MilPipeFEMAESA3.pdf

Refer to NMFS No.: WCR-2017-8340 September 25, 2018

Alessandro Amaglio Environmental Officer Federal Emergency Management Agency U.S. Department of Homeland Security Region IX 1111 Broadway, Suite 1200 Oakland, California 94607-4052

Re: Endangered Species Act Section 7(a)(2) Biological Opinion, and Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Response and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Recommendations for the Disaster, Mitigation, and Preparedness Programs in California

Dear Mr. Amaglio:

Thank you for your letter of November 15, 2017, requesting initiation of consultation with NOAA’s National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) for the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Disaster, Mitigation and Preparedness Programs in California. This letter transmits NMFS’ biological opinion (BO) based on information provided in the biological assessment provided on November 15, 2017, and email discussions between NMFS and Federal Emergency Management Agency clarifying project description and effects of the project. A complete administrative record of this consultation is on file at the NMFS California Central Valley Office.

Based on the best available scientific and commercial information, the BO concludes that the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Disaster, Mitigation and Preparedness Programs (Programmatic) is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence and is not likely to destroy or adversely modify the designated critical habitat of 13 federally listed:

North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) Southern DPS, California coastal Chinook (O. tshawytscha), Central Valley Spring-run Chinook (O. tshawytscha), Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook (O. tshawytscha), Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho (O. kisutch), Central California Coast Coho (O. tshawytscha), Southern California Steelhead (O. mykiss), South-Central California Coast Steelhead (O. mykiss), Northern California Steelhead (O. mykiss), Central Valley Steelhead (O. mykiss), Central California Coast Steelhead (O. mykiss), Southern DPS Eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus), or Black abalone (Haliotis cracherodii).

NMFS has included an incidental take statement with reasonable and prudent measures and non-discretionary terms and conditions that are necessary and appropriate to avoid, minimize, or monitor incidental take of listed species associated with the program.

This letter also transmits NMFS's review of the likely effects of the proposed action on essential fish habitat (EFH) for Pacific Coast Salmon, Coastal Pelagic Species, Pacific Coast Groundfish, and Highly Migratory Species, designated under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), including conservation recommendations. This review was pursuant to section 305(b) of the MSA, implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.920, and agency guidance for use of the ESA consultation process to complete EFH consultation. We concluded that the project would adversely affect the EFH of Pacific Coast Salmon, Coastal Pelagic Species, and Pacific Coast Groundfish in the action area and have included recommendations.

Please contact Abbie Moyer in NMFS’ California Central Valley Office at (916) 930-3707 or via email at Abbie.Moyer@noaa.gov if you have any questions concerning this consultation, or if you require additional information.

Sincerely, Cc: To the file: 151422-WCR2017-SA00388 Lorena Solorzano-Vincent, lorena.solorzano-vincent@aecom.com Alessandro Amaglio, alessandro.amaglio@fema.dhs.gov mailto:lorena.solorzano-vincent@aecom.com

Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7(a)(2) Programmatic Biological Opinion, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat

Response, and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Recommendations for the

Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Disaster, Mitigation, and Preparedness Program in California

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Consultation Number: WCR-2017-8340

Action Agency: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX Oakland, California

Affected Species and NMFS’ Determinations:

ESA-Listed Species Status

Is Action Likely to Adversely Affect

Species?

Is Action Likely To Jeopardize the Species?

Is Action Likely to Adversely Affect Critical Habitat?

Is Action Likely To Destroy or

Adversely Modify Critical Habitat?

North American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) Southern

DPS

Threatened Yes No Yes No

California Coastal Chinook (O. tshawytscha) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Central Valley Spring-run Chinook (O. tshawytscha) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Sacramento River Winter-run Chinook (O. tshawytscha) Endangered Yes No Yes No

Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Coho (O.

kisutch) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Central California Coast Coho (O. tshawytscha) Endangered Yes No Yes No

Southern California Steelhead (O. mykiss) Endangered Yes No Yes No

South-Central California Coast Steelhead (O. mykiss) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Northern California Steelhead (O. mykiss) Threatened Yes No Yes No

California Central Valley Steelhead (O. mykiss) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Central California Coast Steelhead (O. mykiss) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Southern DPS Eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus) Threatened Yes No Yes No

Black abalone (Haliotis cracherodii) Endangered Yes No Yes No

Consultation Conducted By: National Marine Fisheries Service, West Coast Region

Date: September 25, 2018

Fishery Management Plan That Identifies EFH in the

Does Action Have an Adverse Effect on

Are EFH Conservation Recommendations

Project Area EFH? Provided?

