100 likes | 198 Views
Adapting the North Carolina Merger 01 Process to be Compliant with Section 6002. Clarence W. Coleman, P.E. North Carolina Division. Merger 01 Background Information. 404/NEPA process agreement signed in 1997, revisions began 2001
E N D
Adapting the North Carolina Merger 01 Processto be Compliant with Section 6002 Clarence W. Coleman, P.E. North Carolina Division
Merger 01 Background Information • 404/NEPA process agreement signed in 1997, revisions began 2001 • Modified Merger Process was approved in 2005 with an MOU signed by USACE, NCDOT, FHWA, and NC Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Merger 01 Concurrent Points • Concurrence Point 1: Purpose and Need and Study Area Defined • Concurrence Point 2: Detailed Study Alternatives Carried Forward (DSA) • Concurrence Point 2A: Bridging Decisions and Alignment Review • Concurrence Point 3: LEDPA/Preferred Alternative Selection • Concurrence Point 4A: Avoidance and Minimization • Concurrence Point 4B: 30% Hydraulic Review • Concurrence Point 4C: Permit Drawings Review
Merger Process: Project Specific Details • Project Schedule • Development • Availability and modifications • Public Involvement Procedures • Agency Roles and Responsibilities • Review Time Frames & Deadlines
Section 6002 of SAFETEA-LU • Requires a Coordination Plan be developed for projects requiring an EIS • Coordination Plan may be Programmatic • NCDOT decided not to pursue the exemption allowed under Section 6002.
Merger 01 Update for Section 6002 Compliance • FHWA Division Office reviewed Merger 01 Guidance to determine what needed to be updated to make Guidance Section 6002 compliant. • Most substantive change for Section 6002 compliance is soliciting public input on Purpose and Need statement prior to concurrence on Concurrence Point 1.
Merger 01 Process Update for Section 6002 Compliance • Merger update includes revised commenting periods, collaboration on methodologies, and responsibilities of participating agencies. • During updating of Merger 01 Process, the Office of Project Development and Environmental Review (HEPE) participated in the review. The updated document also was also legally reviewed.
Benefits of Programmatic Approach • Approval of coordination plan for individual projects is not necessary. • Participating agencies are already familiar with process and are aware of pending changes. • Consistency will likely lead to increased efficiency in completing the environmental review process.
Merger “Concurrence” vs Satisfying SAFETEA-LU Challenges • Empowering “Participating Agencies” who are not Merger signatories • “Collaboration on Methodologies and Level of Detail for Alternatives” • Reaching “concurrence”