IRLNews:2021-03-01/NASA Causeway Bridges and Beyond: Difference between revisions

From Indian River Lagoon Project
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 17: Line 17:
It wasn’t until 1970 that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed to regulate the environmental impact of Federal Agencies. NEPA requires federal organizations to adhere to a defined environmental review of their activities.<ref>[https://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/process.html NASA and the National Environmental Policy Act], retrieved 2021-02-28</ref>
It wasn’t until 1970 that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed to regulate the environmental impact of Federal Agencies. NEPA requires federal organizations to adhere to a defined environmental review of their activities.<ref>[https://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/process.html NASA and the National Environmental Policy Act], retrieved 2021-02-28</ref>


There are 4 levels to a NEPA review, the first is Categorical Exclusion (CATEX), which allows a federal agency to list any activities that should be excluded from environmental review.<ref>[https://environmental.ksc.nasa.gov/environmentalplanning/nepa KSC NEPA], retrieved 2021-02-28</ref> NASA has Categorically Excluded most all of real property in the name of national security.<ref>[https://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/catex.html NASA Categorical Exclusions],Quote="
There are 4 levels to a NEPA review, the first is Categorical Exclusion (CATEX), which allows a federal agency to list any activities that should be excluded from environmental review.<ref>[https://environmental.ksc.nasa.gov/environmentalplanning/nepa KSC NEPA], retrieved 2021-02-28</ref> NASA has Categorically Excluded many activities and assets in the name of national security.<ref>[https://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/catex.html NASA Categorical Exclusions], retrieved 2021-02-28</ref>
<ol style="list-style-type: lower-roman;"><b>Real and Personal Property Activities</b>
<li>Acquisition, transfer, or disposal of any personal property, or personal property rights or interests.
</li><li>Granting or acceptance of easements, leases, licenses, rights-of-entry, and permits to use NASA-controlled property or any other real property for activities which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section. This assumes NASA has included any terms and conditions necessary to ensure protection of the environment and any required notices in the transfer documentation, as applicable.
</li><li>Transfer or disposal of real property or real property rights or interests if the change in use is one which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section.
</li><li>Transfer of real property administrative control to another Federal agency, including the return of public domain lands to the Department of the Interior (DOI) or other Federal agencies, and reporting of property as excess and surplus to the General Services Administration (GSA) for disposal.
</li><li>Acquisition of real property (including facilities) where the land use will not change substantially."
</li></ol>, retrieved 2021-02-28</ref>


==SR405 Indian River Bridge Rebuild==
==SR405 Indian River Bridge Rebuild==
Line 33: Line 26:
<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">NASA's project to rebuild the 1964 Indian River Bridge avoided a NEPA environmental review when NASA Categorically Excluded the project, and then named the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a co-agency on the project. As a federal co-agency the FHWA inherited the bridge project’s Categorical Exclusions from NASA.</span>
<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">NASA's project to rebuild the 1964 Indian River Bridge avoided a NEPA environmental review when NASA Categorically Excluded the project, and then named the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a co-agency on the project. As a federal co-agency the FHWA inherited the bridge project’s Categorical Exclusions from NASA.</span>


<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">In 2017, NASA signed over ownership of the SR405 Indian River Causeway to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)<ref>[https://disposal.gsa.gov/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00Pt0000003L7XtEAK KSC Targeted Asset Review 2017-07-14 (PDF 18pp 685KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28</ref> . A convenient 2016 FHWA - FDOT Agreement allowed FHWA to easily transfer the rebuild project's Categorical Exclusions to FDOT.<ref>[https://www.fdot.gov/docs/default-source/info/co/news/newsreleases/121416-FDOT-FHWA-Environmental-Agreement-Will-Save-Time-and-Money.pdf FDOT - FHWA NEPA Agreement 2016-12-14 (PDF 1p 150KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28.</ref></span>
<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">In 2017, NASA signed over ownership of the SR405 Indian River Causeway to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)<ref name=NASAGSASR405TAR>[https://disposal.gsa.gov/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00Pt0000003L7XtEAK KSC Targeted Asset Review 2017-07-14 (PDF 18pp 685KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28</ref> . A convenient 2016 FHWA - FDOT Agreement allowed FHWA to easily transfer the rebuild project's Categorical Exclusions to FDOT.<ref name=FDOTMOU2016>[https://www.fdot.gov/docs/default-source/info/co/news/newsreleases/121416-FDOT-FHWA-Environmental-Agreement-Will-Save-Time-and-Money.pdf FDOT - FHWA NEPA Agreement 2016-12-14 (PDF 1p 150KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28.</ref></span>


