PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINSTRATION
AND
THE NEW MEXICO STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
REGARDING THE PROCESSING OF ACTIONS CLASSIFIED AS CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS FOR FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAY PROJECTS

THIS PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT (“Agreement”), made and entered into by and between the FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and the STATE of NEW MEXICO acting by and through its DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION hereby provides as follows:

1. PARTIES

   The Parties to this Agreement are the Federal Highway Administration (“FHWA”) and the New Mexico Department of Transportation (hereinafter “NMDOT”).

2. PURPOSE

   The purpose of this Agreement is to authorize NMDOT to determine on behalf of the FHWA whether a project qualifies for a Categorical Exclusion (CE) specifically listed in 23 CFR 771.117 (c) and (d) without further review and approval by FHWA. This Agreement also authorizes NMDOT to certify to the FHWA that an action not specifically listed in 23 CFR 771.117 (c) and (d), but meeting the CE criteria in 40 CFR 1508.4 and 23 CFR 771.117(a), qualifies for a CE as long as there are no unusual circumstances present that would require the preparation of either an environmental assessment (EA) or an environmental impact statement (EIS).

3. AUTHORITIES

   This agreement is entered into pursuant to the following authorities:

   1. National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 4321 - 4370

   2. Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, P.L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, Sec. 1318(d)

   3. Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, Pub. L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312, Sec. 1315 (Dec. 4, 2015).

   4. DOT Order 5610.1C

   5. 23 CFR 771.117

4. RESPONSIBILITIES

   1. NMDOT is responsible for:

      1. Approving CEs, without the need for FHWA consultation, for actions specifically listed in 23 CFR 771.117(c) and 23 CFR 771.117(d) including c list activities constrained by 23 CFR 771.117(e), on behalf of FHWA. This includes any activities added through FHWA rulemaking to those listed in 23 CFR 771.117(c) or 23 CFR 771.117(d) after the date of execution of this Programmatic Agreement. NMDOT will identify the applicable listed CE, ensure any conditions or constraints are met, verify that unusual circumstances as defined in 23 CFR 771.117(b) do not apply, address any and all other environmental requirements, and complete the review with a wet or electronic signature evidencing approval. No separate review or approval of the CE by FHWA is required.

      2. NMDOT may not unilaterally approve actions not specifically listed as CEs in 23 CFR 771.117, but meet the requirements of a CE under 23 CFR 771.117(a). Instead, NMDOT may certify that such actions qualify as a CE, will not result in significant environmental impacts, and do not involve unusual circumstances that warrant the preparation of an EA or EIS. NMDOT shall submit this certification (in the form of a CE Checklist) to the FHWA for approval prior to the time the FHWA contemplates its next approval or grant action for the project.

         1. If any project requires a Section 4(f) de minimis determination or programmatic evaluation, NMDOT shall submit the 4(f) documentation for the FHWA determination and approval.

         2. NMDOT may request notice to proceed with final design, acquisition of right-of-way, or construction from the FHWA once NMDOT has completed its certification that a project is a CE.

         3. FWHA’s objection to a NMDOT certification may not constitute a disapproval of the action but signifies that FHWA will need to engage in project-specific review to verify that the certification is adequate, which may include consultation with other agencies.

      3. Consulting with FHWA for actions that involve unusual circumstances (23 CFR 771.117(b)) to determine the appropriate class of action for environmental analysis and documentation. NMDOT may decide, or FHWA may require, additional studies to be performed prior to making a CE approval or changing the class of action to an EA or EIS.

      4. Meeting applicable documentation requirements, as listed in Section V of this agreement, for NMDOT CE approvals on FHWA’s behalf, applicable approval and re-evaluation requirements in Section VI, and applicable quality control/quality, monitoring, and performance requirements in Section VII.

   2. FHWA is responsible for:

      1. Providing timely review and approval of CEs for actions that are not specifically listed in 23 CFR 771.117, or for actions for which NMDOT has requested FHWA approval based on unusual circumstances.

      2. Providing timely review and response to any request for coordination, consultation, or compliance with any environmental requirement under law, regulation, or Executive Order related to NMDOT’s processing of CE actions under this agreement. This includes all Section 4(f) evaluations and de minimis and temporary occupancy determinations, all formal ESA consultations except those included in a programmatic ESA consultation, all responses to Essential Fish Habitat conservation recommendations, all Section 106 Memorandums of Agreement, and government-to-government consultation with Native American Tribes.