Pacific Coast Salmon Yes Yes

Coastal Pelagic Species Yes Yes Pacific Coast Groundfish Yes Yes Highly Migratory Species Yes Yes

Table of Contents

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 3 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents List of Acronyms List of Tables and Figures

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

1.2 Consultation History

1.3 Proposed Federal Action

1.3.1 Overview of Proposed Action

1.3.2 Disaster, Mitigation, and Preparedness Programs

1.3.3 Description of Framework Actions

1.3.4 Description of Standard Actions

1.3.5 Not Included in this BO

1.3.6 Process for ESA and MSA Compliance:

1.3.7 FEMA’s Proposed Suitability Criteria for ESA Coverage

1.3.8 FEMA’s Proposed Suitability Criteria for MSA Coverage

1.3.9 Avoidance and Minimization Measures

1.3.10 Monitoring and Reporting Requirements

1.3.11 Annual Reporting Requirements

2. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT:

2.1 Analytical Approach

2.2 Rangewide Status of the Species and Critical Habitat

2.2.1 Life History and Range

2.2.2 Status of the Species

2.2.3 Essential Fish Habitat for Species with Potential to Occur in Action Area

2.3 Action Area

2.4 Environmental Baseline

2.4.1 Southern California

2.4.2 Central and Northern California

2.4.3 California Central Valley

2.5 Effects of the Action

2.5.1 Effects to Species

2.5.2 Effects to Critical Habitat

2.5.3 Summary of Effects to Species and Critical Habitat

2.6 Cumulative Effects

2.7 Integration and Synthesis

2.7.1 Synthesis of the Analysis on Listed Species Populations and Critical Habitat

2.7.2 Discussion of Effects at the ESU/DPS Level

2.7.3 ESU/DPS Survival and Recovery/Critical Habitat Value

2.8 Conclusion

2.9 Incidental Take Statement

2.9.1 Amount or Extent of Take

2.9.2 Effect of the Take

2.9.3 Reasonable and Prudent Measures

Table of Contents

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 4 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

2.9.4 Terms and Conditions

2.10 Conservation Recommendations

2.10.1 Procedures for Implementing FEMA Programs within the Context of Listed Resource

Conservation

2.10.2 Education of Subapplicants on Species Conservation

2.10.3 Conservation Efforts at Project Design and Project Planning Levels by Subapplicants . 160

2.10.4 Incorporating Ecosystem Services into FEMA’s Decision-making Process

2.11 Reinitiation of Consultation

3. MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT RESPONSE

3.1 Essential Fish Habitat Affected by the Project

3.2 Adverse Effects on Essential Fish Habitat

3.3 Essential Fish Habitat Conservation Recommendations

3.4 Statutory Response Requirement

3.5 Supplemental Consultation

4. DATA QUALITY ACT DOCUMENTATION AND PRE-DISSEMINATION

REVIEW 165

4.1 Utility

4.2 Integrity

4.3 Objectivity

5. REFERENCES

6. LIST OF APPENDICES

List of Acronyms

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 5 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

List of Acronyms

AMM Avoidance Minimization Measures BA biological assessment BCSSRP Battle Creek Salmon and Steelhead Restoration Program BO Biological Opinion BRT Biological Review Team ℃ Degrees Celsius Cal OES California Office of Emergency Services CCV California Central Valley CDFG California Department of Fish and Game CDFW California Department of Fish Wildlife CRF Code of Federal Regulations cfs Cubic Feet per Second CNFH Coleman National Fish Hatchery CV Central Valley CVP Central Valley Project CVFPB Central Valley Flood Protection Board CWA Clean Water Act dB Decibels DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichlor Delta Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta DO Dissolved Oxygen DPS distinct population segment EFH Essential Fish Habitat ESA Endangered Species Act ESU Evolutionarily Significant Unit ℉ Degrees Fahrenheit FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FI Functionally Independent FMP Fisheries Management Plan FRFH Feather River Fish Hatchery ha Hectare HAPC Habitat Area of Particular Concern HU Hydrologic Unit ITS Incidental Take Statement IWM Instream Woody Material km Kilometer LSNFH Livingston Stone National Fish Hatchery LWD Large Woody Debris LWM Large Woody Material m Meter MHHW Mean Higher High Water MLLW Mean Lower Low Water MOU Memorandum of Understanding MSA Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act

List of Acronyms

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 6 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs nDPS Northern Distinct Population Segment NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NMFS National Marine Fisheries Service NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration PBA Programmatic Biological Assessment PBO Programmatic Biological Opinion PBF Physical Biological Feature PCE Primary Constituent Elements PFMC Pacific Fisheries Management Counsel PI Potentially Independent RBDD Red Bluff Diversion Dam RHA Rivers and Harbors Act RM River Mile RPA Reasonable and Prudent Alternative RRCSCBP Russian River Coho Salmon Captive Broodstock Program SDFPF Skinner Delta Fish Protection Facility sDPS Southern Distinct Population Segment SRA Shaded Riverine Aquatic SWP State Water Project TCD Temperature Control Device TFCF Tracy Fish Collection Facility TRT Technical Review Team USACE United State Army Corps of Engineers USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service VSP Viable Salmonid Populations WS-RLO Rickettsiales-like Organism YOY Young of Year

Note: Throughout this document there are references cited as CDFG. This refers to the California Department of Fish and Game. This name was changed to California Department of Fish and Wildlife on January 1, 2013. However, for consistency on publications, references prior to January 1, 2013, will remain CDFG.

