local and state regulations concerning stormwater runoff are followed? During construction activities, would all state, local, and tribal regulations concerning erosion controls, runoff abatement, and vegetation removal be followed? During construction activities, would proper hazardous spill procedures be in place to minimize impacts of spills on water quality? Would the project avoid affecting a designated Wild and Scenic River in any manner? Would the project avoid affecting any portion of a 100-year or 500-year floodplain or jurisdictional wetland? 

Significance Criteria Impacts on water resources would be considered significant if effluent or pollutant emissions result in exposure of people, to surface or ground waters that do not meet the standards established under the Clean Water Act, or interfere with state w

standards. An action would cause a significant impact on wetlands and floodplains if the soil structure, hydrology or the vegetation of 

(1/10 ha) of a wetland would be altered, or a floodplain area is altered enough to present a reasonable flood danger to the degradation or loss of habitat for populations indigenous to the floodplain area, or prohibits farming activities. Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Natural Environment (Wildlife, Wildlife Habitat, and Vegetation) 

Would the project avoid causing more than a short-term change in the composition, structure, or density of vegetation? Would the project avoid causing more than temporary disturbance or relocation of wildlife? Would the project avoid impacting current or future wildlife or vegetation biodiversity or species composition? 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Would the project insure that the potential for the establishment of non-native plant species within disturbed areas created by this project would be minimal? Would project construction occur in an area other than a unique or sensitive plant community? Would the project avoid extirpating any plants or animals from the project area? 

Significance Criteria An action would cause a significant impact if any changes to native vegetation extend beyond a small area and affect the vspecies population or vegetation community. Full recovery would not occur in a reasonable time, considering the size of thaffected resource’s natural state. An action would cause a significant impact if any changes affect a large portion of a wildlife population and the viability of recovery would not occur in a reasonable time, considering the size of the project and the affected species’ natural state. 

An action would cause a significant impact if the degradation or loss of habitat is sufficient to cause native wildlife popula

the area.Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Endangered Species 

Would the project avoid impacts on T&E species or critical habitat? Is the project area free of any Federal or state listed T&E species or critical habitat, as determined by consultation with FWS or NMFS? Would the project avoid impacting any areas in or adjacent to habitat for rare, threatened, or endangered species? If the project is expected to adversely affect a listed species, would mitigation measures be employed that would successfully avoid such effects? 

Significance Criteria Any effect to a federally listed species or its critical habitat would be so small that it would not be of any measurable or pe

to the protected individual or its population. This effect would equate to a “no effect” or “not likely to adversely affect” deFish and Wildlife Service terms. Anything else would be considered significant. 

______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-3 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants ProgramResource Concern Yes or No Comments Historic Preservation 

Is the project site free of any historic structures, archeological concerns, or other cultural resource issues, as determined by consultation with the SHPO? Would the project avoid affecting any NRHP listed properties, or properties that are eligible for listing? Would the project occur within an existing facility that is not considered historic, as determined by consultation with the SHPO? If project activities are determined to impact cultural resources as defined by Section 106, would mitigation steps as outlined in Section 106 be followed? Would renovation projects exclude historic buildings? 

Significance Criteria An impact would be significant if an effect occurs that may diminish the integrity of, cause a substantial adverse change in directly or indirectly destroy a cultural resource. This effect would equate to an “adverse effect” determination for purposResource Concern Yes or No Comments Land Use Would the project comply with local zoning and 

development ordinances (apply for rezoning if needed)? Would the project comply with local comprehensive and development plans? Would the project obtain necessary building and occupancy permits from local authorities? 

Significance Criteria An impact would be significant if a proposed action conflicts with any Federal, regional, State, or local land use plans. If changed in the immediate project area due to a proposed action, the impact would also be considered significant. Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Human Population (Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice) 

Would the project avoid appreciably changing the total population or demographics of the population, housing demand or employment levels, or property values? Would the project avoid increasing human infrastructure requirements (i.e., new workers need housing and consume additional community resources such as water, electricity, roadways, open space, etc.)? 

______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-4 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Would the project avoid displacing existing residents or workers from their homes and communities? Would the action avoid areas that have a high proportion of minority residents or residents living below the poverty level? If it does occur in such an area, would the grantee ensure that low-income households are not adversely impacted by the project? Would environmentally unsafe, unpleasant, or noxious conditions for nearby populations, including release of contaminants into air or water, increased levels of traffic or noise occur only during the period of construction? 

