(b)(5) deliberative process

Similar documents
Appendix E: Cowardin Classification Coding System

Statewide wetland geospatial inventory update

Improvement of the National Hydrography Dataset for Parts of the Lower Colorado Region and Additional Areas of Importance to the DLCC

SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT INFORMATION REQUESTED FOR VERIFICATION OF CORPS JURISDICTION

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

NATIONAL HYDROGRAPHY DATASET (NHD) UPDATE PROJECT FOR US FOREST SERVICE REGION 3

Wetland Mapping. Wetland Mapping in the United States. State Wetland Losses 53% in Lower US. Matthew J. Gray University of Tennessee

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Update Project for US Forest Service Region 3

Geospatial Models Aid in Shoreland Zoning for Rural Maine Communities

Southern California Coastal Water Research Project. Sharon De Leon. California State University Northridge. June 19, May 2013

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Wetland and Riparian Mapping: An Overview of the Montana Program

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

MISSOURI LiDAR Stakeholders Meeting

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Version TNW Only 1 of 3

MVP WMS, George Schorr

Appendix I Feasibility Study for Vernal Pool and Swale Complex Mapping

Distinct landscape features with important biologic, hydrologic, geomorphic, and biogeochemical functions.

USGS Hydrography Overview. May 9, 2018

A Comprehensive Inventory of the Number of Modified Stream Channels in the State of Minnesota. Data, Information and Knowledge Management.

Wetland Mapping & Functional Assessment Canadian River Watershed New Mexico. Association of State Wetland Managers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

New Land Cover & Land Use Data for the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Chapter 6. Fundamentals of GIS-Based Data Analysis for Decision Support. Table 6.1. Spatial Data Transformations by Geospatial Data Types

Development and Land Use Change in the Central Potomac River Watershed. Rebecca Posa. GIS for Water Resources, Fall 2014 University of Texas

Minimum Standards for Aquatic Resource Delineations

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Savannah District s Revised SOP: Moving Towards A Functional Approach. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

Use of Remote Sensing and GIS for Wetland, Riparian, and Watershed Assessment, Restoration, and Monitoring

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Data Dictionary Hudson River Features: Estuary shoreline Flood scenario Emergency Services: Police stations Fire stations EMS

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Chesapeake Bay Remote Sensing Pilot Executive Briefing

Phase 6 Land Use Database version 1

Global reviews of wetland inventory, classification and delineation

Critical Area Mapping Update Project St. Mary s County Town Hall April 8th, :30 p.m.

Schuyler County Idle Farmland Analysis. Conducted by Cornell Cooperative Extension of Schuyler County

Home About Us Articles Press Releases Image Gallery Contact Us Media Kit Free Subscription 10/5/2006 5:56:35 PM

Wetlands and Riparian Mapping Framework Technical Meeting

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

software, just as word processors or databases are. GIS was originally developed and cartographic capabilities have been augmented by analysis tools.

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

EEC Modification Project. Initial Draft Resource Report 10 Alternatives. 569 Brookwood Village Suite 749 Birmingham, Alabama 35209

HURRICANE NATE BRIEFING

Development of Improved Stream Mapping for NC

PILOT PROJECT: Wetland Mapping for the Town of Dryden, New York

Denis White NSI Technical Services Corporation 200 SW 35th St. Corvallis, Oregon 97333

Improvement of the National Hydrography Dataset for US Forest Service Region 3 in Cooperation with the National Forest Service

Laboratory Exercise #4 Geologic Surface Processes in Dry Lands

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Southwest LRT Habitat Analysis. May 2016 Southwest LRT Project Technical Report

The Evolution of NWI Mapping and How It Has Changed Since Inception

The National Hydrography Dataset in the Pacific Region. U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey

THE USE OF GEOSPATIAL DATA TO SUPPORT VULNERABILITY MAPPING OF THE OREGON COAST. Kelvin Raiford MS Candidate Geography Department of Geosciences

What is a watershed or landscape perspective?

Louisiana Transportation Engineering Conference. Monday, February 12, 2007

Potential Restorable Wetlands (PRWs):

LIDAR: Statutory Compliance Benefits for Nebraska Natural Resources

2011 Land Use/Land Cover Delineation. Meghan Jenkins, GIS Analyst, GISP Jennifer Kinzer, GIS Coordinator, GISP

Application #: TEXT

Wessinger Road, Hilton Area Chapin, South Carolina

3D Elevation Program- Status and Updates. Oklahoma GI Council Meeting November 2, 2018 Claire DeVaughan US Geological Survey

GRAPEVINE LAKE MODELING & WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

Kyoto and Carbon Initiative - the Ramsar / Wetlands International perspective

A Help Guide for Using gssurgo to Find Potential Wetland Soil Landscapes

3Chapter Three: Rescue and Response

Glaciers of Mt. Baker. Mt. Baker is located in Mt. Baker National for in the North West part of Washington. There are