      3. Providing timely advice and technical assistance on CEs to NMDOT, as requested.

      4. Overseeing the implementation of this Agreement in accordance with 23 CFR 771.117(g).

5. DOCUMENTATION OF NMDOT CE APPROVALS

   1. For NMDOT CE approvals, NMDOT shall ensure that it fulfills the following responsibilities for documenting the project-specific determinations made:

      1. For actions listed in 23 CFR 711.117 (c) and 23 CFR 711.117 (d), NMDOT will identify the applicable action and ensure any conditions specified in FHWA regulation are met, verify that unusual circumstances do not apply, address all other environmental requirements, and complete NMDOT’s NEPA form(s) with a NMDOT electronic signature evidencing approval. Depending on project complexity, NEPA compliance may be documented using a CE Checklist (see template example in Appendix A) or a Programmatic CE form (see template example in Appendix B).

      2. In addition, for actions listed in 23 CFR 771.117(c) and 23 CFR 771.117(d), NMDOT shall prepare documentation that supports the CE determination and that no unusual circumstances exist that would make the CE approval inappropriate.

   2. NMDOT should maintain a project record for CE approvals it makes on FHWA’s behalf. This record should include at a minimum:

      1. Any checklists, forms, or other documents and exhibits that summarize the consideration of project effects and unusual circumstances.

      2. Any stakeholder communication, correspondence, consultation, or public meeting documentation.

      3. The name and title of the document approver and the date of NMDOT’s approval.

      4. For cases involving re-evaluations, any documented re-evaluation (when required) or a statement that a re-evaluation was completed for the project (when supporting documentation is not necessary).

6. AUTHORITY AND DELEGATIONS

   1. NMDOT’s CE approvals and CEs submitted to FHWA for approval may only be made by officers or offices specifically identified below:

      1. Approval of CEs listed in 23 CFR 771.117 (c) and (d) is delegated to the NMDOT Environmental Bureau Chief, or in the Bureau Chief’s absence, by the NMDOT Environmental Bureau NEPA & Natural Resources Section Manager.

      2. Certification of CEs is delegated to the NMDOT Environmental Bureau Chief, or in the Bureau Chief’s absence, by the NMDOT Environmental Bureau NEPA & Natural Resources Section Manager.

   2. In accordance with 23 CFR 771.129, NMDOT shall re-evaluate its determinations and certifications for projects, consult with FHWA, and as necessary, prepare additional documentation to ensure that determinations are still valid.

7. QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE, MONITORING & PERFORMANCE

   1. NMDOT Quality Control & Quality Assurance

      NMDOT agrees to carry out regular quality control and quality assurance activities to ensure that its CE approvals and CE submissions to FHWA for approval, are made in accordance with applicable law and this Agreement.

   2. NMDOT Performance Monitoring and Reporting.

      1. FHWA and NMDOT shall cooperate in monitoring performance under this Agreement and work to assure quality performance.

      2. NMDOT agrees to annually submit to FHWA a report summarizing its performance under this Agreement no later than 45 calendar days following the end of each calendar year. The report will identify any areas where improvement is needed and the measures NMDOT is taking to implement those improvements. The annual report will include:

         1. A list of all Programmatic CE forms and CE checklists completed during the year;
         2. Follow-up from prior years’ report recommendations;
         3. Quality control and assurance activities that were undertaken in the past year;
         4. The results from implementing quality control and assurance activities;
         5. Identification of training needs and training provided;
         6. NEPA program changes (including changes to form and checklist templates) that have occurred during the year;
         7. NEPA program changes that should be considered.

   3. FHWA Oversight and Monitoring

      1. Monitoring by FHWA will include consideration of the technical competency and organizational capacity of NMDOT, as well as NMDOT’s performance of its CE processing functions. Performance considerations include, without limitation, the quality and consistency of NMDOT’s CE approvals, CE submissions to FHWA for approval, adequacy and capability of NMDOT staff and consultants, and the effectiveness of NMDOT’s administration of its internal CE approvals.

      2. FHWA will conduct one or more program reviews as part of its oversight activities, during the term of this Agreement. NMDOT shall prepare and implement a corrective action plan to address any findings or observations identified in the FHWA review. NMDOT should draft the corrective action plan within 45 days of FHWA finalizing its review. The results of that review and corrective actions taken by NMDOT shall be considered at the time this Agreement is considered for renewal.