<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">And so, FDOT now owns the SR405 Indian River Causeway, and the state's rebuild project is exempt from environmental review.</span>  <small>(Recanted on 5/27/2021)</small>
<span style="text-decoration: line-through;">And so, FDOT now owns the SR405 Indian River Causeway, and the state's rebuild project is exempt from environmental review.</span>  <small>(Recanted on 5/27/2021)</small>
Line 41: Line 34:
*2015 NASA-KSC begins planning SR405 Indian River Causeway rebuild project.
*2015 NASA-KSC begins planning SR405 Indian River Causeway rebuild project.


*2016 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signs a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) giving Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) the ability to perform NEPA environmental assessments on FHWA projects in Florida.<ref>[https://www.fdot.gov/docs/default-source/info/co/news/newsreleases/121416-FDOT-FHWA-Environmental-Agreement-Will-Save-Time-and-Money.pdf FDOT - FHWA NEPA Agreement 2016-12-14 (PDF 1p 150KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28.</ref>
*2016 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signs a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) giving Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) the ability to perform NEPA environmental assessments on FHWA projects in Florida.<ref name=FDOTMOU2016 />


*2016 NASA names FHWA as a federal co-agency on the project.
*2016 NASA names FHWA as a federal co-agency on the project.


*2017 NASA GSA Targeted Asset Review recommends passing SR405 Indian River Causeway ownership to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)<ref>[https://disposal.gsa.gov/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00Pt0000003L7XtEAK KSC Targeted Asset Review 2017-07-14 (PDF 18pp 685KB)], retrieved on 2021-02-28</ref> The bridge now falls under NASA's list of categorical exclusions as a targeted real property asset.
*2017 NASA GSA Targeted Asset Review recommends passing SR405 Indian River Causeway ownership to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)<ref name=NASAGSASR405TAR /> The bridge now falls under NASA's list of categorical exclusions as a targeted real property asset.<ref>[https://www.nasa.gov/green/nepa/catex.html NASA Real Property Categorical Exclusions],Quote="
<ol style="list-style-type: lower-roman;"><b>Real and Personal Property Activities</b>
<li>Acquisition, transfer, or disposal of any personal property, or personal property rights or interests.
</li><li>Granting or acceptance of easements, leases, licenses, rights-of-entry, and permits to use NASA-controlled property or any other real property for activities which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section. This assumes NASA has included any terms and conditions necessary to ensure protection of the environment and any required notices in the transfer documentation, as applicable.
</li><li>Transfer or disposal of real property or real property rights or interests if the change in use is one which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section.
</li><li>Transfer of real property administrative control to another Federal agency, including the return of public domain lands to the Department of the Interior (DOI) or other Federal agencies, and reporting of property as excess and surplus to the General Services Administration (GSA) for disposal.
</li><li>Acquisition of real property (including facilities) where the land use will not change substantially."
</li></ol>, retrieved 2021-02-28</ref>


