1 / 44

CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005

CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005. Typical IP Process. Application Submitted. Public Notice Issued (15 days). Pre-application meetings. Incomplete. Decision Time NEPA 404(b)(1) Public Interest Other Legal Requirements.

keita
Download Presentation

CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CORPS OF ENGINEERS SECTION 404 INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EVALUATION PROCESS July 22, 2005

  2. Typical IP Process Application Submitted Public Notice Issued (15 days) Pre-application meetings Incomplete Decision Time NEPA 404(b)(1) Public Interest Other Legal Requirements Public/Agency Comments Received & Evaluated Applicant Coordination Is Public Hearing Needed? Corps Evaluates Response Applicant Responds

  3. Individual PermitEvaluation Process • Application Completeness Review • Scope of Analysis • Public Notice • Purpose and Need • Alternatives Assessment • 404(b)(1) Guidelines • Public Hearing • Mitigation • Water Quality Certification • Cultural Resources • Threatened and Endangered Species • Public Interest Evaluation

  4. Complete Application • Review information submitted • Within 15 days, determine if complete or request additional information • Application complete when sufficient information is received to prepare the Public Notice.

  5. Complete Application • Information needed for complete application • Name & address of applicant/agent • Description of proposed activity • Wetland delineation (if applicable) • Adjacent landowners • Project location • Completed work • Signature of applicant agent • Drawings, plans, sketches

  6. Scope of Analysis • Determine the Corps Federal action area (permit area) • Determine how the Corps will evaluate indirect (secondary) adverse environmental effects as well as cumulative effects

  7. Scope of AnalysisPermit Area • All waters of the United States, as well as any additional area of non-waters where the Corps determines there is adequate federal control and responsibility • Area of jurisdiction + Areas where impacts are caused by (or “a product of”) the Corps permitted activity

  8. Permit Area FactorsNEPA (App. B) • Activity “merely a link” in corridor type project • Nearby upland facility location affects location of permitted activity (& visa versa) • Extent of entire project in Corps jurisdiction • Extent of cumulative Federal control and responsibility

  9. Permit Area FactorsNHPA (App. C) • Upland activity integrally related to permitted activity in waters of United States • Activity Directly associated with activity in waters of the U.S. • Project couldn’t occur “but for” a Corps permit

  10. Permit Area Permit Area for a Simple Road Crossing •No Federal Involvement Other Than Corps Permit • No Other Impacts in Waters of U.S. •Permit Area Limited to Directly-Affected Waters of U.S., and Uplands in Immediate Vicinity Affecting/Affected by Regulated Activity (e.g., Adjacent Road Alignments, Clearing for Staging Area, Equipment Access, etc.)

  11. Permit Area for Multiple Road Crossings NWR 5 mi. Permit Area • Substantial Federal Control (Corps permit + NWR Land) • Substantial Impacts (Waters of U.S., Endangered Species, Cultural Resources) • 1 Permit Area

  12. Permit Area in Subdivisions - Case A •Limited Direct Impacts •Limited Indirect Impacts •Limited Federal Control •No Other Impacts to Waters of U.S. Permit Area

  13. = Historical / Cultural Resource = T/E Species / Critical Habitat Permit Area in Subdivisions - Case D Permit Area •Substantial Direct Impacts •Indirect Impacts Close to Permitted Activities • Several Activities Require Permits •Federal Control Over Much of Project

  14. Public Notice • The Public Notice is the primary method of advising all interested parties of a proposed activity for which a permit is sought. • The Public Notice solicits agency and public comment for input in the decision making process.

  15. Public Notice • The PN must contain: • Statutory Authority • Name and address of the applicant • Location • Project description • Plan and cross-section drawings • Other regulatory authorizations • Statement on endangered species • Statement on cultural resources

  16. Public Notice • (Con’t): • Statement on need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) • Evaluation factors • Length of comment period (15-30 days) • Statement on public hearing • Additional information to assist reviewer

  17. Public Notice • Public Notices must be distributed to: • Post office in the vicinity of the project • Applicant • Applicable government agencies • Congressional representatives • Adjacent property owners • Specific individuals or organizations • In-house support

  18. Purpose and Need What’s the applicant What should be done trying to accomplish to address a problem? Purpose Need

  19. Purpose and Need Project Purpose • Fundamental, Essential, or Irreducible purpose of proposed project • Used to determine if project is water dependent • Required to be addressed as part of 404(b)(1) analysis and NEPA evaluation • Examples • to provide housing • to provide sufficient water supply • to increase the capacity of the school system • to provide/improve transportation efficiency

  20. Purpose and Need Project Need • Required to be addressed during public interest review • Corps generally defers to state or other government agency’s decision to spend money • Corps may make independent review of public need

