The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 26-30

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 26... ... 26 mitigation ratio is used unless otherwise agreed for specific projects. The EEP approach led to a great deal of learning about the mitigation options and opportunities across the state and by helping to define relevant watersheds. Read the entire page →
From page 27... ... 27 approved the use of federal funding for wetlands mitigation efforts under the National Highway System (NHS) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP) Read the entire page →
From page 28... ... 28 The FAST Act was signed into law in 2015. Eligibility requirements under the NHPP did not change. Read the entire page →
From page 29... ... 29 "mitigation property" as "real property interests acquired to mitigate for impacts of a project eligible for funding under title 23."280 In 2008, the FHWA provided an Information Memorandum addressing funding of long-term management for compensatory mitigation provided by wetland and habitat banks and ILFs, concluding that these costs are typically reflected in the price of credits and affirming that they are eligible costs for federal aid.281 In 2006, FHWA and other federal agencies collaborated on a program called Eco-Logical: An Ecosystem Approach to Developing Infrastructure Projects.282 It is intended to provide a methodology for integrating broader-scale ecological considerations into transportation planning and decision making, and reflects the value of participating in conservation planning at a variety of levels. A technical approach to collaboration on data and identification of mitigation opportunities is a further outgrowth of this approach.283 A key aspect of this integrated process is the recommendation for creating a "regional ecosystem framework" that includes a conservation strategy, a crediting strategy, and a data framework with the ability to provide updated conservation and restoration priorities.284 These activities provide an approach that can support state transportation agency participation in conservation plans at multiple scales in order to achieve better conservation outcomes and more efficient processes for project planning, funding, and delivery. Read the entire page →
From page 30... ... 30 C ILFs Established by State Transportation Agencies The RIBITS database maintained by the Corps of Engineers' Institute for Water Resources shows a total of 56 approved ILFS operating in 26 states across the United States.293 No ILFs are specifically operated by state transportation agencies, but many have agreements with state transportation agencies to use their mitigation credits. Read the entire page →

From page 26...

... 26 mitigation ratio is used unless otherwise agreed for specific projects. The EEP approach led to a great deal of learning about the mitigation options and opportunities across the state and by helping to define relevant watersheds.

Read the entire page →

From page 27...

... 27 approved the use of federal funding for wetlands mitigation efforts under the National Highway System (NHS) and the Surface Transportation Program (STP)

Read the entire page →

From page 28...

... 28 The FAST Act was signed into law in 2015. Eligibility requirements under the NHPP did not change.

Read the entire page →

From page 29...

... 29 "mitigation property" as "real property interests acquired to mitigate for impacts of a project eligible for funding under title 23."280 In 2008, the FHWA provided an Information Memorandum addressing funding of long-term management for compensatory mitigation provided by wetland and habitat banks and ILFs, concluding that these costs are typically reflected in the price of credits and affirming that they are eligible costs for federal aid.281 In 2006, FHWA and other federal agencies collaborated on a program called Eco-Logical: An Ecosystem Approach to Developing Infrastructure Projects.282 It is intended to provide a methodology for integrating broader-scale ecological considerations into transportation planning and decision making, and reflects the value of participating in conservation planning at a variety of levels. A technical approach to collaboration on data and identification of mitigation opportunities is a further outgrowth of this approach.283 A key aspect of this integrated process is the recommendation for creating a "regional ecosystem framework" that includes a conservation strategy, a crediting strategy, and a data framework with the ability to provide updated conservation and restoration priorities.284 These activities provide an approach that can support state transportation agency participation in conservation plans at multiple scales in order to achieve better conservation outcomes and more efficient processes for project planning, funding, and delivery.

Read the entire page →

From page 30...

... 30 C ILFs Established by State Transportation Agencies The RIBITS database maintained by the Corps of Engineers' Institute for Water Resources shows a total of 56 approved ILFS operating in 26 states across the United States.293 No ILFs are specifically operated by state transportation agencies, but many have agreements with state transportation agencies to use their mitigation credits.

Read the entire page →

Key Terms

← Previous Chapter Skim

Next Chapter Skim →

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.