*2018 FDOT and USCG serve public notice and hold public hearings presenting the Project's Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study, and completed construction plans.<ref>[https://spacecoasttpo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/NASA-Cswy-Flyer-FINAL-12-6-18.pdf NASA Causeway Bridge Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Flyer 2018-12-06 (PDF 2pp 1.78MB) ], retrieved 2021-05-27.</ref>
*2018 FDOT and USCG serve public notice and hold public hearings presenting the Project's Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study, and completed construction plans.<ref>[https://spacecoasttpo.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/NASA-Cswy-Flyer-FINAL-12-6-18.pdf NASA Causeway Bridge Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Flyer 2018-12-06 (PDF 2pp 1.78MB) ], retrieved 2021-05-27.</ref>
Line 64: Line 64:
The 2017 KSC Master Plan displays a map showing over 8,000 acres of "developable" property available for commercial development, including areas deep in the heart of a National Wildlife Refuge and a National Seashore.<ref>[https://masterplan.ksc.nasa.gov/-/media/Master%20Plan/PDF-Word-Doc/NASA-KSC-Executive-Summary-2017.ashx KSC Master Plan 2017 (PDF 10pp 16.12MB)], retrieved 2021-02-28.</ref>  
The 2017 KSC Master Plan displays a map showing over 8,000 acres of "developable" property available for commercial development, including areas deep in the heart of a National Wildlife Refuge and a National Seashore.<ref>[https://masterplan.ksc.nasa.gov/-/media/Master%20Plan/PDF-Word-Doc/NASA-KSC-Executive-Summary-2017.ashx KSC Master Plan 2017 (PDF 10pp 16.12MB)], retrieved 2021-02-28.</ref>  


NASA is the reason these wilderness areas exist in the first place. KSC set aside a large land parcel as a buffer zone, and they gave it to the to the National Park Service (NPS), and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), to manage as Canaveral National Seashore (CANA) and Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR).  
Kennedy Space Center is the reason these wilderness areas exist in the first place. KSC set aside a large land parcel as a buffer zone, and they gave it to the to the National Park Service (NPS), and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), to manage as Canaveral National Seashore (CANA) and Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR).  


Now, NASA is offering up the land it set aside as public wilderness areas for commercial development. [https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Merritt_Island/Proposed_Shiloh_Launch_Complex.html.aspx Fish and Wildlife Service: Proposed Shiloh Launch Complex in Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge]
Now, NASA is offering up the land it set aside as public wilderness areas for commercial development. [https://www.fws.gov/refuge/Merritt_Island/Proposed_Shiloh_Launch_Complex.html.aspx Fish and Wildlife Service: Proposed Shiloh Launch Complex in Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge]
Line 70: Line 70:
For decades, we have trusted NASA to be good environmental stewards for the largest stretch of undeveloped land on Florida’s East Coast, yet it appears that the MINWR and CANA wilderness areas are in grave jeopardy.<ref>[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TMXrTVViIeBulfB6zjHTsS9ihQRtSdf- Shiloh-FWS Environmental Statement Letter 2014-01-03], retrieved on 2021-02-28</ref>  
For decades, we have trusted NASA to be good environmental stewards for the largest stretch of undeveloped land on Florida’s East Coast, yet it appears that the MINWR and CANA wilderness areas are in grave jeopardy.<ref>[https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TMXrTVViIeBulfB6zjHTsS9ihQRtSdf- Shiloh-FWS Environmental Statement Letter 2014-01-03], retrieved on 2021-02-28</ref>  


We stand to lose a National Wildlife Refuge, a National Seashore, and numerous archeology sites if NASA's plans for Kennedy Space Center are successful.
We stand to lose a National Wildlife Refuge, a National Seashore, and numerous archeological sites if NASA's plans for Kennedy Space Center are successful.




Latest revision as of 18:28, January 15, 2022

News Form

Indian River Lagoon News
Indian River Lagoon News
News
NASA passes ownership of the SR405 Indian River Causeway to the Florida Department of Transportation along with a decades old categorical exclusion that exempts the bridge replacement from environmental review.
Indian River Lagoon News
NASA Causeway Bridges and Beyond
IRLNews, Author
March 1, 2021
Opinion-Editorial
Titusville - The 1960's NASA causeways across the Indian and Banana River lagoons were constructed during a furious Cold War space race that completely disregarded the environment in the name of national security.

