Impact Analysis. Impact Analysis (204) ODOT attempts to avoid, and minimize impacts to the natural environment throughout the PDP process Despite these.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Summary of Aquatic Programs Administered by the WV Division of Natural Resources Dan Cincotta WVDNR P. O. Box 67 Elkins, WV
Advertisements

Framework for the Ecological Assessment of Impacted Sediments at Mining Sites in Region 7 By Jason Gunter (R7 Life Scientist) and.
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS for ANTIDEGRADATION
Introduction to Field Survey Methods Eco surveys generally employ a descriptive or qualitative approach towards data collection. Eco surveys generally.
HOC-664 Hocking Hills Study Stakeholder Meeting August 15, 2008 Hocking Hills State Park.
Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia. Background Mountaintop coal mining is a surface mining practice used in the Appalachian states involving.
401 Water Quality Certification South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.
Section 4(f) Section 6(f). Section 4(f) Process Overview 2 Project Initiation Package Field Review 4(f) Property Present Use Coordination NEPA Document.
Environmental Scoping Guidance Jerry Vogt Region Environmental Coordinator ODOT – Region 3.
Ecological Survey Reports The level of ESR Report is determined by the type of project and its probable level of impacts.
080820_v1DP TRAVEL MANAGEMENT - PROCESS ON THE GILA NATIONAL FOREST.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® A New Indicator of Ecosystem Restoration Benefit: The Biodiversity Security Index Richard Cole Environmental.
Climate Adaptation Planning: from Vulnerability Assessment to Strategy Identification -A New York Workshop Case Study- Chris Hilke Climate Change Adaptation.
Utah Watershed Coordinating Council Conservation Planning Workshop Navigating the Corps’ Permitting Process July 20, 2011 Jason Gipson Chief, Utah/Nevada.
1 C E T A S Range of Alternatives Presentation Date Project Name Project location (city, county) ODOT Key Number:
Level 1 Ecological Survey Report Requirements ODOT -- Office of Environmental Services.
Lec 12: Rapid Bioassessment Protocols (RBP’s)
Developing and Refining the Biological Study Area Have you ever wondered where to start when you are setting up a Biological Study Area (BSA) for a project?
Wetlands and Waterways Permits Patti Caswell Statewide Wetlands/Permits Program Coordinator Geo-Environmental, ODOT.
Methods for Incorporating Aquatic Plant Effects into Community Level Benchmarks EPA Development Team Regional Stakeholder Meetings January 11-22, 2010.
Clean Water Act Section 404: An O&G Perspective Andrew D. Smith SWCA Environmental Consultants.
Suzanne Macey.  DEC looks at known occurrences with 1 mile  FWS looks at known occurrences plus the potential for suitable habitat  Contact DEC and/or.
Northeast Corridor Greenway Acquisition – Mitigation Feasibility Study Results City Council Workshop June 24, 2014.
Fire Effects on Aquatic Ecosystems
Protecting Lake Water Quality & Aquatic Habitat from Effects of Lakeshore Development Kellie Merrell Lakes & Ponds Management & Protection Section VT Agency.
Breewood Stream Restoration Montgomery County Capital Improvement Project to Stabilize the Breewood Tributary November 14, 2012 Sligo Middle School.
Assessing Project Related Impacts to Migratory Birds.
West Virginia University Natural Stream Restoration Program An Interdisciplinary Program Focusing on Research, Education, and Professional Services in.
California Rapid Assessment Method for Wetlands (CRAM) Project and Ambient Assessments.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® 2012 Changes to Stream Mitigation Procedures and Guidelines Mike Moxey USACE, Mobile District IRT Chair May.
Building Strong! 1 US Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Kimberly McLaughlin Program Manager Headquarters Operations and Regulatory Community of.
ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ARCHAEOLOGICAL - HISTORICAL INVESTIGATIONS PERMITTING FOR UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AREA ENDANGERED.
