DOCSLIB.ORG

12. CHAPTER 12: PROPOSED PHASE III EARLY RESTORATION PROJECTS: FLORIDA (Continued)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
12. CHAPTER 12: PROPOSED PHASE III EARLY RESTORATION PROJECTS: FLORIDA (Continued) 12. CHAPTER 12: PROPOSED PHASE III EARLY RESTORATION PROJECTS: FLORIDA (continued) CHAPTER 12: PROPOSED PHASE III EARLY RESTORATION PROJECTS: FLORIDA (continued) ........................ i 12.70. Navarre Beach Park Coastal Access and Dune Restoration: Project Description ............................ 1 12.70.1. Project Summary ........................................................................................................... 1 12.70.2. Background and Project Description............................................................................. 1 12.70.3. Evaluation Criteria ......................................................................................................... 1 12.70.4. Performance Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance ................................................... 3 12.70.5. Offsets ........................................................................................................................... 4 12.70.6. Costs .............................................................................................................................. 4 12.71. Navarre Beach Park Gulfside Walkover Complex: Project Description .......................................... 5 12.71.1. Project Summary ........................................................................................................... 5 12.71.2. Background and Project Description............................................................................. 5 12.71.3. Evaluation Criteria ......................................................................................................... 6 12.71.4. Performance Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance ................................................... 6 12.71.5. Offsets ........................................................................................................................... 7 12.71.6. Costs .............................................................................................................................. 7 12.72. Navarre Beach Park Gulfside Walkover Complex, Coastal Access and Dune Restoration: Environmental Review ..................................................................................................................... 8 12.72.1. Introduction and Background ....................................................................................... 8 12.72.2. Project Location ............................................................................................................ 9 12.72.3. Construction and Installation ...................................................................................... 13 12.72.4. Operations and Maintenance ..................................................................................... 17 12.72.5. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ......................................... 18 12.72.6. Noise ........................................................................................................................... 25 12.72.7. Summary and Next Steps ............................................................................................ 43 12.72.8. References................................................................................................................... 44 12.73. Gulf Breeze Wayside Park Boat Ramp: Project Description .......................................................... 48 12.73.1. Project Summary ......................................................................................................... 48 12.73.2. Background and Project Description........................................................................... 48 i 12.73.3. Evaluation Criteria ....................................................................................................... 49 12.73.4. Performance Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance ................................................. 49 12.73.5. Offsets ......................................................................................................................... 50 12.73.6. Costs ............................................................................................................................ 50 12.74. Gulf Breeze Wayside Park Boat Ramp: Environmental Review ..................................................... 51 12.74.1. Introduction and Background ..................................................................................... 51 12.74.2. Project Location .......................................................................................................... 51 12.74.3. Construction and Installation ...................................................................................... 54 12.74.4. Operations and Maintenance ..................................................................................... 56 12.74.5. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ......................................... 56 12.74.6. Summary and Next Steps ............................................................................................ 75 12.74.7. References................................................................................................................... 75 12.75. Developing Enhanced Recreational Opportunities on the Escribano Point Portion of the Yellow River Wildlife Management Area: Project Description ...................................................... 79 12.75.1. Project Summary ......................................................................................................... 79 12.75.2. Background and Project Description........................................................................... 79 12.75.3. Evaluation Criteria ....................................................................................................... 80 12.75.4. Performance Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance ................................................. 81 12.75.5. Offsets ......................................................................................................................... 81 12.75.6. Costs ............................................................................................................................ 