SAFETEA-LU: Environmental Provisions for Transportation Planning Michael Culp FHWA Office of Project Development and Environmental Review

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

SAFETEA-LU Efficient Environmental Review Process (Section 6002) Kelly Dunlap.

Advertisements

Environmental Commitments Categorical Exclusion Training Class.

NEPA Environmental Procedure Pam Truitt, Grants Management Consultant  September 4, 2014.

Environmental Compliance Negotiating our way through the process…

Forest Service Transportation Planning Process Anthony Erba National Land Management Planning Specialist Ecosystem Management Coordination USDA Forest.

Trisha White, Director Habitat and Highways Campaign Defenders of Wildlife.

Environmental Review: NEPA, TEPA and Tribes. NEPA – good and bad for Tribes Tribes can use as tool to slow, examine, participate in process and urge changes.

Executive Order Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure Project Reviews Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure.

FOIA and NEPA Federal Highway Administration Environmental Conference June 2006.

1 Planning and Environment Linkages: Case Studies Michael Culp and John Humeston FHWA November 2, 2006.

1 How to Succeed in Statewide and MPO Transportation Planning.

NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.

Environmental Justice: Policies, Guidance, and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions FTA Region VII Civil Rights Training.

Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.

Connecticut Department of Transportation Bureau of Policy & Planning.

I n t e g r a t I n g C S S Practitioner Module 3 Module 3: CSS and Livability In Area Wide Planning.

Colorado: Planning and Environmental Linkages Integrated Planning Work Group Peer Exchange Washington, DC – January 27, 2009.

L O N G B E A C H, C A. Ryk Dunkelberg Barnard Dunkelberg & Company Roles Of Sponsor, Consultant and FAA During NEPA Process L O N G B E.

Funding Levels Similar funding levels to the Transportation Enhancement Activities under SAFETEA-LU: FY 2013: $808,760,000 FY 2014: $819,900,000 Total.

Page CDBG Recipients' Workshop Community Finance Division NEPA Environmental Procedures.

Awareness Guidance for Mainstreaming Environmental Stewardship and Enhancements Activities into Planning and Project Development November 2009.

2012 FTIP/FSTIP Workshop Project Selection Process.

THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.

Is NEPA Preventing Energy Development? Bryan Hannegan, Ph.D. Associate Director – Energy and Transportation White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Overview of SAFETEA-LU Sections 6001, 6002, 3005, and 3006 TRB January 13, 2008 Shari Schaftlein FHWA Project Development & Environmental Review Washington,

Coordination of Section 106 and Long Range Planning July 2014 NCHRP 25-25/Task 87.

Ron Hall Tribal Technical Assistance Program Colorado State University

MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Virginia Association of Planning District Commissions October 4, 2012.

SAFETEA-LU Changes  Exemption of the Interstate System from Section 4(f) [Section 6007]  de minimis impacts to historic sites [Section 6009(a)]  de.

Mitigation in the Section 106 Process Dave Berwick Army Program Manager Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.

CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.

Planning and Environment Linkages: Overview and Examples TRB Workshop on Environmental Analysis January 13, 2008 Michael Culp and Rob Ritter FHWA Office.

INTRODUCTION TO SECTION 4(f) Presented by Ian Chidister Environmental Program Manager FHWA – Wisconsin Division December 4, 2013.

Initiative to Integrate an Eco-Logical Approach to Infrastructure Development Air Quality Advisory Committee July 24, 2008.

SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”

Number of Copies Agency Submissions & Comments. Coordination ESRs are reviewed by OES and coordinated with resource agencies as part of the NEPA review.

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE: FROM PLANNING TO PROJECT Ohio Planning Conference July 16, 2014.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.

SAFETEA-LU: Workshop on Planning and Environmental Issues AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence October 17-19, 2005 Arlington, Virginia.

Linking Planning & NEPA Overview Mitch Batuzich FHWA Texas Division FHWA Texas Division April 17, 2007.

May 5, 2007 AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways.

Title Subtitle Meeting Date Office of Transportation Performance Management T3 Webinar Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Performance Measures June 12,

Solutions on the Horizon: Integrated Planning in the 21 st Century Trisha White Defenders of Wildlife.

Recreational Trails Program Federal Requirements.

1 Implementing the Concepts Environment Pre-Conference Workshop TRB MPOs Present and Future Conference August 27, 2006 Michael Culp FHWA Office of Project.

1 CDBG and Environmental Review For Local Officials.

Why Conserve Swainson’s Hawks?. Two Reasons Endangered Species Act –Section 2080 –Incidental take permit –HCP CEQA –Mandatory finding of significance.

PEL 101: The Tools for Adopting and Implementing a PEL Approach August 20, 2009.

