Maryland Department of the Environment Restoration and Regulation Discussion Presented by: Wetlands and Waterways Program Maryland Department of the Environment.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
S trategic S ubwatershed I dentification P rocess Illinois Department of Natural Resources Conservation 2000 Ecosystems Program.
Advertisements

WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS for ANTIDEGRADATION
Maryland Department of the Environment Restoration and Regulation Discussion Presented by: Wetlands and Waterways Program Maryland Department of the Environment.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Restoration and Regulation Discussion Joseph P. DaVia US Army Corps of Engineers-Baltimore Chief, Maryland.
Overview of Mitigation Banking Program December 10, 2009 Robert M. Brown, Director Environmental Resource Regulation Department Robert M. Brown, Director.
Bush Fire Risk Management Planning Community Participation Department of Lands, National Parks and Wildlife Service, Integral Energy, Rural Fire Service,
Department of the Environment Water Use and Appropriation of Maryland’s Waters.
Environmental Scoping Guidance Jerry Vogt Region Environmental Coordinator ODOT – Region 3.
Division of State Lands’ Wetlands Program. Issues That Spawned State Wetlands Program (SB 3) Lack of detailed wetlands inventory information or guidance.
Queensland Wild Rivers Policy and legislation Scott Buchanan Team Leader (Wild Rivers)
National Environmental Policy Act of Establishes protection of the environment as a national priority Mandates that environmental impacts be considered.
MINING OPERATIONS ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND APPROVING, MONITORING, AND RECLAIMING OPERATIONS MINING OPERATIONS ON NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM LAND APPROVING,
April 14, Indicate every resource type proposed for impact on the Application: Tidal Wetland (short form for some projects) Nontidal Wetland Waterway.
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.
1 Massachusetts Wetlands Regulations and the MCP Rachel Freed Mass. Department of Environmental Protection Wetlands and Waterways Program Northeast Regional.
Chesapeake Bay Program Habitat Goals Implementation Team June 26, 2013.
9.Monitoring Plan + 10.Implementation Plan + 4. LAs* 5. WLAs* 6. MOS* 7.Seasonal Variation* 8.Reasonable Assurance + TMDL Process 1 Problem Understanding.
New England Cottontail Conservation Efforts Anthony Tur US Fish and Wildlife Service New England Field Office Concord, New Hampshire.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Regulatory Program Glen Justis Chief, Policy & Administration Regulatory Division Alaska District 2010 Building.
Compensatory Mitigation in Coastal Louisiana Keith Lovell, Administrator Office of Coastal Management Department of Natural Resources 10/03/121.
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
SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 1977 Rosemary Newsome.
WETLANDS and LOCAL PROGRAMS Environmental Services Oregon Department of Transportation.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
Copyright © 2005 Pearson Education Canada Inc. Business Law in Canada, 7/e, Chapter 3 Business Law in Canada, 7/e Chapter 3 Government Regulation and the.
Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultations. The Endangered Species Act Sec. 2:Purpose Sec. 3:Definitions Sec. 4:Listing, Recovery, Monitoring Sec.
Measuring Habitat and Biodiversity Outcomes Sara Vickerman and Frank Casey September 26, 2013 Defenders of Wildlife.
NIEA’s Roles and Challenges Delivering Habitat Protection in Northern Ireland Diane Stevenson 15 th October 2012.
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.
Current condition and Challenges for the Future Report s (Scotland and Solway Tweed)
Wetland Monitoring What Do We Need? Integration of Wetland Monitoring and Wetland Management Wetlands and Waterways Program Maryland Dept. of the Environment.
Water Quality Program Financial Assistance Progress and Plans for Meeting RCW Requirements (Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee)
Range Planning 1 & Objectives & Objectives The Focus is on Results.
LEGISLATIVE DEVELOPMENTS IN NATURE CONSERVATION AND HABITATS LAW IN 2011 Margaret Austin 29 March 2012.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
Sustaining Michigan’s Wetlands: Mitigation, Conservation Easements, and No Net Loss Andrew T. Kozich MTU School of Forest Resources & Environmental Science.
Mitigation and Impact management
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Document Preparation WETLANDS BEST PRACTICES 33 rd Annual Airports Conference Marie.
Notebook Ref Summary of the Issue Part of a Tier II antidegradation review should incorporate the consideration of feasible alternatives, some of.
Environmental Commitments/Tracking. Environmental Commitments Federal Agencies Shall –Use all practicable means consistent with the requirements of.
New Development and Significant Development 12/21/20151 New Development & Significant Redevelopment.
Bureau of Watershed Management Regulatory Proposal Chapter 102 [Erosion and Sediment Control] Erosion, Sediment and Stormwater Management February 21,
Proposition 1 Workshop: the Grant Application Process July 2015.
Current condition and Challenges for the Future Report s (Scotland and Solway Tweed)
Visual Decision Frameworks –Habitat GIT Adaptive Management based on annual review. Share progress and address challenges and opportunities Adjust management.
ODOT Programmatic ESA Consultation on the Federal-Aid Highway Program (FAHP) User’s Guide Training, June-July 2013 Clearing and Site Preparation and Site.
CE 360Dr SaMeH1 Environmental Eng. 1 (CE 360) Associate Professor of Environmental Eng. Civil Engineering Department Engineering College Majma’ah University.
1 1 The Project Description: Framing the CEQA Analysis Terry Rivasplata.
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Requirements for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Minimization Plans Rich Janati, M.S., Chief Division of Nuclear Safety PA Dept. of Environmental Protection.
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Section 3: Mining Regulations and Mine Reclamation
THE CORPS REGULATORY AUTHORITY
36 CAs across Ontario (mainly in the south)
Section 3: Mining Regulations and Mine Reclamation
Kevin “Doc” Hoover Water’s Edge Hydrology, Inc.
Tom Wolf, Governor Patrick McDonnell, PA DEP Secretary
Objectives Describe seven important potential environmental consequences of mining. Name four federal laws that relate to mining and reclaiming mined land.
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Analysis of the notification of compensatory measures
Environmental Regulations:
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Restoration and Regulation Discussion
Marine Strategy Coordination Group 14 November 2011, Brussels
Presentation transcript:

Maryland Department of the Environment Restoration and Regulation Discussion Presented by: Wetlands and Waterways Program Maryland Department of the Environment Coordination Meeting March 12, 2013

Need for Timely Completion of Restoration Projects Need for Complete and Accurate Permit Applications and Compliance with Requirements to Issue Authorizations Issues

Practitioners Have Expressed Frustration with Need for Permits, Information Requirements, and Delays Regulatory Agencies Have Expressed Frustration at Poor Coordination, Incomplete Applications, and Projects that Fail to Comply with Requirements

Supporting Information

As with development projects, improperly located, poorly designed and/or constructed restoration projects can also be damaging to water resource functions and statutory/regulatory considerations. The amount of detailed information required for the alternatives analysis is usually based on: Extent of the proposed impact Condition and function of the resource Other mandated considerations

Amount of information and extent of avoidance and minimization required depends on characteristics of resource and associated considerations i.e., less information may be required to justify a project in a site with poor condition and limited functional benefits; or other considerations Example is a project in a farm field vs. forested wetlands

Examples of Required Information Projects goals and objectives Project narrative and justification Resource characterization Alternatives analysis Hydrologic and hydraulic analysis Notification/permission of adjacent property owners Water quality data

Narrative and Justification Attachments or application form Site selection process Alternative site analysis Avoidance and minimization Describe how and why the resource will improve as a result of the restoration

Resource Characterization Description of Degradation that Would Benefit from Restoration Include references from other plans, monitoring efforts, and results from project site. Describe assessment method Include field data forms Wetland Biological and Stream Assessment Photographs Sensitive resource/SAV etc. surveys

Watershed Plans Can Answer Previous Questions For example: Refer to prioritized list of sites in MS-4 plan and show how proposal is ranked Proposal may face challenges if omitted, is low priority; or contrary to watershed plan priorities

Justify Design and Impacts Documentation that landowners affected by project have given permission for project to be established on, or affect their land Include provisions to address consequences of failure Plans- additional guidance under development Project shown in relation to all regulated resources Must be complete and legible

Provide clear, step-by-step description of construction methods Are there different construction practices with fewer impacts? Is there another access point with fewer adverse impacts What measures have been taken to avoid soil compaction? How will excavated material be disposed of?

Construction Methods cont. How will temporary disturbances be rectified? What measures will be taken to prevent spread of invasive species?

If Habitat is the Focus, Describe: Habitat requirements of the specific targeted species or general group of species; What habitat elements are lacking or minimal at the site; How the proposed project will successfully provide the habitat elements so that the desired species would increase at the site; Historic suitability of the site to support the species.

Performance Standards These should be: Achievable Measurable, and expected to occur when the project is built as designed within the monitoring period For habitat, may be more appropriate to use: physical chemical and/or biological features of habitat

Performance Standards Use of habitat features prevents project being deemed a failure if wildlife species do not return to certain thresholds within the monitoring period However, there should be a reasonable likelihood that the restored species would support the species over a period of time

1800 Washington Boulevard | Baltimore, MD | TTY Users: Maryland Department of the Environment Wetlands and Waterways Program