[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 17 (Thursday, January 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7768-7770]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-2219]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families


Head Start and Early Head Start Grantees; Preliminary Finding of 
No Significant Impact

AGENCY: Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), ACF, 
DHHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Administration for Children and Families published a 
Notice in the Federal Register on November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67377) 
notifying interested parties that a Draft Programmatic Environmental 
Assessment issued by ACF was available for review and comment. The 
document assesses the environmental impacts of activities undertaken by 
Head Start and Early Head Start grantees

[[Page 7769]]

when purchasing, renovating or constructing child care facilities with 
grant funds. This document was prepared in accordance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, the regulations of the 
Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), and the 
Revised General Administration Manual, HHS Part 30, Environmental 
Protection. ACF received no comments on the Draft Programmatic 
Environmental Assessment. The Agency has reviewed the conclusion of the 
Environmental Assessment (EA), and agrees with its findings. ACF has 
made a preliminary determination that regulations governing the 
purchase, construction and renovation of Head Start and Early Head 
Start child care centers will not have a significant impact on the 
quality of the human environment and that preparation of an 
environmental impact statement will not be necessary. A final finding 
of no significant impact will not be made until at least 30 days from 
the publication of this notice.

DATES: Written comments on this preliminary finding of no significant 
impact should be received February 26, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to comment on this finding of no significant 
impact may respond to writing to: Head Start PEA Team, The Mangi 
Environmental Group, 701 West Broad Street, Suite 205, Falls Church, 
Virginia 22046.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Klafehn, Acting Associate 
Commissioner, Head Start Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth and 
Families, 330 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20447; (202) 205-8572.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Head Start and Early Head Start are 
authorized under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq.). It is a 
national program providing comprehensive developmental services to low-
income preschool children, primarily from age three to the age of 
compulsory school attendance, and their families. Early Head Start 
programs enroll children from birth to three years old and pregnant 
women. To help enrolled children achieve their full potential, Head 
Start and Early Head Start programs provide comprehensive health, 
nutritional, educational, social and educational services. ACF has 
proposed amendments to existing Head Start regulations (44 CFR part 
1309) to establish procedures for grantees to apply to use grant funds 
to cover the cost of constructing and making major renovations to Head 
Start and Early Head Start facilities and the steps necessary to 
protect the federal interest in those facilities. The regulations at 45 
CFR part 1309 currently establish procedures for grantees to request to 
use Head Start and Early Head Start grant funds to purchase facilities 
and to protect the federal interest in those facilities. The authority 
for use of Head Start and Early Head Start grant funds to purchase, 
construct or undertake major renovations is found in section 644 (f) 
and (g) of the Head Start Act.
    ACF prepared and published for comment a Draft Environmental 
Assessment on November 9, 2000 (65 FR 67377). The alternative assessed 
included the Proposed Action, which would include the full range of 
authorized activities including facility purchase, new construction and 
major renovation. The Alternative Action to the Proposed Action 
assessed a more restrictive alternative in which only minor 
construction and renovations would be conducted. The No Action 
Alternative under which only incidental alterations and renovations 
would be conducted was also assessed. The assessment considered the 
Proposed Action, Alternative Action and the No Action Alternative and 
the effects of each on water quality, air quality, noise, land use, 
transportation, waste management, human health and safety, soils, 
vegetation and wildlife, wetlands, cultural resources, socioeconomic 
factors, environmental justice, recreation, aesthetics, public services 
and utilities.
    ACF has chosen to implement the Proposed Action. Environmental 
resources may be affected by implementing the Proposed Action and these 
impacts are analyzed in the Programmatic Environmental Assessment. 
Given the nationwide nature of this Assessment and the variety of 
possible environmental conditions it was not deemed prudent to define 
the affected environment for all possible sites. Instead, the 
Assessment identifies circumstances which may result in significant 
impacts which must be avoided or mitigated when costs of purchasing, 
constructing or making major renovations to a Head Start or Early Head 
Start facility are met with grant funds. In the course of implementing 
the Proposed Action, there will be some impacts to environmental 
resources. Most of these impacts, however, are expected to be minimal, 
largely due to mitigating measures during the site selection, 
construction, operation and decommissioning phases. In many cases 
compliance with state, local and tribal regulations will lead to the 
avoidance of significant impacts, simply by requiring mitigation or by 
leading the grantee to select a different site.
    The Programmatic Environmental Assessment described the following 
possible significant impacts and means for mitigating them.
    (a) Water Quality--An impact 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. Significant impacts on the environment 
from operation, construction or renovation will be mitigated by 
grantees adhering to all state, local and tribal regulations regarding 
zoning, planning and construction.
    (b) Air Quality--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. Significant impacts on the environment will be mitigated by 
grantees adhering to all state, local and tribal regulations regarding 
construction and operational emissions.
    (c) Noise--An impact would be considered significant if it resulted 
in exposure of sensitive receptors to a Day-Night Level (DNL) of 
greater than 65 A-weighted decibels (dBA). A significant impact on the 
environment from operation, renovation or construction sites can be 
mitigated by maintaining normal daylight hours for construction and 
normal operation. Significant impacts on the environment will be 
mitigated by grantees adhering to all state, local and tribal noise 
regulations.
    (d) Land Use--An impact would be considered significant if the 
proposed action conflicted with any federal, regional, state, or local 
land use plans. If land use patterns are changed in the immediate 
project area due to the proposed action, the impact would also be 
considered significant. Significant impacts can be mitigated by 
requiring grantees to comply with state, local and tribal land use 
plans and ordinances.
    (e) Transportation-- An impact would be considered significant if 
there is 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. Significant impacts can be mitigated 
by using flaggers on busy roads during construction phases. Transit can 
be subsidized if a facility is on a major road to discourage automobile 
use.