It wasn’t until 1970 that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) was passed to regulate the environmental impact of Federal Agencies. NEPA requires federal organizations to adhere to a defined environmental review of their activities.[1]

There are 4 levels to a NEPA review, the first is Categorical Exclusion (CATEX), which allows a federal agency to list any activities that should be excluded from environmental review.[2] NASA has Categorically Excluded many activities and assets in the name of national security.[3]

SR405 Indian River Bridge Rebuild

SR405

NASA is the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary's largest shareholder, and their mission statement includes promises of environmental stewardship, yet they continue to perpetuate outdated causeways that have constricted water flow in the Indian River and Banana River lagoon for decades.

NASA's project to rebuild the 1964 Indian River Bridge avoided a NEPA environmental review when NASA Categorically Excluded the project, and then named the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a co-agency on the project. As a federal co-agency the FHWA inherited the bridge project’s Categorical Exclusions from NASA.

In 2017, NASA signed over ownership of the SR405 Indian River Causeway to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)[4] . A convenient 2016 FHWA - FDOT Agreement allowed FHWA to easily transfer the rebuild project's Categorical Exclusions to FDOT.[5]

And so, FDOT now owns the SR405 Indian River Causeway, and the state's rebuild project is exempt from environmental review. (Recanted on 5/27/2021)

(05/27/2021 Edit)

Timeline

  • 2015 NASA-KSC begins planning SR405 Indian River Causeway rebuild project.
  • 2016 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) signs a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) giving Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) the ability to perform NEPA environmental assessments on FHWA projects in Florida.[5]
  • 2016 NASA names FHWA as a federal co-agency on the project.
  • 2017 NASA GSA Targeted Asset Review recommends passing SR405 Indian River Causeway ownership to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)[4] The bridge now falls under NASA's list of categorical exclusions as a targeted real property asset.[6]
  • 2018 FDOT and USCG serve public notice and hold public hearings presenting the Project's Development and Environmental (PD&E) Study, and completed construction plans.[7]
  • 2020 FDOT Office of Environmental Management gives the project a NEPA Type 2 Categorical Exclusion.
  • 2021 FDOT owns NASA's SR405 Indian River Causeway, has categorically excluded the project from an environmental impact study (EIS), and plans to begin construction in the fall of 2021.

(End Edit)

A 57 year old earthen berm causeway; hurriedly constructed during the Cold War; built years before environmental regulations were enacted; will continue to constrict over 80% of the Indian River lagoon at Addison Point.[8]

Unfortunately, the Indian River Bridge project's lack of a thorough environmental impact study is just an indication of what is ahead for the national estuary as environmental stewardship transitions from KSC Environmental Branch professionals to state run agencies.

And Beyond

KSC Property Suitability

NASA is quickly working to divest it’s non-mission critical facilities and vacant land at Kennedy Space Center (KSC).

The 2017 KSC Master Plan displays a map showing over 8,000 acres of "developable" property available for commercial development, including areas deep in the heart of a National Wildlife Refuge and a National Seashore.[9]

Kennedy Space Center is the reason these wilderness areas exist in the first place. KSC set aside a large land parcel as a buffer zone, and they gave it to the to the National Park Service (NPS), and Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), to manage as Canaveral National Seashore (CANA) and Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge (MINWR).

Now, NASA is offering up the land it set aside as public wilderness areas for commercial development. Fish and Wildlife Service: Proposed Shiloh Launch Complex in Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge

For decades, we have trusted NASA to be good environmental stewards for the largest stretch of undeveloped land on Florida’s East Coast, yet it appears that the MINWR and CANA wilderness areas are in grave jeopardy.[10]

We stand to lose a National Wildlife Refuge, a National Seashore, and numerous archeological sites if NASA's plans for Kennedy Space Center are successful.


