If construction will last for more than 5 years, include construction emissions in the conformity hot spot analysis above, verify that they are included in the regional conformity analysis, and state: Construction activities will last for more than 5 years. Construction-related emissions have been included in any hot spot analysis performed for conformity purposes, and have been included in the regional conformity analysis (.123(c)(5)). Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures List any avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures here. Climate Change Neither the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) nor the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has issued explicit guidance or methods to conduct greenhouse gas analysis. FHWA emphasizes concepts of resilience and sustainability in highway planning, project development, design, operations, and maintenance. Because there have been requirements set forth in California legislation and executive orders on climate change, the issue is addressed in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) chapter of this document. The CEQA analysis may be used to inform the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) determination for the project. Regulatory Setting The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provide the broad basis for analyzing and abating highway traffic noise effects. The intent of these laws is to promote the general welfare and to foster a healthy environment. The requirements for noise analysis and consideration of noise abatement and/or mitigation, however, differ between NEPA and CEQA. CEQA requires a strictly baseline versus analysis to assess whether a proposed project will have a noise impact. If a proposed project is determined to have a significant noise impact under CEQA, then CEQA dictates that mitigation measures must be incorporated into the project unless those measures are not feasible. The rest of this section will focus on the NEPA/23 Code of Federal Regulations Part 772 (23 CFR 772) noise analysis; please see Chapter 3 of this document for further information on noise analysis under CEQA. 23 CFR 772 For highway transportation projects with Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) involvement (and the Department, as assigned), the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1970 and its implementing regulations (23 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 772) govern the analysis and abatement of traffic noise impacts. The regulations require that potential noise impacts in areas of frequent
as defined by the Coastal Act. Discuss whether the habitat is especially valuable in terms of sustaining a special–status species, providing habitat connectivity, wildlife movement corridors, etc. Also note if the area could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and development. Environmental Consequences For each habitat type, discuss the potential direct and indirect impacts (and cumulative impacts if not discussed in a separate section). Discuss, as needed, habitat fragmentation, potential impacts to wildlife corridors and/or fish passage, potential impacts to the natural communities related to the distribution of this community in the region or statewide, and function of the community in terms of services it provides for water quality, habitat, breeding, etc. This is a good place to reference any regional conservation plans, such as habitat conservation plans (HCP), multiple species conservation plans (MSCP), or coastal plans. Such plans are usually developed to lessen habitat loss and fragmentation and to maintain wildlife corridors. The NES discusses issues such as migration routes, fish passage, wildlife corridors, concentrations of animal strikes on the roadway, and habitat fragmentation. Regulatory agencies are likely to raise concerns over these issues, so discuss them in the environmental document as applicable. If the project is in the coastal zone and has the potential to affect ESHA, discuss potential impacts and consistency with applicable coastal policies and ordinances. Discuss the relevant project features and standardized measures, including best practices that have avoided or minimized the project’s environmental consequences. Examples might include standard revegetation efforts performed by the Contractor (and not required as mitigation or as a permit condition), fish passage or wildlife crossings included as part of the project design, and the establishment of environmental sensitive areas (ESAs). Avoidance, Minimization, and/or Mitigation Measures Discuss any proposed avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures. Remember to state what the measure would do and why we are proposing it. If mitigation is determined to be necessary under CEQA, discuss the significance of the impact and the proposed mitigation measures in Chapter 3. Additional Guidance