Significance Criteria A change of more than 2 percent of the previously projected level of local employment, population, or gross domestic prod

a significant impact on socioeconomics. Also, if school populations decrease by more than 2 percent, revenues decrease band if vacancy rate increases by more than 2 percent, that would constitute a significant impact. A significant impact on environmental justice would occur if a disproportionate amount of minority and/or low-income popadversely affected by the project. 

Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Noise Would project activities avoid noise impacts to sensitive 

receptors? If noise levels during construction projects exceed existing background sounds temporarily, would the project insure that they do not exceed applicable noise standards? Would operation of a newly constructed facility avoid producing noise levels that would disturb people or displace wildlife? 

Significance Criteria Sounds levels of 65 dBA are considered annoying to most individuals, while constant or repeated exposure to sounds of 90 

to significant impacts. Noise levels are significant if they exceed ambient noise level standards determined by the federal, s

governments. An impact would be considered significant if there is sustained exposure of sensitive receptors to a DNL of g

______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-5 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants ProgramResource Concern Yes or No Comments Energy Would the demand on the region’s energy supply be 

negligible (for projects occurring within existing facilities that may require additional energy)? Would the project comply with regulations for electricity and gas provisions? Would the project avoid the wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy? 

Significance Criteria Significant impacts to energy would occur if a proposed project were to create a substantial increase in the level of demanand/or use energy in a wasteful, inefficient, excessive or unnecessary manner. Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Solid Waste Management

Would any solid (or liquid) waste that is created by the project, including hazardous waste and construction debris, be disposed of properly? Would laboratories maintain safe and adequate storage and disposal procedures for hazardous waste and chemicals? 

Significance Criteria An action would cause a significant impact if it would increase the generation of solid or hazardous waste beyond the capaand dispose of that waste. Resource Concern Yes or No Comments Transportation Would the project avoid generating new traffic over the 

long-term? Would the project avoid creating an additional need for parking? Would the project avoid short- or long-term decreases in the level of service of a roadway? Would the project ensure unrestrained movement of emergency vehicles? Would the project avoid conflicts with planned transportation projects or adopted public transportation policies? Would the project avoid causing noticeable deterioration of local roadway surfaces? 

______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-6 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program______________________________________________________________________________ Appendices A-7 Significance Criteria A significant impact to transportation would be a traffic increase which is predicted to upset the normal flow of traffic, cre

road repair as a result of the action, or generate traffic levels requiring the expansion of existing roadways or facilities. 

Resource Concern Yes or No Comments State Environmental Policy Act 

Would the project occur in states other than Arkansas, 

California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Guam, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Dakota, Virginia, Washington, or Wisconsin? If so, the project would not require compliance with a state environmental policy act. 

Intergovernmental Review and Other Federal Agency Reaction to the Project 

Would grantees partnering with other federal agencies, or whose project may affect another federal agency consult and coordinate with that entity and conduct intergovernmental review as necessary? 

Cumulative Impacts 

Would cumulative impacts be less than significant for all resources affected by the project? 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

APPENDIX B: SAMPLE CHEMICAL LIST 

The following table contains examples of chemicals that have been used in past NIJ funded 

projects. 

Chemical Health Flammability Reactivity Disposal

acetic acid 3 2 0 c 

aluminum sulfate 2 0 0 a 

ammonium persulfate 1 3 0 c 

bromophenol blue 1 0 0 a 

butyl alcohol 2 3 1 c 

dithiothreitol (DTT) 2 1 1 c 

ethidium bromide 3 1 1 c 

ethanol 1 3 0 a 

ethyl alcohol 0 3 0 a 

EDTA (ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid) 3 1 0 c 

formamide 2 1 0 c 

glycerol 1 1 0 c 

guanidine HCl 2 1 0 d 

hydrochloric acid 3 0 1 c 

hydrofluoric acid 4 0 2 c 

hydrogen peroxide, 30% 2 0 3 a 

iodine 3 0 1 c 

isopropyl alcohol 1 3 0 c 

magnesium chloride 1 0 0 a 

methanol 1 3 0 a 

methyl alcohol 3 3 1 a 

nitric acid 4 0 0 c 

phenolphthalein 1 1 1 c 

potassium iodide 2 0 1 c 

proteinase K 1 1 0 c 

sodium carbonate 2 0 1 c 

sodium chloride 2 0 0 b 

sodium hydroxide 4 0 2 c 

sulfuric acid 3 0 2 c 

Tetrahydrofuran 2 4 2 c 

Codes: 0 = minimum hazard, 1 = slight hazard, 2 = moderate hazard, 3 = serious hazard, 4 = severe hazard 

 a = drain, b = garbage/trash, c = biohazard container, d = solid waste authority pickup 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices B-1 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