Environmental Justice: Context Sensitive Planning Grant Program California Department of Transportation Division of Transportation Planning Office of Community.

Environmental Commitments/Tracking. Environmental Commitments Federal Agencies Shall –Use all practicable means consistent with the requirements of.

Metropolitan Planning Organization for Blair County (Altoona MSA) Regional Long Range Transportation Plan Draft Agency Coordination Meeting (ACM)

Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,

FHWA’s Current Activities Related to Climate Change Southeastern Natural Resource Leadership Group Regional Climate Change Meeting Charleston, SC May 27,

TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM 2016 Project Scoring Update Workshop.

The Kern Regional Transportation Plan A Vision and Guidebook for Kern County in 2025.

South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office and the Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands July 24, 2013 National Grasslands Visitor Center.

Highlights of the “Procedural Guidance” Results of transportation planning process “inform” the NEPA process. Format of planning products for inclusion.

Statewide and Nonmetropolitan Planning Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPOs) State Programs Meeting 8/7/13 John Sprowls Community Planner,

Federal Aviation Administration ARP SOP No SOP for CATEX Determinations Effective Date: Oct. 01, 2014 February 2016.

UW - Madison Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) David L. Kopacz, P.E. Wisconsin Division Office February 20, 2015.

Integration of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) NEPA and NHPA A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and.

Welcome to the Public Comment Hearing on the Proposed Regulatory Update to the California Environmental Quality Act AB 52, Gatto (2014) Heather Baugh Assistant.

Wetlands Focus Group. Responsibilities and Goals   Growth Managements Act (Chapter 163, FS) of 1985   Included the adoption of the State Comprehensive.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Migratory Bird Program Conserving America’s Birds Addressing Migratory Birds in NEPA Migratory Bird Conservation for Federal.

NC RPO Meeting July 25, 2018.

Planning Mitigation February 24, 2016

Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class – Presented by the Office of Environmental Services.

Protecting What We Love Building What We Need – The “H” Factor

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

NEPA Assignment Program Overview

Presentation transcript:

SAFETEA-LU: Environmental Provisions for Transportation Planning Michael Culp FHWA Office of Project Development and Environmental Review Summer Meeting of ADC50 Williamsburg, VA July 26, 2006

SAFETEA-LU Section 6001 Expanded environmental considerations in Metropolitan and Statewide Transportation Planning –Consultation –Mitigation

Consultation Provision During development of long-range transportation MPOs and States must consult “as appropriate” with State and local agencies responsible for: –Land-use management –Natural resources –Environmental protection –Conservation –Historic preservation For Statewide plans, States must also consult with Tribal agencies

Consultation Provision (cont) The consultation shall involve, “as appropriate” –Comparison of transportation plans with State conservation plans or maps, if available; or –Comparison of transportation plans to inventories of natural or historic resources, if available

Plans and Inventories What are the other plans or inventories that might be considered? Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plans Wildlife Action Plans Special Area Management Plans Historic Resource Inventories Watershed Plans Green Infrastructure Planning Land Use Plans Natural Heritage Databases Transportationplan

Mitigation Provision Long-range transportation plans must include a discussion of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential locations to carry them out –Must be developed in consultation with Federal, State and Tribal wildlife, land management, and regulatory agencies

How do the planning provisions relate to project development, NEPA and 106?

A few differences… Local and State elected officials – driven process High level (systems- perspective) Produces Long Range Plan/TIP Process Certified by FHWA/FTA Not a Federal Action or reviewable by courts Lead agency/FHWA driven Project-Alternatives specific NEPA document/MOA Approved by FHWA Federal Action, reviewable by courts Transportation Planning Project Development/NEPA/106

Consideration of Cultural Resources Preservation plans Data/inventories General assessment Fuzzy, systems-level Project –specific inventories Project-specific analysis Focused consideration of significance & eligibility Transportation Planning Project Development/NEPA/106

Mitigation General discussion of mitigation “activities” Avoidance and minimization during plan development Eco-system-level, banking (most value) Fuzzy, systems-level Project –specific impact mitigation, avoidance and minimization Project-level, at project site and in-kind (may be costly and low value) Transportation Planning Project Development/NEPA/106

What’s in it for you? Better Plans, Projects and Stewardship Early involvement in planning envisioned as part of NEPA to ensure better decisions Planning products are being encouraged to be used in NEPA, given that they are done appropriately Projects from a “environmentally-considerate” planning process will be better projects If resource agencies are not involved, may have problems down the road

Some next steps NPRM for Planning is currently out for comment until September 7, 2006 Deadline for Planning Agencies to comply with provisions is July 1, 2007 Agencies will likely be developing approaches to meet requirements soon

Thank You!