New York Codes, Rules and Regulations
Title 6 - DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Chapter V - RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Subchapter D - REAL PROPERTY AND LAND ACQUISITION
Part 591 - Procedures For The Selection, Review, Approval And Funding Of State Projects Under The 1986 Environmental Quality Bond Act
Section 591.4 - Project ranking procedure
Current through Register Vol. 46, No. 39, September 25, 2024
(a) Funds available for State projects under the 1986 Environmental Quality Bond Act are finite. It is in the best interest of the public for the State, from the pool of eligible projects, to choose those which will best achieve the bond act objectives of long-term preservation, enhancement, restoration and improvement of the State's environment. In order to assure that these objectives are carried out within the limits of available funding, priority ranking systems for eligible projects are established. Priority ranking of various State projects is achieved by identifying the characteristics possessed by a given project which provide natural resource value and help achieve bond act objectives. Then, using the ranking system forest preserve projects contained in subdivision (c) of this section or the ranking system for a given category or subcategory of environmentally sensitive lands project contained in subdivisions (d) through (m) of this section, a rating is assigned to each characteristic indicating that characteristic's relative importance in contributing to program objectives. Unless otherwise indicated, the sum of the ratings is the proposed project's ranking score. It is recognized that a project under any given category of environmentally sensitive lands may meet the minimum eligibility requirements of one or more other categories of environmentally sensitive lands. The acquisition of such a project would protect additional natural resource values, thus providing multiple benefits to the public. Whenever such multiple benefits are identified, an amount equal to 10 per centum of the total achievable rating under the primary category will be added for the first additional category of environmentally sensitive land identified as a multiple benefit, eight per centum for the second additional category, six per centum for the third additional category, four per centum for the fourth additional category and two per centum for the fifth additional category. Each rating system is different and results in a number that has meaning only in relation to the range of possible ratings within that system. The maximum natural resource value rating for each rating system is stated so that the relevance of any particular rating will be clearer.
(b) While there may be natural resource values that are common to several of the rating systems, vulnerability is the only characteristic that is common to and used by all the rating systems. Accordingly, in order to ensure consistency in the use of the term, this subdivision defines vulnerability and establishes the method for determining a vulnerability rating.
A-substantial adverse impact is expected to occur within two years;
B-substantial adverse impact is expected to occur; the time of occurrence is beyond two but less than five years;
C-substantial adverse impact is likely to occur; the time of occurrence is beyond five but less than 10 years;
D-substantial adverse impact may occur at some time beyond 10 years.
Once derived by the application of this rating scale, the vulnerability rating will be incorporated into the natural resource value rating of each project meeting minimum eligibility requirements as more fully defined in each of the rating systems set forth in this section. The vulnerability rating is not included within the maximum natural resource value rating score set forth at the beginning of each of the rating systems.
(c) Forest preserve.
If a proposed project meets the minimum eligibility requirements set forth in section 591.3(c) of this Part, then it must be assigned to one of the following subcategories according to the primary objective of the acquisition: preserves wild, scenic or recreational river corridors; completes wilderness, primitive or canoe areas; consolidates forest preserve; provides recreational opportunity; preserves ecologically significant areas; preserves scenic areas or views including scenic highway corridors; enhances access to forest preserve. Proposed acquisition projects once so assigned will be rated only against other proposed projects within the same subcategory in accordance with the following:
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added to natural resource value rating |
A | 25% of the natural resource value |
B | 20% of the natural resource value |
C | 10% of the natural resource value |
D | 5% of the natural resource value |
(d) Aquifer recharge areas. The maximum natural resource value rating is 40.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 10 |
B | 5 |
C | 3 |
D | 1 |
(e) Exceptional forest character.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 30.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 10 |
B | 7 |
C | 5 |
D | 3 |
(f) Exceptional scenic beauty.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 167.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added to natural resource value rating |
A | 20% of the natural resource value |
B | 15% of the natural resource value |
C | 10% of the natural resource value |
D | 5% of the natural resource value |
(g) Open space.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 160.
Assign a rating of 5-25 in increments of 5.. (5-25).......................................................................................
