DECISION MEMO FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION USDA-Forest Service Hiawatha National Forest Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site Forest Service Facility Realignment and Enhancement Act of 2005 Chippewa County, Michigan Hiawatha #2193 DECISION Description of Decision I have decided to sell a parcel of land with buildings located at the Sault Ste. Marie Ranger District. The site is located within the City of Sault Ste. Marie, being Part of the SW¼ of the SE¼, Section 13, T47N-R1W. The site address is 4000 I-75 Business Spur, Sault Ste. Marie, MI 49783. This land sale is authorized pursuant to the Forest Service Facility Realignment and Enhancement Act of 2005 (FSFREA). The FSFREA authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to sell excess buildings and land under the jurisdiction of the Forest Service and to retain proceeds for maintenance and rehabilitation of Forest Service facilities. The Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site was originally acquired from Sault Savings Bank by warranty deed dated 11/19/1986, recorded at Liber 486, pages 108-113, under authority of the Organic Act of 08/03/1956. The on-site improvements consist of an office building of approximately 5,013 square feet between the main level and partial basement with an attached 4-stall vehicle garage (additional 1,056 square feet), paved drive and parking areas, and landscaping. Utility services are installed. The structure was constructed in 1974 and was used as a bank until the Forest Service acquired it in 1986. The improvements have no historic significance. Purpose of Decision The purpose of this proposal is to sell the property and facilities that are no longer needed by the Forest Service through the FSFREA, thereby eliminating excess administrative buildings and unnecessary maintenance costs. The sale receipts would be used for facility demolition/construction/re-construction at the Raco Work Center. The Hiawatha National Forest does not have a future need for the Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site. The site is identified in the Forest Facilities Master Plan as no longer needed for administrative purposes. The plan also says the facilities and site are in the process of being disposed of through land sale. Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 1
Use of the proceeds of the sale shall be available to the Secretary for the acquisition, construction, or improvements of needed administrative facilities and associated land in connection with the Hiawatha National Forest and, to the extent possible, the acquisition of land and interests in land in the State of Michigan. Due to recent commercial business development activities in the neighborhood and no known direct sale opportunities, disposal through competitive sale should maximize the financial return to the United States. Scoping and Public Involvement Since the 1996 consolidation of the Sault Ste. Marie and St. Ignace Ranger Districts, decommissioning of this administrative site has been identified in Facilities Master Plans (1992 and 2008). The Forest conducted internal scoping during preparation of the 2008 Facilities Master Plan. The Facilities Master Plan recommended disposing of this property. In March 2009, initial contacts were made with Senator Carl Levin, Senator Debbie Stabenow, and Congressman Bart Stupak s offices. On May 22, 2009, a HNF news release was sent to several Upper Peninsula newspapers with distribution within or near the boundaries of the Forest. The Sault Evening News in Sault Ste. Marie, The Mining Journal in Marquette, the Eagle Herald in Menominee, The Daily Press in Escanaba, and the Iron Mountain Daily News in Iron Mountain (Dickinson County and part of Wisconsin), as well as other Michigan Forests (Ottawa and Huron- Manistee). Public involvement for this project began with a July 6, 2009, mailing of a scoping letter that also included the 30-day notice and comment period. The letter was mailed to 75 individuals, organizations, and public agencies and described the proposed action and Civil Rights Impact Analysis. The mailing list included area tribal chairpersons, landowners adjacent to the project area, the Chippewa County Board, township chairpersons, and state and federal elected officials. A legal notice was published in the Sault Evening News on July 9, 2009. In 2008, an inquiry was received from a development company representative working in the Sault Ste. Marie area. He requested future sale notices for the property. Two phone calls were received in response to the scoping and 30-day comment process. Based on analysis of comments, two non-significant issues were identified. Commenter 1 called and was interested in bidding on the demolition of the Raco and Moran worksite buildings. This activity will take place in implementing a separate proposed action and does not take issue with the proposed action or no action alternative and is beyond the scope of the proposed action. Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 2