List of Tables, Figures, and Appendices

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 7 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

Tables

Table 1. Summary of Standard Actions and Framework Actions

Table 2. Federally Listed ESU/DPS and Critical Habitat Covered under BO

Table 3. Summary of effects to species and critical habitat

Table 4. Extent of take indicators for actions authorized or carried out under the FEMA Programmatic, by NMFS Field Office Jurisdiction per year

Table 5. Amount of Take per year by species for projects that may involve fish or abalone capture and relocation

Figures

Figure 1. Number of streams with coho salmon present

Figure 2. The Action Area

Figure 3: Range of Listed Species under NMFS Jurisdiction Within the Action Area

Figure 4: Critical Habitat of Listed Species under NMFS Jurisdiction within the Action Area 111

Figure 5. EFH Designation Within the Action Area

Figure 6. EFH Designation Within the Action Area

Section 1 – Introduction

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 8 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

1. INTRODUCTION

This Introduction section provides information relevant to the other sections of this document and is incorporated by reference into Sections 2 and 3 below.

1.1 Background

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) prepared the biological opinion (BO) and incidental take statement (ITS) portions of this document in accordance with section 7(b) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (16 USC 1531 et seq.), and implementing regulations at

50 CFR 402.

We also completed an essential fish habitat (EFH) consultation on the proposed action, in accordance with section 305(b)(2) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 50 CFR 600.

We completed pre-dissemination review of this document using standards for utility, integrity, and objectivity in compliance with applicable guidelines issued under the Data Quality Act (DQA) (section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public Law 106-554). The document will be available through NMFS’ Public Consultation Tracking System https://pcts.nmfs.noaa.gov/pcts-web/homepage.pcts. A complete record of this consultation is on file at NMFS California Central Valley Office.

1.2 Consultation History

This programmatic BO is the culmination of several years of collaboration with FEMA and NMFS. In 2011, FEMA developed a programmatic approach for ESA compliance with NMFS, which lead to the preparation of a programmatic biological assessment (PBA). The key elements of these coordination efforts between FEMA and NMFS, which have led to the preparation of this BO, include:

September 2011, FEMA sent a fact sheet on the PBA Framework to NMFS;

January 2012, FEMA and NMFS held a meeting to discuss the PBA;

From 2012 through 2014, FEMA sent various interim draft sections of the PBA and other draft documents to NMFS;

From 2014 through 2016, FEMA and NMFS participated in recurring calls for coordination;

October 22, 2015, FEMA submitted the Draft FEMA PBA for NMFS to review;

January 2016, NMFS sent FEMA comments on the Draft FEMA PBA;

Throughout 2016, NMFS and FEMA participated in regular calls and exchange of interim draft documents for this programmatic consultation;

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 9 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

March 2017 through October 2017, FEMA submitted additional draft sections of the FEMA PBA document, and NMFS and FEMA participated in weekly coordination calls;

November 15, 2017, FEMA submitted the Final FEMA PBA to NMFS;

December 19, 2017, NMFS submitted questions to FEMA regarding the Final PBA, following NMFS’s sufficiency review;

December 21, 2017, FEMA responded to NMFS’s questions;

December 21, 2017, NMFS initiated formal consultation.

1.3 Proposed Federal Action

“Action” means “all activities or programs of any kind authorized, funded, or carried out, in whole or in part, by Federal agencies” (50 CFR § 402.02). The proposed action is designed to provide a programmatic consultation to cover typical recurring disaster reponse, recovery, mitigation, and preparedness program actions funded by FEMA in California. The intent of undergoing this programmatic consultation is to cover many of the typical reoccurring actions funded by FEMA in California that effect listed species and designated critical habitat under the jurisdiction of NMFS. This would allow FEMA to more effectively prepare for and respond to disasters, enabling FEMA to expedite recovery from a disaster while meeting the requirements of the ESA, and reducing impacts of disaster, mitigation and preparedness actions on the environment.

The proposed action for this consultation is a “mixed programmatic action,” as defined by 50 CFR § 402.02, because it approves some actions that are not subject to further section 7 consultation (referred to as Standard Actions), as well as a framework for the development of future actions that would be authorized at a later time (referred to as Framework Actions). For the actions authorized at a later time, take of listed species would not occur until that subsequent authorization. For the non-framework actions, including construction activities, this biological opinion (BO) will serve as the final ESA consultation and, as required by section 7 of the ESA, with respect to those actions NMFS is providing an incidental take statement with this BO. For the Framework Actions a programmatic level of analysis is completed but lack sufficient detail to analyze to the level of take; therefore, those activities are not expected to occur until further authorization and section 7 analysis is completed (see Section 1.3.3 Description of Framework Actions).

Under 50 CFR § 402.02, “interrelated actions” are those that are part of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification. “Interdependent actions” are those that have no independent utility apart from the action under consideration (50 CFR § 402.02). Interrelated and interdependent actions that are reasonably certain to occur as part of a preparedness, response, recovery, or mitigation activity include the continued operation and maintenance of structures and facilities included in the proposed action.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 10 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

1.3.1 Overview of Proposed Action

FEMA administers federal grant programs to assist with preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation for natural and human-caused disasters. These disasters can result from natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, wildfires, rains, and windstorms; and human-caused events, such as fires and terrorist attacks. When administering these federal grant programs, FEMA must comply with applicable Federal statutes, including the ESA and MSA. FEMA has determined that the majority of typical recurring actions proposed for funding, and for which a BO is required, can be consulted on in a programmatic manner, as described in this BO.

Over a five year period, this BO is designed to cover many of the typical recurring actions funded through these grant programs in California. For a proposed action to be covered under this BO, the project must meet the suitability criteria for ESA compliance and the suitability criteria for MSA compliance outlined below in Section 1.3.7 and 1.3.8, must follow the applicable Avoidance and Minimization Measures (AMM) outlined below in Section 1.3.9, and must be agreed upon by FEMA and NMFS. If a proposed project does not meet the criteria outlined below, an individual ESA consultation would be required. As the federal action agency, FEMA is ultimately responsible for determining if a project is covered under this BO, and for implementing the applicable AMMs and conservation measures.

This proposed action requires avoidance and minimization measures specific to an activity type to reduce and avoid effects of the action on federally listed species, designated and proposed critical habitat, and EFH. These include adherence to construction work windows, erosion and sedimentation prevention measures, spill prevention measures, biological monitoring, environmental awareness training for construction personnel, integration of NMFS guidance on fish passage design and fish screening criteria, and implementing bioengineering techniques.

The projects funded through FEMA’s Disaster, Mitigation and Preparedness Programs in California that are included as part of the proposed action but would be authorized at a later time (Framework Actions) include the following:

• Constructing, Modifying, or Relocating Facilities o Upgrading or Modifying Facilities o Providing Temporary Facilities o Acquiring and Demolishing Existing Facilities o Constructing New Facilities or Relocating Existing Facilites o Developing Demonstration Projects

• Actions Involving Watercourses and Coastal Features o Constructing a Water Detention, Retention, Storage, or Conveyance Facility o Constructing Other Flood Control Structures.

These actions are fully described in Section 1.3.3. Table 1 provides a complete summary of the project types that are considered Framework Actions in this BO.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 11 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

The projects funded through FEMA’s Disaster, Mitigation and Preparedness Programs in California that are included as part of the proposed action and are not subject to future section 7 consultation (Standard Actions) include the following:

• Non-Emergency Debris Removal

• Constructing, Modifying, or Relocating Facilities o Repairing, Realigning, or Otherwise Modifying Roads, Trails, Utilities, and Rail Lines o Relocating the Function of an Existing Facility

• Actions Involving Watercourses and Coastal Features o Repairing, Stabilizing, or Armoring Embankments o Constructing a Water Crossing o Constructing an Existing Coastal Feature

• Wildfire Risk Reduction o Mechanical or Hand Clearing of Vegetation o Biological Control.

These actions are fully described in Section 1.3.4. Table 1 provides a complete summary of all the project types that are considered Standard Actions in this BO.

FEMA shall prepare an annual report (for each of the 5 years covered by this BO) to NMFS containing a summary of the numbers and types of projects completed under this programmatic.

This annual report would include a tabular summary of the projects implemented that were covered under this programmatic each year. An accounting of take based on a number of individuals or disturbance to suitable habitat as a surrogate would be provided in the annual report, which would also include a tally of the total from all prior years.

1.3.2 Disaster, Mitigation, and Preparedness Programs

This BO covers projects that FEMA administers for disaster preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation in California. Under these programs, FEMA provides Federal financial assistance to projects completed by State and territorial governments; Federally-recognized tribes; local governments, including cities, counties, special districts, and other local and regional entities;

certain private non-profit organizations; and individuals and households. Generally, these programs fall into two categories: disaster and non-disaster programs. Both Standard and Framework Actions may be administered by these programs.

1.3.2.1 Disaster Programs:

FEMA is authorized to provide disaster assistance by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. §§ 5121–5207), as amended (“Stafford Act”). Pursuant to the Stafford Act, the President may declare an emergency or major disaster when an event

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 12 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs exceeds the capabilities of State, local, and tribal governments to respond and recover. This declaration enables FEMA to make supplemental assistance available, either directly through Department of Defense and other Federal agencies, or through financial assistance programs.

Financial assistance programs are generally funded through Congressional appropriations in the Disaster Relief Fund, which Congress replenishes periodically. Pursuant to the Stafford Act, FEMA provides funds through the following:

• Programs to help individuals and households who have been affected by the disaster, including assistance with minor home repairs, temporary housing, transportation, medical assistance, funeral assistance, crisis counseling, and disaster legal services; extraordinary costs of State, territorial, tribal, and local governments for measures to save lives, protect public health and safety, and protect improved property;

• Repair or replacement of disaster-damaged buildings and infrastructure owned by State, territorial, tribal, and local governments, and by certain private non-profit entities (such as hospitals, schools, and electrical cooperatives);

• Alternate projects, in situations where a public or private non-profit facility owner determines that it is not in the public’s interest to restore a disaster-damaged facility;

• As part of the repair of a disaster-damaged facility, implementation of cost-effective measures to reduce the risk of damage to that facility in future, similar disasters;

• State-, territory-, and tribally-managed hazard mitigation programs to reduce the risks associated with future disasters through community-wide and facility-specific mitigation measures; and

• Assistance to States, territories, and tribes for extraordinary costs associated with fighting wildfires, including measures to reduce post-fire erosion, flooding, and debris flows.

For some of these activities, the costs are shared between FEMA and the State.

1.3.2.2 Non-Disaster Programs

FEMA also implements a wide range of non-disaster financial assistance programs under the authority of several laws. In general, Congress provides funding for these programs through annual appropriation, and the Federal share of program costs varies. These programs include the following:

• State-, territory-, and tribally-managed hazard mitigation programs.

• Planning, project, and technical assistance to States, territories, tribes, and local governments to reduce the risk of flood damage to public and privately owned buildings, thereby reducing the financial impact of flooding.

• Programs to enhance the preparedness of States, territories, tribes, local governments, and urban areas through financial assistance for planning, training, exercises, and the

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 13 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs purchase of systems and equipment. These programs include funding for State emergency management agencies, regional organizations, law enforcement and firefighting agencies, medical services providers, transportation providers, operators of critical infrastructure, and organizations devoted to the preparedness of the general public.

1.3.3 Description of Framework Actions

1.3.3.1 Constructing, Modifying, or Relocating Facilities

As a Framework Action, FEMA may provide funds for constructing, modifying, or relocating facilities. Relevant actions include (Table 1):

• Upgrading or otherwise modifying structures;

• Providing temporary facilities;

• Acquiring and demolishing existing facilities;

• Constructing new facilities or relocating existing facilities; and

• Developing demonstration projects.

During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action (see Section 1.3.9 Avoidance and Minimization Measures).

1.3.3.1.1 Upgrading or Otherwise Modifying Facilities

As a Framework Action, FEMA may provide funds to implement changes required by current building codes and standards, or otherwise modify existing structures (Table 1). Often, these changes make the structure more resistant to damage in future events. Typical activities would include:

• Making structures more fire-resistant (e.g., by replacing roofs and doors with fire-resistant materials);

• Installing bracing, shear panels, shear walls, anchors, or other features so that structures are better able to withstand seismic events or high wind or snow loads;

• Modifying structures to reduce the risk of damage during floods by elevating structures above the expected flood level or by floodproofing; and

• Modifying structures to meet another need of a subapplicant, such as through an improved project or an alternate project.

A structure can also be floodproofed so that floodwaters can encounter it without causing damage to the structure or its contents. Dry floodproofing methods involve the installation of flood shields, watertight doors and windows, earthen barriers, and pumping systems to prevent water from entering the structure. Wet floodproofing involves the installation of vents and flood-

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 14 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs resistant materials so that water may enter and leave areas of the structure without causing damage. With both dry and wet floodproofing, utilities must be modified, elevated, or relocated to prevent floodwaters from accumulating within them.

1.3.3.1.2 Providing Temporary Facilities

As a Framework Action, FEMA may provide temporary housing facilities when a disaster renders homes uninhabitable for long periods (Table 1). Such facilities typically consist of manufactured housing. Typical activities may involve:

• Developing the pads for dwellings;

• Constructing ancillary facilities, such as roads, streets, and parking lots;

• Installing utilities, such as potable water lines, sewer hookups, electricity (including street lighting), and telephones lines; and

• Installing manufactured homes.

Additionally, FEMA may modify existing facilities to serve as temporary housing. Appropriate sites would not be located in a floodplain and would not contain wetlands or critical habitat, affect historic properties or archaeological sites, or contain hazardous materials. Installation of housing units and utilities would be accomplished in accordance with current codes and standards. After temporary housing is no longer needed at the disaster site, FEMA would remove the temporary housing units and associated ancillary facilities, and restore the land to its original use. All removed materials would be stored for future use or disposed of in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

Another method that FEMA would use to provide temporary housing involves modifying existing facilities to serve as temporary housing. These facilities could consist of existing residential property or the adaptive reuse of non-residential facilities. Specific activities would range from conducting repairs and minor upgrades to complete reconstruction of a building’s interior. This action may involve acquisition or leasing of facilities. Modifying existing facilities for temporary housing may be conducted by FEMA directly or by providing funding to a recipient (subapplicant).

FEMA may also provide funding for temporary relocation of essential public services, in the event that the structures that house these services are damaged, destroyed, or otherwise rendered inaccessible by a disaster. Funds may also be provided for upgrades necessary to meet current codes and standards, and for the installation or modification of appurtenances, such as utilities, that are necessary to operate facilities.

1.3.3.1.3 Acquiring and Demolishing Existing Facilities

As a Framework Action, FEMA may provide funds for the acquisition and demolition of existing facilities, particularly if they are located in high-hazard areas and are subject to repetitive loss (Table 1). Typically, these facilities are at a high risk because of: (1) damage from flooding; (2) erosion of stream banks, beaches, slopes, or bluffs; (3) landslides; or (4) wildfire. These facilities

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 15 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs may consist of private properties, such as houses and commercial buildings, or publicly owned facilities, such as utilities, roads, and bridges. A local government entity would purchase private properties on a willing-seller basis and, after the property is purchased, the property would be dedicated and maintained in perpetuity for uses compatible with open space, recreation, or wetlands management practices, pursuant to 44 CFR Part 206.434(e).

Existing facilities would be either removed or demolished. All demolition materials would be disposed of at approved and licensed disposal sites, in compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Any hazardous materials or other contaminants would be removed and disposed of in an appropriate manner. Construction debris and household materials may be recycled if recycling facilities exist. Once structures are removed, lots would be graded to conform to the local topography, and disturbed areas would be revegetated with species approved for the local area. Frequently, the local government would develop the acquired land for recreational or open space uses, such as parks, athletic fields, or walking and biking trails.

1.3.3.1.4 Constructing New Facilities or Relocating Existing Facilities

If a facility is located in a floodplain or other hazardous area,1 is subject to repetitive damage, or has been damaged in such a way that restoration in the current location is not practical or cost-effective, as a Framework Action, FEMA may fund the construction of a new facility or the physical relocation of the existing facility (Table 1). Examples of this action include construction of roads, trails, utilities and utility lines, and rail lines in a different area from the existing facility; construction and relocation of buildings; and construction of drainage improvements.

In both new facility construction and physical relocation, FEMA may fund the cost of land acquisition and the construction of appurtenant features, such as access roads and utilities. For properties in the hazard area, FEMA would acquire damaged properties, demolish existing structures (except in cases of physical relocation), and places deed restrictions that would limit future uses to open space in perpetuity. However, FEMA does not acquire land directly nor does it become a land owning agency as a result of this process.

1.3.3.1.5 Developing Demonstration Projects

Demonstration projects focus on public education and are designed to highlight procedures that the public can use to reduce property damage during flood, earthquake, wildfire, wind, and rainstorm disasters and may qualify as Framework Actions. Demonstration projects may involve the development of a model facility to demonstrate how hazard mitigation technologies can be used to reduce potential damage during a disaster. Flood demonstration projects may involve items such as elevating a structure or waterproofing windows and doors that are below the base flood elevation. A fire demonstration project may include vegetation management around a facility and replacing roofs, doors, and windows with fire-resistant materials. Wind and

1 Hazard areas are susceptible to some type of natural hazard, such as flooding, seismic activity, coastal inundation, or mudslide.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 16 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs earthquake demonstration projects may include changes to the structural design of buildings to allow them to withstand higher wind velocity or more movement during an earthquake.

1.3.3.2 Actions Involving Watercourses and Coastal Features

Framework Actions include some projects involving watercourses and coastal features (Table 1).

Relevant categories of activities include the following:

• Constructing or modifying a water detention, retention, storage, or conveyance facility;

and

• Constructing, repairing, or modifying coastal and other flood control structures

During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action (see Section 1.3.9 Avoidance and Minimization Measures).

1.3.3.2.1 Constructing a Water Detention, Retention, Storage, or Conveyance Facility

Constructing a water detention, retention, storage, or conveyance facility may include the construction, enlargement, or restoration of detention basins, retention basins, sediment ponds, reservoirs, or conveyance facilities, such as irrigation ditches or flumes, to reduce flood flows or to provide a water source for fighting fires in an area of high fire hazard. The creation and/or enlargement of water storage reservoirs would be most frequently associated with flood disasters and to a lesser extent, fire disasters.

Detention basins, retention basins, sediment ponds, and reservoirs would be constructed to temporarily store floodwater to reduce downstream peak flows. The stored water would be released at a slower rate so that the existing drainage-ways can convey water without contributing to downstream flooding. All areas that would be disturbed during the construction of these features would be revegetated with native plant species. This action would also include the repair or restoration of water retention or conveyance structures. All sediment removed from these features would be disposed of in a manner consistent with Federal, State, and local laws and regulations.

Frequently in rural areas, firefighting is heavily constrained by the lack of water that firefighters can use. In response to this need, proposed activities may also include the creation of retention facilities in locations that firefighters can readily access, either as a direct source of water or as a source of water to fill water supply trucks. All areas that would be disturbed during the construction of a retention facility would be revegetated with native plant species.

