Copyright
Robert Peccia & Associates.

Environmental assessment and nationwide section 4(f) evaluation Canyon Ferry Road : STPS 430-1(5)1; CN 4480, Lewis and Clark County, Montana (Volume 2003) online

. (page 15 of 19)
Online LibraryRobert Peccia & AssociatesEnvironmental assessment and nationwide section 4(f) evaluation Canyon Ferry Road : STPS 430-1(5)1; CN 4480, Lewis and Clark County, Montana (Volume 2003) → online text (page 15 of 19)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


Wildlife Service (Service) . These comments have been prepared under the authority of, and in
accordance with, the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16
U.S.C. 1531 et. seq.) and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et. seq.).

The Service reviewed the proposed project and determmed that mountain plovers (Charadrixis
montanus), which are proposed for listing as a threatened species, and black-tailed prairie dogs
iCynomys ludovicianus), a candidate species, may be present within the action area. However,
considering the specific scope, nature and location of this project, we do not anticipate any
project related adverse impacts to T/E, proposed or candidate species, or any critical habitat.

Your letter did not indicate whether wetlands might be impacted by the proposed project. If so.
Corps of Engineers (Corps) Section 404 permits may eventually be required. In that event,
depending on permit type and other factors, the Service may be required to review permit
applications and will recommend any protection or mitigation measures to the Corps as may
appear reasonable and prudent based on the information available at that time.

This concludes consultation on this project and no iurther review under S.7 of the Act is
necessary. We appreciate your efforts to consider and conserve fish and wildlife resources,
including T/E species. If you have questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Scott
Jackson, of my staff, at (406)449-5225, ext. 201.

Sincerely,

-^- '■ - R. Mark Wilson

i^Q 1 3 ZGOl Field Supervisor




LEWIS & CLARK CONSERVATION DISTRICT



790 Colleen Street • Helena, Montana 59601 • 449-5000 ext. 1 12 • Fax (406) 449-5039



August 14, 2001

Daniel M. Norderud, AICP
Environmental Planner
Robert Peccia & Associates, Inc.
825 Custer Avenue
Helena, MT 59604

RE: Canyon Ferry Road

Dear: Mr. Norderud

Enclosed are the aerial photos showing soil delineations that you requested for
the Canyon Ferry Road reconstruction project. The following soils have been
designated as prime, state wide, local, or other importance:

33C: State Wide Importance

33B: Prime Importance
137B: Local Importance
218A: State Wide Importance
306A: Other Importance
406A: Other Importance
413A: Prime and State Wide Importance
513A: State Wide Importance
533B: State Wide Importance
569A: State Wide Importance

If you have any questions please call me at 449-5000 ext. 112.



Sincerely,



CONSERVATION DISTRICT




Chris Evans

District Administrator



AUG 1 5 zoai

ROBERT 0\A

ft ^ ■ '"■



CONSERVATION • DEVELOPMENT • SELF-GOVERNMENT



East Helena Lead Education & Abatement Program

#2 South Morton

PO Box 1231

East Helena, MT 59635

(406)227-8451



June 8, 2002

Mr. Mark Lambrecht
Robert Peccia and Associates
825 Custer Avenue
Helena, MT 59604

Dear Mr. Lambrecht,

It was my pleasure to speak with you on the phone recently.

I have discussed your concerns with our advisory committee and they agree that there is
minimal risk of your laborers encountering dangerously elevated lead levels in the soil
along Canyon Ferry Road. Typically, soil lead levels in that area are very close to
background level. Although flooding has occurred in the area between Wylie Drive and
Valley Drive, we have no evidence of dangerously elevated lead levels in that area. As a
standard precaution, I would recommend the following basic hygiene practices:

• Do not eat or smoke in the work area.

• Wash well before eating or smoking.

• Do not wear work clothes or shoes into your home.

• Wash work clothes separately from children's clothing.

• Do not allow pets or children in the work area.

Thank you for your inquiry. If I canbeof further assistance, please call me at 227-8451.
Best regards.





Janet SteUer, RS
'Program Coordinator




m 1 7 2002

ROBERT PECCIA
& AS£ iAtW




PTEX.liijISFA



3S40 North MnntniTn Avenue

Helena, KoiiLaiia. by602

(406) 442-3292



dlSTTtXCT



September 17, 2002

Robert P>ecr;-itT Si Associates
Mr, Tom Cavajrxaugh, P.E.
r.O. BOK 5653
Helena^ MT 59ci04




sab:ject: Highway HDT Project J4o. STPS 430-l-(5)l
Canyon Ferry Road Preliminary Plan



Dear Mr. Cavanaugh.,

He discusserf the proposed replacement bridges that cross the Helena
Valley Canal, We support the replacHjnert of the bridge;? so long
as they are a clear span design-

We have a concern with the design nn sheet 4^. Vcinr design shows
that the now highway easement will tiut into our existing canal
easement- This is unacceptable for several reasons. Firsts the
removal oE bank material could coitiprowi ae the br^nk stability
integrity. Second, our access road would be eliminated preventing
maintenance equipment and ditch riders acccsE to the north side of
the canal.



Whftii we spoke about tills, you indicated that you would try to
purchase right of way south of the cnn.il and if grade would allow^
move this stretch of canal south leaving us with the same easement
dimensions as original.

Please get back to me before the mdI' October 7 meeting regarding
o«r concerns. Thank you.

Sincerely,




JAMES A. FOSTER, MANAGER

HELENA VALLEY IRRIGATTO^f DISTRICT



cc: Michael Petrunis

JBurea^^ of Eeclamation
Montana Area omce
P.O. Box J u 1 :] 7

Dillingsy MT 59107-fi]:57




SEP 1 9 im

ROBEP-T r^ECCiA
&A. - ^- '■.TEE




IN REPLY
REFER TO:

MT-432

LND-6.00



United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Great Plains Regioo

Montana Area Office

P.O. Box 30137

Billings, Montana 59107M)]37



SEPTEMBER 2 4 20K



-5?nSl«"'<i"«JR;



^ft



-^y^Ii^CF-tCLiSili



a*.




SEP 2 5 200Z

ROBERT PECCIA
Robert Peccia and Associates * ^ \TES

Attn: Tom Cavanaugh
P.O. Box 5653
Helena, MX 59604

Subject: Highway MDT Project No. STPS 430-1(5)1

Designation; Canyon Ferry Road, Helena Valley Road

Dear Mr. Cavanaugh:

We have reviewed the preliminary plans for the subject project and offer the following comments
in regard to the Helena Valley Canal.

Canvon Ferrv Road Stationing 48+40 to 49+80 ^ 46 C^y^

The road configuration shown on Sheet 5 is unacceptable. The road may not cut into the
canal bank as presently shown. The road must either be moved north or arrangements be
made to move the canal south. Under either scenario, the following conditions must be
met:

1 . The cross section of the canal prism and banks must remain the same as the
dimensions of the existing canal section.

2. The width of the existing O&M road must be maintained.

3. The overall width of the canal and O&M road right-of-way must be maintained.

4. If the canal is moved, the minimimi radius of any curve in the canal must be no less
than ten times the width of the water surface at the normal operating elevation of the
canal.



A Century of Water for the West
1902-2002



CanvoD Ferry Road Stationing 87+66

The new bridge shall be a clear span, meet all federal and state design requirements, and
have a miniinum distance from high canal water siirface elevation to bottom span
elevation of 2 feet.

Canyon Ferry Road Stationing 162+05

The new bridge shall be a clear span, meet all federal and state design requirements, and
have a minimum distance from high canal water surface elevation to bottom span
elevation of 2 feet.

In regards to your August 5, 2002 inquiry about the timber stock bridge that crosses the Helena
Valley Canal at approximate canal stationing 705+40, Reclamation has an easement granted
November 7, 1 957 from Nickolaus and Catherine Poeppmg (copy enclosed), on the lands
identified. There is no reference to the bridge in the easement. If it is determined that a new
bridge is necessary, you will need to send us a written request for an Acknowledgement of
Easement Crossing. Also, to ensure that your proposed project does not interfere with
Reclamation's dominant easement, a subservient easement needs to be procured from the
imderlying landowner, if applicable. The new bridge would be required to clear span the canal
and have a minimum distance from the high canal water surface to bottom span elevation of 2
feet.

I will not be available to attend the October 7* design review meeting; however, if you have any
questions or need any other information conceming the canal m relation to the widening of
Canyon Feny Road, please contact me at (406) 247-7312.



Sincerely,




Enclosure

cc: Helena Valley frrigation District
Attn: Jim Foster
3840 North Montana
Helena, MT 59602



tEFjiJflMEWr CJ-" TEE inTLHlM

. Hi[]<«Aij r>i' !;i-:rT,:.Mii-inH ■■
rrT.r-u, v.f.T.w wu



lilLS IlOKIflURQ, Ilflde tJnjL y'lM day otyt$ r^ f^/jf/r i3h7 ■ I>iir4>uant



.W.tJic- ftft of CiJUETOBu dT Jiinc 17, 1502 [32 GtBti 566 J , OcS nil BctE. uucdatoiry

thfiiceor Oi uuEpLeiBtaLEi'^ Uiirtsti^^ Eurtlauliirly the mt of Consrei»& of Aupjftt- If,

tiKl UuUsii ELilL^u Ei: Jtaauica. twiulnoftur rcf-oirci!, to 13. Unltctl CtBtSi, Mfl



iliolralana 1. Fwr



bUalu^Ul. 1O.IUI rrirs






parti ea:



1- Eur I'^u? iii]riiiiri-era.Lluri lii?r'?J»itL'<''?f tzTjirtKhifi t.l]7 "Vj^ndor i*o<;g btrc



eXAI^E LiiCa tUfe ULlLtfid 'JHX.Z&ii aiii. la ItA aUdBe-EaMa Aaa. aEEieQE. firraver A.
rioht c/t vBy -and uiiiri;ini:a't, ^cgt^tku:!- vi'th. all ttic rlEtitB .end privlla^a
liuLlant ti> tlic use anl «nJo;;mcrit tJKrcDf, liuliiilDg 'Qut not limLtud by
^1^19 -TQCttELl to tbr; rLghL of i.Qgivj.i3d Emii cgrcQD, tG c-aiiGtrucb| uvbiaiiulji

11'triu.tiixeB avei and BUDG<e the fpllovJjig 'l^scrttKl Er«ni9«-9 :ln Uic



, Btlltj: oC



Uect Half ot the [Jprttiuaot a^rter {HaHE^O: otA ttw Coutn llaa of Vtk.
jliartJiUEflt Qpaitai' (E.^:KsJi-) qC ilactioii TMiitj' (.2uJ, iU'iKaLlp OKia (iJJj
Hc4:Uii Sli])[^ Tka (ll] lIcEti frlnt^li^il M-Tldluiii [njrc: |>jiri>lciLLirl^
dsEELrlLEiii at, follattj^i A jitrlf af' Un^ iJitli U busiimlDE Uii'i.b oL

-bJtA fiAUeuus oeacrusd CE^Bti^r linn : uc^innicLs aij -a palsrt c<n tba
Ifiji'tli UuQ of Sac. SC?, ¥. lU N., k. £ LJ., F.K., iDXJ.ti feet Btlirl,Lit<ly
from, "the; Nort"b ftLii^H-i^r Currii^r cjL" uaid Rais- a>j ^.tienruj il>U-"*2^'}i.,

2Qit.9 Caotj -tbAOcii ua a Euive to tlie ri^^ uitn a IiOlIiO fuot miUiDj

3L0<2 Ec^irj tj^tcitf"^ Si^i^^ll'W"*! i3't-fl freat, thajjoe uri b qui'u^ ta the
lert iiltn a >Wo!.0 taot risiim, ISO. 6 feet, tLcncc fi.SO'St'ff.,
l^Y-'[) fafitj tliDDQU- UD a cufire tC IJJ.i: ICCt HLtn & 3CU.IJ Ti)^ rffl^lua,

^ — ^"- 17Gi&'fccrtj-tb.'nt:c"firl2'^&'Ej|-Klvl-l'uc-l;-a-i-iftiiaU-tji!i'L- li6 ididvii i=^

ta-Ins UrC Uf till!' btiiiX/^ lAna U&ri!3±e£ tu h^.O feat, thmioa [i|i -a
ckrl^ iij tlus ri4iliL.j ulLJi a ya.O i\i^iL luJliiii, 3fi5.3 fuut, tTTencc
BiST^O^'l'.r SW.Y ((^ot., tLcncn "n ii curuB ia J. he- ri,";ifc jlth n lOCO.O
foot TOdiuD, 1£^.T f'QDV, tb:nc« a.6i*''^'\l,, l£3>jL fca-L at utiLijii lUtLiit
thj uiiitti "tu tljE IrjEt aT IhiR cEULtr ilrLR ' I ilsnsjijrfiB 4,ii iJQ.O Ecct,

-■-: — ili£nee eoitlmilnsi C-*St"K'V.j 15D.-D fcpt at uliicli pulrit -^Ik -uidtL id- -

lti£ S-^^'lIi'LiIN tLiQ.Ci^k&x lull's ljicr<i[Ui3a ta 7U.t> rei^t^ {ijuill^b cuciiinitioti,
E.61^'32'H., 033. Il ftutVtliHiiea uii u, eUtvl; Uj ibiu -ri.FM,«l-1.t u 30C.0 '
.^fDot Eodjunj IBT.D f«i:1.j tlimme 3,a^°5iJ'W-, lLlJiS.5 fK=1.j"_t.hL!ii™ un li
-... 'EUrye t» the. r4^Lit .^LUi ,ii.^|j.C^<^i^£^Qt TUdiuEi, i£l.l X£^i:"ui; lijiisb



161.U fest, tiiao.. ii.6i"i^^w., ^la.s i-L..n, tJ*«w oe q ..r.. to" *






iz.1 J.'^^ *^J- i"'*"'.f5l-*''5 £«" flcrth Jiiti 4C9,5 f06t tiloL: fica tUff



MKaa, ifi^iy or loflfl.

Ctunkeii fur JEuaLiiB-Qi-ijia D^ta ,5-^ ^'J-S'P



■U* niatli t- -llLt: left ot tlld EGjitaj- lln.; liscrftEAiii ta a>M foet
-,ti,*2™ cnntlauiaij-a.eit'jd'w., ]0?.0 fccitiit wMjj, i:,.int ttve wiati, tj

B.oi 3a'H-, a33.ii ftct, ticaca t^ ^ Qurve v; the rigtrt ijitii a 500.0^
fMt radius, lB-f.ci f^(;t, -thaice S.Bs^a'iJ., Li^.s fc-et/ tbc«m nn u
CUlVa to t^t riBlit UlKi a iK].;o.ronb sdOito, ISl.l feat "at uiilcj.




IN REPLY
REFER TO

MT-432
LND-6.00



United States Department of the Interior

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

Great Plains Region

Montana Area Office

P.O. Box 30137

Billings, Montana 59107-0137



FEBRUARY 14 to03



FEB i ? 2003

n-^cicRi PEUCIA
&AS?^-"riATES



Robert Peccia and Associates
Attn: Tom Cavanaugh
P.O. Box 5653
825 Custer Avenue
Helena, MT 59604

Subject: Highway MDT Project No. STPS 430-1(5)1
Designation: Canyon Ferry Road
Helena Valley Road

Dear Mr. Cavanaugh: .. ■ i :

Inresponsetoyourletter of January 13, 2003, we offer the following comments: '

■ ■ ■ I
1. Bureau of Reclamation Contact Person

For this project, please address correspondence as follows: Ms. Susan Kelly, Area Manager
Montana Area Office P.O. Box 30137, Billings, MT 59107-0137 Attention: Mike Petronis.

Concerning the permitting process. Reclamation wdll not require a special use permit because
our right-of-way for the land is an easement rather than fee title interest. However,
Reclamation will require the processing of a Construction Authorization Contract prior to
approval of the project. Please see Response 4. below for further information. Mike Petronis
will work with the appropriate persons in our office to process your requests and attempt to
simplify the commimications process for your office. Please continue to provide copies of all
correspondence to Jim Foster.

2. Minimum Cover Requirements over Siphons

In regards to the minimum cover requirements over siphons. Reclamation design standards
state; "At all siphons crossing under roads other than farm roads and siphons crossing imder
railroads, a mininium of -3 feet of (compacted) earth cover should be provided. If roadway
ditches exist and are extended over the pipe, the minimum distance from the ditch to the top
of the pipw should be 2 feet (of compacted backfill)." If the cover over the pipe is less than 3
feet at any location. Reclamation will also require that a concrete cap be installed over the

A Century of Water for the West
1902-2002



2
siphon pipe to protect it from any future excavation activities. In addition, the final design of
the roadway over the siphon will need to be submitted to Reclamation's Great Plains
Regional Office Technical Services Group for approval. Depending on the degree of
reduction of cover over the siphon, Reclamation may require inspectionof the inside of the
siphon pipe to ensure its integrity prior to approval of the road construction.

3. Subsurface Utility Engineering

Reclamation concurs with the proposal to perform "soft locates" using a vacuum excavator on
all of Reclamation's buried structures that will remain in place. Please notify us at least ten
days in advance of these excavating activities so we may have the opportunity to witness the
excavating process.

4. Proposed Canal Relocation Right of Sta. 49+00 (Project Stationing)

Since Reclamation holds an easement from the underlying landowner for the section of canal
that is to be relocated, we recommend the following process for completion of the canal
relocation:

a. The Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) will need to acquire a permanent
easement in the name of the Bureau of Reclamation for the area where the new canal will
be located and provide our office with the appropriate documentation. If you have any
questions regarding the existing canal easement, please contact our Realty Specialist,
Susan Stiles at 406-247-7316.

b. Once documentation of the new easement is received, specifications and drawings for the
canal relocation will need to be approved by Reclamation. There are two options for
completion of the specifications and drawings:

(1) You may utilize Reclamation's design standards (available from George Gliko, Civil
Engineer, Great Plains Regional Office Technical Services Group, 406-247-7651) to
develop specifications and drawings for the canal relocation and submit them to this
office. Mr. Petronis w^ll coordinate with Reclamation's Great Plains Regional Office
Technical Services Group for review and approval, or

(2) You may request that Reclamation's Great Plains Regional Office Technical Services
Group develop the specifications and drawings for the canal relocation and submit
them to you for your use. The cost for development of the specifications and
drawings must be provided to Reclamation in advance of commencement of the
work.

In either case, the final canal relocation specifications and drawings should be submitted
to your contractor for inclusion into the overall scope of work. Reclamation vAll send a
Construction Inspector to inspect the work performed by your contractor during the canal
relocation to ensure the work meets the requirements of the specifications. Depending on



the duration of the construction, Reclamation may require reimbursement for the
Construction Inspector's activities.

c. Once documentation of the new easement is received and final construction plans are
approved by our office, Reclamation will prepare a Construction Authorization Contract
to be signed by our office and MDT. The Construction Authorization Contract will
contain provisions necessary to:

(1) Protect the Helena Valley Canal and associated laterals and siphons from damage.

(2) Ensure unrestricted flow and adequate water quality in the Helena Valley Canal.

(3) Not diminish the ability to operate, maintain and access the Helena Valley Canal.

(4) Protect and provide for the unrestricted use of Reclamation's easement for the Helena
Valley Canal.

(5) Prevent an unreasonable burden of liability to Reclamation.

d. In order to ensure uninterrupted delivery of irrigation water, construction related to the
relocation of the canal must be scheduled to guarantee the operation of the canal between

April 1 and October 1 . (i.e. the canal may be out of service only from October 2 to
March 31).

In regards to your January 6th inquiry concerning drawings for the bridge at Helena Valley Canal
stationing 183+52, we have searched our records and have only located drawing 596-D-162.
This is the same drawing as was provided to you by Mr. Jim Foster. Apparently the bridge was
not constructed as was originally planned or was modified since its original construction. In
either case, the records for this modification are unavailable. If you have any questions or need
additional information, please contact Mike Petronis at 406-247-7312.

Sincerely,



Susan J. Kelly
Area Manager




U S. Department of Agriculture

FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING


PART 1 (To be completed by Federal Agency)


Date of Land Evaluation Request February 27, 2003


Name of Project

CANYON FERRY ROAD

STPS 430-1 (5) 1; Control No. 4480


Federal Agency Involved

U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration/

Montana Department of Transportation


Proposed Land Use

Road Reconstruction and New R/W


L.ounty and state

Lewis and Clark County, Montana


PART II (To ke completed by SCS)


Date Request Received by SCS 2/27/03


Does the site contain pnme unique, statewide or local important farmland'? Yes No
(If no, the FPPA does not apply - do not complete additional parts of this form). ^ CH


Acres
Irrigated

9 T2


Average Farm Size
1633


rviajor cropfs;

Barley, Winter Wheat, Alfalfa


Farmable Land in Govt. Junsdiction
Acres %


Amount of Farm
Acres 45.8


and As Defined in FPPA
%


Name of Land Evaluation System Used
LESA


Name of Local Site Assessment
System Lewis ana Cla*


Date Land Evaluation Returned by SCS
3/4/03


PART III (To be completed by Federal Agency) Land Evaluation Information


Alternative Site Rating


Proposed Action


Alternatives


Existing Highway
(No-Action)


A Total Acres To Be Converted Directly (Area of farmland wittiin new R/W)


43.8


NA


0.0


B Total Acres To Be Converted Indirectly


0.9


NA


0.0


C Total Acres in Site (Total Acres of New or Existing Rigtit-of-Way)


141.5


NA


41.8


PART IVfTo be completed by SCS) Land Evaluation Information








A. Total Acres Of Prime And Unique Farmland


6




1.7


B Total Acres Of Statewide or Local Important Farmland


27




8


C Percentage Of Farmland in County or Local Govt. Unit To Be Converted


.04




.01


D Percentage Of Farmland in Govt Julstliction yyitfi Same Or Higher Relative Value










PART V (To be completed by SCS) Land Evaluation Critenon

Relative Value Of Farmland To Be Converted (Scale of to 100 Points)


65




65


PART VI (To be completed by Federal Agency)

Site Assessment Criteria (These criteria are explained in 7 CFR 658 5(b)


Maximum
Points








1 Area in Nonurban Use


15


12






2 Perimeter in Nonurban Use


10


8






3 Percent of Site Being Farmed


20


10






4 Protection Provided by State and Local Government


20









5 Distance From Urban Builtup Area


N/A


-






6 Distance to Urban Support Services


N/A


-






7 Size of Present Farm Unit Compared to Average


10


g






8 Creation of Nonfarmable Farmland


25









9 Availability of Farm Support Seivices


5


5






10 On-Farm Investments


20


20






11. Effects of Conversion on Farm Support Services


25









12 Compatibility With Existing Agricultural Use


10


5






TOTAL SITE ASSESSMENT POINTS


160


69






PART VII (To be completed by Federal Agency)










Relative Value Of Farmland (From Part V)


100


65






Total Site Assessment (From Part VI above or a local
Site assessmer]t)


160


69






TOTAL POINTS (Total of above 2 lines)


260


134






biie beieciea:
Action As Proposed


uate OTbeie


tion J-4-oJ


was a Local i^ite Assessment used'i.
Yes No ESI


Keason i-or


|i.'ee instructions on reverse side/








F


3rm AU-10Uti|10-Q3l



STEPS IN PROCESSING THE FARMLAND AND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM



Step 1 - Federal agencies involved in proposedprojects that may convert farmland, as defined in tlie Farmland Protection
Policy Act (FPPA) to nonagri cultural uses, will initially complete Parts I and III of form.

Step 2 - Originator will send copies A, B, and C together with maps indicating locations of site(s), to the Soil
Conservation Service (SCS) local field office and retain copy D for tlieir files. (Note: SCS has a field office in most
counties in the U.S. The field office is usually located in the county seat. A list of field office locations are available from
the SCS State Conservationist in each state).

Step 3 - SCS will, witliin 45 calendar days after receipt of form, make a determination as to whetlier the site(s) of tlie
proposed project contains prime, unique, statewide or local important farmland.

Step 4 - hi cases where farmland covered by the FPPA will be converted by tlie proposed project, SCS field offices will
complete Parts 11, IV, and V of tliefomi.

Step 5 - SCS will return copy A andB of tlie form to the Federal agency involved in tlie project. Copy C will be retained
for SCS records.

Step 6 - The Federal agency involved in the proposed project will complete Parts VI and VII of the form.

Step 7 - The Federal agency involved in tlie proposed project will make a determination as to whether tlie proposed
conversion is consistent with tlie FPPA and the agency s internal policies.



INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE FARMLAND CONVERSION IMPACT RATING FORM

Part I : In completing the County and State questions list all the local governments that are responsible for local land
controls where site{s) are to be evaluated.

Part III: In completing item B (Total Acres to Be Converted Indirectly), include the following:

1. Acres not being directly converted but tliat would no longer be capable of being faimed after the conversion, because
the conversion would restrict access to them.

2. Acres planned to receive services fiom an infrastructure project as indicated in the project justification (e.g. highways,
utilities) that will cause a direct conversion.

Part VI: Do not complete Part VI if a local site assessment is used.

Assign the maximum points for each site assessment criterion as shown in 658.5(b) of CFR. In cases of corridor-type

Erojects such as transportation, powerline and flood control, criteria #5 and #6 will not apply and will be weighted zero,
owever, criterion # S will be weighted a maximum of 25 points, and criterion #1 1 a maximum of 25 points.

Individual Federal agencies at the national level, may assign relative weights among tlie 12 site assessment criteria other
than tliose shown inlhe FPPA rule. In all cases where otlier weights are assigned, relative adjustments must be made to


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 17 18 19

Online LibraryRobert Peccia & AssociatesEnvironmental assessment and nationwide section 4(f) evaluation Canyon Ferry Road : STPS 430-1(5)1; CN 4480, Lewis and Clark County, Montana (Volume 2003) → online text (page 15 of 19)