The full definition for terms included in this article (listed below) can be found in the HKP Glossary.

• • Significant Impacts
  • Notice of Intent
  • Base Studies
  • Categorical Exclusion (CE)
  • Communicating All Promises (CAP)
  • Environmental Assessment (EA)
  • Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
  • Environmental Overview (EO)
  • National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
  • Record of Decision (ROD)

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to perform environmental reviews and assess the potential environmental impacts of proposed actions (e.g., road projects, issuing permits). To maintain compliance with NEPA, when the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approves transportation projects the agency must identify, evaluate, and — if possible — avoid impacts to the social and natural environment. Analysis of potential impacts requires interagency and interdisciplinary coordination. Once analyses are complete, findings must be documented and made available to the public so individuals can submit comments. FHWA and KYTC work to balance environmental considerations and the public interest to arrive at the best possible transportation decision.

KYTC’s Division of Environmental Analysis (DEA) assists project managers (PMs) on all issues related to NEPA and the environmental process. DEA helps PMs ensure applicable state and federal laws are followed during planning, design, construction, operation, and maintenance projects that require environmental review. Throughout every project, PMs must work closely with DEA and District Environmental Coordinator (DECs) in each highway district to keep the environmental process moving forward and make sure that KYTC fulfills all environmental commitments made throughout project development. Drawing on partnerships with and the expertise of DEA, DECs, and subject-matter experts (SMEs) helps PMs understand the environmental implications of alternatives; avoid, minimize, or mitigate project impacts; and implement sound, cost-effective, and defensible decision making.

When a project begins KYTC evaluates whether it will have significant environmental impactsAccording to the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), the term “significant” requires consideration of both context and intensity, in relation to short- and long-term potential impacts from project actions. Project context includes impacts to the local area, the affected region, the stakeholders, and potentially, society. Project intensity relates to the severity of the project action, which could include both beneficial and adverse impacts., looking at a number of factors to make this determination:

• Public health and safety
• Unique geographical characteristics
• Human environment
• Historic and cultural resources
• Endangered or threatened species
• Cumulative impacts or setting a precedent for additional future actions

The NEPA process can sometimes be long and winding — especially for complex projects — but it provides critical protections for fragile ecosystems and gives community stakeholders a voice in transportation decision making. No one wants to return to the pre-1970 status quo, prior to the passage of key environmental and social legislation, when rivers teeming with pollution caught fire and interstate construction uprooted communities of color. Through the environmental process, KYTC can develop projects equitably and practice good environmental stewardship.

NEPA impacts the design and implementation of projects in many ways. As such, PMs must put integrated decision making into practice from a project’s outset. This means design and environmental work should occur alongside and inform one another. Integrated decision making has six key components:

• Develop a reasonable number of alternatives, including a no-build alternative. The Project Development Team (PDT) evaluates alternatives based on the purpose and need (see Section 4). Alternatives failing to address the purpose and need are eliminated from consideration.
• Use FHWA-approved procedures to share project information with the public and solicit feedback (see Section 5)
• Evaluate impacts to local ecology, wetlands, streams, communities, and historic and cultural resources.
• Coordinate with agencies and partners that participate in the environmental and public involvement processes (e.g., tribal governments, transportation and environmental interest groups, MPOs, resource and regulatory agencies, underserved communities).
• Implement FHWA’s five-step mitigation sequence: avoid impacts, minimize impacts, repair or restore impacted areas, reduce or eliminate impacts across the project life cycle, compensate for impacts (e.g., purchase wetland and stream mitigation credits).
• Thoroughly and clearly document the transportation decision making process. Document every step KYTC takes to avoid, minimize, or mitigate negative environmental impacts.

Through integrated decision making, the PDT can develop alternative implementation strategies during a project’s early stages. And with multiple alternatives in hand, the Cabinet can avoid costly, time-consuming efforts to re-engineer a project. From a project’s outset, the PM should engage in and document the decision-making process and strive to balance public impacts, environmental directives and regulations issued by external agencies, cost, safety, and mitigation techniques.

A critical step in the NEPA process is obtaining environmental clearance. This entails completing an environmental document and receiving state/federal approval for a proposed project. Environmental documents record the project decision-making process and evaluate project alternatives. When evaluating alternatives, the PDT must consider engineering, environmental, and socioeconomic factors. Analysis contained in environmental documents must state who evaluated alternatives, criteria used to eliminate alternatives, when alternatives were eliminated, and measures that were employed to assess the effectiveness of alternatives.  The goal is to make informed decisions that balance project objectives with environmental considerations.

