Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:


Pages 23-52

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 23...
... 23 C h a p t e r 5 The assurance needs of resource agencies and transportation agencies as they relate to ecosystem approaches were summarized under Assurance Needs in Chapter 3. Many of these needs relate to advance mitigation.
From page 24...
... 24Table 5.1. Essential Features and Limitations of Mechanisms for Regulatory Assurances Regulatory Tool Description Assurances Provided Advantages Disadvantages Page Number in Report Clean Water Act Section 404 Assurances Wetland banking Either a DOT or a third party establishes an area of constructed, restored, or preserved wetlands and negotiates agreement with resource agency regarding the number of credits that can be sold to applicants requiring wetland mitigation.
From page 25...
... 25 Regional general permit (RGP) Permits issued to cover activities within a limited geographic area.
From page 26...
... 26 Table 5.1. Essential Features and Limitations of Mechanisms for Regulatory Assurances (continued)
From page 27...
... 27 Recovery credits A specific program established to implement recovery actions on nonfederal lands for specific species while creating a bank of credits for a federal agency to use to offset the effects of its actions. Recovery credits require a net benefit to the recovery of a species.
From page 28...
... 28 resources. These agencies include state historic preservation officers, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, USFWS, USACE, and others.
From page 29...
... 29 • Simplicity: Approaches that reduced the regulatory process to the simplest method possible were favored. • Stewardship: A key objective for the Oregon DOT was to demonstrate commitment to the stewardship component of the agency's transportation mission through building green bridges with minimal effect to the environment.
From page 30...
... 30 acquisition criteria and a finance plan to determine how much will be allocated each year. Acquisitions have been completed, and USFWS has issued a BO for Highway 176, among other areas (San Diego Association of Governments, TransNet)
From page 31...
... 31 strengthened and clarified in the 2008 Mitigation Rule (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and U.S.
From page 32...
... 32 actual implementation, a portion of credits may be released at the initial establishment of a bank through long-term protection of the mitigation site. Phased credit release allows banks to sell credits as specific milestones are met.
From page 33...
... 33 established by state legislation, for unavoidable impacts. Water management districts conduct water-quality and restoration planning within their districts, identifying both preservation and restoration needs.
From page 34...
... 34 and preserving ecosystem functions and compensating for impacts at the watershed level. The program addresses watershed concerns, including preservation of threatened high-quality sites and restoration of wetlands and riparian buffers along impaired streams.
From page 35...
... 35 Nationwide Permits, State Programmatic General Permits, and Regional General Permits How It Works USACE issues a nationwide permit (NWP) , state programmatic general permit (SPGP)
From page 36...
... 36 protect is controversial, though there is recognition of the need to ensure public resources (including conservation and restoration investments) are spent wisely.
From page 37...
... 37 Table 5.3. Representative Completed SAMPs SAMP Project (State)
From page 38...
... 38 intended to streamline the environmental process while establishing long-term development goals. The project integrates four plans: a new general plan, four new transportation corridors under the Community and Environmental Transportation Acceptability Process, a multispecies habitat conservation plan (MSHCP)
From page 39...
... 39 watershed. Selected areas can fulfill multiple beneficial watershed needs and regulatory requirements for a number of agencies at the same time.
From page 40...
... 40 Watershed action plans (Ohio, other states) Representative example of state program implemented by local watershed groups to identify mitigation priorities (Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 1997)
From page 41...
... 41 identify preferred locations for conservation and restoration in four watersheds in southwestern Maryland. To support the registry, the Baltimore District GIS staff created a comprehensive mapping tool that suggests what types of activities might be most beneficial to a watershed and where those activities ought to occur.
From page 42...
... 42 during the planning phase. Preconsultation allows the action agency, in coordination with the Services, to assess the most appropriate method for ESA consultation (i.e., informal, formal, programmatic, or other)
From page 43...
... 43 FHWA Web-Based Biological Assessment Tool The FHWA web-based BA tool is an online resource to streamline preparation and submittal of complete regular, nonprogrammatic BAs under ESA Section 7, for which FHWA is the lead federal action agency. The five priorities that drove development of the tool were • Streamline the BA development process by helping preparers develop complete and accurate BAs.
From page 44...
... 44 Association v. National Marine Fisheries Service, No.
From page 45...
... 45 Considerable project-specific information is required for this approach. The design of each project is sufficiently developed to accurately assess its potential effects and anticipated take, if any.
From page 46...
... 46 Table 5.5. Sample Programmatic Section 7 Agreements, Biological Assessments, and Biological Opinions State Title Year Agencies Proposed Action Action Area Species Covered Incidental Take Mitigation–Compensation California Programmatic Formal Endangered Species Act Consultation on Issuance of 404 Permits for Projects with Relatively Small Effects on Listed Vernal Pool Crustaceans within the Jurisdiction of the Sacramento Field Office, California 1996 USFWS USACE Any action under review by USACE that meets the conditions of the agreement.
From page 47...
... 47 Ohio Programmatic Agreement for the Ohio Programmatic Biological Opinion–Department of Transportation's Statewide Transportation Program and its effects on the Indiana Bat 2007 USFWS FHWA Ohio DOT Continuing implementation of Ohio DOT's statewide transportation program, including current and future road construction and maintenance projects over a 5-year period (2007–2012)
From page 48...
... 48 Conservation banks must remain under active management in perpetuity and can be either privately or publicly owned. In each case, the bank operator is allowed to sell credits to infrastructure agencies needing to satisfy legal requirements to compensate for their projects' environmental impacts.
From page 49...
... 49 Examples East Plum CrEEk CoNsErvatioN BaNk, Colorado Three bridge projects were proposed that would cross East Plum Creek in Colorado. Establishing the bank was seen as cheaper than case-by-case mitigation, and it would also provide an opportunity to create a larger habitat area.
From page 50...
... 50 which is likely to cause development entities to evaluate project alternatives prior to impacting threatened and endangered species and their habitats" (Peck et al.
From page 51...
... 51 Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances How It Works Candidate conservation agreements (CCAs) are formal agreements between the Services and one or more parties to address the conservation needs of proposed or candidate species or species likely to become candidates.
From page 52...
... 52 a CCA. In July 2003, USFWS delayed their listing decision by 6 months to allow completion of the CCA and resolution of some final issues.

Key Terms



This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.