[[Page 7770]]

    (f) Waste Management-- An impact would be considered significant if 
there an increase in the generation of solid or hazardous waste beyond 
the present facility capacity or new facility capacity to safely handle 
and dispose of that waste. Significant impacts will be mitigated by 
grantees adhering to state, local and tribal regulations and ordinances 
for waste management.
    (g) Human Heath and Safety--An impact would be considered 
significant if there is inadequate protection against serious injury to 
any worker or user during construction, maintenance, or operation of 
the project. Exposure to hazardous compounds or fumes at concentrations 
above health-based levels would be a significant impact. Significant 
impacts can be mitigated by making use of Head Start provided design 
guides, and by following state, local and tribal licensing 
requirements. Grantees will avoid new construction at sites with a 
history of hazardous material use or storage or sites near pollution 
sources. As required under 45 CFR 1304.22 all Head Start grantees must 
establish and implement policies and procedures to respond to medical 
and dental health emergencies with which all staff are familiar and 
trained. In addition all grantees are required to post emergency 
evacuation routes and other procedures for emergencies which are 
practiced regularly.
    (h) Soils--An action would cause of significant impact if soil 
erosion produced gullying, damage to vegetation, or a sustained 
increase in sedimentation in streams. An action would also constitute a 
significant impact if the action causes ground fracturing, folding, 
subsistence or instability. Impacts associated with soil contamination 
would be significant if the affected area was no longer able to support 
its current function or vegetable cover. Significant impacts will be 
mitigated by grantees adhering to all applicable state, local and 
tribal regulations.
    (i) Vegetation and Wildlife--An action would cause a significant 
impact if the degradation or loss of habitat sufficient to cause 
indigenous populations to leave or avoid the area occurred. Significant 
impacts will be avoided by Head Start and Early Head Start grantees 
choosing sites which do not raise substantial biological concerns.
    (j) Wetlands--An action would cause a significant impact if the 
soil structure, or water related hydrologic features or the vegetation 
of more than 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, or causes the degradation or loss of habitat for 
populations indigenous to the floodplain area, or prohibits farming 
activities. Significant impacts will be avoided by Head Start and Early 
Head Start grantees choosing sites other than wetlands.
    (k) Cultural Resources--An impact would be significant if an effect 
on a historic property occurs that may diminish the integrity of the 
historic property's location, design, setting, workmanship, feeling or 
association as set forth in 36 CFR 800.9. Significant impacts will be 
avoided by Head Start and Early Head Start grantees choosing sites 
which are not historic sites.
    (l) Socioeconomics--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. Also, if 
school populations decrease by more than 2 percent, revenues decrease 
by more than 2 percent and if the vacancy rate increased by more than 2 
percent that would constitute a significant impact. Mitigation of 
significant impacts are not expected to be likely as the impacts in 
this area are considered to be positive.
    (m) Environmental Justice--A significant impact would occur if a 
disproportionate number of minority and/or low income populations were 
adversely affected by the project. Mitigation of significant impacts 
are not expected to be necessary because facilities are not expected to 
have significant adverse environmental impacts.
    (n) Recreation--Significant impacts on recreation facilities and 
resources would occur when the project conflicts with local, state or 
tribal recreation plans for the community, or a physical invasion by 
the project prevents current and/or future recreational use of adjacent 
properties. Significant impacts will be mitigated by including 
recreation sites in plans for child care centers to reduce reliance on 
public resources.
    (o) Aesthetics--A significant impact would be the addition, into a 
predominantly natural setting, of incongruous human-made elements such 
as structures, noise, trash or pollutants, to the extent that they 
degrade the enjoyment of the setting for a majority of visitors or 
residents. Significant impacts will be mitigated by grantees adhering 
to with local or tribal ordinances and regulations on building 
appearance.
    (p) Public Services--An impact would be considered significant if 
the proposed project inhibited the public services by preventing fire, 
police, emergency or social services from responding to calls in a 
timely way or if the project would impose excessive demands on public 
services. Significant impacts will be mitigated by grantees using 
public services in appropriate and responsible ways and by complying 
with state, local or tribal licensing regulations to reduce dangers of 
fires or other emergencies.
    (q) Utilities--Significant impacts would occur where the proposed 
project would inhibit the use of such services by any other property 
owner, or if the project created an unreasonable demand on utility 
companies. Significant impacts will be mitigated by incorporating 
energy efficient features in building design.
    (r) Cumulative Effects--Considered on a nationwide scale, 
activities related to the purchase, construction and major renovation 
of Head Start and Early Head Start facilities are expected to have a 
negligible cumulative impact.
    In the course of implementing the Proposed Action, there will be 
some impacts to environmental resources. ACF believes that compliance 
by grantees with State, local or tribal requirements will prevent 
significant impacts by requiring mitigation or will lead grantees to 
select other sites for their projects which do not raise issues of 
environmental impact. When existing requirements do not fully address 
the need for mitigation of environmental impacts, ACF will require the 
grantee to take additional steps.
    ACF does not contemplate approving the purchase, construction or 
major renovation of Head Start or Early head Start facilities located, 
or to be located, on wet lands or floodplains, at sites where the 
project would affect significantly sensitive natural habitats, or at 
sites where the project would significantly affect historic properties. 
This policy reflects concern not only with the adverse effects on the 
environment that selection of such sites would have but also in 
recognition of the prohibitive costs which would likely be incurred in 
mitigating significant impacts at those sites.

    Dated: January 16, 2001.
Olivia A. Golden,
Assistant Secretary for Children and Families.
[FR Doc. 01-2219 Filed 1-24-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-M