1 / 18

April 20, 2005

8 th National Mitigation & Conservation Banking Conference The Corps’ Perspective on the EEP David Franklin. April 20, 2005.

owen
Télécharger la présentation

April 20, 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. 8th National Mitigation & Conservation Banking Conference The Corps’ Perspective on the EEP David Franklin April 20, 2005

  2. EEP is a partnership with NCDENR, NCDOT, and USACE to manage an effective mitigation program for transportation projects that embraces both environmental stewardship and streamlining

  3. What is relationship of the EEP to the Corps’ regulatory program? MOA transfers responsibility of compensatory mitigation for transportation projects from NCDOT to NCDENR (EEP)

  4. EEP represents a huge paradigm shift: From project by project mitigation to a programmatic, watershed-wide, ecosystem enhancement that produces compensatory mitigation where it provides the most benefit

  5. How is the EEP doing? “Temperature check”

  6. EEP goals/expectations: • Streamlining: • To remove mitigation as one of the top causes of delay in delivery of transportation projects • Up to 80 percent of projects were delayed due to mitigation prior to EEP • No delays due to mitigation in last 22 months

  7. EEP goals/expectations (cont.): • Streamlining: • To establish a more cost effective, comprehensive method to provide compensatory mitigation for transportation project impacts • Multiple impacts addressed with single project • Comprehensive, strategically planned mitigation projects

  8. EEP goals/expectations (cont.): • Stewardship • To dramatically improve ecological effect of compensatory mitigation • Planned mitigation based on watershed needs • Multi-agency involvement - Program Assessment and Consistency Group and facilitated partnerships • Long-term management of mitigation sites

  9. EEP goals/expectations (cont.): • Stewardship • To maximize efficiencies • Facilitated partnerships • Multiple project impacts and watershed needs addressed through comprehensive mitigation projects

  10. EEP goals/expectations (cont.): • Stewardship • To provide successful in-the-ground compensatory mitigation before transportation impacts occur • Schedule established in MOA: • In-the-ground = 2007 • 5th year monitoring completed = 2012

  11. EEP accomplishments: Preservation Acquired Obligated Total Acres protected 26,637 12,958 39,595 (EEP and with partners) Streams (ft) 611,182 727,112 1,338,294 Wetlands (acres) 5,924 2,943 8,867

  12. EEP accomplishments: Restoration/Enhancement Contracted In review Total Streams (ft) Restoration 88,452 280,670 369,122 Enhancement 9,405 9,405 Wetlands (acres) Riverine Restoration 251 134 385 Enhancement 36 36 Nonriverine restoration 166 544 710

  13. EEP challenges:Program needs more accurate forecasting of impacts – New GIS layers covering streams and wetlandsProgram must develop mechanism for dealing with TIP schedule changes Program must resolve potential shortfalls in highly developed/low opportunity areas

  14. EEP challenges (cont.):Program must continue to improve its operational efficiency and product effectiveness Program must maintain close coordination and collaboration with the regulatory and review agencies Program needs adequate supply of qualified, experienced providers – You!

  15. EEP challenges (cont.): National mitigation guidance must allow program to operate without undue restrictions – treated as policy – needs clarification

  16. In closing: Thoughts EEP has changed focus of transportation project review to avoidance and minimization EEP mitigation discussions are separate from project impact discussions - less emotions involved/better decisions EEP has moved mitigation to the forefront – strategic planning Partners (all) can influence EEP at program level (e.g., Endangered and threatened species, EFH, etc.)

  17. In closing: Conclusions EEP has already produced huge successes and is on schedule to meet MOA established targets. Corps considers the EEP as a partnership. We will continue to assist in the advancement of this program. Prediction: EEP will become “the” focus for ecosystem enhancement in North Carolina.

  18. Questions?

More Related