The type of environmental document generated for a project is determined by considering the project’s scope, scale of impacts, complexity, and potential for controversy. Table 1 describes the three types of environmental documents: Categorical Exclusion (CE), Environmental Assessment (EA), Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and Record of Decision (ROD)A concise public document summarizing the findings in the EIS and the basis for the decision. The ROD must identify mitigations which were important in supporting decisions, such as those mitigations which reduce otherwise significant impacts, and ensure that appropriate monitoring procedures are implemented (32 CFR 651.26).. The amount of time and resources that are needed to prepare environmental documents varies greatly (see Table 4). The environmental assessment (EA)Environmental assessment means a concise public document for which a Federal agency is responsible that serves to (40 CFR 1508.9):
a) Briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) or a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).
b) Aid an agency’s compliance with the Act when no environmental impact statement is necessary.
c) Facilitate preparation of a statement when one is necessary.
and environmental impact statement (EIS)An EIS is a full disclosure document for major Federal actions that significantly affect the quality of the human environment. They detail the process through which a transportation project was developed, include consideration of a range of reasonable alternatives, analyze the potential impacts resulting from the alternatives, and demonstrate compliance with other applicable environmental laws and executive orders. The EIS process is completed in the following ordered steps: Notice of Intent (NOI), draft EIS, final EIS, and record of decision (ROD).
are usually reserved for complex capital projects with significant impacts. Very few projects require an EA or an EIS. If a PM is managing a project with an EA environmental document, they must understand all relevant requirements and timeframes.

Purpose and need statements explain and justify why KYTC is proposing a project and consist of purpose and need elements (Table 2). Not all Cabinet projects require individual purpose and need statements. Programmatic purpose and need statements cover projects and activities conducted under the following programs:

• FE01 — Routine Maintenance Program
• FE05 — State Resurfacing Program
• FE02 — Bridge Maintenance Program
• FE06 — New Guardrail Program
• FE07 — Welcome Center/Rest Area Maintenance and Operation Program
• FE04 — Traffic Operations Program

A good purpose and need statement is straightforward and can be understood by different stakeholders, including the general public. Purpose and need statements justify (a) why public funds should be used to finance a project and (b) any environmental impacts that a project may generate. It should not suggest specific roadway solutions but rather focus on outlining the issues.

During project development, the PDT uses the purpose and need statement as the basis to establish a project scope, including the project footprint and project deliverables. Developing a comprehensive, highly specific purpose and need statement is critical for identifying which alternative is best positioned to address operational, safety, and performance goals in a reasonable, prudent, and practicable manner. The purpose and need statement is not static. It is updated throughout project development as the PDT gains knowledge of the project context and receives feedback from the public. All updates to the purpose and need statement should be complete by the end of Preliminary Design.

FHWA has catalogued items that purpose and need statements often tackle (Table 3). This list is non-exhaustive, and it is important to keep in mind that purpose and need statements must be tailored to individual projects.

The PMGB article Project Scoping provides an in-depth treatment of purpose and need statements.

The environmental document records the project decision-making process and presents an evaluation of alternatives — including the chosen alternative — based on engineering, environmental, and economic factors.

Once a project is authorized, the environmental process kicks off with the PM and Project Development Branch Manager (PDM) working with the District Environmental Coordinator (DEC) to gauge potential project impacts and determine the most appropriate environmental document type.

If the expected environmental document is a Categorical Exclusion (CE) Level 3 or above, the PM must work with DEA Environmental Project Managers (EPMs) and Division of Highway Design’s Location Engineers to schedule a scope verification meeting. Required attendees include the PM, PDT members, and the FHWA representative. The meeting should be held before the pre-design conference and focuses on potential environmental impacts, including those related to:

• Air quality
• Aesthetics
• Cemeteries
• Cultural resources
• Endangered species
• Federal lands
• Floodplains
• Groundwater resources
• Hazardous materials and underground storage tanks
• Section 4(f) resources
• Section 6(f) resources
• Socioeconomic concerns and environmental justice
• Streams
• Wetlands

If KYTC knows a project will have significant environmental impacts, it can issue a notice of intent (NOI)A formal announcement of intent to prepare an EIS as defined in Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1508.22). and begin the scoping process, after which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is drafted (see Section 3). But if there is uncertainty over whether a project will generate significant impacts, KYTC conducts an Environmental Assessment (EA) (see Section 3).

5.1 No Significant Impacts — Categorical Exclusions

The most common type of environmental document is a CE — over 90 percent of KYTC projects qualify for a CE.

Under an agreement with FHWA, the Cabinet is authorized on the agency’s behalf to determine whether a project counts as a CE action. Appendix A and Appendix B of this agreement list many project types eligible for a CE. DECs help PMs determine if their project qualifies for a CE. But some common actions covered by the agreement include:

• Projects that will take place entirely within the existing operational right of way, including:
  • Highway modernization through resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and the addition of shoulders or auxiliary lanes
  • Highway safety improvement projects (i.e., those included in Kentucky’s highway safety plan) or traffic operations improvement projects
  • Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction, or the replacement or construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings
  • Bridge scour and debris removal
• Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, traffic signals, railroad warning devices and small passenger shelters if no significant land acquisition or traffic disruptions will occur
• Emergency repairs following a disaster declaration by Kentucky’s governor or the president. This encompasses the repair, reconstruction, restoration, retrofitting, or replacement of any road, highway, tunnel, or transit facility that was under construction or operational when a disaster struck.
• Facility alterations designed to improve accessibility for the elderly and people with disabilities
• Federal-aid projects that (a) receive less than $5 million in federal funds or (b) have a total cost of < $30 million and < 15 percent of costs are paid for with federal funds.

 The agreement also establishes four CE levels (Table 4) as well as criteria for determining the appropriate CE level.

Cells in the Class of Action column link to checklists that are used to evaluate whether a project meets the criteria for different types of CE. When deciding on the appropriate CE level, the first step is to look at the CEMP checklist to determine if a project fulfills relevant criteria. If it does not, evaluate the project against CE Level 1 criteria. This process continues until the correct CE level is identified.

*To view the checklists click on the appropriate CE Level: CEMP, CE Level 1, CE Level 2, CE Level 3

Form TC 58-48 (CE Determination) must be completed for all CEs. This form, usually completed by the DEC, includes a project summary, description of alternatives evaluated, environmental determinations for each functional area, environmental commitments and/ or mitigation, review of public involvement, a discussion of social, economic, and cultural historic resource impacts, and other information. PMs must review commitments and input relevant information into the Communicating All Promises (CAP) document in KYTC’s Project Delivery Platform (PDP).

 For CE Level 1 – 3 projects, a CE Environmental Review must also be completed and attached to Form TC 58-48 (CE Determination)

A CE document remains valid for two years after its approval. If more than two years pass, FHWA will not authorize funding until the CE document is reevaluated. Reevaluations are also needed prior to a federal funding authorization of a project phase (i.e. right-of-way, utilities, construction) if more than 3 months have elapsed since the original approval.  Reevaluations may be needed if there are changes in the project scope, conditions in the project area, or regulations.

5.2 Uncertain Impacts — Environmental Assessment

Environmental assessments (EAs) are reserved for projects that may have larger impacts but when it is unclear if they are significant enough to warrant an environmental impact statement (EIS). Regulations issued by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) mandate that EAs contain the following information:

• Description of the proposed action and the purpose and need
• Description of alternatives
• Evaluations of impacts associated with each alternative
• Review of proposed mitigation
• A list of agencies and people consulted during early coordination
• Discussion of the preferred alternative (if selected)

 EAs must also describe the findings of environmental base studies, which are detailed investigations of how different environmental features (e.g., air quality, ecology, noise) will be impacted by project activities.

EAs are performed almost exclusively by consultants. But the PM, PDT, DEC, other DEA subject-matter experts, and FHWA collaborate to establish a schedule for completing documentation and the levels of effort needed to identify the range of alternatives and conduct relevant investigations (e.g., base studies). Table 5 lists the possible outcomes of EAs. Once DEA approves an EA, it submits the EA to FHWA.

A FONSI documents the final transportation decision and summarizes information on the project’s environmental, economic, and engineering impacts as well as mitigation that will be carried out as part of the selected alternative and responses to issues raised during the public hearing and comment period. Specifically, a FONSI must:

• Address the impacts of the selected alternative
• Include an explicit finding that the project will not significantly impact the environment
• Describe steps to comply with relevant environmental laws and regulations
• Include a final Section 4(f) determination
• Identify mitigation measures that will be implemented to minimize the project’s environmental impacts

FHWA must approve a FONSI if Federal-aid dollars will be used to fund the project.