82 12.76. Developing Enhanced Recreational Opportunities on the Escribano Point Portion of the Yellow River Wildlife Management Area: Environmental Review ................................................. 83 12.76.1. Introduction and Background ..................................................................................... 83 12.76.2. Project Location .......................................................................................................... 84 12.76.3. Construction and Installation ...................................................................................... 85 12.76.4. Operations and Maintenance ..................................................................................... 90 12.76.5. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ......................................... 90 12.76.6. Public Health and Safety and Shoreline Protection5 ................................................ 101 12.76.7. Summary and Next Steps .......................................................................................... 103 12.76.8. References................................................................................................................. 104 12.77. Norriego Point Restoration and Recreation Project: Project Description .................................. 105 12.77.1. Project Summary ....................................................................................................... 105 12.77.2. Background and Project Description......................................................................... 105 ii 12.77.3. Evaluation Criteria ..................................................................................................... 105 12.77.4. Performance Criteria, Monitoring and Maintenance ............................................... 107 12.77.5. Offsets ....................................................................................................................... 107 12.77.6. Costs .......................................................................................................................... 107 12.78. Norriego Point Restoration and Recreation Project: Environmental Review .............................. 108 12.78.1. Introduction and Background ................................................................................... 108 12.78.2. Project Location ........................................................................................................ 109 12.78.3. Construction and Installation .................................................................................... 109 12.78.4. Operations and Maintenance ................................................................................... 114 12.78.5. Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ....................................... 114 12.78.6. Summary and Next Steps .......................................................................................... 134 12.78.7. References................................................................................................................. 134 12.79. Deer Lake State Park Development: Project Description ............................................................ 138 12.79.1. Project Summary ....................................................................................................... 138 12.79.2. Background and Project Description........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pensacola Bay Bridge
    Florida Department of Transportation RICK SCOTT 1074 Highway 90 ANANTH PRASAD, P.E. GOVERNOR Chipley, Florida 32428 SECRETARY July 18, 2011 Ms. Lauren P. Milligan Florida State Clearinghouse Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., Mail Station 47 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 RE: Advance Notification Pensacola Bay Bridge Replacement PD&E Study ETDM #: 13248 From: 17th Avenue in Pensacola to Baybridge Drive in Gulf Breeze Federal Aid Project Number: 4221 078 P Financial Project ID Number: 409334-1-22-02 Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties, Florida Dear Ms. Milligan: We are sending this Advance Notification (AN) Package to your office for distribution to State agencies that conduct Federal consistency reviews (consistency reviewers) in accordance with the Coastal Zone Management Act and Presidential Executive Order 12372. We are also distributing the AN Package to local and Federal agencies. Although we will request specific comments during the permitting process, we are asking that permitting and permit reviewing agencies (consistency reviewers) review the attached information and provide us with their comments. This is a Federal-aid action and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), in consultation with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), will determine what type of environmental documentation will be necessary. The determination will be based upon in-house environmental evaluations and comments from other agencies. Please provide a consistency review for this project in accordance with the State’s Coastal Zone Management Program. www.dot.state.fl.us In addition, please review the project’s consistency, to the maximum extent feasible, with the approved Comprehensive Plan of the local government to comply with Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes.
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-02-398 Intercity Passenger Rail: Amtrak Needs to Improve Its
    United States General Accounting Office Report to the Honorable Ron Wyden GAO U.S. Senate April 2002 INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL Amtrak Needs to Improve Its Decisionmaking Process for Its Route and Service Proposals GAO-02-398 Contents Letter 1 Results in Brief 2 Background 3 Status of the Growth Strategy 6 Amtrak Overestimated Expected Mail and Express Revenue 7 Amtrak Encountered Substantial Difficulties in Expanding Service Over Freight Railroad Tracks 9 Conclusions 13 Recommendation for Executive Action 13 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 13 Scope and Methodology 16 Appendix I Financial Performance of Amtrak’s Routes, Fiscal Year 2001 18 Appendix II Amtrak Route Actions, January 1995 Through December 2001 20 Appendix III Planned Route and Service Actions Included in the Network Growth Strategy 22 Appendix IV Amtrak’s Process for Evaluating Route and Service Proposals 23 Amtrak’s Consideration of Operating Revenue and Direct Costs 23 Consideration of Capital Costs and Other Financial Issues 24 Appendix V Market-Based Network Analysis Models Used to Estimate Ridership, Revenues, and Costs 26 Models Used to Estimate Ridership and Revenue 26 Models Used to Estimate Costs 27 Page i GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking Appendix VI Comments from the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 28 GAO’s Evaluation 37 Tables Table 1: Status of Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions, as of December 31, 2001 7 Table 2: Operating Profit (Loss), Operating Ratio, and Profit (Loss) per Passenger of Each Amtrak Route, Fiscal Year 2001, Ranked by Profit (Loss) 18 Table 3: Planned Network Growth Strategy Route and Service Actions 22 Figure Figure 1: Amtrak’s Route System, as of December 2001 4 Page ii GAO-02-398 Amtrak’s Route and Service Decisionmaking United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 April 12, 2002 The Honorable Ron Wyden United States Senate Dear Senator Wyden: The National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) is the nation’s intercity passenger rail operator.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION in Re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMEN
    USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 1 of 354 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) Case No. 3:05-MD-527 RLM In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE ) (MDL 1700) SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMENT ) PRACTICES LITIGATION ) ) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) ) Carlene Craig, et. al. v. FedEx Case No. 3:05-cv-530 RLM ) Ground Package Systems, Inc., ) ) PROPOSED FINAL APPROVAL ORDER This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 11, 2019, to consider final approval of the proposed ERISA Class Action Settlement reached by and between Plaintiffs Leo Rittenhouse, Jeff Bramlage, Lawrence Liable, Kent Whistler, Mike Moore, Keith Berry, Matthew Cook, Heidi Law, Sylvia O’Brien, Neal Bergkamp, and Dominic Lupo1 (collectively, “the Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and the Certified Class, and Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (“FXG”) (collectively, “the Parties”), the terms of which Settlement are set forth in the Class Action Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) attached as Exhibit A to the Joint Declaration of Co-Lead Counsel in support of Preliminary Approval of the Kansas Class Action 1 Carlene Craig withdrew as a Named Plaintiff on November 29, 2006. See MDL Doc. No. 409. Named Plaintiffs Ronald Perry and Alan Pacheco are not movants for final approval and filed an objection [MDL Doc. Nos. 3251/3261]. USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 2 of 354 Settlement [MDL Doc. No. 3154-1]. Also before the Court is ERISA Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and for Payment of Service Awards to the Named Plaintiffs, filed with the Court on October 19, 2018 [MDL Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents
    FLORIDA Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Plan SEPTEMBER 2008 (Originally submitted October 2006) Prepared by: Florida Coastal Management Program In cooperation with: Florida Department of Environmental Protection Division of State Lands Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas Florida Natural Areas Inventory ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many state partners and individuals assisted the Florida Coastal Management Program in developing the Florida Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Plan. The Florida Coastal Management Program would like to extend special thanks to the following for their assistance and support in developing this plan: From the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of State Lands O. Greg Brock, Donna Jones Ruffner and Ellen Stere From the Florida Natural Areas Inventory Gary Knight and Ann F. Johnson The Florida Coastal Management Program 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. MS #47 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Coastal Program URL: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/mainpage/programs/cmp.htm Development of this plan was supported with funding from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management under Section 306 of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. Florida Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Plan Overview of conservation lands in the State of Florida ii Florida Coastal and Estuarine Land Conservation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 a. Background
    [Show full text]
  • The Quarterly Journal of the Florida Native Plant Society
    Volume 28: Number 1 > Winter/Spring 2011 PalmettoThe Quarterly Journal of the Florida Native Plant Society Protecting Endangered Plants in Panhandle Parks ● Native or Not? Carica papaya ● Water Science & Plants Protecting Endangered Plant Species Sweetwater slope: Bill and Pam Anderson To date, a total of 117 listed taxa have been recorded in 26 panhandle parks, making these parks a key resource for the protection of endangered plant species. 4 ● The Palmetto Volume 28:1 ● Winter/Spring 2011 in Panhandle State Parks by Gil Nelson and Tova Spector The Florida Panhandle is well known for its natural endowments, chief among which are its botanical and ecological diversity. Approximately 242 sensitive plant taxa occur in the 21 counties west of the Suwannee River. These include 15 taxa listed as endangered or threatened by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), 212 listed as endangered or threatened by the State of Florida, 191 tracked by the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, 52 candidates for federal listing, and 7 categorized by the state as commercially exploited. Since the conservation of threatened and endangered plant species depends largely on effective management of protected populations, the occurrence of such plants on publicly or privately owned conservation lands, coupled with institutional knowledge of their location and extent is essential. District 1 of the Florida Sarracenia rosea (purple pitcherplant) at Ponce de Leon Springs State Park: Park Service manages 33 state parks encompassing approximately Tova Spector, Florida Department of Environmental Protection 53,877 acres in the 18 counties from Jefferson County and the southwestern portion of Taylor County westward.
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Security Disclosure
    MUNICIPAL SECURITY DISCLOSURE FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2019 For the City of Miami Beach, Florida and The Miami Beach Redevelopment Agency (A Component Unit of the City of Miami Beach, Florida) MUNICIPAL SECURITY DISCLOSURE City of Miami Beach, Florida For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2019 Prepared by: The City of Miami Beach Finance Department 1700 Convention Center Drive, Miami Beach, Florida • 33139 Tel: (305) 673 – 7466 • Fax: (305) 673 – 7795 Last updated July 13, 2020 City of Miami Beach, Florida Report of Annual Financial Information For Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2019 This Report of Annual Financial Information is being filed with the Electronic Municipal Market Access (EMMA), a service of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). The following is a list of all outstanding bonds and other obligations for the City of Miami Beach at September 30, 2019, in accordance with provisions regarding continuing disclosure set forth in: Outstanding Bonds Original Description Resolution Resolution Commitment Amount Number Date Date $22,500,000 Gulf Breeze Fixed Rate Loan, Series 1985E No. 2001-24500 June 26, 2001 August 1, 2001 (used to repay a portion of the outstanding principal from the Sunshine State Loan and renovation and improvement of two City owned golf courses and their related facilities), (“2001 Gulf Breeze Loan”) $62,465,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 (used No. 2003-25240 June 11, 2003 July 22, 2003 to improve neighborhood infrastructure in the City, consisting of streetscape and traffic calming measures, shoreline stabilization, Fire Safety Projects and Beaches Projects) (Note: The outstanding balance on the above City of Miami Beach, General Obligation Bonds, Series 2003 were fully refunded by the Series 2019 bonds at September 30, 2019.) $13,590,000 Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, No.
    [Show full text]
  • Pensacola Bay System EPA Report
    EPA/600/R-16/169 | August 2016 | www.epa.gov/research Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation Office of Research and Development 1 EPA/600/R-16/169 August 2016 Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation by Michael A. Lewis Gulf Ecology Division National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Gulf Breeze, FL 32561 J. Taylor Kirschenfeld Water Quality and Land Management Division Escambia County Pensacola, FL 32503 Traci Goodhart West Florida Regional Planning Council Pensacola, FL 32514 National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Gulf Breeze, FL. 32561 i Notice The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through its Office of Research and Development (ORD) funded and collaborated in the research described herein with representatives from Escambia County’s Water Quality and Land Management Division and the West Florida Regional Planning Council. It has been subjected to the Agency’s peer and administrative review and has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. This is a contribution to the EPA ORD Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program. The appropriate citation for this report is: Lewis, Michael, J. Taylor Kirschenfeld, and Traci Goodheart. Environmental Quality of the Pensacola Bay System: Retrospective Review for Future Resource Management and Rehabilitation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf Breeze, FL, EPA/600/R-16/169, 2016. ii Foreword This report supports EPA’s Sustainable and Healthy Communities Research Program.