      3. Nothing in this Agreement prevents FHWA from undertaking other monitoring or oversight actions, including audits, with respect to NMDOT’s performance under this Agreement. FHWA may require NMDOT to perform such other quality assurance activities, including other types of monitoring, as may be reasonably required to ensure compliance with applicable Federal laws and regulations.

      4. NMDOT agrees to cooperate with FHWA in all oversight and quality assurance activities.

8. AMENDMENTS

   This Agreement shall not be altered, changed, or amended except by an instrument in writing and executed by the Parties hereto with new signatures and dates of the signatures. The term of the Agreement shall remain unchanged unless otherwise expressly stated in the amended Agreement.

9. TERM, RENEWAL, AND TERMINATION

   1. This Agreement shall have a term of five (5) years, effective on the date of the last signature. NMDOT shall post and maintain an executed copy of this Agreement on its website, available to the public.

   2. This Agreement is renewable for additional five (5) year terms if NMDOT requests renewal and FHWA determine that NMDOT has satisfactorily carried out the provisions of this Agreement. In considering any renewal of this Agreement, FHWA will evaluate the effectiveness of the Agreement and its overall impact on the environmental review process.

   3. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time only by giving at least 30 days written notice to the other party.

   3. Expiration or termination of this Agreement shall mean that NMDOT is not able to make CE approvals on FHWA’s behalf.

10. INDEPENDENCE OF PARTIES

    In the exercise of their respective rights and obligations as the signatories to this Agreement, each signatory shall act in an independent capacity, consistent with each signatory’s own statutes, regulations and fiscal constraints, and none of the signatories are to be considered the officer, agent or employee of the other.

11. SEVERABILITY:

    In the event that any portion of this Agreement is determined to be void, unconstitutional or otherwise unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

12. SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT:

    This Agreement incorporates all the agreements, covenants, and understandings between the parties hereto concerning the subject matter hereof, and all such covenants, agreements, and understandings have been merged into this written Agreement. No prior agreements or understandings, verbal or otherwise, of the Parties or their agents shall become valid or enforceable unless embodied in this Agreement.

13. CONSTRUCTION:

    In constructing this Agreement, all headings and titles are for the convenience of the parties only and shall not be considered a part of this Agreement. Words of any gender used in this Agreement shall be held and construed to include any other gender, and words in the singular number shall be held to include the plural, and vice versa, unless the context requires otherwise. This Agreement shall not be construed as if prepared by one of the Parties, but rather according to its fair meaning as a whole, as if all Parties had prepared it. Execution of this Agreement and implementation of its terms by both parties provides evidence that both parties have reviewed this Agreement and agree to the terms and conditions for its implementation. This Agreement is effective upon the date of the last signature below.

Appendix A: Template CE Checklist

	NEW MEXICO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION CONTROL NO.:           NMDOT DISTRICT:
Project Control Number:			NMDOT District:
Title and Description of Proposed Project:
Location (Route and Milepost):			County:
Land Ownership:
Project Proponent:		Project Development Engineer/Manager:
Consulting Engineer Name and Company:
Environmental Consultant Name and Company:
FHWA Funding for Project: ▢ No    ▢ Yes

This document has been prepared pursuant to 23 CFR 771.117, FHWA Technical Advisory T6640.8, and the Programmatic Agreement Between the FHWA New Mexico Division and the New Mexico DOT Regarding the Processing of Actions Classified as Categorical Exclusions for Federal-Aid Highway Projects (Programmatic Agreement). In accordance with the Programmatic Agreement, NMDOT ensures the project 1) meets the criteria for a CE under CFR 771.117 [identify (c) or (d) list and activity #]; or 2) certifies the action is not listed as a CE in regulation but meets the criteria of a CE, and no unusual circumstances exist that would have a significant impact on the quality of the human or natural environment and therefore require preparation of an EA or EIS, provided stipulations identified in this analysis are met. Supporting documentation is available at the NMDOT Environmental Bureau.

▢ Project location map attached.
▢ STIP page attached.
▢ Project area photos attached.

Insert project location map

Insert STIP page

1.       OTHER LAND JURISDICTION(S): Select the appropriate land management entity from the list below. The appropriate land management agency shall be contacted to address the potential impacts, alternatives and possible mitigating measures for the proposed action. The Environmental Commitments section should reflect any mutually agreed upon stipulations or mitigation measures determined through coordination with the land management entity.