Commenter 2 called and expressed concern over the closure of the Sault Ste. Marie office and wondered where Forest information and service would be available. She hoped the Sault Ste. Marie office would remain open, at least for several days per week. This comment will be addressed by developing an alternate site where Forest users can receive Forest-based information and services. The decision to provide public service was already made at higher decision level in the HNF Facilities Master Plan in 2008 (pp. 7). REASON FOR CATEGORICALLY EXCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION: FSFREA NEPA Requirements Section 504(d)(4) of the FSFREA provides as follows: Environmental Review The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) shall apply to the conveyance of administrative sites under this title, except that, in any environmental review or analysis required under such Act for the conveyance of an administrative site under this title, the Secretary is only required to (A) analyze the most reasonably foreseeable use of the administrative site, as determined through a market analysis; (B) determine whether or not to reserve any right, title, or interest in the administrative site under subsection (a)(3); and (C) evaluate the alternative of not conveying the administrative site, consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. A) Based on a market analysis, I conclude that the reasonable foreseeable use is that the property would be purchased for commercial development. B) I have determined that the Forest Service has no interest in retaining any rights in the Sault Ste. Marie administrative site. The HNF Facilities Master Plan (pp. 7), approved in 2008, recommends disposal of this property. C) I evaluated the alternative of not conveying this administrative site and concluded the Forest Service has no need to retain ownership of this property. Furthermore, continued Forest Service ownership would require spending money for maintenance, thereby reducing funds available for other Forest Service facilities and programs. Decisions may be categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment when they are within one of the categories identified by the Secretary at 7 CFR part 1b.3 or a category list in 36 CFR 220.6(d) and there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the proposed action. Category of Exclusion I have determined that the proposed action may be categorically excluded from documentation in an environmental impact statement or in an environmental assessment. I have made this determination based on the following findings: Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 3
1) I find that the proposed action meets 36 CFR 220.6(d)(7), Sale or exchange of land or interest in land and resources where resulting land uses remain essentially the same. This action involves an administrative site sale resulting in the disposal of federal lands where the land uses are expected to remain essentially the same. According to a Forest Service Market Analysis done in the fall of 2008, commercial use is the concluded highest and best use and reasonably foreseeable use for the tract. Two commercial development scenarios are considered likely due to historic development trends: a) alteration to suit particular investor or b) razing in favor of the ideal development. With the parcel s zoning of B-3 General Business and the somewhat limited tract size for development purposes, the larger commercial ventures which generally raze current improvements to build ideal developments may not find the site as suitable, therefore, it is difficult to determine if a buyer would raze or alter the existing improvements. 2) I find that the proposed action does not involve extraordinary circumstances, as documented in the following section. Relationship to Extraordinary Circumstances An interdisciplinary team of specialists including an archaeologist, realty specialist, geologist, hydrologist, recreation manager, botanist, wildlife biologist, and engineer provided review, documentation, and reports on their findings. The summary of the findings follows: The Forest archaeologist completed a historic records review and report on cultural and historic resources. The Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer provided concurrence that no cultural or historic resources are located on the property. A biological evaluation was completed on November 17, 2009. It determined that there was no habitat present for any threatened, endangered, or sensitive plant or wildlife species and concluded that there were no effects. A preliminary report was prepared by the Forest geologist a March 27, 2008, field inspection. Database records, courthouse records, and Forest Service records were reviewed. Contract lead-based paint (LBP) and asbestos surveys were done in July and August 2008. There is LBP and two small areas of asbestos (patch area on roof and linoleum in main floor hallway adjacent to basement staircase and back door). The Forest will take any and all necessary actions to comply with the requirements of 120(h)(3) of the CERCLA and 504(d)(3) of the FSFREA. In accordance with 504(d)(3) of FSFREA, requirements to abate LBP and asbestos-containing materials (ACM) are waived with respect to conveyances of administrative sites under this authority. However, the Forest Service is required to provide notice to the person or entity acquiring the site of the presence of any LBP or ACM, and to obtain written assurance from that person or entity that they will comply with all federal, state, and local laws relating to the management of the LBP and ACM. Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 4
On July 17, 2008, Edward Radecki, Asbestos Inspector employed by Mackinac Environmental Technology, Inc., tested the buildings on this site for ACM and found small areas of asbestos (patch area on roof and linoleum in main floor hallway adjacent to basement staircase and back door). On July 15, 2008, James D. Armstrong, Lead Inspector and Risk Assessor employed by ARM Industrial & Environmental Consultants, Inc. (retained by Mackinac Environmental Technology, Inc.), tested the buildings for LBP and found none. To meet the assurance requirement of 504(d)(3)(B) of FSFREA, the following clause, provided in a March 22, 2006, letter from the Director of Engineering to Regional Foresters, will be included in the invitation for bid, and other documentation associated with the transfer: [Person/entity acquiring site] hereby agrees to comply with any and all applicable Federal, State, and local laws relating to the management of lead-based paint and asbestos-containing building material associated with the property, including