    [Show full text]
  • 11-1 335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications. (1) the ALABAMA RIVER BASIN Waterbody from to Classification ALABAMA RIVER MOBILE RIVER C
    335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications. (1) THE ALABAMA RIVER BASIN Waterbody From To Classification ALABAMA RIVER MOBILE RIVER Claiborne Lock and F&W Dam ALABAMA RIVER Claiborne Lock and Alabama and Gulf S/F&W (Claiborne Lake) Dam Coast Railway ALABAMA RIVER Alabama and Gulf River Mile 131 F&W (Claiborne Lake) Coast Railway ALABAMA RIVER River Mile 131 Millers Ferry Lock PWS (Claiborne Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Millers Ferry Sixmile Creek S/F&W (Dannelly Lake) Lock and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Sixmile Creek Robert F Henry Lock F&W (Dannelly Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Robert F Henry Lock Pintlala Creek S/F&W (Woodruff Lake) and Dam ALABAMA RIVER Pintlala Creek Its source F&W (Woodruff Lake) Little River ALABAMA RIVER Its source S/F&W Chitterling Creek Within Little River State Forest S/F&W (Little River Lake) Randons Creek Lovetts Creek Its source F&W Bear Creek Randons Creek Its source F&W Limestone Creek ALABAMA RIVER Its source F&W Double Bridges Limestone Creek Its source F&W Creek Hudson Branch Limestone Creek Its source F&W Big Flat Creek ALABAMA RIVER Its source S/F&W 11-1 Waterbody From To Classification Pursley Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Beaver Creek ALABAMA RIVER Extent of reservoir F&W (Claiborne Lake) Beaver Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Cub Creek Beaver Creek Its source F&W Turkey Creek Beaver Creek Its source F&W Rockwest Creek Claiborne Lake Its source F&W Pine Barren Creek Dannelly Lake Its source S/F&W Chilatchee Creek Dannelly Lake Its source S/F&W Bogue Chitto Creek Dannelly Lake Its source F&W Sand Creek Bogue
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Habitat and River Reach Units for Aquatic Species of Conservation Concern in Alabama by E
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF ALABAMA SPECIAL MAP 248 Strategic Habitat and River Reach Units for Aquatic Species of Conservation Concern in Alabama by E. Anne Wynn, Patrick E. O'Neil, and Stuart W. McGregor - Geological Survey of Alabama; Jeffrey R. Powell, Jennifer M. Pritchett, and Anthony D. Ford - U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; Berry H. (Nick) Tew, Jr. State Geologist and Paul D. Johnson - Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources TENNESSEE Explanation Rivers and streams 4 Open water County lines 3 5 8 9 Hydrologic Unit Code (HUC) 10 LAUDERDALE 6 subregion boundary LIMESTONE Strategic Habitat Unit (SHU) 2 39 MADISON JACKSON COLBERT Strategic River Reach Unit (SRRU) LAWRENCE FRANKLIN 7 MORGAN The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service DE KALB 1 MARSHALL in conjunction with the Alabama 20 22 CHEROKEE Department of Conservation and MARION Natural Resources and the Geological 18 37 CULLMAN GEORGIA Survey of Alabama have selected WINSTON BLOUNT ETOWAH watersheds and river segments in the five 19 38 major HUC 4 subregions in Alabama to focus 23 36 conservation activities for managing, recovering, FAYETTE WALKER LAMAR ST CLAIR 35 and restoring populations of rare fishes, mussels, 21 41 CALHOUN snails, and crayfishes. These Strategic Habitat Units 17 CLEBURNE 14 (SHUs) and Strategic River Reach Units (SRRUs) 32 33 JEFFERSON include a substantial part of Alabama’s remaining 16 34 high-quality water courses and reflect the variety of aquatic 31 RANDOLPH habitats occupied by these species historically and presently. MISSISSIPPI 30 PICKENS 15 The SHUs were selected based on the presence of federally CLAY SHELBY listed and state imperiled species, potential threats to the TUSCALOOSA TALLADEGA 27 species, designation of critical habitat, and the best available 29 TALLAPOOSA information about the essential habitat components required by 13 BIBB CHAMBERS these aquatic species to survive.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 335-6-11 Water Use Classifications for Interstate and Intrastate Waters
    Environmental Management Chapter 335-6-11 DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT WATER DIVISION - WATER QUALITY PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 335-6-11 WATER USE CLASSIFICATIONS FOR INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE WATERS TABLE OF CONTENTS 335-6-11-.01 The Use Classification System 335-6-11-.02 Use Classifications 335-6-11-.01 The Use Classification System. (1) Use classifications utilized by the State of Alabama are as follows: Outstanding Alabama Water ................... OAW Public Water Supply ......................... PWS Swimming and Other Whole Body Shellfish Harvesting ........................ SH Fish and Wildlife ........................... F&W Limited Warmwater Fishery ................... LWF Agricultural and Industrial Water Supply ................................ A&I (2) Use classifications apply water quality criteria adopted for particular uses based on existing utilization, uses reasonably expected in the future, and those uses not now possible because of correctable pollution but which could be made if the effects of pollution were controlled or eliminated. Of necessity, the assignment of use classifications must take into consideration the physical capability of waters to meet certain uses. (3) Those use classifications presently included in the standards are reviewed informally by the Department's staff as the need arises, and the entire standards package, to include the use classifications, receives a formal review at least once every three years. Efforts currently underway through local 201 planning projects will provide additional technical data on certain waterbodies in the State, information on treatment alternatives, and applicability of various management techniques, which, when available, will hopefully lead to new decisions regarding use classifications. Of particular interest are those segments which are currently classified for any usage which has an associated Supp.