▢ Bureau of Land Management, BLM Field Office:
▢ U.S. Forest Service, USFS Forest and Ranger District:
▢ Bureau of Indian Affairs
▢ Tribal Entity: Navajo Nation
▢ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
▢ National Park Service
▢ Bureau of Reclamation
▢ Department of Defense
▢ New Mexico State Land Office
▢ New Mexico Department of Game and Fish
▢ New Mexico State Parks
▢ Federal Aviation Administration
▢ Private
▢ Other:

Provide additional information regarding communication with land management entities:

2.       CULTURAL RESOURCE INVESTIGATIONS: Conduct cultural resource investigations as directed by the NMDOT Environmental Bureau.

NMCRIS records check date:

Cultural resource inventory conducted? ▢ No ▢ Yes Concurrence date:

▢ No historic properties or cultural resources are present; therefore, there is no potential to affect these resources (attach No Effect Memo or SHPO/THPO concurrence).
▢ Historic properties and/or cultural resources are present, but there will be no use of or effect to these resources (attach No Effect Memo or SHPO/THPO concurrence).
▢ The proposed project would not constitute a use or have an adverse effect to historic properties and/or cultural resources (attach SHPO/THPO concurrence).
▢ The proposed project would constitute a use of or have an adverse effect to historic properties and/or cultural resources.
     ▢ MOA for mitigation has been developed under Section 106 of NHPA (attach signed MOA).
     ▢ A project-specific Programmatic Agreement has been developed under Section 106 of NHPA.
▢ Special properties of concern are present. Specify:
▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for historic/cultural resource protection or treatment measures.

3.       TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PROPERTIES: Contact the NMDOT Native American/Tribal Coordinator in the NMDOT Environmental Bureau.

▢ The proposed project has no potential to impact Traditional Cultural Properties based on coordination with NMDOT Native American/Tribal Coordinator.
▢ Traditional Cultural Properties have been identified, management recommendations developed, and coordination with land management agencies and Tribal/State Historic Preservation Officer completed.
▢ See attached documentation from the NMDOT Native American/Tribal Coordinator.
▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for mitigation measures resulting from tribal coordination and consultation.

4.       BIOLOGICAL COMMUNITY: Conduct biological investigations as directed by the NMDOT Environmental Bureau.

Biological evaluation report prepared? ▢ No ▢ Yes Date:

If no, explain:

Federally listed threatened, endangered, or proposed species and/or critical habitat or proposed critical habitat are present within or adjacent to the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes

▢ The proposed project would have no effect to federally listed threatened, endangered, or proposed species and/or modify critical habitat or proposed critical habitat (attach No Effect documentation).
▢ The proposed project may affect, is not likely to adversely affect federally threatened, endangered, or proposed species and/or adversely modify critical habitat or proposed critical habitat (attach ESA consultation documentation).
▢ The proposed project may affect, is likely to adversely affect federally threatened, endangered, or proposed species and/or adversely modify critical habitat or proposed critical habitat (attach ESA Biological Opinion).

Is the proposed project expected to impact state-listed, tribal-listed, or other applicable agency-listed plant and/or animal species? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain:

Are there migratory bird concerns associated with the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain:

Are there wildlife or wildlife corridor/collision hotspot issues associated with the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain:

Are noxious weeds, as recognized by the NM Dept. of Agriculture, present? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, identify noxious weed species, classification (A, B, C), and explain mitigation measures:

Additional information regarding the biological community:

▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for biological community mitigation measures.

5.       WATER RESOURCES: Evaluate impacts to water resources within and adjacent to the project area.

Do any FEMA-designated Special Flood Hazard Areas occur within the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain impacts and FEMA compliance (attach consultation documentation), if required:

Is a designated Wild and Scenic River present within the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain compliance:

Is an acequia or irrigation ditch present within the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain coordination with owner/operator, if required:

Are Outstanding National Resource Waters or Impaired Surface Waters present within the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain mitigation measures, if required:

Clean Water Act (CWA) Permitting: Determine if Waters of the United States, subject to jurisdictional authority under the CWA, would be impacted by the proposed project.

Are wetlands or regulated waterways present within the proposed project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes Are the wetlands or regulated waterways expected to be impacted? ▢ No ▢Yes

If yes to either question above, explain:

▢ Wetland determination and delineation report prepared. Date of report:

▢ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CWA §404 Maintenance Exemption applies to the proposed project.
▢ CWA §404 Nationwide Permit applies: ▢ No ▢ Yes If yes, Nationwide Permit #:
▢ CWA §404 Individual Permit required
▢ CWA §401 certification required from: ▢ NMED ▢ EPA ▢ Tribal Entity:

Additional CWA permitting information:

Are there any impacts to non-jurisdictional waterways within the project area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain and identify mitigation measures, if required:

Is the project within an MS4 permit area? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain compliance with drainage design standards, if required:

Erosion and Sediment Control: Determine if the provisions of the NPDES Construction General Permit (CGP) issued by the EPA applies to the proposed project.