but not limited to, any such laws relating to the mitigation, abatement, remediation, cleanup, renovation, demolition, and disposal of lead-based paint and asbestos-containing building material. Accordingly, [person/entity acquiring site] hereby agrees to indemnify, release, defend, and hold harmless the United States, its agencies, employees, agents, assigns, and successors from and against any liability, judgment, claim, penalty, fine, or other adverse action (whether legal or equitable in nature, and including without limitation, court costs and attorneys fees) brought against the United States after the date of this agreement by any person or entity under any Federal, State, or local law, including but not limited to environmental and tort laws, with respect to any lead-based paint and/or asbestos-containing building material associated with the property. This covenant to indemnify, release, defend, and hold harmless the United States shall survive the subsequent conveyance of all or any portion of the property to any person and shall be construed as running with the real property, and may be enforced by the United States in a court of competent jurisdiction. A floodplains and wetlands report was completed by the zone hydrologist on January 28, 2010. Ashmun Creek (a/k/a Hollow Creek and Hotton Creek) is located behind the office and parking areas, with the property boundary at or near the stream channel. The floodplain/wetland areas are not entirely on NFS land with the floodplain varying from about 30-60 feet in width and the wetlands occupying approximately the same area as the floodplain. Disposal is allowed under Section 4 and Section 3(a) of Executive Orders 11990 (wetlands) and 11988 (floodplains), respectively. The EO s state that federal agencies shall (a) reference in the conveyance those uses that are restricted under identified federal, state or local wetland or floodplain regulations; and (b) attach other appropriate restrictions to the uses of properties by the grantee or purchase and any successor, except where prohibited by law; or (3) withhold such properties from conveyance. Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 5
Disposal of the Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site can be made consistent with EO s 11988 and 11990 by disclosing the floodplain and wetland situation in the Notice of Proposed Realty Action and property sale advertisements, and by protecting the wetland disposal in deed language including state, federal, and local floodplain/wetland regulations. A Minerals Potential Report was completed by the Forest geologist February 28, 2008. The Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site has no outstanding or reserved minerals. There is very low potential for this area to yield an economic deposit of useable mineral materials. Mineral resources with potential value are those used in construction or for industrial purposes (i.e., sandstone, limestone, dolomite, sand, gravel). These minerals have value if there is a market for them in the area and a party is willing to extract or develop them. This parcel has little potential for minerals to have economic value. It is proposed that the mineral estate be transferred with the surface estate. The Land Surveyor completed the Land Description Verification form January 12, 2007. There do not appear to be any encroachments. The property will be sold as a whole. I have also determined that my decision is consistent with the Forest Land and Resource Management Plan for the Hiawatha National Forest. Public Interest Determination I have determined that the public interest will be well-served by the sale of this property. There will be no need for reservations in the conveyance to protect the public interest; however, floodplain/wetland deed language may be necessary. I have considered the following factors in making this determination: Decision Disposal of this unneeded administrative site property will achieve better management of federal lands and resources. Sale of the property is consistent with the Forest Plan and the Facilities Master Plan. Disposal of floodplain/wetland area can be mitigated through deed language. I have decided to complete this land sale as proposed to convey the Sault Ste. Marie Administrative Site (4.08 acres) and to have the proceeds of the sale be available to the Secretary as outlined in FSFLREA. Consideration of third party interests on the parcel will be as follows: Cloverland Electric Cooperative s sewer line special use permit can be protected with an easement executed at closing by the purchaser. Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 6
U.S. Department of Transportation easement to Michigan Department of Transportation for the bike path provides adequate protection of that use. Outstanding rights (utility, use restrictions, Hotton Creek, and street, road or highway interests) are adequately protected through conveyances prior to federal acquisition. Fixtures will remain in building and all personal property (e.g., furniture, cabinets, files, computers, office equipment and supplies, appliances, field equipment, employee personal items, vehicles, garage contents, signage) will be removed prior to completion of sale. Administrative Review and Appeal This decision is not subject to appeal since only supportive comments were received (36 CFR 215.12(e)(1)). Implementation The implementation of this project may begin immediately. Contact Person Steve Christiansen Sharon Hagstrom District Ranger Lands Program Manager Sault Ste. Marie/St. Ignace Ranger District Supervisor s Office Lands Section 1798 West US-2 820 Rains Drive St. Ignace, MI 49781 Gladstone, MI 49837 906/643-7900; sjchristiansen@fs.fed.us 906/428-5889; shagstrom@fs.fed.us (for) Janel M. Crooks 05/23/2012 JO REYER, Forest Supervisor Date Hiawatha National Forest Decision Memo for Categorical Exclusion Page 7