Modified Charleston Method (MCM)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Restoration and Regulation Discussion Joseph P. DaVia US Army Corps of Engineers-Baltimore Chief, Maryland.
Advertisements

Coal Mining Activities Mark A. Taylor Huntington District Corps of Engineers.
401 Water Quality Certification South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Galveston District Interim Stream Tool Lessons Learned a Year Later.
Sections 10 and 404: NMFS’ Oversight, Concerns and Actions
BUILDING STRONG ® Mitigation in a Modern World or 33 CFR 332 and You Presented by Jayson M Hudson To the Texas Association of Environmental Professionals.
Permitting and MVN MCM Overview
Bill Orme, Senior Environmental Scientist, State Water Board Liz Haven, Asst. Deputy Director, Surface Water Regulatory Branch, State Water Board Dyan.
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation Fish, Wildlife & Marine Resources Briefing on Proposed Amendments to Endangered Species Regulations.
US Army Corps of Engineers One Corps Serving The Army and the Nation U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program.
What is an In Lieu Fee Program ? Clean Water Act - Section 404 : “no overall net loss” of wetland acreage and functions. One mechanism for providing Compensatory.
Wetland Assessment Methods FHWA Needs. Laws and Regulations National Environmental Policy Act Section 404 CWA Regulatory Program Executive Order 11990,
KEY CONCEPTS OF MITIGATION BANKING March 27, 2003 US Army Corps of Engineers Jacksonville District.
Environmental Consultants BMI Environmental Services, LLC AN OVERVIEW OF THE WETLANDS REGULATORY PROCESS AS IT RELATES TO THE PROPOSED OCEAN SPRINGS HIGH.
“Insert” then choose “Picture” – select your picture. Right click your picture and “Send to back”. The world’s leading sustainability consultancy Legislation.
Spectra Energy Partners Texas Eastern Transmission, LP Ohio Pipeline Energy Network Project (OPEN) Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification.
1 Wetland Regulatory Programs Department of Natural Resources Legislative Audit Bureau July 2007.
Clean Water Act Section 404 Basics Clean Water Act Section 404  Regulates discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S., including.
U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy.
Oregon Jobs and Transportation Act Section 18 CETAS Director’s Meeting Action Items.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Coordinating U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Permits with Species Conservation Plans November 16,
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Regulatory Program Glen Justis Chief, Policy & Administration Regulatory Division Alaska District 2010 Building.
Governor’s Executive Order: Supporting and Strengthening the State’s Wetland Policy 6 th Annual Wetlands Conference January 30, 2013 Dave Weirens,
Compensatory Mitigation in Coastal Louisiana Keith Lovell, Administrator Office of Coastal Management Department of Natural Resources 10/03/121.
1 Wetland and Riparian Protection Resolution. 2 Wetland Policy Development Team State Water Board Staff: Val Connor Bill Orme Cliff Harvey San Francisco.
Wetlands Mitigation Policy Sudbury Wetlands Administration Bylaw April 27, 2015.
WETLANDS and ODOT Environmental Services Oregon Department of Transportation.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act 404(b)(1) Guidelines Field Exercise
WETLANDS and LOCAL PROGRAMS Environmental Services Oregon Department of Transportation.
BUILDING STRONG ® 1 Regional General Permit (RGP) 31 Interagency Meeting June 11, 2015.
Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultations. The Endangered Species Act Sec. 2:Purpose Sec. 3:Definitions Sec. 4:Listing, Recovery, Monitoring Sec.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® 2012 Changes to Stream Mitigation Procedures and Guidelines Mike Moxey USACE, Mobile District IRT Chair May.
Presented by: The Ohio Department of Transportation 1 Land Use Managing the Environmental & Project Development Process.
Building Strong! 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Kimberly McLaughlin Program Manager Headquarters Operations and Regulatory Community of.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
NOAA Restoration Center Implementing the Gulf Regional Sediment Management Master Plan …responding to an ongoing emergency, improving responses to new.
Number of Copies Agency Submissions & Comments. Coordination ESRs are reviewed by OES and coordinated with resource agencies as part of the NEPA review.
OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT Karl Morgan JUNE 2013 Karl Morgan JUNE 2013.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AND TECHNIQUES.
Fish and Wildlife : Regulatory Framework and Challenges Cherise M. Oram STOEL RIVES LLP Hydrovision 2008 Ocean/Tidal/Stream Power Track 7D “Environmental.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Mitigation and Conservation Bank Approval in Northern California Kate Dadey Chief, CA Delta Branch Sacramento.
Environmental Decision Making SC.912.L Why have environmental laws?  To regulate activities that are harmful to the environment. a. E.g., Clean.
Recreational Trails Program Federal Requirements.
1 Implementing the Concepts Environment Pre-Conference Workshop TRB MPOs Present and Future Conference August 27, 2006 Michael Culp FHWA Office of Project.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Inter-Agency Coordination BLM PILOT VERNAL & GLENWOOD SPRINGS U.S. Army Corps of Engineers & U.S. Bureau of Land.
FLAG, Policy Overview 15 December 1999 Presenter - Bruce Bayle USDA/Forest Service.
JWMP Update Draft Report Bosworth Botanical Consulting Team.
Oregon Department of Transportation Stormwater Management Initiative: Meeting New Challenges Presented by: William Fletcher, ODOT February 5, 2008.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY PROGRAM PUBLIC INTEREST REVIEW (33 CFR Part 320) August 12, 2005.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Document Preparation WETLANDS BEST PRACTICES 33 rd Annual Airports Conference Marie.
Impact/Compensation Assessment Method (ICAT) Application for Utility Corridors.
Environmental Commitments/Tracking. Environmental Commitments Federal Agencies Shall –Use all practicable means consistent with the requirements of.
1 Atchafalaya River and Bayous Chene, Boeuf, and Black, Louisiana Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) Kick off Meeting April 13, 2005 Project Manager.
Steve Todd WetSAG co-chair Suquamish Tribe Ash Roorbach CMER Riparian Ecologist August 5, 2010.
October 16, 2013 Mira Monte Marina PERMITTING MITIGATION UPDATE MIRA MONTE MARINA.
1 Calcasieu River & Pass, Louisiana Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) Kick off Meeting February 2, 2005 Project Manager Mireya Laigast, Civil Engineer,
Overview of Everything You Need to Know About Mitigation.
State of Minnesota Section 404 Assumption Feasibility Study
Coal Mining Activities
THE CORPS REGULATORY AUTHORITY
Coal Mining Activities
Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Water Resources Division
Planning Mitigation February 24, 2016
History of Environmental Law
Wetland Mitigation.
Joint Army-EPA Mitigation Rule
Mitigation.
Proposed Mitigation Rule Amendment Rulemaking Pre-Proposal State and Local Government Outreach June 20, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Modified Charleston Method (MCM) Brenda A. Archer, Regulatory Program U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans District (CEMVN)