Landscape Planning Framework

Guide for the determination of waterways using the spatial data layer Queensland waterways for waterway barrier works

A NEW GIS-BASED RIVER BASIN FRAMEWORK

Huron Creek Watershed 2005 Land Use Map

3.11 Floodplains Existing Conditions

Remote Sensing and Geospatial Application for Wetlands Mapping, Assessment, and Mitigation

Flood Map. National Dataset User Guide

APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

±10.89 AC. Lincreek Drive Columbia, South Carolina. Site. Property Features. For Sale. Tom Milliken

Current and Future Technology Applications for Coastal Zone Management. Bruce K. Carlisle, Acting Director Office of Coastal Zone Management

Trip and Parking Generation Study of Orem Fitness Center-Abstract

GIS Data and Technology to Support Transportation & MPO Decision-Making & Planning. using an Eco-Logical* Approach within the Kansas City Region

Fig 1. Steps in the EcoValue Project

Information for File MVP RMM

ESRI NONPROFIT/CONSERVATION GRANTS PROGRAM STATUS REPORT JANUARY 2010

Leveraging LiDAR for Statewide NHD Hydrography Projects. Susan Phelps, CFM, GISP

MEMORANDUM FOR SWG

Hydrology and Watershed Analysis

MARYLAND S LAND USE/LAND COVER MAP AND ASSOCIATED ANALYSIS

USGS National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and NHDPlus

KENTUCKY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN RISK ASSESSMENT

Eyes in the Sky & Data Analysis.

Two-Dimensional Simulation of Truckee River Hydrodynamics

National Wetland Inventory

Link to USGS Phase 6 Land Use Viewer website:

Transcription:

-----Original Message----- From: Jensen, Stacey M CIV USARMY CEHQ (US) Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 1:00 PM To: 'Goodin, John' <Goodin.John@epa.gov> Cc: Eisenberg, Mindy <Eisenberg.Mindy@epa.gov>; Moyer, Jennifer A CIV USARMY CEHQ (US) <Jennifer.A.Moyer@usace.army.mil>; Kwok, Rose <Kwok.Rose@epa.gov> Subject: RE: Two actions Hi John, I have provided the graphics you requested (attached) along with some draft "key takeaways." Let me know what you think. I am also putting together a graphic for the visual of the flow relationships; I'll have something shortly. Stacey M. Jensen HQUSACE Regulatory Program Manager 441 G Street NW Washington, DC 20314 (202) 761-5856 -----Original Message----- From: Goodin, John [mailto:goodin.john@epa.gov] Sent: Monday, September 04, 2017 6:08 PM To: Jensen, Stacey M CIV USARMY CEHQ (US) <Stacey.M.Jensen@usace.army.mil> Cc: Eisenberg, Mindy <Eisenberg.Mindy@epa.gov>; Moyer, Jennifer A CIV USARMY CEHQ (US) <Jennifer.A.Moyer@usace.army.mil>; Kwok, Rose <Kwok.Rose@epa.gov> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Two actions Hi, Stacey-- Mindy and I poured over the totality of the briefing materials for Lamont and the Administrator and made some edits consistent with my last email to the group and Mindy's forthcoming one tonight. Two things that would benefit from your expertise are: Thanks! John (b)(5) deliberative process CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED

Breakdown of Flow Regimes in NHD Streams Nationwide Both length (miles) and count (number) of streams were the same percentages. 30% of all streams are perennial; 52% of all streams are intermittent; 18% of all streams are ephemeral. Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Perennial 30% Ephemeral 18% *Note that NHD focused their mapping efforts of ephemeral streams in the Arid West. In the rest of the country, many of the ephemeral streams are classified as intermittent or are not mapped. Intermittent 52%

Withhold In Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Arid West for NHD analysis included AZ, CA, CO, ID, NV, NM, OR, TX, UT, WA, WY

Withhold In Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Breakdown of Flow Regimes in Arid West Streams as Mapped in NHD 18% of all streams count in the Arid West are perennial; 47% of all streams count in the Arid West are intermittent; and 35% of all streams count in the Arid West are ephemeral. 13% of all stream length in the Arid West is perennial; 48% of all stream length in the Arid West is intermittent; and 39% of all stream length in the Arid West is ephemeral. COUNT LENGTH Perennial 18% Perennial 13% Ephemeral 35% Ephemeral 39% Intermittent 47% Intermittent 48%

Key Takeaways for NHD-mapped Waters Intermittent Streams: Majority of total length and number of NHD features comprise Intermittent Streams (~52%) Intermittent Streams are found in every state. The median value of stream miles by type for all states is: Intermittent Streams - ~46,000 miles; Perennial Streams - ~24,000; and Ephemeral Streams - ~300 miles. Potential policy options for defining relatively permanent flow excluding Intermittent Streams could result in a large reduction in jurisdiction and would impact every state. Arid West: NHD mapping has focused on distinguishing Ephemeral from Intermittent Streams in the Arid West more than other parts of the U.S. In NHD, the majority of mapped Ephemeral Streams (~99%) and a large portion of mapped Intermittent Streams (47%) are in the Arid West. ~87% of all mapped stream length in the Arid West is either Ephemeral (39%) or Intermittent (48%). Based on NHD analysis, the proposed options for defining relatively permanent flow could result in a greater reduction of jurisdiction in Arid West states than in other states. Canals/Ditches: NHD does not map all canals/ditches that may be of stakeholder interest. Canals/Ditches comprise 4% of the overall NHD-mapped features. Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process

NHD Caveats and Status Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Caveats: NHD does not map all streams or waterbodies. The majority of perennial and most intermittent streams are captured at this resolution. Ephemeral streams: although such streams do exist throughout the country, the NHD dataset focused their mapping efforts on ephemeral streams in the Arid West. Ephemeral streams in the rest of the country were generally classified as intermittent or are not mapped in the dataset. This may result in an underestimation of the number of ephemeral streams throughout the country, although it does give a more accurate picture of the stream network in the Arid West. Canals/Ditches: not all canals/ditches are mapped in NHD or they may be mapped as tributaries. NHD does not depict jurisdictional status of streams. No available national datasets depict the jurisdictional extent of all mapped waters. Status: still reviewing data for further, more detailed analysis. Need to complete analysis of NHD lakes/ponds data.

Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Total Number of Potential Wetlands in NWI Nationwide 87,602 54,312 Total Acreage of Potential Wetlands in NWI Nationwide 1,809,093 1,227,780 17,965,942 79,773,823 Estuarine Lacustrine Palustrine Estuarine Lacustrine Palustrine

Nationwide Percentage of NWI Potential Wetland Acreage Intersecting NHD-mapped Streams 0.5% Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process 13.2% 50.9% 34.8% 0.6% Ephemeral Intermittent Perennial Undefined Flow Not Intersecting

Key Takeaways for NWI-mapped Potential Wetlands Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process Majority of NWI-mapped potential wetlands in both number and acreage are Palustrine (freshwater wetlands). This may be because wetlands associated with lakes/ponds (Lacustrine) are generally smaller in number and size due to the depth of water and limited floodplains compared to streams, and there are many more interior freshwater systems than remaining coastal wetlands (Estuarine) due to coastal development. Potential policy options for defining continuous surface connections may reduce jurisdiction over Palustrine waters the most since they may not be directly touching rivers, lakes, or tidal waters. Majority of NWI-mapped potential wetlands (by acreage) do not intersect any NHD stream feature. The proposed option of defining continuous surface connection as directly touching a waters of the U.S. may result in ~51% of NWI-mapped potential wetland acreage not being considered adjacent.

Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Key Takeaways for NWI-mapped Potential Wetlands (cont d) Of the 49% of NWI-mapped potential wetland acreage which does intersect an NHD stream, the largest proportion intersect Perennial Streams. Perennial Streams would be expected to have wider floodplains and larger acreages of adjacent wetlands than Intermittent or Ephemeral Streams. Majority of potential wetland acreage which intersected NHD streams was Palustrine which correlates with the majority of mapped potential wetland acreage in NWI being Palustrine; larger wetlands may more often intersect NHD-mapped streams due to their size, landscape position, and hydrology. However, 51% of all Palustrine wetlands did not intersect any NHD stream. Estuarine potential wetlands almost exclusively intersected perennial streams. The option selected for RPW would have an effect on the option selected for CSC; for example, ~13% of NWI potential wetlands intersected Intermittent Streams. Small amounts of acreage of NWI-mapped potential wetlands intersect Ephemeral Streams. Ephemeral Streams often lack adequate hydrology to maintain adjacent wetlands. Reminder: NHD has generally not mapped Ephemeral Streams outside the Arid West.

NWI Caveats Withhold in Entirety (b)(5) Deliberative Process NWI does not map all wetlands and deepwater habitats. Certain wetland habitats may be excluded from the NWI because of the limitations of aerial imagery interpretation. The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery and/or field work. NWI does not recognize ephemeral water areas as a wetland type so ephemeral waters/wetlands are not included. These are areas flooded or ponded less than seven days. Certain wetlands are harder to identify remotely (e.g., wetlands in forested areas). NWI excludes certain types of farmed wetlands as defined by the Food Security Act. Wetlands are dynamic systems that may sustain several years of drought conditions, making it difficult to identify and map simply because they are not detected on aerial imagery. Small wetlands <1.0 acre are not required to be mapped; minimum mapping unit target for NWI is 1.0 acre. Wetland boundary location can be an inaccurate up to 10 meters and still be acceptable. NWI does not depict jurisdictional status of wetlands. No available national datasets depict the jurisdictional extent of all mapped wetlands.