Phase: Applied learning · Worked scenarios · Calculations · Audit findings · Document drills
Apply what you've read — scenario by scenario, calculation by calculation
NEPA/CEQA, CE/EA/EIS, Section 4(f) and 106. Each exercise has a hidden solution — work through your answer before revealing.
I
Scenario 01
CE eligibility — a road resurfacing
Setup
An LPA is repaving 0.8 miles of an urban arterial within existing curb-to-curb pavement, with no widening, no R/W acquisition, and no significant work in environmentally sensitive areas. The project is on the NHS.
Question
What is the likely NEPA classification? What documentation is required?
Solution
Likely NEPA classification: Categorical Exclusion (CE) — specifically, a programmatic CE under 23 CFR 771.117(c) for repaving operations.
Documentation:
1. Caltrans NEPA Assignment under 23 USC §327 means Caltrans (not FHWA) makes the CE determination for most CE projects.
2. PES (Preliminary Environmental Study) Form completed by the LPA.
3. Section 4(f) determination — likely "No use" since within existing pavement.
4. Section 106 (historic preservation) — review if the road has any historic resources adjacent. Likely "No Historic Properties Affected" given the constrained scope.
5. CEQA: Likely Class 1c categorical exemption (minor alterations to existing structures).
The SER (Standard Environmental Reference) Volume 1 walks through the CE classification process. The Caltrans Environmental Coordinator at the District is the LPA's primary contact.
Key gotcha: If any portion of the work extends outside existing curb (even a few feet for ADA ramp updates), additional environmental review may be triggered. Verify scope precisely before assuming CE applies.
Authority: LAPM Ch 6; 23 CFR 771.117; SER Vol 1
III
Audit Finding 01
Read the fact pattern — what's the finding?
Facts
An audit reviews a federal-aid project where the LPA proceeded with R/W acquisition negotiations 3 weeks before the NEPA approval was issued. The LPA argued the property owner approached them voluntarily.
Analysis
What is the finding?
Finding · Citation · Corrective action
Finding: Premature R/W acquisition activity before NEPA approval, violating LAPM Ch 13 §13.2 and 23 CFR 710.
LAPM Ch 3 §3.3.3 is explicit: "An approved NEPA document is required prior to the majority of R/W activities (e.g., negotiating with property owners, acquisition, and relocation assistance)."
The "voluntary approach" by the owner does not cure this. NEPA exists to ensure environmental review precedes major federal actions — including R/W acquisitions that would foreclose alternatives. Even hardship acquisitions and protective buying require specific FHWA approval (which IS non-delegable per Ch 2).
Consequence: The R/W acquisition costs may be ineligible for federal reimbursement. If the project is restructured or alternatives later become preferable, the LPA could be left holding non-reimbursable property costs.
Corrective action: Suspend further negotiations until NEPA is approved. Document the timing of conversations carefully. If the property is ultimately acquired, the costs may need to be charged to non-federal sources.
Authority: LAPM Ch 6; Ch 13 §13.2; 23 CFR 710; LAPM Ch 3 §3.3.3
Applied learning · Companion chapter
These exercises apply the procedural framework presented in LAPM Chapter 06: Environmental Procedures. For the full chapter reference, glossary, and recall quiz, see the deep chapter file.