Section 408 Approval Process (New 408 Regional General Permit)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SAFETEA-LU Efficient Environmental Review Process (Section 6002) Kelly Dunlap.
Advertisements

The Role of Levees in the National Flood Risk Management Program Pete Rabbon June 19, 2008 Hazards Caucus Alliance.
F1B - 1 BU ILDING STRONG SM Flood Risk Management Module F1: Authorities and Policies.
FDR1 - 1 Flood Risk management History/Mission/Policies.
General Information on Permitting Electric Transmission Projects at the California Public Utilities Commission June 2009 Presentation created by the Transmission.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® COL Richard P. Pannell District Commander, Galveston District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers United States Army.
Utah Watershed Coordinating Council Conservation Planning Workshop Navigating the Corps’ Permitting Process July 20, 2011 Jason Gipson Chief, Utah/Nevada.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Vertical Team Roles & Responsibilities Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Sacramento District Regional Vegetation Variance Paige Caldwell, P.E. Emergency Manager.
Presented by: Terri Gaines DWR FESSRO February 28, 2014 Regional Permitting for the CVFPP.
An Innovative Partnership For Regulatory Permitting City of Seattle and US Army Corps of Engineers Joy Keniston-Longrie, Seattle Public Utilities, City.
Flood Risk Management Program Ed Hecker, Chief, Office of Homeland Security National Levee Summit February 2008 St Louis, MO.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services Utah Field Office.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Coordinating U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Permits with Species Conservation Plans November 16,
Compensatory Mitigation in Coastal Louisiana Keith Lovell, Administrator Office of Coastal Management Department of Natural Resources 10/03/121.
Engineer Circular Requests to Alter USACE Projects
Hydraulic Screening and Analysis Needed for USACE Review
Managing Risk to Reduce Construction Claims (And Improve Project Success) Presented by Laurie Dennis, PE, CVS-Life, FSAVE.
US Army Corps of Engineers PLANNING SMART BUILDING STRONG ® Project Planning with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Presenter Name Presenter Title.
Deciding How To Apply NEPA Environmental Assessments Findings of No Significant Impact Environmental Impact Statements.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Missouri River Flood Task Force (MRFTF) Concept Briefing
L O N G B E A C H, C A. Ryk Dunkelberg Barnard Dunkelberg & Company Roles Of Sponsor, Consultant and FAA During NEPA Process L O N G B E.
Flood Risk Management Program Rolf Olsen Institute for Water Resources U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Acquisition of Flood Control Easements Triangle High-Ground Area City of West Sacramento, Yolo Co. Meeting of the Central Valley Flood Protection Board.
Our mission ead and execute environmental programs and provide expertise that enables Army training, operations, acquisition and sustainable military communities.
HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANNING Charles J. Randel, 1 III, Howard O. Clark, Jr., 2 Darren P. Newman, 2 and Thomas P. Dixon 3 1 Randel Wildlife Consulting,
Briefing to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board on Status of the FCSA July 12, 2013 Central Valley Integrated Flood Management Study.
ASFPM – May 24, 2012 CASE STUDY – 408 PERMITTING AND LEVEE ACCREDITATION FOR WATERLOO, NEBRASKA ASFPM MAY 24, 2012 Presented by Randy Behm, PE, CFM Lalit.
BUILDING STRONG ® 1 Regional General Permit (RGP) 31 Interagency Meeting June 11, 2015.
N AVIGATING THE T URN : F LOOD R ISK A SSOCIATED WITH L EVEES Sam Riley Medlock, J.D., CFM Association of State Floodplain Managers May 2011.
Fish and Wildlife Service Mission Conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American.
Endangered Species Act Section 7 Overview Endangered Species Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2001.
An update from the National Committee on Levee Safety Presented to the TWCA by Karin M. Jacoby, PE, Esq. June 17, of 14An Involved Public and Reliable.
Building Strong! 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Kimberly McLaughlin Program Manager Headquarters Operations and Regulatory Community of.
Module 11 STEPS 4 & 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study & Report Certification Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
HIGHWAY/UTILITY PROGRAM OVERVIEW ROADWAY CONFERENCE APRIL 20, 2009.
Relevant, Ready, Responsive, Reliable 1 Addressing the Flood Risk Challenge.
CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.
Regional Grant Funding Coordination for Implementation of Watershed Management Plans Project Clean Water Summit July 15, 2004 David W. Gibson SDRWQCB
1 Environmental Planning in the Army Corps of Engineers Ch 2 Mod 5 Relationship of the NEPA to Principles & Guidelines
Energy, Environmental Impacts, and Sustainable Development Presented by Cat Shrier, Ph.D., P.G. Water Resources Planner (403)
INTRODUCTION TO SECTION 4(f) Presented by Ian Chidister Environmental Program Manager FHWA – Wisconsin Division December 4, 2013.
SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
Linking Planning & NEPA Overview Mitch Batuzich FHWA Texas Division FHWA Texas Division April 17, 2007.
US Army Corps of Engineers Chicago District FY04tpr\skbcongressional Civil Works Program Missions Missions Process Process Select Authorities Select Authorities.
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.
1 CDBG and Environmental Review For Local Officials.
Salton Sea Species Conservation Habitat Scoping Meetings July 7 and 8, 2010.
Flood Risk Management Cosgrove Creek Section 205 Planning Basics.
CORPS OF ENGINEERS REGULATORY PROGRAM PUBLIC INTEREST REVIEW (33 CFR Part 320) August 12, 2005.
Environmental Assessment in British Columbia Forum of Federations Conference September 14, 2009.
Cooperating Agency Status Presented by Horst Greczmiel Associate Director, NEPA Oversight Council on Environmental Quality Washington, DC September 14,
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Mobile District Nationwide Permit Overview Cindy House-Pearson Chief, Inland.
Request to Alter USACE Projects
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Overview of Risk Approach to Manage USACE Dam and Levee Safety Program The Reality of Risk: Dam Safety in.
December 2015 Detailed Presentation STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARDS CALIFORNIA Water Boards.
US Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento DistrictIntroductionIntroduction Sacramento River Bank Protection Project: Phase II Supplemental Authorization –
Rulemaking by APHIS. What is a rule and when must APHIS conduct rulemaking? Under U.S. law, a rule is any requirement of general applicability and future.
California’s Flood Future Recommendations for Managing the State’s Flood Risk Flood Risk Management & Silver Jackets Workshop August 21, 2012.
 What is EWP & How Does the Program Work? Emergency Watershed Protection Program.
Environmental Planning in the Army Corps of Engineers Relationship of the NEPA to Principles & Guidelines 1 Ch 2 Mod 5
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Huntington District Floodplain Management Services Dan Bailey, CFM Huntington District August 2012.
AGENCY ROLES Level 1B: Advanced Fundamentals July 2016 LOCAL, STATE, FEDERAL 1.
Lessons Learned from Everglades Restoration Julie A. Hill Everglades Policy Associate.
Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Water Resources Division
Environmental Requirements and planning grants
USACE infrastructure team update
Presentation transcript:

Section 408 Approval Process (New 408 Regional General Permit) Richard J. Muraski Jr. Colonel, Corps of Engineers Commander Fort Worth District

Overview 408 Approval Authority Flood Risk Paradigm Why Streamline? Streamlining Initiatives 408 RGP – What is it? Key Takeaways POCs / Resources Questions & Answers

How are they Applied? Stakeholder Projects Federal Project Waters of the US Federal Project RGP PEA Visualize the rectangle as representing the entire portfolio of stakeholder projects Some projects will impact jurisdictional WUS and are subject to Section 404 and/or Section 10 permitting requirements Some projects will impact, or have the potential to impact, existing Federal Flood Damage Reduction Projects Some projects will impact both For projects that impact both an existing Federal project and jurisdictional WUS the Fort Worth District has been proactive and we have implemented procedures such as Regional General Permit 12 and a Programmatic Environmental Assessment, which MAY assist in streamlining this process. 404 / 10 408

408 Approval Authority 33 USC 408 (Rivers & Harbors Appropriations Act of 1899) Title 33 – Navigation and Navigable Waters Section 408 – Taking possession of, use of, or injury to harbor or river improvements Unlawful for any person or persons to build upon, alter, deface work built by the US to prevent floods unless SecArmy grants permission based on determination that the proposed project will: Not be injurious to the public interest (NEPA Component) Not impair the usefulness of the Federal project

Flood Risk Paradigm THEN NOW Flood Damage Reduction (FDR) Paradigm: Federal Protection “We are Safe” Individual Agency Processes Project-by-Project Focus on reducing damages by managing floods Minimal consideration to future land use or other social effects Decisions based on reducing the potential for failure NOW Flood Risk Management (FRM) Paradigm: Shared Risk Reduction Integrated Agency & Stakeholder processes to buy-down risks to a tolerable level Focus on reducing probability of flooding & consequences should flooding occur Systems Approach (weakest link) Integrate environmental, social, and economic factors Self Explanatory?

