SpecialistReportTemplate.docx

DOCX document 59 KB Posted

Attached to
USDA FS PRESCOTT NF HERITAGE SUPPORT
Solicitation number
AG-94TZ-S-17-0124
Issued by

About this file

SPECIALIST REPORT TEMPLATE

View the file

Other files

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

Resource Name

Project Name Environmental Assessment Resource Report Prepared by:

Name Title for:

Chino Ranger District Prescott National Forest Date

In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.

To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at http://www.ascr.usda.gov/complaint_filing_cust.html and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer and lender.

Resource Report

Table of Contents

Introduction1
Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy1
Regulatory Framework1
Topics and Issues Addressed in This Analysis2
Purpose and Need2
Issues3
Other Resource Concerns3
Resource Indicators and Measures3
Methodology3
Information Sources3
Incomplete and Unavailable Information3
Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis3
Affected Environment4
Existing Condition4
Environmental Consequences5
Alternative 1 – No Action5
Alternative 2 – Proposed Action5
Summary7
Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans8
Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures8
Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted9
References Cited10

To refresh table of contents, click in it and press F9.

To generate a list of tables or figures, go to References tab, captions group and click on “Insert Table of Figures”. Choose the appropriate caption label (table or figure) for the list you want.

Tables

Table 1. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects (example)3
Table 2. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition (example)4
Table 3. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 1 (example)5
Table 4. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 2 direct/indirect effects (example)6
Table 5. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 2 cumulative effects7
Table 6. Summary comparison of environmental effects to (x) resources (example)7

Figures

Blue text provides instructions and guidance.

Resource Report Title of Project, [Name of Resource] Report i Introduction What is your analysis going to focus on? This is a short introductory paragraph briefly describing the intent of the specialist report and stating what attachments, if any, follow the report. (This style is Body Text).

Identify which proposed activities (including connected actions) you are analyzing and why they are included in your analysis. If there are components (actions) of the proposed action that you are not including in your analysis, state why you are not analyzing them.

State if your resource is directly related to the purpose and need (FSH.1909.15, 11.21) and/or issues (FSH 1909.15, 12.4) identified through scoping. Briefly describe any background necessary to set the stage for your analysis.

Relevant Laws, Regulations, and Policy Regulatory Framework Land and Resource Management Plan The Prescott National Forest Land and Resource Management Plan (Forest Plan) provides standards and guidelines for insert type of project and/or resource area.

Forest Plan Standards and Guidelines - Include pertinent Forest Plan standards and guidelines and supplemental management direction as it pertains to the resource you are reporting on.

Include pertinent required monitoring.

Desired Condition Describe the desired condition that is relevant to your resource. Consider Forest Service direction, state and federal laws, and other relevant regulations. Address immediate foreseeable and long-term desired conditions. Cite the direction you are using.

Management Area List applicable Management Areas, MA direction, land management prescriptions and other land allocations pertaining to your resource.

Special Area Designations Describe special area designation as applicable, or delete this heading. This includes the Grapevine Botanical Area.

Federal Law Briefly list the federal laws directly pertaining to your resource – e.g. ESA, Clean Air Act, etc. and describe the basic requirements for compliance. Add or delete from the list below as needed for the resource.

Endangered Species Act

Critical Habitat Unit

Clean Water Act

Clean Air Act

National Historic Preservation Act

National Forest Management Act

Executive Orders Below is a list of some but not all regulations – ensure these are current, and delete or add as needed for your resource.

Invasive Species, EO 13112 of February 3, 1999 Migratory Birds, EO 12962 of January 10, 2001 Environmental Justice, EO 12898 of February 11, 1994 State and Local Law Briefly list the state laws pertaining to your resource – e.g. State Clean Air Act, along with the basic requirements for compliance. Delete or add as needed for your resource.

Regional Water Quality Control Board Requirements Burn Permit –County Air Pollution Control District Other Guidance or Recommendations Other local requirements, guidance documents, agreements, or recommendations (for example – MOUs, conservation plans, etc.) not included in the Forest Plan. Include pertinent ongoing monitoring programs operating outside the Forest Plan. Add or delete topics as needed. Describe the degree of authority – for example, is the document a voluntary agreement, a recommendation? Delete or add as needed for your resource.