What is the MCM?

Modified Charleston Method (MCM) An Assessment Methodology for evaluating unavoidable wetland impacts associated with Section 404 Clean Water Act permits and projects that are proposed as mitigation for those unavoidable impacts

MCM – Conditional Assessment Model Measures wetland functional loss indirectly by considering the quality of wetland functions of the impacted site weighed against the perceived increases of wetland functions of the mitigation project. Evaluates only the site as it exists at the time of evaluation. *of course you take into consideration the value of the site prior to a violation or a last logging event.

History of the MCM

Regulatory was tasked with developing an assessment model that: Produced comparable mitigation requirements as other Corps Districts in Louisiana and Promoted consistency among New Orleans District regulatory project managers with diverse backgrounds

Interagency Review Team Federal and state resource/regulatory agencies involved in the decisions for the assessment model included: US Environmental Protection Agency US Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Service Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management

Modified Charleston Method The Charleston Method was developed by the Charleston District in collaboration with an Interagency Review Team in that District; Used by Vicksburg District Provides comparable mitigation requirements from the other Districts adjacent to the New Orleans District. After minimal training and practice, project managers are able to easily apply the method with a minimal about of field data collection and a high degree of consistency. Allows unlimited mixing of mitigation locations, and types (e.g. restoration, preservation, enhancement). Allows mixing of mitigation banks and permittee-responsible mitigation projects.

Modified Charleston Method (conti-) Only required slight modifications for it to be used in the New Orleans District. These modifications were to account for Regional wetland differences CEMVN Mitigation Standard Operating Procedures 33 CFR 332: New Mitigation Rule

Who can use the MCM?

MCM Operators CEMVN permit and mitigation bank project managers for Section 404 CWA permits including restoration and/or enhancement projects Applicants/agents to estimate the amount of mitigation that will be required to compensate for various project scenarios (avoidance and minimization), and to compare mitigation options

How does the MCM work?

MCM Factors MCM evaluates a suite of factors that are used to assess the potential of the site to perform wetland functions. A factor is an element, circumstance, or influence which contributes to the overall quality of the site. Each factor is defined by a list of options that qualify the factor based on conditions at the evaluated site. The functional value of the site is determined by selecting the options that best fit the site conditions for each factor and then summing all the factor values.

MCM Workbook MCM workbook is an excel spreadsheet consisting of four worksheets: “Summary Worksheet”, “Adverse Impact Worksheet”, “Mitigation from Bank Worksheet”, and “Proposed Restoration/Enhancement Mitigation Worksheet”.

MCM Guidebook Definitions of terms used in the model Discussions of the use of each worksheet Definitions for each factor and option associated with that worksheet, and Examples using each worksheet.

1. Assessment of Adverse Impacts The model considers; The habitat rarity or difficulty to replace, Site wetland quality, Work involved and the extent to which that work will impact wetland functions, Duration of the impact Potential for project to result in cumulative impacts.

Adverse Impacts Worksheet

2. Assessment of Mitigation Project The model considers: Net improvement Negative impacts on the site that can not be remediated, Protection type, Temporal loss, Credit availability versus Credit use. Replacement with in-kind/out-of-kind Location of impact versus mitigation.

Restoration Worksheet

3. Kind and Location Factors These factors are included when evaluating an permit project with a particular mitigation bank and/or permittee responsible mitigation project The value for these Factors adjust the required mitigation amount depending upon the degree of variance from the most to least preferred option of in-kind/on-site to out-of-kind/out-of-watershed.

Additional Information

Resource for MCM Guidebook and Workbook Located in the Regulatory In-Lieu Fee and Bank Information Tracking System (RIBITS) Go to RIBITS from the following website: https://ribits.usace.army.mil Once in RIBITS, Choose “New Orleans District” in the lower, left-hand side of the screen and then the “Assessment Tools” tab in the upper, left-hand side of the screen.

Contact Information Dr. James A. Barlow, Section Chief Special Projects and Policy Team (504) 862-2250 or james.a.barlow@usace.army.mil

QUESTIONS??