5.3 Significant Impacts — Environmental Impact Statement

If an EA concludes a project will produce significant environmental impacts or KYTC knows the project will result in significant impacts, the Cabinet moves forward with the EIS process — typically lead by a consultant. This process begins with KYTC preparing and publishing a notice of intent (NOI) in the Federal Register. Next, a Draft EIS (DEIS) is developed. This document:

• Summarizes the findings of environmental base studies
• Reviews environmental, engineering, and economic data or reports undertaken in accordance with the approved scope of work
• Discusses a reasonable range of alternatives for the proposed action (including eliminated alternatives)
• Summarizes studies, reviews, consultations, and coordination mandated by environmental laws and executive orders

DEA submits the completed DEIS to FHWA. Following FHWA approval, the Cabinet has 30 days to publish a notice for a public hearing in a local newspaper; the PM can also decide to publish the notice in publications that have regional or statewide circulation.

Following public hearings, the PDT evaluates the comments received, prepares responses, and identifies a preferred alternative. In some cases, comments submitted by the public or information comes to light that motivates the study of new alternatives. Once these are taken under consideration, the environmental process culminates in preparation of the Final EIS (FEIS). This document:

• Identifies the preferred alternatives
• Summarizes investigations and activities that occurred following publication of the DEIS
• Discusses comments received on the DEIS
• Documents the final Section 4(f) determination (if applicable)
• Catalogues environmental mitigation measures
• Documents compliance with all relevant environmental laws and executive orders

Once the FEIS is drafted, undergoes internal review and is finalized, the document is submitted to FHWA along with Form TC 58-52 (Final Environmental Impact Statement — Guidance and Accountability Form). The process ends with KYTC preparing a record of decision (ROD). This document undergoes internal reviews before DEA submits it to FHWA for approval. An approved ROD cannot be published until at least 45 days pass following approval of the FEIS.

For additional information on step-by-step procedures for the environmental process, see the Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual.

Table 6 summarizes the features of different NEPA documents. It specifies when each type of document should be used, the party responsible for its preparation, approval authority, time required for completion, and the amount of time a document is valid before it needs to be reevaluated. The Document Type column links to sections in the Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual that talk about each kind of environmental document.

PMs are responsible for initiating reevaluation of approved NEPA documents. Typically, reevaluations are done when a document is no longer valid due to the passage of time, if it will expire before a major project phase is authorized, or if the project has undergone significant changes following the approval (e.g., in scope, regulation, or project area). PMs must work with the DEC to initiate reevaluations promptly, well in advance of scheduled major phase authorizations to ensure there is enough time to complete additional studies, coordinate with resource agencies, and finish other activities.

In most cases, the office that developed the original document performs the reevaluation. For CEMP and CE Level I documents prepared in a District Office, the DEC coordinates and/or completes the reevaluation. For other types of documents developed by DEA or consultants, the Division coordinates and/or completes the reevaluation. In some cases, environmental consultants may help prepare documents as part of reevaluations.

The following HKP articles provide insights into subject-area assessments and mitigation strategies: 

• Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act for Project Managers
• Section 404 Permitting for Project Managers
• Section 106 Process for Project Managers
• Stream and Wetland Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS)

Further description of the level of effort and information to be included in each document type is included in the DEA’s Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual, and the Categorical Exclusion Guidance Manual.

FHWA requires that states develop a public involvement program pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 128 and 40 CFR 1500 – 1508. A project’s size, potential impacts, and NEPA document type (CE, EA or EIS) influence decisions about the type and scale of public involvement opportunities. KYTC must: 

• Offer planning and coordination of public involvement opportunities from the outset of the NEPA process.
• Give opportunities for the public to help identify potential impacts (e.g., social, economic, and environmental impacts as well as relocations).
• Hold at least one or more public hearings for any Federal-aid project determined to have significant impacts in the public interest (typically only EIS projects).
• Advertise or provide other reasonable notice of public input opportunities.

The HKP article Public Involvement with Customers and Stakeholders and the Highway Design Guidance Manual (HD-600 — Public Involvement) provide additional information on KYTC’s public involvement procedures.

Several tools help PMs track findings, decisions, and commitments made during the environmental process. Because the NEPA process can be complex, stretch across multiple years, and involve numerous agencies and people (some of whom move to other positions), PMs must track project decisions so project commitments and project statuses are readily available. Key tools are described below.