National Fire Plan

Topics and Issues Addressed in This Analysis Purpose and Need Is your resource driving all or part of the project’s Purpose and Need for Action? If so explain.

Issues Is your resource associated with a project issue? If so explain.

Other Resource Concerns Are there other resource concerns brought up by the public or associated with law, regulation, and policy?

Resource Indicators and Measures Identify the resource indicators and measures (FSH 1909.15, 12.5) you use in your analysis to measure and disclose effects.

Measures should be understandable, quantifiable, and sensitive to change. They may address the purpose and need, the issues identified during scoping, public comments, and are often based on law, regulation, and policy relevant for your resource.

Table 1. Resource indicators and measures for assessing effects (example)

Resource Element
Resource Indicator
Measure

(Quantify if possible)

Used to address: P/N, or key issue?
Source

(LRMP S/G; law or policy, BMPs, etc.)?

Water quality
Sediment delivery
Number of trail stream crossings
Yes
DBNF Standard

1.E-REC-1

Water quantity
Water yield
Trail density (mi/mi²)
No
DBNF Standard

1.E-REC-3

Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Sediment delivery and streamside cover
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
Yes
DBNF Standard

1.G-ENG-WET-1;

DBNF BMP 3

Soil Stability
Soil Erosion
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade (miles)
No
Research - Marion (2006)

Methodology Describe the method of analysis or basis of your effects analysis. If applicable, discuss models and briefly describe assumptions used and any limitations.

Information Sources Describe sources of information used to support your analysis.

Incomplete and Unavailable Information If you don’t have any, state that.

Note any incomplete and unavailable information pertinent to your resource. Include assumptions made to address the gap and how the missing information influences your effects conclusions, if at all.

Spatial and Temporal Context for Effects Analysis Define the affected spatial area for each resource where effects (direct / indirect and cumulative) may be caused by the proposed activities (FSH.1909.15, 15.2a).

Define the temporal boundaries for each resource from the proposed activities. How long will the effects last? (FSH 1909.15, 152b) Describe the effects timeframes in years (short term vs. long term) and state why this is appropriate. Define short-term and long-term for your resource.

Direct/Indirect Effects Boundaries The spatial boundaries for analyzing the direct and indirect effects to (resource) are (what), because (why).

The temporal boundaries for analyzing the direct and indirect effects are (what), because (why).

Cumulative Effects Boundaries Spatial and temporal boundaries set the limits for selecting the actions most likely to contribute to cumulative effects (FSH 1909.15, 15.2).

The spatial boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects to (resource) are (what), because (why).

The temporal boundaries for analyzing the cumulative effects are (what), because (why).

Affected Environment Existing Condition Describe the existing condition of your resource. Provide historical or background info that supports how the resource has developed into the current condition. The descriptions shall be no longer than is necessary to understand the effects of the alternatives (40 CFR.1502.15).

The existing condition description should be structured around your resource indicators and measures.

Table 2. Resource indicators and measures for the existing condition (example)

Resource Element
Resource Indicator

(Quantify if possible) Measure (Quantify if possible) Existing Condition

Water quality
Sediment delivery
Number of trail stream crossings
73
Water quantity
Water yield
Trail density (mi/mi²)
1.1
Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Sediment delivery and streamside cover
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
17
Soil Stability
Soil Erosion
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade (miles)
6.8

Resource Indicator and Measure 1 Describe and quantify the existing condition related to this analysis indicator. For example, if the indicator is “change in sediment delivery” then be sure your existing condition includes the sources (and amounts, if possible) of sediment delivery currently in your analysis area. Describe how the existing water quality/sediment delivery meets or does not meet desired conditions.

Resource Indicator and Measure 2 Same as above.

Resource Indicator and Measure 3 Same as above.

Environmental Consequences Alternative 1 – No Action By definition, direct and indirect effects (40 CFR 1508.8), and cumulative effects (40 CFR 1508.7) result from the proposed action, and thus are not germane to the No Action alternative.