APPENDIX C: CHECKLIST GLOSSARY 

100-year and 500-year Floodplain – A floodplain is the level area adjoining a river channel that 

is inundated during periods of high flow. A 100-year floodplain would have a 100-year 

recurrence interval of flooding. In other words, a flood of that magnitude has a 1 percent chance 

of happening in any year. Likewise, a 500-year flood would have a 500-year recurrence interval, 

or a 0.2 percent chance of happening in any year. 

Ambient – Of the surrounding area or environment 

Attainment Area – An attainment area is a zone within which the level of a pollutant is 

considered to meet United States National Ambient Air Quality Standards. It is an area 

considered to have air quality as good as or better than the national ambient air quality standards 

as defined in the Clean Air Act. An area may be an attainment area for one pollutant and a nonattainment area for others. 

Biodiversity – The number and variety of organisms found within a specified geographic region; 

the variety of different habitats within an area; the variety of interactions that occur between 

different species in a habitat; and the range of genetic variation among individuals within a 

species. 

Clean Air Act – The original Clean Air Act was signed in 1963. The law set emissions standards 

for stationary sources (e.g., factories, power plants). The Act was amended several times, most 

recently in 1990. The Amendments of 1970 introduced motor vehicle emission standards (e.g., 

automobiles, trucks). The Act authorized the establishment of federal and state regulations that 

limit emissions of air pollutants to protect our health and air from further damage, and to begin to 

reverse some of the damage caused by decades of air pollution. 

Criteria Pollutants – Criteria air pollutants include the six most common air pollutants as 

identified by the Clean Air Act of 1970. The criteria pollutants list consists of ozone, carbon 

monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), particulate matter (PM10), and lead. 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls these pollutants "criteria" air pollutants 

because it regulates them by developing human health-based and/or environmentally-based 

criteria (science-based guidelines) for setting permissible levels. The set of limits based on 

human health is called primary standards. Another set of limits intended to prevent 

environmental and property damage is called secondary standards. 

Critical habitat – Critical habitat is a specific geographic area that is essential for the 

conservation of a threatened or endangered species and that may require special management and 

protection. Critical habitat for a listed species may be designated under the Endangered Species 

Act. 

Cumulative Impacts – Impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of 

an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless 

of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices C-1 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

Environmental Justice – Fair treatment of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels 

with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies, fair treatment implies that no population of people should be forced to 

shoulder a disproportionate share of the negative environmental impacts of pollution or 

environmental hazards due to a lack of political or economic strength levels. 

EPA – Environmental Protection Agency is an agency of the federal government of the United 

States charged to protect human health and the environment. It has the primary responsibility for 

setting and enforcing national standards under a variety of environmental laws, in consultation 

with state, tribal, and local governments. 

Erosion – The wearing down or washing away of soil and land surface by the action of water, 

wind, or ice. 

Extirpate - To destroy completely; exterminate. 

Farmland Protection Policy Act - A statute enacted in 1981 by the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture (USDA) to ensure that significant agricultural lands are protected from conversion to 

nonagricultural uses. 

FWS – The United States Fish and Wildlife Service is a federal agency responsible for 

addressing the protection of fish and wildlife, including rare, threatened, or endangered species. 

The FWS has primary responsibility for terrestrial and freshwater organisms under the 

Endangered Species Act. 

Hydrology – The applied science concerned with the waters of the earth, their occurrences, 

distribution, and circulation through the unending hydrologic cycle (precipitation, consequent 

runoff, infiltration, and storage; evaporation; and condensation). In the context of this document, 

it refers to the overland and subsurface movement of water. 

Jurisdictional Wetland – Wetlands are areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or 

groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal 

circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil 

conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and other similar areas. A 

jurisdicational wetland is an area that meets the criteria established by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers for a wetland; such areas come under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers for 

permitting certain actions such as dredge and fill operations. 

Land Use – The way in which real property is utilized. Examples of land uses include 

commercial, industrial, residential, or wilderness designations. 

Mitigation Measures – Specific measures that serve to moderate or lessen impacts deriving 

from a proposed action. Mitigation includes avoidance, minimization, rectification, reduction, 

and compensation of adverse impacts. 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices C-2 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

NMFS – National Marine Fisheries Service is a a division of the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Department of Commerce. NMFS is responsible 

for the stewardship and management of the nation's living marine resources and their habitats. 

The NMFS has primary responsibility for marine species such as salmon and whales under the 

Endangered Species Act. 

Non-native plant - An introduced, alien, exotic, non-indigenous, or non-native species is a 

species living outside its native distributional range, which has arrived there by human activity, 

either deliberate or accidental. Some introduced species are damaging to the ecosystem they are 

introduced into, others negatively affect agriculture and other human uses of natural resources, or 

impact the health of animals and humans. 

NRHP – National Register of Historic Places is America's official list of cultural resources 

worthy of preservation. Listed properties generally fall into one of five categories, though there 

are special considerations for other types of properties which do not fit into these five broad 

categories or fit into more specialized subcategories. The five general categories for NRHP 

properties are: building, structure, object, site, and district. 

Runoff abatement – Measures taken to reduce Reduce the amount of runoff. See definition for 

Stormwater Runoff below. 

Section 106 – Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires 

Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties, and 

afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable opportunity to comment. 

Sedimentation – The act or process of depositing sediment. Sediment consists of solid 

fragments of inorganic or organic material that come from the weathering of rock and are carried 

and deposited by wind, water, or ice. Sediment can be deposited in natural water bodies via 

erosion or stormwater runoff where it can cloud the water and make it difficult or impossible for 

aquatic plants to grown. Sediment also can destroy aquatic habitats. 

Sensitive Receptors – Land uses and activities sensitive to noise. Common sensitive receptors 

include: picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, 

motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. 

SHPO – The State Historic Preservation Office was created in 1966 under Section 101 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). The purposes of SHPO include surveying and 

recognizing historic properties, reviewing nominations for properties to be included in the 

National Register of Historic Places, reviewing undertakings for the impact on the properties as 

well as supporting federal organizations, state and local governments, and private sector. 

State Environmental Policy Act – The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires that 

State and local governmental agencies determine the environmental impact of land use decisions. 

Government agencies are required to conduct an environmental review and determine if a 

proposal will cause a “probable significant adverse impact” to the environment. SEPA is 

designed to ensure that environmental values are considered during land use decisions; adequate 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices C-3 

 
US Department of Justice Programmatic Environmental Assessment 

Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Grants Program

______________________________________________________________________________ 

Appendices C-4 

 

 

and timely environmental information is gathered and provided to decisionmakers; and public 

involvement is included in the decision-making process. 

State Implementation Plan – A State Implementation Plan is a United States state plan for 

complying with the federal Clean Air Act. The Plan consists of narrative, rules, technical 

documentation, and agreements that an individual state will use to clean up polluted areas. 

Stormwater Runoff - Stormwater runoff occurs when precipitation from rain or snowmelt flows 

over the ground. Impervious surfaces like driveways, sidewalks, and streets prevent stormwater 

runoff from naturally soaking into the ground. Stormwater can pick up debris, chemicals, dirt, 

and other pollutants and flow into a storm sewer system or directly to a lake, stream, river, 

wetland, or coastal water. Anything that enters a storm sewer system is discharged untreated into 

waterbodies used for swimming, fishing and providing drinking water. 

T&E species – Threatened and endangered species are defined by both state and federal law. 

Endangered species are listed on the state endangered species list under or determined to be an 

endangered species under the federal Endangered Species Act. The term generally refers to 

species whose continued existence as a viable component of the wild fauna or flora is in 

jeopardy. Threatened species are species whose numbers are significantly declining because of 

loss of habitat or human disturbance, and unless protected will become an endangered species. 

Water quality – Water quality is the physical, chemical and biological characteristics of water. 

It is most frequently used by reference to a set of standards against which compliance can be 

assessed. The most common standards used to assess water quality relate to drinking water, 

safety of human contact and for the health of ecosystems. 

Wild and Scenic River – The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System was created by Congress 

in 1968 to preserve certain rivers with outstanding natural, cultural, and recreational values in a 

free-flowing condition for the enjoyment of present and future generations. The Act is notable 

for safeguarding the special character of these rivers, while also recognizing the potential for 

their appropriate use and development.