• ProjectWise®: KYTC uses Bentley ProjectWise® to store and manage project reports, files, and data. It is available only to Cabinet staff and provides immediate access to users across KYTC. The system uses a standard file structure that includes locations of environmental documents and data. PMs need to ensure the completed environmental documents are in the appropriate project folder locations.
• CE Matrix and Checklists:
  • The CE Exclusion Matrix lists the characteristics of different types of CEs
  • The Categorical Exclusion Determination sheet (TC 58-48) is submitted for review and approval of CEs.
  • The Categorical Exclusion Environmental Review is required for CE Levels 1 – 3 is and is an attachment to the CE Determination Sheet (Form TC 58-48)
• Communicating All Promises (CAP): KYTC must fulfill promises made to project participants and stakeholders. CAP tracks the following information:
  • Description of the promise made
  • The person/entity to whom the promise was made
  • Source of the promise
  • Date the promise was made
  • Location of the work or activities to fulfill the promise

All promises and related data are stored and tracked in the project database system. Users cannot delete entries from the system once they have been entered. The CAP report follows the project through the construction bid package and project completion. See HD-203.4 for more information. 

• Environmental Assessment Tracking System database (EATS): EPMs and other KYTC staff can use the web-based EATS to enter, maintain, and access detailed information for environmental reviews. EATS’ interface provides access to information such as status and comment data related to environmental milestones, meetings, review dates, and documents received. It should be regularly updated. 

EATS can capture commitments that will be addressed prior to the construction phase, and therefore may not need to be entered into CAP. For example, if KYTC identifies archaeological sites that need further investigation, that can be noted in the project commitments function of EATS. Any commitment that needs to be carried through to project construction should be coordinated with the PM so they can include it in CAP. EATS can generate customized reports and is available through KYTC’s intranet site. 

• Project Impact Profile (PIP): The PIP form (TC 58‐28) summarizes findings from the development of an EA/FONSI or EIS/ROD, including potential environmental impacts. It provides a consistent format to capture potential issues for each resource subject area and is submitted along with the environmental document. 

More information on tools KYTC uses to monitor environmental assessments and commitments is included in the Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual. For additional information on PM tools see the HKP article PM Tools and Technology (coming soon).

Throughout a project, PMs need to identify and manage environmental risks that may affect the project’s timeline, cost, and legal status. Risk assessment begins with project scoping. A good starting point is reviewing all previous studies and documents related to the proposed action to identify information relevant to the NEPA process as well as to locate potential risks, special considerations, and possible solutions previously identified.

9.1 Importance of Documentation

PMs and DEA personnel must carefully document the NEPA process. While the Cabinet may have taken appropriate actions and adhered to the NEPA process, the effectiveness of these efforts relies heavily on thorough documentation. Without proper documentation, it is as if these actions didn’t occur or are not evident, highlighting the importance of well-documented processes.  All environmental documentation should use clear, concise language. Because NEPA litigation can focus on project termini, the PM and PDT must pay close attention to segmentation on highway projects. NEPA documents should include evidence- and data-rich narratives of the project decision-making process that can be placed in a project’s administrative record. PDTs must document how and when alternatives are eliminated. Reevaluating alternatives whose elimination was justified but not properly documented increases time and costs.

9.2 Time for Permits

If KYTC needs to obtain permits or approvals from other agencies (e.g., United States Coast Guard), or a project is especially complex, PM and PDTs should allocate more time during project development for the environmental process. Routinely coordinating with regulatory agencies from the earliest stages of a project can help PDTs locate sources of risk and mitigate delays. Findings from base studies help PMs identify potential risks from the project’s outset. PM and PDTs must identify potential water-related impacts early in project development and refine the design, if feasible, to avoid these impacts. This helps keep permitting off the critical path.

9.3 Changes in Scope

As preliminary design advances on complex projects, scopes typically evolve. Modifying the project scope could change the type of environmental document needed. To address these challenges, the PM communicates issues to the PDT, including the SMEs and DEC, so team members can discuss the probable environmental impacts associated with scope modifications and determine if a different environmental document type is warranted. Scope changes can negatively impact the project schedule.

If a project is modified after an environmental document is approved the PM must communicate the nature of the changes to all PDT members and oversee efforts to update environmental documents. Examples of changes that require reworking environmental documents include minor revisions to the project footprint resulting from detailed design at intersections, definition of approaches, changes in slopes, or other refinements that minimally expand the area impacted by a project.

If the PDT identifies significant additional impacts or the project area is greatly expanded after completion of the environmental document (e.g., incorporation of excess excavation sites), the PM and PDT may need to reevaluate the environmental document and prepare a supplement or addendum, regardless of scheduled project development phases.