Use this space to describe the conditions that would develop from not implementing the proposed action. What trends would continue that would not be addressed because no action is taken? This discussion should be structured around your resource indicators. For example, if one of your indicators is “change in sediment delivery,” describe the anticipated sediment delivery and water quality if the proposed action is not implemented.

Refer back to the Existing Condition section for the values associated with your indicators and measures, as needed.

Table 3. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 1 (example)

Resource Element
Resource Indicator

(Quantify if possible) Measure (Quantify if possible) (Alternative 1)

Water quality
Sediment delivery
Number of trail stream crossings
73
Water quantity
Water yield
Trail density (mi/mi²)
1.1
Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Sediment delivery and streamside cover
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
17
Soil Stability
Soil Erosion
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade (miles)
6.8

Alternative 2 – Proposed Action If you feel it necessary, provide a brief (one paragraph) overview of the proposed action, only providing the details that may later be necessary to support your analysis.

Direct and Indirect Effects - Alternative 2 The direct and indirect effects discussion can be combined into one section as long as you distinguish the two types of effects. Direct effects occur at the time and place the action is implemented--describe effects that would occur directly to your resource as a result of the proposed actions. Indirect effects occur off-site or later in time--discuss the effects that could be caused indirectly by the proposed actions.

Resource Indicator and Measure 1 All effects discussions should disclose the values for your resource indicators and measures, as well as a narrative interpretation of “so what?” – what do the results mean in terms of meeting the purpose and need, addressing the issues, complying with law, regulation, and policy, and environmental effects to your resource?

Resource Indicator and Measure 2 Same as above.

Resource Indicator and Measure 3 Same as above.

Table 4. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 2 direct/indirect effects (example)

Resource Element
Resource Indicator

(Quantify if possible) Measure (Quantify if possible) Alternative 2 Direct/Indirect Effects

Water quality
Sediment delivery
Number of trail stream crossings
44
Water quantity
Water yield
Trail density (mi/mi²)
0.9
Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Sediment delivery and streamside cover
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
9
Soil Stability
Soil Erosion
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade (miles)
6.8

Cumulative Effects – Alternative 2 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Activities Relevant to Cumulative Effects Analysis Cumulative impacts result from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions.

If there are no direct or indirect effects of the proposed action, there cannot be cumulative effects.

Use the master list of specific projects provided by your IDT leader to identify the past, present and reasonably foreseeable activities projects that are relevant to your resource for cumulative effects. Actions can be on other agency or private lands, and inside or outside of the project area boundary area depending on your spatial boundary (identified above). State clearly which projects from the master list have the potential to affect your resource, and those are the projects you considered in your cumulative effects analysis.

Cumulative effects analyses use the same resource indicators and measures as your direct and indirect effects.

Resource Indicator and Measure 1 All effects discussions should disclose the values for your resource indicators and measures, as well as a narrative interpretation of “so what?” – what do the results mean in terms of meeting the purpose and need, addressing the issues, complying with law, regulation, and policy, and environmental effects to your resource?

Resource Indicator and Measure 2 Same as above.

Resource Indicator and Measure 3 Same as above.

Table 5. Resource indicators and measures for alternative 2 cumulative effects

Resource Element
Resource Indicator

(Quantify if possible) Measure (Quantify if possible) Alternative 2 Cumulative Effects

Water quality
Sediment delivery
Number of trail stream crossings
44
Water quantity
Water yield
Trail density (mi/mi²)
0.9
Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Sediment delivery and streamside cover
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
9
Soil Stability
Soil Erosion
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade (miles)
6.8

Summary This is a concise summary comparison of the effects of the alternatives, describing your conclusions and including the “so what?” narratives to clearly explain what your analysis means for your resource. It includes the resource indicators and measures you used in your analysis to measure and disclose effects. It is objective and does not draw conclusions of which alternative is best.

The information in the following tables (if appropriate to your resource) will be used to build the alternative comparison tables in chapter 2 of the NEPA document. Resource indicators and values may be repeated in more than one table.

