Categorical Exclusion

B-2.3. Categorical Exclusions for Equipment and Instrumentation. This category includes the list of CATEXs for FAA actions involving installation, repair, or upgrade of equipment or instruments necessary for operations and safety. The responsible FAA official must also review Paragraph B-1, Extraordinary Circumstances, before deciding to categorically exclude a proposed action.

b. Circumstances. An extraordinary circumstance exists if a proposed action involves any of the following circumstances and has the potential for a significant impact:
(1) An adverse effect on cultural resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 54 U.S.C. §300101 et seq.;
(2) An impact on properties protected under Section 4(f);
(3) An impact on natural, ecological, or scenic resources of Federal, state, tribal, or local significance (e.g., federally listed or proposed endangered, threatened, or candidate species, or designated or proposed critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544);
(4) An impact on the following resources: resources protected by the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 661-667d; wetlands; floodplains; coastal zones; national marine sanctuaries; wilderness areas; National Resource Conservation Service-designated prime and unique farmlands; energy supply and natural resources; resources protected under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1287, and rivers or river segments listed on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI); and solid waste management;
(5) A division or disruption of an established community, or a disruption of orderly, planned development, or an inconsistency with plans or goals that have been adopted by the community in which the project is located;
(6) An increase in congestion from surface transportation (by causing decrease in level of service below acceptable levels determined by appropriate transportation agency, such as a highway agency);
(7) An impact on noise levels of noise sensitive areas;
(8) An impact on air quality or violation of Federal, state, tribal, or local air quality standards under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q;
(9) An impact on water quality, sole source aquifers, a public water supply system, or state or tribal water quality standards established under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, and the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f-300j-26;
(10) Impacts on the quality of the human environment that are likely to be highly controversial on environmental grounds. The term “highly controversial on environmental grounds” means there is a substantial dispute involving reasonable disagreement over the degree, extent, or nature of a proposed action’s environmental impacts or over the action’s risks of causing environmental harm. Mere opposition is not sufficient for a proposed action or its impacts to be considered highly controversial on environmental grounds. Opposition on environmental grounds by a Federal, state, or local government agency or by a tribe or a substantial number of the persons affected by the action should be considered in determining whether or not reasonable disagreement regarding the impacts of a proposed action exists. If in doubt about whether a proposed action is highly controversial on environmental grounds, consult the LOB/SO’s headquarters environmental division, AEE, Regional Counsel, or AGC for assistance;
(11) Likelihood to be inconsistent with any Federal, state, tribal, or local law relating to the environmental aspects of the proposed action; or
(12) Likelihood to directly, indirectly, or cumulatively create a significant impact on the human environment, including, but not limited to, actions likely to cause a significant lighting impact on residential areas or commercial use of business properties, likely to cause a significant impact on the visual nature of surrounding land uses, likely to cause environmental contamination by hazardous materials, or likely to disturb an existing hazardous material contamination site such that new environmental contamination risks are created.

Exclusion Text

(c) Federal financial assistance for, or Airport Layout Plan (ALP) approval of, or FAA installation or upgrade of facilities and equipment, other than radars, on designated airport or FAA property or commercial space launch sites. Facilities and equipment means FAA communications, navigation, surveillance, and weather systems. Weather systems include hygrothermometers, Automated Weather Observing System (AWOS), Automatic Surface Observation System (ASOS), Stand Alone Weather Sensors (SAWS), Runway Visual Range (RVR), and other essentially similar facilities and equipment that provide for modernization or enhancement of the service provided by these facilities. Navigational aids include Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range (VOR), VOR Test facility (VOT), co-located VORs and Tactical Aircraft Control and Navigation (TACAN) (VORTAC), Low Power TACAN, Instrument Landing System (ILS) equipment or components of ILS equipment (establishment or relocation of an ILS is not included; an EA is normally required; see § 1.5(c)(8)), Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS), Local Area Augmentation System (LAAS), other essentially similar facilities and equipment, and equipment that provides for modernization or enhancement of the service provided by that facility, such as conversion of VOR to VORTAC, conversion to Doppler VOR (DVOR), or conversion of ILS to category II or III standards. FAA Order 6820.10, VOR, VOR/DME and VORTAC Siting Criteria governs the installation of VOR/VOT/VORTAC-type equipment. These facilities are typically located within a 150 feet by 150 feet parcel, with a total structure height reaching approximately 50 feet in height. (ATO, ARP, AST)

Extraordinary circumstances

• b. Circumstances. An extraordinary circumstance exists if a proposed action involves any of the following circumstances and has the potential for a significant impact:
  (1) An adverse effect on cultural resources protected under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, 54 U.S.C. §300101 et seq.;
  (2) An impact on properties protected under Section 4(f);
  (3) An impact on natural, ecological, or scenic resources of Federal, state, tribal, or local significance (e.g., federally listed or proposed endangered, threatened, or candidate species, or designated or proposed critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544);
  (4) An impact on the following resources: resources protected by the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 661-667d; wetlands; floodplains; coastal zones; national marine sanctuaries; wilderness areas; National Resource Conservation Service-designated prime and unique farmlands; energy supply and natural resources; resources protected under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1287, and rivers or river segments listed on the Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI); and solid waste management;
  (5) A division or disruption of an established community, or a disruption of orderly, planned development, or an inconsistency with plans or goals that have been adopted by the community in which the project is located;
  (6) An increase in congestion from surface transportation (by causing decrease in level of service below acceptable levels determined by appropriate transportation agency, such as a highway agency);
  (7) An impact on noise levels of noise sensitive areas;
  (8) An impact on air quality or violation of Federal, state, tribal, or local air quality standards under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7671q;
  (9) An impact on water quality, sole source aquifers, a public water supply system, or state or tribal water quality standards established under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, and the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 300f-300j-26;
  (10) Impacts on the quality of the human environment that are likely to be highly controversial on environmental grounds. The term “highly controversial on environmental grounds” means there is a substantial dispute involving reasonable disagreement over the degree, extent, or nature of a proposed action’s environmental impacts or over the action’s risks of causing environmental harm. Mere opposition is not sufficient for a proposed action or its impacts to be considered highly controversial on environmental grounds. Opposition on environmental grounds by a Federal, state, or local government agency or by a tribe or a substantial number of the persons affected by the action should be considered in determining whether or not reasonable disagreement regarding the impacts of a proposed action exists. If in doubt about whether a proposed action is highly controversial on environmental grounds, consult the LOB/SO’s headquarters environmental division, AEE, Regional Counsel, or AGC for assistance;
  (11) Likelihood to be inconsistent with any Federal, state, tribal, or local law relating to the environmental aspects of the proposed action; or
  (12) Likelihood to directly, indirectly, or cumulatively create a significant impact on the human environment, including, but not limited to, actions likely to cause a significant lighting impact on residential areas or commercial use of business properties, likely to cause a significant impact on the visual nature of surrounding land uses, likely to cause environmental contamination by hazardous materials, or likely to disturb an existing hazardous material contamination site such that new environmental contamination risks are created.