I-90 Snoqualmie Pass East Project Tanya Lamb Urban Geography, GEOG 481 Description 15-mile stretch Hyak (MP 55.1) to Easton (MP 70.3) 2010 scheduled to.
At the last Steering Team meeting… Goals (Rule-level) EPS (Measurable and Reportable) Natural Resources Human/Cultural Environment Administrative Avoid,
Watercourse DPA District of North Vancouver Streamside DPA Development Permit Area for the Protection of the Natural Environment: Streamside Areas Public.
Tahera Environmental Monitoring Commitments Summary Use TK in monitoring; cooperate with communities Collect reliable information that will: Allow detection.
1 C E T A S Purpose and Need Presentation Date Project Name Project location (city, county) ODOT Key Number:
1 C E T A S Triage Presentation, Date Project Name Project location (city, county) ODOT Key Number:
Number of Copies Agency Submissions & Comments. Coordination ESRs are reviewed by OES and coordinated with resource agencies as part of the NEPA review.
Farm Ponds and Fish and Wildlife
Ash Roorbach CMER Riparian Ecologist CMER Monthly Meeting, July 27, 2010.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
APPLICATIONS OF WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS Module 22, part c – Applications.
- Aquatics - Presented by: Rick Pattenden Mainstream Aquatics Ltd.
Wetlands and Waterways Permits Ken Franklin Statewide Permits Program Coordinator Geo-Environmental, ODOT.
Solano Habitat Conservation Plan 580,000 Acres 36 Covered Species; 4 Natural Communities 17,500 acres of Urban Development; 1,280 acres of other New Facilities.
ODFW Habitat Mitigation Policy and Energy Facility Siting.
Program Implementation Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program.
Why Conserve Swainson’s Hawks?. Two Reasons Endangered Species Act –Section 2080 –Incidental take permit –HCP CEQA –Mandatory finding of significance.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Environmental Document Preparation WETLANDS BEST PRACTICES 33 rd Annual Airports Conference Marie.
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service “Helping people help the land"
Comparison of Benthic Invertebrate Communities Upstream and Downstream of Proposed Culvert Installations in Alabama Amy C. Gill USGS, Alabama Water Science.
Habitat Mapping of High Level Indicators at Multiple Scales for Fish and Wildlife.
NRC Environmental Reviews for Uranium Recovery Applicants and Licensees James Park (301)
California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Role in Timber Harvest Review.
Riparian Buffers And Their Role In Coastal Georgia By Jackie Jackson & Bethany Jewell Water Resource Planners.
August 19, 2015 Port Bienville Rail EIS Scoping Meeting Presented by: Rhea Vincent Mike McGuire.
ODOT Programmatic ESA Consultation on the Federal-Aid Highway Program (FAHP) User’s Guide Training, June-July 2013 Clearing and Site Preparation and Site.
Steve Todd WetSAG co-chair Suquamish Tribe Ash Roorbach CMER Riparian Ecologist August 5, 2010.
MRERP Missouri River Ecosystem Restoration Plan and Environmental Impact Statement One River ▪ One Vision A Component of the Missouri River Recovery Program.
Agnes Water Desalination Project Preliminary Studies – Aquatic Ecology John Thorogood and Kylie McPherson.
CEQA 101  CA Legislature passed CEQA in 1970; signed by Governor Reagan  CEQA statutes are found in Public Resources Code sections et seq.  The.
Iron Range Tourism Bureau April 25, 2013 Hwy 53 Update.
1 Introduction to Ecological Re-Use Concepts: ITRC Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document 2006 Brownfields Conference Boston, Massachusetts Charles.
EVALUATING STREAM COMPENSATION PERFORMANCE: Overcoming the Data Deficit Through Standardized Study Design Kenton L. Sena (EPA VSFS Intern), Joe Morgan,
Source: Stream Corridor Restoration Manual WATERSHED MANAGEMENT.
Mountaintop Mining/Valley Fills in Appalachia
Environmental Impact Reports
Agricultural Order 4.0 Discussion
NATURAL RESOURCE ISSUES
Presentation transcript:

Impact Analysis

Impact Analysis (204) ODOT attempts to avoid, and minimize impacts to the natural environment throughout the PDP process Despite these efforts, transportation related projects will result in some level of disturbance to the natural environment Ecological reports should focus on these three areas of impact analysis Aquatic Ecology Streams Wetlands Potentially Jurisdictional Ditches Ponds/Lakes/Reservoirs Aquatic Life Terrestrial Ecology Vegetative Communities Wildlife Listed Species

Ecological survey reports should never make recommendations for avoiding, minimizing, and/or mitigating impacts associated with ODOT projects Submit recommendations in a separate letter/document Alternatives can be utilized during the 404/401 Waterway Permit Application/Water Quality Certification process Impact Analysis (204)

Impacts Analysis: Level of Reports Data and impacts for each resource are presented in the same table No impacts to aquatic life write-up except for Unionid mussels. State and Federal Listed Species tables are very similar to Level 2 Impact tables. Level 1 Reports

Impacts Analysis: Level of Reports Data tables and impact tables are separate. Ecological impacts summary Impact table for each resource Alternative analysis required. Minimum is a build no build alternative. Level 2 Reports

Impacts Analysis: Level of Reports The Preliminary Draft Level 3 Report will not contain an impacts section. The Impacts Section in the Draft Level 3 Report will follow the same format as the Impacts Section in the Level 2 Report. Will discuss impacts to the feasible alternatives Alternative analysis will be required The Impacts Section in the Final Level 3 Report will contain impacts for the preferred alternative only. It will also follow the same format as the Level 2 Report. Level 3 Reports

Impact Analysis: Aquatic Ecology Streams, Wetlands, Ditches, Ponds and Lakes Type of impact and whether temporary or permanent fill Expected short and long term impacts to the waterway Any evident prior degradation, pollution impacts, or other pertinent information. Comparisons of impacts between alignments (for Level 2 Reports with alternatives, and Draft Level 3 Reports)

Impact Analysis: Aquatic Ecology Impacts box should include the following: Individuals, species and suitable mussel habitat that may be impacted by the project. Potential impacts Indirect, such as siltation Direct, such as burying, crushing, etc. For all projects that have alternatives, include a comparison of impacts between alternatives. Unionid Mussels

Short term impacts (typically associated with sedimentation) Mobile species vacate the project area Immobile or sensitive taxa may suffer mortality Recovery is typically expected 1-2 years following construction Preconstruction taxa are expected to re-colonize the site Long term impacts (typically associated with channel modifications) Loss of the in-stream habitat diversity capable of supporting a diverse community of fauna Loss of riparian cover resulting in increased light levels and thermal changes May result in extirpation of species from the project area Impact Analysis: Aquatic Ecology General Discussion Points

Impact Analysis: Aquatic Ecology Discuss impacts to specific fish, macroinvertebrate, and/or mussel assemblages and their habitats. Focus on the following: Rare species Intolerant species Discuss whether the project may extirpate any of the assemblages within the stream. Projects that require aquatic fauna collection

Impact Analysis: Terrestrial Ecology Discussion of impacts should include the following: For all projects that have alternatives, include a comparison of impacts between alternatives. Type of impacts associated with that community The severity of impact in context with the local and regional ecology of the area. Focus discussion on rare, unique, or high-quality habitats or rare or unique species. Discuss if project may cause the extirpation of a certain community or species within the area. Any listed species must also be discussed in the Listed Species section. Vegetative Community and Wildlife Impacts

Impacts Analysis: Listed Species For each species with known ranges that includes the project county(ies), include the following: A brief life history synopsis, focusing on habitat requirements Records within a mile (or within 5 miles for IB captures, and 10 miles for hibernacula) If the species was found within the project area (IF YES, CALL OES FIRST!!!) If critical habitat was found within the project area (IF YES, CALL OES FIRST!!!) If suitable habitat was found within the project area Impacts to the suitable habitat For Indiana bat, also summarize the information from the Bat Habitat Worksheet. Compare impacts within alternatives for projects that possess alternatives (when applicable). Federally Listed Species

Impacts Analysis: Listed Species For each species with records within a mile of the project (or that were found within or directly adjacent to the project area) A brief life history synopsis, focusing on habitat requirements Distance of record from project area If the species was found within the project area If suitable habitat was found within the project area Impacts to the suitable habitat If a federal species record is located within a mile, reference between the Federal and State species tables to minimize repetition.. Comparisons of impacts between alternatives should be included for projects that have alternatives. State Listed Species

QUESTIONS?