As part of the development of each Trail segment, authorization from the South Florida Water Management District and the US Army Corps of Engineers may be required. To determine what type of authorization a given FKOHT project requires, use the Permit Decision Tree. Following the steps of the Decision Tree will also lead to regulations and permit application templates. Following is additional information about the FKOHT Permit Process.

The South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) is the state agency tasked with permitting the FKOHT in the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) process.  A Conceptual Permit (Permit No. 44-00323-P) covering the entire FKOHT alignment was issued on January 15, 2004.  Authorization for construction will be achieved through modifications to the Conceptual ERP.  An application for each segment of the FKOHT will be submitted as a separate modification to the approved Conceptual ERP, as either a Standard General or Individual ERP.  In addition to the ERP issued by the SFWMD, each segment may also need to apply for authorization from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), along with other Federal, State and local authorizations.  The permit chart shown here depicts the flow of the ERP process for the Trail, illustrating the role of all key parties in the process.

A Permit Template has been developed to assist design engineers in submitting ERP applications for FKOHT development projects. This template is in word format, and provides sample text, guidance comments and standard information to reduce the time spent on each ERP and to increase consistency in applications submitted.

Following is a review of the ERP and US Army Corps of Engineers process for FKOHT applications.

Review of the ERP and Army USACE application process for the FKOHT

In the ERP process for each Trail segment, the first step is for the project design engineers to determine approximate site layout and proposed impacts to regulated resources, as identified through preliminary design. The segment specific pages in Appendix B provide planning information by segment that may help in preliminary resource identification. This information should be used to determine the likely ERP category that the project will fall under, if the project proceeds according to preliminary design. Per regulatory requirements, all phases of the FKOHT will be processed as a standard general or an individual ERP. However, the SFWMD may choose to allow very minor projects (pathway resurfacing, trailhead creation) to be processed as No Notice General or Exempt activities. In order to determine if a minor project qualifies for a No Notice General permit or an exemption, review 40E-4.0415 Permit Thresholds for a detailed permit threshold description. All projects for the FKOHT proposed for exemption or a No Notice General Permit should be discussed with the SFWMD (Ron Peekstok) for his concurrence. In order to determine the likely ERP category, the ERP Decision Tree should be used to guide the design engineers through the permit process. The ERP Decision Tree will also identify key thresholds for the project to stay below  to avoid impacts to wetlands and other resources to the maximum extent possible. At this stage, efforts should be made to adjust the design of the project in order to avoid (or minimize if avoidance is impossible) impacts to wetlands and other regulated resources including open water, mangroves and wetland buffers. This redesign effort will not only lessen environmental impacts, it could reduce the intensity of review (and therefore time and effort) needed to issue an authorization for the given Trail segment. Special attention should be made to stay below designated permit thresholds.

If during preliminary design it appears that the segment has potential issues of concern such as high resource impact or competing regulatory initiatives, notify FDEP - OGT and E Sciences. If avoidance is not possible, the engineering firm designing the given FKOHT segment will most likely be asked to host a pre-application meeting with relevant agencies including SFWMD.

Once the likely ERP authorization is determined and initial design has been completed (30%), design engineers will forward the draft design and ERP determination to E Sciences and FDEP – OGT. E Sciences will then verify the ERP category determination, evaluate the potential for further design changes/process streamlining by incorporating methods used on previous FKOHT segments, as well as evaluating the potential for combining the ERP application with other like segments at the same stage of design.

After incorporating comments from initial review by E Sciences and an agency pre-application meeting, if necessary, project design should proceed with the review process repeating at the 60% and 90% design stages. Once the 90% design has been reviewed by FDEP and E Sciences, the application will be submitted by the design engineers to the SFWMD.

During the permit review process, the design engineers will copy E Sciences and FDEP on all SFWMD requests for additional information (RAI’s) along with their responses, as well as the final authorization. This will enable a free flow of information among design engineers for various Trail segments.

Other environmental regulations include but are not limited to the Coastal Zone Management Act, Section 302 of Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, NEPA, the Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1956, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 and Sections 402 and 404 of the Clean Water Act. Each of these laws should be reviewed for their applicability to/implications for each Trail segment. This evaluation however is preliminary in nature, and each segment will need to be reviewed for implications from these laws according to final design criteria. In general, the above laws are not administered individually, but rather through two permit processes; the USACE permit review process and the NEPA process.

In general, the construction of bicycle facilities will not require a permit from the USACE because most segments will not require direct impacts to wetlands or surface waters. However, each segment of the FKOHT will need to be evaluated and this assessment confirmed. Due to the location of the FKOHT, only very limited non-tidal wetland impacts may qualify for a nationwide permit (ex: Nationwide #14). If any tidal or wetland impacts are proposed for a given segment (or non-tidal wetlands that may affect essential fish habitat), the segment will require an individual permit from the USACE. If a USACE permit is required, the design engineers will follow the same design with the USACE permit as outlined under the ERP process, from preliminary design and use of the decision tree to final permit submittal with copies to E Sciences and the applicants. All ERP applications are forwarded to the SFWMD (with a copy to E Sciences and FDEP – OGT).

In addition to a general review of the Conceptual ERP including general conditions to insure consistency, design engineers for each segment of the FKOHT should take note of the special conditions. These conditions were written specifically for the FKOHT ERP process, and have significant and specific implications for design and permitting activities. The list of Special Conditions from the Conceptual ERP is listed below. Important notations/implications to keep in mind during design phase appear in brackets below relevant special conditions.

Special Conditions:
1. The conceptual phase of this permit shall expire on January 15, 2006 [FDEP will be responsible for obtaining an extension of the conceptual ERP as needed].
2. Operation of the surface water management system shall be the responsibility of the FDEP.
3. The Permittee shall be responsible for the correction of any erosion, shoaling or water quality problems that result from the construction or operation of the surface water management system.
4. Measures shall be taken during construction to insure that sedimentation and/or turbidity violations do not occur in the receiving waters. [Adjacent waters are classified as Outstanding Florida Waters, as well as a National Marine Sanctuary.] Permits for new dredging and filling must be clearly in the public interest, taking into consideration:
• Whether the activity will adversely affect the public health, safety, or welfare or property of others;
• Whether the activity will adversely affect the conservation of fish and wildlife, including endangered or threatened species, or their habitats;
• Whether the activity will adversely affect navigation or the flow of water or cause harmful erosion or shoaling;
• Whether the activity will adversely affect the fishing or recreational values or marine productivity in the vicinity of the activity;
• Whether the activity will be of a temporary or permanent nature;
• Whether the activity will adversely affect or will enhance significant historical and archaeological resources under the provisions of sec. 267.061 F.S.; and
• The current condition and relative value of functions being performed by areas affected by the proposed activity (373.414(1)(a), F.S.). Impacts to Outstanding Florida Waters may be allowed for:
    • Temporary lowering of water quality during construction activities (with special restrictions).
    • Activities to allow or enhance public usage, or to maintain pre-existing activities (with certain safeguards). 
    See http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/ofwfs.htm for more information.]
5. The SFWMD reserves the right to require that additional water quality treatment methods be incorporated into the drainage system if such measures are shown to be necessary. [See Outstanding Florida Waters comments above. Special measures to preserve water quality may be required above typical requirements.]
6. Facilities other than those stated herein shall not be constructed without an approved modification of this permit.
7. A stable, permanent and accessible elevation reference shall be established on or within one hundred (100) feet of all permitted discharge structures no later than the submission of the certification report. The location of the elevation reference must be noted on or with the certification report.
8. The Permittee shall provide routine maintenance of all of the components of the surface water management system in order to remove all trapped sediments/debris. All materials shall be properly disposed of as required by law. Failure to properly maintain the system may result in adverse flooding conditions.
9. This permit is issued based on the applicant’s submitted information which reasonably demonstrates that adverse water resource related impacts will not be caused by the completed permit activity. Should any adverse impacts caused by the completed surface water management system occur, the SFWMD will require the Permittee to provide appropriate mitigation to the SFWMD or other impacted party. The District will require the permittee to modify the surface water management system, if necessary, to eliminate the cause of the adverse impacts.
10. At the time of application for construction approval for each segment, the permittee shall conduct an archaeological survey on the site in accordance with the guidelines from the Florida Department of State, Division of Historical Resources (DHR). A report shall be compiled summarizing the results of the survey and be submitted to the DHR for review and approval. The permittee shall submit a letter of no objection from the Historical Resources Division prior to the SFWMD taking final agency action on any construction permits in the undeveloped portions of this project. [FDEP is handling historic resource issues. FDEP will notify design engineers if comments from the DHR need to be incorporated into the design/application.]
11. Upon submittal of an application for construction approval, the permittee shall submit a wetland impact, mitigation, monitoring and maintenance plan for review by SFWMD staff. The plan shall be subject to the approval of SFWMD staff in accordance with environmental criteria in effect at the time of the construction permit application. [A pre-application meeting with the SFWMD will most likely need to take place before an application is submitted which proposes wetland or other impacts requiring mitigation.]
12. A permit modification will be required prior to construction of the different segments of the Trail. Plans and calculations shall be submitted to demonstrate that the proposed project will meet SFWMD criteria for water quality treatment and attenuation.
13. At the time of application for construction approval, additional wildlife surveys shall be performed to demonstrate that no listed species resources are present which may be adversely impacted by the proposed construction activities. [Wildlife requirements are discussed further in this Plan – Section 2.4.6, under the heading Sensitive Species.]
14. Upon submittal of an application for construction approval involving wetland impacts or proposed mitigation, the permittee shall submit a work schedule subject to SFWMD staff review and approval, specifying completion dates for each mitigation, monitoring and maintenance task. [Mitigation should be coordinated though FDEP/E Sciences. Mitigation may be carried out elsewhere along the Trail alignment.]

In addition to (and concurrent with) the ERP process, other environmental regulations and laws may apply to the construction of any given segment of the FKOHT. Each segment will likely require sediment and erosion control plans and review through the NPDES reporting requirements. Though the SFWMD may ask for certain aspects of this information to confirm compliance with ERP requirements, sediment and erosion control is primarily an engineering and contractor responsibility. E Sciences, if requested by design engineers, will review sediment and erosion control plans to evaluate if they pose additional environmental concerns. Obtaining NPDES authorization and related compliance activities will remain the responsibility of the design engineers and/or the project construction contractors.

The NEPA process is the major vehicle by which the Federal government reviews activities according to the previously mentioned environmental laws. The NEPA process is required for the FKOHT project because Federal funding is being used to finance construction and some design plans. The NEPA process for the FKOHT is being handled through a separate effort than the ERP and USACE permitting reviews. E Sciences is working on this process for the FKOHT as well. As NEPA documentation is not a direct aspect of the ERP/USACE permitting processes, it is not included in this permitting plan. However, the SFWMD and the USACE may request general information to insure compliance with the NEPA process, and the NEPA process may require some documentation similar to that needed for the ERP and USACE processes. In these instances, E Sciences will provide coordination for this information to insure both processes receive needed information without duplication of efforts. Design teams needing NEPA documentation for their ERP/USACE permit processes should contact E Sciences.