1.3.3.2.2 Constructing Coastal and other Flood-Control Structures

Coastal structures protect shorelines and coastal features from erosion and manage sediment transport. A flood-control structure is a facility designed to reduce the risk that floodwaters could inundate a flood-prone area. Typical examples are levees (also referred to as dikes) and floodwalls. Activities would include:

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 17 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

• Constructing, replacing, or modifying seawalls, groins, jetties, revetments, levees, dikes, and floodwalls

• Modifying or installing interior drainage systems to reduce the risk of damage behind levees and floodwalls during heavy rains or flooding events on streams located in protected areas.

• Modifying or installing new bank protection of a shoreline structures

• Raising the height of existing flood control structures to prevent overtopping in future floods

Levees would be repaired or constructed using bioengineering techniques, compacted fill (discussed in the Avoidance and Minimizaion Measures Section 1.3.9) and, in some cases, riprap protection. Bare earth would be seeded with grasses to prevent erosion. Typically, a gravel road would be installed on the levee’s crest to allow for maintenance. Floodwalls, typically built in urban areas, would be constructed using reinforced concrete or grouted, reinforced concrete block. Excavation would be necessary to install footings. Levees and floodwalls would both have interior drainage systems that may include pumps for removing accumulated water.

1.3.4 Description of Standard Actions

1.3.4.1 Non-Emergency Debris Removal

Standard Actions include projects involving non-emergency debris removal (Table 1). Debris removal performed in non-emergency situations includes:

• Removing rock, silt, sediment, or woody debris that floodwaters have deposited in harbors and ports, stream channels, bridge and culvert openings, canals, sedimentation basins, sewage treatment ponds, ditches, and other facilities in such a manner as to disrupt normal flows, navigation, recreation, or municipal services.

Removal of material from stream channels usually requires coordination with the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for compliance and permitting under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA). All removed debris would be disposed of at approved and licensed disposal sites, in compliance with existing laws and regulations. Any hazardous materials or other contaminants would be removed and disposed of in an appropriate manner. Woody debris and construction materials can be recycled if recycling facilities exist.

1.3.4.2 Constructing, Modifying, or Relocating Existing Facilities

As a Standard Action, FEMA may provide funds for constructing, modifying, or relocating existing facilities (Table 1). Relevant actions include:

• Repairing, realigning, or otherwise modifying roads, trails, utilities, and rail lines; and

• Relocating the function of an existing facility.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 18 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action (see Section 1.8 Avoidance and Minimization Measures).

1.3.4.2.1 Repairing, Realigning, or Otherwise Modifying Roads, Trains, Utilities, and Rail Lines

Roads, trails, utilities,2 and rail lines are typically damaged when floods cause structural damage, or when floods or heavy rains cause erosion, subsidence, or landslides. Earthquakes may cause similar damage. Repairs would be accomplished by replacing earthen material lost during the disaster and replacing the damaged surface, utility line, or, in the case of rail lines, ballast, and track. Stabilizing the replacement fill using rock, grout, timber walls, or steel sheet piling may be necessary. Hazard mitigation measures may be performed to prevent or limit future damage. For example, a pipe may be installed to convey drainage beneath a road, thus preventing future washouts, or a utility line may be encased in concrete in an area vulnerable to erosion. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1).

If the area of damage is unstable, does not allow for repair, or is subject to repetitive loss, a facility may be realigned so that the area of damage is avoided. Property acquisition or a change in easement may be necessary.

Facilities may also be modified as part of improved projects or alternate projects under the Public Assistance Program to meet additional needs of the proposed action.

1.3.4.2.2 Relocating the Function of an Existing Facility

As a Standard Action, FEMA may fund the relocation of a function of a facility to an existing facility that has adequate capacity to handle the additional load with minor modifications, if necessary (Table 1). For structures, the occupants and materials would be relocated to alternative structures, traffic would use alternate routes, and utility services would be provided by alternative methods. This action would not entail any major physical construction or addition to the existing facility and, if any work is required, it would consist of only minor modifications.

For properties in the hazard area, FEMA would acquire damaged properties, demolish existing structures, and place deed restrictions that would limit future uses to open space in perpetuity.

1.3.4.3 Actions Involving Watercourses and Coastal Features

Many FEMA activities pertain to inland water sources, such as streams, rivers, and lakes, and coastal features, such as harbors and beaches. Inland water sources may be perennial or dry during the summer months. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1). During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action. These typical measures are described in Section 1.3.9. Work in a stream channel often includes temporary diversion of the channel using sandbags or a cofferdam constructed of fill.

Heavy equipment is typically operated from an adjacent road, bank, or other feature; however, in

2 Utilities refer to water, sewer, natural gas, and power/electrical systems and similar types of infrastructure.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 19 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs some cases, operating equipment in a channel area once flow has been diverted may be necessary. A pipe or a temporary secondary channel may be used to convey the diverted water.