▢ The proposed project would disturb less than 1 acre of land, CGP does not apply.
▢ The proposed project would disturb less than 1 acre of land, but the project area is located near a perennial stream, therefore, a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is being developed.
▢ The proposed project would disturb more than 1 acre of land, therefore a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan would be prepared in accordance with the CGP.

▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for water resources mitigation measures.

6.       RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS: Determine if new NMDOT rights-of-way, construction maintenance easements (CME), temporary construction permits (TCP), work permits, federal land transfers, or acquisitions are necessary.

Are any of the above types of right-of-way required for the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes If yes, complete the table below.

▢ Proposed right-of-way map attached (required).

Additional right-of-way information:

7.       AIR QUALITY ANALYSIS: Determine if the proposed project would impact air quality.

Is the proposed project area within any of the following nonattainment or maintenance areas?

▢ Bernalillo County
▢ Sunland Park
▢ Anthony
▢ A non-attainment or maintenance area not listed above. If checked, explain:

If none of the four boxes above are checked, air quality conformity requirements are met. If one of the geographic areas above is checked, complete the section below.

Is hotspot analysis required for the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes

If yes, describe the extent of project level air quality analysis that has been conducted for the proposed project and attach relevant conformity correspondence/documentation:

▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for air quality mitigation measures.

8.       NOISE ANALYSIS: Determine if noise levels associated with the proposed project would impact receptors on nearby properties and determine if local noise abatement ordinances apply.

Is the proposed project considered Type 1 as defined by NMDOT’s current Design Directive for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise? ▢ No ▢ Yes (If no, this section is complete.)

Are receptors (existing or permitted) present within 500 feet in the project area, or is it otherwise known that receptors will be affected by noise? ▢ No ▢ Yes (If no, this section is complete.)

Based on consultation with NMDOT, a traffic noise analysis is required. ▢ No ▢ Yes If no, explain:

If yes, traffic noise analysis must be completed. Date of analysis report:

Does the noise analysis identify noise impacts from the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes If yes, include applicable information in Section 17 Public Involvement.
If yes, have noise abatement measures been determined to be reasonable and feasible? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, do the majority of benefited receptors favor noise abatement? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If no, explain:

Additional noise information:

▢ Refer to Environmental Commitments section for noise mitigation measures.

9.       SECTION 4(f): Section 4(f) refers to situations where transportation projects use parks, recreation areas, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.

Would the proposed project use a Section 4(f) property? ▢ No ▢ Yes (If no, this section is complete)

If yes, based upon verification with NMDOT Environmental Bureau, which of the following levels of 4(f) compliance documentation apply (attach documentation):

▢ Section 4(f) de minimis use determination.
▢ Section 4(f) programmatic evaluation. Identify which evaluation applies:
▢ Section 4(f) individual evaluation.

Additional Section 4(f) information:

10.   LAND USE: For proposed projects that add new, or substantially modify existing, transportation infrastructure, verify whether the proposed project is compatible with urban policy and/or land use plans. For proposed projects that cross federal lands, check with the land management agency for applicable land use plan(s).

Is the proposed project consistent with land use plans or zoning? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If no, explain:

11.   HAZARDOUS MATERIALS ANALYSIS: Determine if hazardous materials are located within or adjacent to the proposed project area.

▢ NMDOT Hazardous Material Investigations Bureau (HMIB) has determined hazardous materials do not occur within the project area
▢ NMDOT HMIB has determined hazardous materials occur within the project areas and have been properly addressed in the construction plans.
▢ A copy of the NMDOT HMIB memo or report is in the project record Date of determination:

Additional hazardous materials information:

12.   SOCIOECONOMICS: Determine potential impacts to social and economic resources resulting from the proposed project.

Would the proposed project result in an adverse impact to social or economic resources? ▢ No ▢ Yes (If yes, verify NEPA level of effort with NMDOT Environmental Bureau.)
Are relocations or displacements necessary to build the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes
Is the project expected to impact neighborhood continuity, community cohesion, or access to important community resources? ▢ No ▢ Yes
▢ Project will qualify as a change to interstate access and therefore require an Interstate Access Change Request (IACR) per FHWA Interstate Access Policy