    [Show full text]
  • Description of the Proposed Action
    United States Department of the Interior FIS H AND WILDLIFE SERVICE South Florida Ecological Services Office 1339 20 111 Street Vero Beach. Florida 32960 Service Log Number: 41910-2011-F-0170 March 13, 2015 Alan M. Dodd, Colonel District Commander U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 701 San Marco Boulevard, Room 3 72 Jacksonville, Florida 32207-8175 Dear Colonel Dodd: This letter transmits the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's revised Statewide Programmatic Biological Opinion (SPBO) for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Civil Works and Regulatory sand placement activities in Florida and their effects on the following sea turtles: Northwest Atlantic Ocean distinct population segment (NW AO DPS) of loggerhead (Carella caretta) and its designated terrestrial critical habitat; green (Chelonia mydas); leatherback (Dermoche!ys coriacea); hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata); and Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) ; and the following beach mice: southeastern (Peromyscus polionotus niveiventris); Anastasia Island (Peromyscus polionolus phasma); Choctawhatchee (Peromyscus polionotus a!lophrys); St. Andrews (Peromyscus polionotus peninsularis) ; and Perdido Key (Peromyscus polionotus trissyllepsis) and their designated critical habitat. It does not address effects of these activities on the non-breeding piping plover (Charadrius melodus) and its designated critical habitat or for the red knot (Calidris canutus rufa), a species currently proposed for listing. Effects of Corps planning and regulatory shore protection activities on the non-breeding piping plover and its designated critical habitat within the North Florida Ecological Services office area of responsibility and the South Florida Ecological Services office area of responsibility are addressed in the Service's May 22, 2013, Programmatic Piping Plover Biological Opinion.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COLA
    Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1: HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING ..................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION ............................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.1 Site and Facilities .....................................................................2.4.1-1 2.4.1.2 Hydrosphere .............................................................................2.4.1-3 2.4.1.3 References .............................................................................2.4.1-12 2.4.1-i Revision 6 Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 COL Application Part 2 — FSAR SUBSECTION 2.4.1 LIST OF TABLES Number Title 2.4.1-201 East Miami-Dade County Drainage Subbasin Areas and Outfall Structures 2.4.1-202 Summary of Data Records for Gage Stations at S-197, S-20, S-21A, and S-21 Flow Control Structures 2.4.1-203 Monthly Mean Flows at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 2.4.1-204 Monthly Mean Water Level at the Canal C-111 Structure S-197 (Headwater) 2.4.1-205 Monthly Mean Flows in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 2.4.1-206 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Canal L-31E at Structure S-20 (Headwaters) 2.4.1-207 Monthly Mean Flows in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A 2.4.1-208 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Princeton Canal at Structure S-21A (Headwaters) 2.4.1-209 Monthly Mean Flows in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-210 Monthly Mean Water Levels in the Black Creek Canal at Structure S-21 2.4.1-211 NOAA
    [Show full text]