|
Section 2
<br />Statewide Demographic, Economic, and Social Setting
<br />Construction of water projects frequently requires an EIS
<br />addressing both construction and operation of the
<br />project. The EIS will address impacts on land use, socio-
<br />economics, hydrology, water rights and stream flows,
<br />water quality, vegetation of wetlands, wildlife, fisheries,
<br />threatened and endangered plant and animal species,
<br />cultural resources, recreation, transportation, sensitive
<br />environmental areas, water supply, hydropower, energy
<br />consumption, state species of special concern, flood
<br />control, soils, geology, air quality, and noise. Other
<br />issues may also be addressed if in the public scoping
<br />process.
<br />2.5.3 Endangered Species Act
<br />Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires consultation with the
<br />USFWS for any federal action that may affect a species
<br />listed as threatened or endangered (listed species). This
<br />consultation process may result in USFWS issuing a
<br />biological opinion identifying actions to be undertaken to
<br />avoid jeopardizing a species, adversely modifying critical
<br />habitat, or an acceptable level of incidental take resulting
<br />from the proposed action and reasonable and prudent
<br />measures to offset the incidental take. Implementation of
<br />reasonable and prudent measures is non-discretionary
<br />by the federal action agency.
<br />The NEPA analysis focuses on the environmental
<br />impacts of the proposed action, any adverse
<br />environmental effects that cannot be avoided, the
<br />relationship between short-term uses of the environment
<br />and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term
<br />productivity, and any irreversible and irretrievable
<br />commitments of resources. The analysis addresses
<br />direct and indirect impacts, and defines mitigation
<br />measures for impacts that must be carried out by project
<br />sponsors. The data and analysis developed are
<br />commensurate with the significance of the impact. The
<br />EIS analysis must be in sufficient detail to identify all
<br />significant impacts. For water projects, this process will
<br />likely take a minimum of 2 years, and a maximum of
<br />5 years, depending on the scope and impacts of the
<br />project.
<br />The NEPA process must integrate and incorporate the
<br />requirements of other statutes, and Executive Orders
<br />including those on Indian Trust assets, Indian sacred
<br />sites, and environmental justice. On completion of the
<br />NEPA process, the federal action agency will issue a
<br />record of decision. The federal agency's record of
<br />decision incorporates all of the environmental
<br />commitments made by the applicant in order to mitigate
<br />the impacts of the project and to comply with other
<br />federal laws, including the Fish and Wildlife Coordination
<br />Act, National Historic Preservation Act, ESA, other laws,
<br />and Executive Orders. The environmental commitments
<br />are also incorporated into any permits issued by USACE,
<br />or other agencies, that are needed to implement the
<br />project, and those commitments become enforceable
<br />terms of the permit.
<br />~
<br />$~ole'ri~ice Wo~e' $upplY Initia~ive
<br />The initiation of Section 7 consultation requires the
<br />identification of a proposed federal action that may
<br />adversely affect federally-listed threatened or
<br />endangered species. Therefore, consultation often is not
<br />initiated until the later stages of the NEPA process and
<br />usually only on the preferred alternative. A biological
<br />assessment (BA) is prepared by the federal action
<br />agency that identifies impacts on endangered species.
<br />The BA and other information are used by USFWS in
<br />preparing the biological opinion. A 135-day period is
<br />allowed for the Service to complete a biological opinion
<br />following initiation of formal consultation. However, this
<br />period will very likely be extended on complex projects
<br />for up to 1 year or more.
<br />The Section 7 regulations require that the effects of a
<br />proposed action are added to the baseline to determine if
<br />the species isjeopardized by the totality of actions that
<br />may affect it (cumulative impact). If the species is
<br />jeopardized by the proposed action, in addition to all
<br />other actions, then a jeopardy biological opinion with
<br />reasonable and prudent alternatives is issued. The
<br />project sponsor is normally required to implement the
<br />reasonable and prudent alternatives. Some of the actions
<br />emanating from a consultation process (i.e., agency
<br />commitments, reasonable and prudent alternatives, and
<br />reasonable and prudent measures) may require changes
<br />to alternatives, and can affect the NEPA process by
<br />presenting actions that have not been fully evaluated.
<br />2.5.4 1041 Regulations
<br />The "1041 regulations" are a special case of land use
<br />powers relating to matters of statewide concern, and
<br />have been used by some counties to control water
<br />project development within the county. The regulations
<br />give counties review and approval authorities over the
<br />~~
<br />S:\REPORT\WORD PROCESSING\REPORT\S2 11-10.04.DOC 2-19
<br />
|