A National Space Center Becomes A State Run Space Port

The 2017 KSC Master Plan outlines NASA’s intention to transition day to day operation of the launch center to Space Florida, in what is to become Cape Canaveral Spaceport.

Cape Canaveral Spaceport's 2017 Master Plan[11] makes no mention of the environment; their mission is to provide public launch facilities for the commercial space industry's tourists and freight.

In the future, Space Florida's spaceport, and it’s many commercial tenants, will be individually responsible for their parcel of Kennedy Space Center's environment.


  • Should a 2021 state run commercial spaceport inherit the same environmental exclusions that NASA's KSC received during the 1960's Cold War?


  • Should our National wilderness areas be parceled out for commercial space development?


  • Can commercial space organizations be good environmental stewards for our National Wildlife Refuge, National Seashore, and the lagoons of the Indian River Lagoon National Estuary?


To be continued...

See Also

Web Links

Documents


References

  1. ↑ NASA and the National Environmental Policy Act, retrieved 2021-02-28
  2. ↑ KSC NEPA, retrieved 2021-02-28
  3. ↑ NASA Categorical Exclusions, retrieved 2021-02-28
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 KSC Targeted Asset Review 2017-07-14 (PDF 18pp 685KB), retrieved on 2021-02-28
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 FDOT - FHWA NEPA Agreement 2016-12-14 (PDF 1p 150KB), retrieved on 2021-02-28.
  6. ↑ NASA Real Property Categorical Exclusions,Quote="
      Real and Personal Property Activities
    1. Acquisition, transfer, or disposal of any personal property, or personal property rights or interests.
    2. Granting or acceptance of easements, leases, licenses, rights-of-entry, and permits to use NASA-controlled property or any other real property for activities which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section. This assumes NASA has included any terms and conditions necessary to ensure protection of the environment and any required notices in the transfer documentation, as applicable.
    3. Transfer or disposal of real property or real property rights or interests if the change in use is one which, if conducted by NASA, would be categorically excluded in accordance with this section.
    4. Transfer of real property administrative control to another Federal agency, including the return of public domain lands to the Department of the Interior (DOI) or other Federal agencies, and reporting of property as excess and surplus to the General Services Administration (GSA) for disposal.
    5. Acquisition of real property (including facilities) where the land use will not change substantially."
    , retrieved 2021-02-28
  7. ↑ NASA Causeway Bridge Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Flyer 2018-12-06 (PDF 2pp 1.78MB) , retrieved 2021-05-27.
  8. ↑ Info:NASA Causeway Indian River
  9. ↑ KSC Master Plan 2017 (PDF 10pp 16.12MB), retrieved 2021-02-28.
  10. ↑ Shiloh-FWS Environmental Statement Letter 2014-01-03, retrieved on 2021-02-28
  11. ↑ Cape Canaveral Spaceport's 2017 Master Plan, retrieved 2021-02-28.
Location: Estuary: Titusville: Brevard County
Source: Opinion-Editorial. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the guest authors and do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of Indian River Lagoon News or it's editors. Published by Indian River Lagoon News on March 01, 2021. Retrieved on March 01, 2021.
Topic: Brevard County Locale
Poster: AdminPosted: 02/28/2021
Indian River Lagoon News - 2021-03-01/NASA Causeway Bridges and Beyond
Home> News 2024
Permalink: https://indianriverlagoonnews.org/guide/index.php/IRLNews:2021-03-01/NASA_Causeway_Bridges_and_Beyond
NASA passes ownership of the SR405 Indian River Causeway to the Florida Department of Transportation along with a decades old categorical exclusion that exempts the bridge replacement from environmental review.


Retrieved from "https://indianriverlagoonnews.org/guide/index.php?title=IRLNews:2021-03-01/NASA_Causeway_Bridges_and_Beyond&oldid=24135"