  21. Alternatives AssessmentRegulations • CEQ NEPA regulations: reasonable alternatives • Corps NEPA regulations: reasonable alternatives • must be feasible • must accomplish purpose and need • alternatives that are reasonable and feasible need not necessarily be available to the applicant • 404(b)(1) Guidelines: practicable alternatives • available and capable of being done taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes

  22. Alternatives AssessmentTypes • No-Build (permit denial) • On-Site • Avoidance • Minimization • Reconfiguration • Off-Site • Alternate sites

  23. Alternatives Assessment404(b)(1) Analysis SUBPART A - PROCEDURESEPA’s Recommended Sequence Review Subparts B & H Alternatives Disposal Site Technical Evaluations Subparts C-F Contaminant Determination (Subpart G) Minimize Impacts (Subpart H) Factual Determination Document Compliance Taken from Procedures section of Subpart A of the Guidelines

  24. 404(b)(1) GuidelinesRebuttal Presumptions • When discharge doesn’t require siting within special aquatic site to achieve basic purpose (i.e., not "water dependent"), practicable alternatives not involving special aquatic sites are presumed available, unless clearly demonstrated otherwise by the applicant • Practicable alternatives not involving special aquatic sites are presumed to have less adverse impact on aquatic ecosystem, unless clearly demonstrated otherwise

  25. 404(b)(1) GuidelinesPracticability • An alternative is practicable if it is available and capable of being done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes. If it is otherwise a practicable alternative, an area not presently owned by the applicant which could reasonably be obtained, utilized, expanded or managed in order to fulfill the basic purpose of the proposed activity may be considered

  26. 404(b)(1) GuidelinesRestrictions • No discharge of dredged or fill material shall be permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic ecosystem, so long as the alternative does not have other significant adverse environmental consequences.”

  27. Public Hearing • A public proceeding to acquire information or evidence to be considered when evaluating a DA permit • Requests for hearing come from public notice process • Option – informal public meeting

  28. Public HearingRequirements • Meeting location in vicinity of project • Public notice at least 30 days before hearing • Time, place, nature of hearing, legal authority, availability of documents • Official transcript • Statements only – not a Q&A session • Incorporate written statements • Comment period after hearing of at least 10 days

  29. Mitigation • No net loss of wetlands/aquatic resources • 1990 Mitigation MOA with USEPA • Avoidance, minimization, compensation • RGL 02-2 • Watershed approach, long-term protection

  30. MitigationTypes of Compensation • Methods • Preservation • Enhancement • Restoration • Creation • Concepts • Project-specific mitigation • Banking • In-lieu fee

  31. MitigationPlan Requirements • Baseline Information • Goals and Objectives • Implementation Plan • Success Criteria • Monitoring • Contingency Plan

  32. Water Quality Certification • Section 401 of the Clean Water Act • Certification or Waiver required for permit issuance • Decision by State agency within 60 days (can extend up to one year)

  33. Cultural Resources • Section 106 of the NHPA • Federal law • 36 CFR Part 800 • Implementing regulations by ACHP • Appendix C • Corps regulations • Uses “permit area”

  34. Cultural ResourcesTypes • Historic structures • Historic properties • Historic districts • Subsurface deposits • Traditional Cultural Properties

  35. Cultural ResourcesCoordination • Entities • State Historic Preservation Office • Advisory Council on Historic Preservation • Federally recognized tribes • Process • Public Notice • Consultation

  36. Cultural ResourcesFindings • Eligibility Determination • National Register of Historic Places • Made by Keeper • Listed in or eligible for… • Effect Determination • Made by District Engineer • No effect • No adverse effect • Adverse effect • Resolution • MOA

  37. Threatened and Endangered Species • Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act • Ensure that any Federal action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a T/E species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat of the T/E species

  38. T/E SpeciesCoordination • Entities • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • KDFWR • Process • Public Notice • Formal Consultation

  39. T/E SpeciesFindings • No effect • May affect • Not likely to adversely affect • Jeopardy Opinion • Authorized Take

  40. Public Interest Evaluation • 20+ factors reviewed • Floodplain • Economics • Aesthetics • Habitat • Cumulative impacts • Weighted according to relevance • Balancing test/Public interest • Benefits versus detriments • Public and private need • extent and permanence

  41. Decision • A permit will be issued unless the project is contrary to the public interest • Compliance with 404(b)(1)/NEPA • Resolution of NHPA/ESA/State issues • Documentation • SOF/EA/FONSI • ROD/EIS • Denial

  42. Questions? James M. Townsend Chief, Regulatory Branch Louisville District P.O. Box 59 Louisville, KY 40201-0059 502-315-6675

More Related