 9.4 Other Considerations for Project Risk

The amount of research conducted and the scope of field studies vary based on the level of NEPA documentation. For all environmental document types, project decision making must consider direct and indirect impacts as well as short-term and long-term effects. Strategies to reduce risk associated with the environmental process are outlined below.

• Environmental Justice Analysis (EJA) might correspond with the Socioeconomic Impact Assessment, but EJA requirements are separate and stipulated in an Executive Order.

• Some ecological fieldwork can only occur during particular seasons. This is an important consideration for investigating certain resources, especially streams, wetlands, and threatened or endangered species. PMs need to consider seasonal fieldwork requirements when developing project schedules.

• When geotechnical field investigations are needed, analyze the environmental setting to verify geotechnical work (e.g., drilling) will not adversely impact sensitive features (e.g., archaeology, forested habitat, special use stream, wetland). The PM must determine if an environmental overview should be conducted prior to geotechnical field investigations.

• The schedule for completing historic resource assessments may vary based upon anticipated project impacts. These impacts are contingent upon context, magnitude, and intensity. Consultation with the State Historic Preservation Office, and possibly other consulting parties, is mandatory at key points throughout the process.

• Evaluations of archaeology and historic architecture are separate disciplines of cultural resource analysis. Although subject to many of the same laws and regulations, they are investigated by discipline‐specific SMEs and have unique fieldwork, reporting, and review requirements.

• If the Biological Assessment finding is may affect, likely to adversely affect for any federally endangered species, DEA must coordinate with the lead federal agency to begin a formal Section 7 consultation with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), unless there is an applicable programmatic agreement (e.g., Indiana Bats) in place.

• A federally funded highway project that uses Section 4(f) property can be approved only after it has been determined no prudent and feasible alternative to use the property exists and that project planning minimizes harm to Section 4(f) sites (49 USC 303). Consult with the DEC to determine any applicable programmatic agreements or flexibilities afforded by de minimis impacts.

• Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act requires that the conversion of lands or facilities acquired with Land and Water Conservation Act funds under the State Assistance program be coordinated with the National Park Service (NPS). Coordination requirements of Section 6(f) compliance are complex and can be time consuming. Section 6(f) applies to state and federally funded projects if a resource is impacted.

• Conforming with the purpose of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) requires that transportation activities must not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Because the Clean Air Act requires transportation conformity, air quality analysis has a high level of importance and urgency. Transportation plans and projects demonstrate conformity through planning level documents. These conformity documents are typically the Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) for areas outside of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) area. Projects within the boundaries of an MPO demonstrate conformity in the MPO’s Transportation Implementation Plan (TIP). Ensure needed project-related modifications to these documents are addressed early to avoid funding authorization delays.

• KYTC may require property owners to perform required cleanup procedures before purchasing a property. Potential sources of pollutants include underground storage tanks (USTs), aboveground storage tanks, waste storage areas, and commercial and industrial process locations. The Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual contains a list of applicable codes, regulations, statutes, and guidance documents.

• Consider potential environmental mitigation fees during alternatives analysis and include forecast expenses in the project cost estimate.

 Additional information on red flag scenarios is available in the HKP article Environmental Approval.

Project Cost Estimation and Management

2022 PMBC Overview Book

Environmental Approval

Develop Preliminary Alternatives

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act

Section 404 Permitting for Project Managers

Section 106 Process for Project Managers

Stream and Wetland Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS)

Code of Federal Regulations Definition of Terms in CEQ Regulations

Environmental Analysis Guidance Manual

Highway Design Guidance Manual

Guidance for Managing Legal Risks in the NEPA Process

CE Exclusion Matrix

Categorical Exclusion Determination sheet

Categorical Exclusion Environmental Review

Categorical Exclusion Guidance Manual

The Elements of Purpose and Need in FHWA’s Environmental Review Toolkit

List of Projects Approved for CE Under Appendix A of the KYTC – FHWA Agreement

List of Projects Approved for CE Under Appendix B of the KYTC – FHWA Agreement

Actions listed in Appendix B or actions listed in Appendix A of the FHWA – KYTC agreement that do not meet the criteria for a CEMP, but which satisfy the criteria below.

Actions listed in Appendix B or Appendix A of the FHWA – KYTC agreement that do not meet the criteria for a CE Level 1, but which satisfy the criteria below.

Actions that do not satisfy the criteria for CEMP or CE Levels 1 – 2. Projects that meet any of the criteria below can only be processed as a CE Level 3 with written approval of FHWA.