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 10 |
B | 9 |
C | 8 |
D | 1 |
(h) Pine barrens.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 74.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 25 |
B | 15 |
C | 10 |
D | 5 |
(i) Public access.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 255.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 10 |
B | 8 |
C | 6 |
D | 4 |
The maximum natural resource value rating is 83.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 17 |
B | 11 |
C | 6 |
D | 1 |
Proposed acquisition projects once so classified will be evaluated using the priority rating system only against other proposed projects within the same classification.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 88.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 12 |
B | 5 |
C | 2 |
D | 1 |
The maximum natural resource value rating is 70.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 25 |
B | 10 |
C | 2 |
D | 1 |
(j) Trailways.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 25.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 5 |
B | 4 |
C | 3 |
D | 1 |
(k) Unique character.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 175.
wetland, mountain top) or which is distinguishable for its archetypical nature to a maximum of 15.. (5)........................................................................................
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 25 |
B | 15 |
C | 5 |
D | 3 |
(k) Wetlands
The maximum natural resource value rating is 12.
Freshwater Wetland Wildlife Productivity Scoring Chart Characteristics
Soil Suitability (SCS) | Hydrology | Vegetation and Structure | Wildlife | |||||
Wetland food and cover plants | Shallow diked or excavated impoundments | Wetland Wildlife | Water supply to refill from lowest to highest | % open water in growing season | Robustness, variety and interspersion | Onsite presence of plant species important to wildlife | Variety and abundance of wildlife observed onsite, historically | |
Score | ||||||||
12 | 1 | 1 | 1 | Plentiful all seasons most years | 40-60 | Rich growth; emergents, submergents, and water well interspersed | High | High |
10 | 2 | 2 | 2 | Adequate all seasons most seasons | 40-60 | Moderate growth, variety, interspersion | ||
8 | 2 | 2 | 2 | Adequate all seasons some years | 40-60 | Moderate growth, variety, interspersion | Med. | Med. |
6 | 3 | 3 | 3 | Seasonally inadequate some years | 70 or 30 | Moderate growth, variety, interspersion | ||
4 | 3 | 3 | 3 | Seasonally inadequate most years | 70 or 30 | Poor growth, variety | ||
2 | 4 | 4 | 4 | Unreliable | 80 or 20 | Monotype | Low | Low |
Vulnerability rating | Value |
A | 1 2/3 |
B | 1 1/2 |
C | 1 1/4 |
D | 1 |
This value is utilized in the computation of the overall rating as set forth in subparagraph (l)(1)(iv) of this section.
Vulnerability rating | Amount to be added |
A | 25 |
B | 10 |
C | 2 |
D | 1 |
(m) Wildlife habitat.
The maximum natural resource value rating is 189.
Determine the species listing rating by determining whether the proposed project provides habitat for a species that is:
If an area has more than one species listed, the score of the species with the highest score will be listed in the total. Half of the score for the species with the next highest score will be added to the first. One fourth of the next will be added. Up to three species will be counted.
Determine the habitat value rating according to the following table using the lowest possible rating based on the presence of any one of the following:
Will be replaced through independent processes within 10 years.. (2);.......................................................................................
Will be replaced through independent processes within five years.. (1);.......................................................................................
Determine the habitat proportion rating for each proposed project, or for all proposed acquisition projects relating to a given species, according to the following table:
If 50 percent or more of a species' population or habitat is in protected ownerships by the Federal, State or local government or a qualified not-for-profit conservation organization, reduce the habitat proportion rating by using 1.0.
The rating derived from the vulnerability scale contained in subdivision (b) of this section is equated to a value determined as follows:
Vulnerability rating | Value |
A | 2 |
B | 1.8 |
C | 1.4 |
D | 1.0 |
This value is utilized in the computation of the overall rating as set forth in paragraph (m)(5) of this section.
Multiply the ratings for habitat value, habitat proportion and habitat vulnerability together yielding the habitat score. Multiply the habitat score by the rating for the species listing to determine the proposed project's overall rating. If any two ratings are equal or without significant difference in terms of resource protection, taxonomic distinctness will be used to break ties. A species will take precedence over a subspecies. The only species in a genus will take precedence over a species with other species in its genus. The only species in a family will take precedence over the only species in a genus. This method will be employed to the highest level necessary in order to provide a meaningful distinction.