Download to read offline
Uploaded bySoutheast Alaska Watershed Coalition
The Southeast Alaska Mitigation Fund
This document discusses the Southeast Alaska Mitigation Fund (SAMF), an in-lieu fee program that allows developers to purchase credits to compensate for impacts to waters in the region rather than doing mitigation themselves. It provides background on mitigation requirements under the Clean Water Act and the three methods for fulfilling those requirements. SAMF was established to keep mitigation funds in Southeast Alaska communities and help reduce development costs while protecting resources. The document evaluates a potential mitigation site, Pat Creek, calculating its existing and projected functional performance units and determining it could generate stream and wetland credits.
More Related Content
Similar to The Southeast Alaska Mitigation Fund
More from Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition
The Southeast Alaska Mitigation Fund
- 1. What is theSoutheast Alaska Mitigation Fund? An In-Lieu Fee Program Of Course!
- 2. Clean Water Act (Compensationfor impacts to waters of the U.S.) • What is a water of the U.S. Wetlands Rivers and Streams Tidal • Impacts regulated by the USACE Generally over a tenth of acre requires mitigation
- 3. Mitigation If you impacta water of the U.S. you have to make up for that (In relation to the Clean Water Act) Fill a 1 Acre Wetland (Debits) Restore, Enhance, Create, Preserve (Credits)
- 4. Three Mitigation Methods •Mitigation Bank • In-Lieu Fee • Permitee Responsible (can be difficult) – USACE approved mitigation plan (12 required components) – Maintain in perpetuity (forever) USACE 12 Fundamental Components: objectives; site selection criteria; site protection instruments (e.g., conservation easements); baseline information (for impact and compensation sites); credit determination methodology; a mitigation work plan; a maintenance plan; ecological performance standards; monitoring requirements; a long- term management plan; an adaptive management plan; and financial assurances
- 5. What is theSoutheast Alaska Mitigation Fund? An In-Lieu Fee Program Based on Restoration
- 6. Southeast Alaska Mitigation Fund(SAMF) March 21, 2012: Draft Prospectus May 29, 2012; COE Approves Draft Prospectus Sept 10, 2102: Prospectus Feb 23, 2013: COE requests additional content March 21, 2013: Meeting with COE and USFWS April 10, 2013: Revised Prospectus June 21, 2013: COE approves Prospectus Sept. 2013: Final Instrument Submitted Aug. 2014: Final Instrument Submitted Nov. 2014: COE IRT review Dec. 23, 2014: Additional changes requested Feb. 2014: Meeting with IRT (Anchorage) March 2015: Final Instrument resubmitted
- 7. Why? • Community Desireto keep mitigation funds in their community • No active restoration ILF program in Southeast Alaska • Provide developers the opportunity for quality restoration mitigation
- 9. SAMF Freshwater and Marine Credits •Keep mitigation $$$ in community • Help reduce development costs • Protect valued community resources • THE CATCH! can’t impact mitigation sites
- 10.
- 11. West Fork Assessment (160meter reach)
- 12. Project Name Assessment AreaName Assessment Area: acreage: 2.47 stream channel length (ft.): 500 average channel width (ft.): 15 total buffer width excluding channel (ft.): 200 rating FPU rating FPU rating FPU Bank Height Ratio 1 3.00 7.40 3.00 7.40 0.00 0.00 0.0% Entrenchment Ratio 1 4.00 9.86 4.00 9.86 0.00 0.00 0.0% Percent Pool 1 4.00 9.86 4.00 9.86 0.00 0.00 0.0% Pool Max Depth Ratio 1 2.00 4.93 3.00 7.40 1.00 2.47 50.0% Width to Depth Ratio 1 2.00 4.93 4.00 9.86 2.00 4.93 100.0% Bank Erosion Hazard Index 1 3.00 7.40 3.00 7.40 0.00 0.00 0.0% Large Woody Debris (LWD) Density 1 6.00 14.79 6.00 14.79 0.00 0.00 0.0% Key LWD Pieces Density 1.5 2.00 4.93 6.00 14.79 4.00 9.86 200.0% Riparian Index 1 3.00 7.40 3.00 7.40 0.00 0.00 0.0% Fish Species Diversity 1 4.00 9.86 5.00 12.33 1.00 2.47 25.0% Public use & recognition 1 5.00 12.33 5.00 12.33 0.00 0.00 0.0% Subsistence & provisioning 1 3.00 7.40 3.00 7.40 0.00 0.00 0.0% 41.00 101.09 49.00 120.81 8.00 19.72 3.42 8.42 4.08 10.07 0.67 1.64 Longitude 6-digit HUC # Name(s) of Evaluator(s) Date Stream Assessment DateLatitude Southeast Alaska Watershed Coalition USACE Project # POA- Metrics Weight (1x-1.5x) Existing Projected Net Gain % Gain FPU total score average score Freshwater-Stream Credit Pat Creek
- 13. rating FPU rating*FPU rating FPU Floodplain Connectivity 3.50 8.63 3.50 8.63 0.00 0.00 0.0% Bed Form Diversity 3.00 7.40 3.50 8.63 0.50 1.23 16.7% Incision/Erosivity 2.50 6.16 3.50 8.63 1.00 2.47 40.0% Large Woody Debris 4.00 9.86 7.50 18.49 3.50 8.63 87.5% Biotic Integrity 3.50 8.63 4.00 9.86 0.50 1.23 14.3% Societal Value 4.00 5.48 4.00 5.48 0.00 0.00 0.0% Sum of avgs 20.50 46.16 26.00 59.72 5.50 13.56 29.4% 8.31 10.75 2.44 29.4% Parameters Weighted avg of avg FPU Credit Calculation-Stream Method Existing Projected Net gain % Gain FPU * The rating is equal to the average of the grouped parameters including any adjustment for Weighting of priority metrics.
- 14. Final Credit Calculation ($130,000to $150,000)
- 18.
Editor's Notes
- #2 I was a research scientist for NOAA for 10 years prior to jumping into the restoration and mitigation world. Thought I had a good idea about restoration. First time I heard In-Lieu Fee program I just nodded my head and kept quiet hopping nobody would notice I had no idea what they were talking about. So I want to start with a little background about mitigation and and In-Lieu Fee Programs.
- #3 I need to check the definition of water of the U.S.
- #6 I was a research scientist for NOAA for 10 years prior to jumping into the restoration and mitigation world. Thought I had a good idea about restoration. First time I heard In-Lieu Fee program I just nodded my head and kept quiet hopping nobody would notice I had no idea what they were talking about. So I want to start with a little background about mitigation and and In-Lieu Fee Programs.