Communication Levee Safety Program Activities

Why Streamline? Perception: Some projects have required multiple years for review Reality: Acquiring sufficient data for proper review & required Agency determination has sometimes been lengthy Contributing Factors Lack of Stakeholder understanding of roles, responsibilities and process Insufficient Corps Guidelines for technical and NEPA submittals Failure to coordinate/secure Sponsor review & approval Incomplete submittal packages Insufficient technical analysis Lack of sufficient environmental compliance documentation

Fort Worth District Streamlining Initiatives Developing Standard Business Process Regional General Permit Programmatic EA Section 214

Standard Business Process Developing Standard Business Process Increase efficiency & reliability Define Roles & Responsibilities Process Map / Responsibility Matrix Submittal Checklists Increase Clarity / Decrease Anxiety

408 RGP – What is it? Permit Name: Modification and Alterations of Corps of Engineers Projects Permit Number: CESWF-09-RGP-12 Issued 24 FEB 2010 Expires 23 FEB 2015 Purpose: Eliminate unnecessary duplication of work where the environmental consequences of the proposed action are individually and cumulatively minimal

Programmatic Environmental Assessment Certain Conditions must be met to use Must be a Minor Section 408 Only affect grassland habitats or be covered under a Nationwide Permit or the RGP Must not result in significant adverse impacts to cultural resources Must not impact threatened or endangered species

WRDA Section 214 Authority Legislation allows the Corps to accept funds from Non-Federal Public Entities to expedite 408 Actions & Regulatory Permits Program Must: Serve Public Interest with Accountability & Transparency Ensure Impartial Decision Making Expedite Permits NCTCOG & USACE entered into a MOA October 2008 to process Regulatory Permits COG is applicant & sets priorities for projects Completed 30 Permit Actions to Date; 31 Pending Projects Draft MOA being processed with NTCOG to process 408 Actions

Comparison of Section 214 Projects VS Regulatory Branch Performance in 2010 Section 214 - 100% of Individual Permits issued in 120 days Branch - 54.8% of Individual Permits issued in 120 days Section 214 – General Permit verification averaged 7.6 days Branch – General Permit verification averaged 25.7 days

Current Section 408 Actions Major Modifications No Major Section 408’s have been processed by the Ft Worth District for final approval by HQ Cities of Irving and Dallas have Section 408 100-year levee remediation projects in process May become minor Section 408’s if the modifications are determined to be insignificant Anticipate several upcoming bridge/roadway levee crossings will be major actions Estimated review & approval costs in the $150,000 range Minor Modifications Receiving numerous requests to modify DFW area projects Goal to process and approve actions within 30 days of final submittal package Review costs dependent on complexity but usually less than $10,000/ action

Key Takeaways USACE is standardizing the process Shared Risks – Shared Responsibility Help improve Stakeholder understanding – embrace the concept Early coordination with Sponsor by applicant will help reduce/minimize USACE review times. Better integration of engineering design with environmental impacts needed to comply with NEPA and CWA (404) and RHA (Sec 10) Ensure complete, comprehensive 408 submittal packages

POCs / Resources 408 Business Process (Primary Contact) Terry Bachim, Chief Maintenance Section Terry.bachim@usace.army.mil hyperlink Regional General Permit (RGP) Stephen Brooks, Chief Regulatory Branch Stephen.brooks@usace.army.mil http://www.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/environ/Regulatory/permitting/rgp/CESWF_09_RGP_12_Final_Signed.pdf Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) Rob Newman, Chief Environmental Branch Rob.newman@usace.army.mil http://www.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/Notices/Minor408PEA/Final_Minor_408_PEA.pdf Section 214 Elston Eckhardt, Chief Civil Programs Elston.eckhardt@usace.army.mil

Q & A

Section 408 Challenges Due to the stringent review process, major Section 408’s typically require 9 months or longer for vertical approval There are inadequate Federal funds for District level review, which is currently delaying the timely processing of Section 408 actions Minor Section 408’s are approved by District Commander and typically require considerably less review time Not all Section 408 requests are approvable due to potential Irreparable harm Provided for your use, is hidden in presentation

Section 214 Benefits Dedicated PM & technical team readily available to evaluate project & permit actions and to participate in meetings and site visits. Offers improved, open Communications PM works with applicant to timely process the actions Results in reduced time for decisions Provided for your use, is hidden in presentation