If yes to any of the questions above, explain:

13.   VISUAL RESOURCES: Determine whether the project would result in adverse impacts to visual resources

Is the proposed project located along a designated Scenic Byway? ▢ No ▢ Yes

Would the proposed project result in visual impacts to historic sites and/or districts? ▢ No ▢ Yes

Would the proposed project result in an adverse impact to visual resources, including landscapes, viewsheds and overall visual quality? ▢ No ▢ Yes

If yes to any of the questions above, was a Visual Impact Assessment prepared for the project?

▢ No ▢ Yes

Additional visual resource information:

▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for visual resource mitigation measures.

14.   MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION: Determine whether the project would impact pedestrians, bicyclists, or transit facilities.

Is the proposed project located along a proposed or designated bicycle route? ▢ No ▢ Yes Would the proposed project impact pedestrian and/or bicycle access? ▢No ▢ Yes

Would the proposed project impact transit facilities? ▢ No ▢ Yes

If yes to any question above, explain:

Is there an opportunity to improve multi-modal access with the proposed project? ▢ No ▢ Yes

If yes, explain:

▢ Refer to the Environmental Commitments section for pedestrian/bicyclist mitigation measures.

15.   OTHER INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS: Determine if any other resource issues apply to the proposed project that are not addressed in the previous sections.

▢ No other resource issues are identified and no additional coordination required.
▢ Paleontological resources (for projects on federal land only)
▢ USDA-designated Prime and Unique Farmland (attach documentation)
▢ Properties protected by Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Act (attach documentation)
▢ Other resource issues:

Additional resource analysis:

16.   PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Determine the level of public involvement and notification necessary for the proposed project. The determination should be based on the resource issues identified in the previous sections.

Describe any public or stakeholder engagement that has taken place. Include documentation of public meeting notices, dates, and locations, if applicable:

Were public comments received as part of the project’s public involvement process? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, were any contentious concerns raised? ▢ No ▢ Yes
If yes, explain how these concerns were addressed:

▢ Public involvement summary report attached.

Additional public involvement information:

END OF CHECKLIST

Attachments:

• Project area photos
• Section 106 cultural resource compliance documentation
• Endangered Species Act compliance documentation
• 4(f) documentation (if applicable)
• Public Involvement documentation
• Other, if applicable

Appendix B: Template Programmatic CE Form

Date			District: Project Control No.:	Michelle Lujan Grisham Governor Ricky Serna Cabinet Secretary   Commissioners Vacant Commissioner District 1 Gary Tonjes Commissioner District 2 Hilma E. Chynoweth Commissioner, Vice Chairman District 3 Walter G. Adams Commissioner, Chairman District 4 Thomas C. Taylor Commissioner District 5 Charles Lundstrom Commissioner, Secretary District 6
Cindy Vigue Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 604 West San Mateo Road Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505 SUBJECT: Programmatic Categorical Exclusion Form for: [project name] Dear Mrs. Vigue: The New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) staff has reviewed the following project. In accordance with the conditions stipulated in the Programmatic Agreement Between the FHWA New Mexico Division and the New Mexico DOT Regarding the Processing of Actions Classified as Categorical Exclusions for Federal-Aid Highway Projects, NMDOT ensures the project 1) meets the criteria for a CE under CFR 771.117 [identify (c) or (d) list and activity #]; and 2) qualifies for NEPA documentation using this Programmatic CE Form.
District	County	Project Number	Termini Description
Project STIP Description: Project Scope: A review of the project has been completed in accordance with the requirements of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. We have determined that the proposed project does not include any activities or programs that will result in changes in the character or use of historic properties and, therefore, will have no effect on historic properties eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The undertaking has no potential to cause effect on historic properties as defined in 36 CFR § 800.3(a)(1). We have also determined the project will have no effect to species or critical habitats protected under the Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973. NMDOT files contain documentation supporting this determination. The files are available for FHWA review. We will continue to monitor project design and development to ensure the applicability of the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion. The aforementioned project meets all of the conditions stipulated in the Programmatic Categorical Exclusion. No further coordination is necessary for environmental approval. Environmental Commitments:   Sincerely,   NMDOT Environmental Bureau Chief     Project STIP page     Programmatic CE Form: [Project control No.]
General Office		P.O. Box 1149	Santa Fe, NM 87504