Natural & Beneficial Functions Committee (Formerly MOM)

2006 - 2007 STATUS REPORT

1. Dave Carlton has continued to represent ASFPM on the Federal Advisory Committee for Water Information. A conference call is held each September and a meeting in Reston is held in January.

2. Dave Fowler represented the association on a panel at the Association of State Wetland Managers (ASWM) Conference-State, Tribal and Federal Workshop concerning the Rapanos decision on March 27-29, 2007. Dave prepared a summary report on his participation at the conference for the ASFPM board.

3. Explore MOM Project Certification Program

No progress to date.

4. Work to integrate stream corridor restoration and floodplain management through education, conferences, workshops, etc. with a wide variety of organizations.

Ongoing

5. Promote watershed planning with built in multi-disciplinary, multi-objective approach.

Ongoing

6. Coordinate with other ASFPM committees and the executive office to assure ASFPM activities and products remain consistent with MOM message.

NBS committee members are continuing to be active and provide input to other committees, relative to NBS, as needed (i.e. working with the International Committee regarding sustainable development). In addition have provided comments on a number of white papers and “National Flood Policy and Programs in Review 2007”

7. Developed a draft white paper titled Managing Floodplains and Floodways “More than Just Conveyance Channels” for internal ASFPM review.

8. Will be facilitating another meeting at the conference for federal agencies to discuss where their agencies are going and how natural and beneficial functions play a role in their organizations.

MOM CHECKLIST
JUNE 2005

1. Have the public and other federal, state and local organizations and agencies been involved in the planning and review of the projects?

2. Do the stated project goals include goals for other flood control or flood damage reduction?

3. Does the project have a recreation component and goal?
Has the project been reviewed and commented on by federal/national, state or local recreation agencies or trail organizations?

4. Does the project have a habitat component and goal?
Has the project been reviewed and commented on by federal/national, state and local wildlife and fisheries agencies or organizations?

5. Does the project have a water quality component and goal?
Has the project been reviewed and commented on by federal/national, state and local water quality agencies and organizations?

6. Does the project have community-stated goals other than flood control?
Has the project been reviewed and commented on by a local watershed group, community group and/or business group?

7. Does the proposed project obstruct existing or potential fish passage in the waterway reach?

8. Does the proposed project obstruct riparian habitat connectivity along the project corridor?

9. Is the waterway on the state's 303d list of water quality impaired waters?

10. Has a TMDL been prepared and/or implemented for this waterway?

11. Are there any existing water quality studies for this waterway?

12. Is there an existing Use Attainability analysis for this waterway?

13. Are there any in-stream and riparian fish and wildlife surveys of this stream system?

14. Do you have a list and map of all the NPDES discharge permits for the watershed upstream of your project and downstream for the same reach?

15. Do you have a watershed map of all the areas contributing to the project reach and the waterway map showing the downstream connection?

16. Do you have a copy of any regional trail system plans for the watershed and stream reach?

17. Do you have information on the waterway bottom sediments and waterway banks or shoreline?

18. If a watercourse reach, do you have information on the incision state of the watercourse?

19. Do you have information on the connectivity of the watercourse and its adjacent floodplain so as to determine at what flood frequency event the watercourse floods the overbank or floodplain?

20. Do you have information on a wide range of flood frequency events including the one and two year frequency flood events?

21. Do you have information on historic flood events and historic flood elevations.

22. Has a program of post-project habitat monitoring been prepared, costed and funding sources been identified?

23. Has a program of post-project water quality been prepared, costed and funding sources been identified?

24. Has a program of post-project recreation use been prepared, costed and funding sources been identified?

25. Has a methodology been prepared, costed and funding identified to determine if the success of the project meets community stated goals?

26. If the proposed project will allow existing floodplain to be made available for development, will the development have to meet water quality design requirements to mitigate the water quality impact of the development?

27. If the proposed project will allow existing floodplain to be made available for development, will the development have to meet habitat design requirements to mitigate the habitat impact of the development?

28. Are there any state or federal threatened and endangered species in the project reach?

29. Are there any state or federal historic structures or culturally valued structures or icons, events and/or practices to consider?

30. Is there opportunity for funding portions of the project out of non-flood control related funding sources and have those sources and their funding requirements been identified?

Click here to view this report as a .pdf.