If the action involves channel modifications, changes to the capacity of bridges and culverts, or the installation of attenuation structures, FEMA would conduct hydraulic/hydrologic analyses to evaluate the changes of upstream and downstream flow rates and determine whether additional action components need to be added to address any changes in hydraulics and hydrology outside the project area may be necessary.

Relevant categories of activities include the following:

• Repairing, stabilizing, or armoring embankments;

• Constructing or modifying an existing water crossing; and

• Constructing or modifying an existing coastal feature, such as groins, jetties and revetments.

During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action (see Section 1.3.9 Avoidance and Minimization Measures).

1.3.4.3.1 Repairing, Stabilizing, or Armoring Embankments

Repairing, stabilizing, or armoring embankments would involve the repair of earthen or rock embankments damaged by floodwaters. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1). Examples are natural stream banks (such as those in parks); road, trail, and rail line embankments; embankments for irrigation and navigation canals; and levees used for flood control and reclamation. In addition to repair of damaged features, FEMA may fund measures designed to prevent damage in future flood events.

Proposed streambank stabilization methods include alluvium placement, vegetated riprap with large wood (LW), log or roughened rock toe, woody plantings, herbaceous cover, deformable soil reinforcement, coir logs, bank reshaping and slope grading, floodplain flow spreaders, floodplain roughness, and engineered log jams (ELJs), alone or in combination.

1.3.4.3.2 Constructing a Water Crossing

As a Standard Action, FEMA may fund the repair or replacement of damaged water crossings, the enlargement of openings to allow greater conveyance and reduce the risk that debris would get trapped during floods, or the installation of bank protection or other means to reduce the risk of erosion (Table 1). Crossings may also be relocated or improved to avoid high-hazard areas, repetitive damage, or areas where reconstruction is not cost-effective or feasible.

Culverts may consist of corrugated metal pipes, reinforced concrete pipes, or reinforced concrete box culverts. The capacity of a culvert crossing may be increased to reduce the risk of flooding to the surrounding area, or the culvert may be modified to prevent overtopping or erosion of the crossing. Typical measures would include:

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 20 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

• Increasing the size of a culvert or adding culvert barrels;

• Changing the type of culvert; and

• Changing the location or alignment of a culvert.

Similarly, bridges may be modified to increase capacity to reduce the risk of flooding or to reduce the risk of damage to the crossing. Typical activities would include:

• Widening existing openings or constructing new openings;

• Reconfiguring bracing to reduce the risk that debris would be trapped; and

• Replacing a multi-span structure with a clear-span structure.

A bridge may be installed to replace a culvert to increase the flow capacity of a crossing.

1.3.4.3.3 Repairing an Existing Coastal Feature

Constructing a coastal feature would involve the repair or replacement of facilities in coastal environments, such as estuaries, inlets, harbors, and beaches. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1). These facilities include:

• Recreational facilities, such as piers and boat ramps;

• Facilities for maritime use, such as docks and slips;

• Shoreline protection devices, such as seawalls, groins, jetties, and revetments; and

• Coastal flood-control structures, such as levees.

Construction activities would be expected to occur in water and involve driving piles, placing rock or soil, or dredging sand, mud, or other sediment.

1.3.4.4 Wildfire Risk Reduction

Vegetation management is intended to reduce the risk of loss and damage due to wildfire as described in Section 3.3. Vegetation management for wildfire risk reduction may be accomplished using mechanical means, hand-clearing, or grazing. Some activities may include a combination of these methods. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1). During construction, avoidance and minimization measures would be used and incorporated as part of the action (see Section 1.8 Avoidance and Minimization Measures).

Relevant categories of activities include

• Mechanical or hand clearing of vegetation, and

• Biological control.

NMFS Biological Opinion of FEMA’s California 21 September 25, 2018 Disaster, Mitigation, & Preparedness Programs

1.3.4.4.1 Mechanical or Hand Clearing of Vegetation

Mechanical or hand clearing of vegetation would be used for the selective removal of vegetation so that a certain proportion of vegetation is left in place. This would be done to reduce the amount of vegetative fuels in an area where mechanical removal of vegetation is impractical or the remaining vegetation needs to be protected. Per FEMA’s Wildfire Mitigation Policy (MRR- 2-08-1) vegetation may be removed to create defensible space around buildings and structures, and to protect life and property beyond defensible space perimeters but proximate to (less than 2 miles from) at-risk structures. Such projects may qualify as Standard Actions (Table 1). The creation and maintenance of firebreaks, access roads, and staging areas is not eligible for FEMA funding.

In mechanical removal, heavy equipment would be used to uproot, crush, pulverize, or cut the trees and brush being removed. Hand removal would involve the use of chainsaws, axes, and hoes to cut and uproot vegetation. Depending on the location of the vegetation removal project and State and local regulations, vegetation downed as a result of mechanical or hand removal would be piled and burned on site, chipped and spread on site, or loaded and hauled away from the site. After the removal of the targeted vegetation, cleared areas would be revegetated with native, fire-resistant species.