Table 6. Summary comparison of environmental effects to (x) resources (example)

Resource Element
Indicator/Measure
Alt 1
Alt 2
Alt 3
Water quality
Number of trail stream crossings
No new trail construction or stream crossings would be implemented, therefore sediment increases would be limited to existing trail condition and usage. Seventy-three existing trail stream crossings would not be improved to required design standards, having a continued adverse effect on water quality.
No new trail construction or stream crossings proposed, therefore sediment increase would be minimal and limited to trail improvements. Sedimentation would be reduced by eliminating five crossings located within the two mile trail closure. Forty-four crossings would be improved to meet required design standards, reducing impacts to water quality. Overall net positive effect on water quality when compared to alternatives 1 and 3.
Five miles of new trail construction and three new stream crossings would increase sediment in the short term. Eliminating five crossings located within the two mile trail closure would reduce sedimentation. Fifty-six crossings would be improved to required design standards. Alternative 3 is expected to have greater short term impacts on water quality compared to alternatives 1 and 2. Overall net positive effect on water quality when compared to the existing condition.
Water Quantity
Trail density (mi/mi²)
Trail density 1.1 mi/mi². With no changes to existing trail density, water yield would remain relatively constant. Increases in trail work-arounds and denuded vegetation would increase water quantity, but increases would not be discernible.
Trail density 0.9 mi/mi². Closure of two miles of trail in the riparian corridor and improvement of 22 miles of trail to required design standards would stabilize overland flow. There would be no discernible changes to water quantity.
Trail density 1.5 mi/mi². Five miles of new trail construction would increase trail density in the project area, subsequently increasing overland flow. Improvement of 22 miles of trail to required design standards would stabilize overland flow. There would be no discernible changes to water quantity.
Riparian Function, and Channel Stability
Trail in riparian Corridor (miles)
Seventeen miles of mostly degraded trails within the riparian corridor would continue to promote expansion of trail work-arounds, denuded vegetation, and adverse effects to riparian function.
No new trails are proposed within riparian areas. Nine miles of trail within the riparian corridor would be improved to required design standards, having an overall positive effect on riparian function.
No new trails are proposed within riparian areas. Ten miles of trail within the riparian corridor would be improved to required design standards, having an overall positive effect on riparian function.
Soil Erosion and Productivity
Trails on slopes greater than 15 percent grade
6.8 miles of trail on slopes greater than 15 percent would continue to degrade soil resources, compacting and displacing the organic surface layers.
No new trails are proposed for alternative 2. Upgrades to existing 6.8 miles of trail on slopes greater than 15 percent and trail maintenance would provide erosion control measures which would further reduce existing erosion rates.
0.8 miles of new trail construction on slopes greater than 15 percent would increase soil erosion potential. Trail design would mitigate effects. Upgrades to existing 6.8 miles of trail on slopes greater than 15 percent and trail maintenance provide erosion control measures to further reduce existing erosion rates.

Compliance with Forest Plan and Other Relevant Laws, Regulations, Policies and Plans Discuss how well or whether each alternative complies with relevant laws, regulations, policies or the Land and Resource Management Plan – this section should address all the management direction you listed above in the “Regulatory Framework” section.

Please note: This project falls into the Agua Fria/Crown King (Forest Plan, pages 100-101) and Prescott/Chino/Drake (Forest Plan, pages 105-106) geographic areas; the Crown King (Forest Plan, page 103-105) and Williamson Valley South (Forest Plan, pages 109-110) managements areas. These areas include the special area, Grapevine Botanical Area and inventoried roadless area, Blind Indian Creek.

Other Relevant Mandatory Disclosures This section is resource-specific. Include only those for your resource that are relevant to the proposed activities.

The disclosures needed for an EA and EIS are noted below. There may be other disclosures needed for your resource.

Other Agencies and Individuals Consulted List other agencies and individuals consulted and provide a summary of what information they provided. Delete if not applicable.

References Cited This heading has a command built in to always put it on the next page—no page break needed. Be sure that everything you reference in your previous text has a corresponding citation here and that you have an electronic copy for your files. Do this as soon you cite it in your text so you (or the team leader) aren’t scrambling later to find the reference.

This is the reference style. It is designed to have your first line left justified and all hanging text indented five spaces.

12 Ranger District, National Forest

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .