2020-08-10-minutes-public-works-study-session

Home Browse Search

regulatory agencies will have the certainty that a mitigation site is successfully functioning and will not have to review and approve a new site that has the risks associated with concurrent mitigation. The site's mitigation credit generally will increase over time as the site matures until it reaches the maximum credit potential when the mitigation goals, objectives and performance standards are met. Ratios required to offset impacts generally will be reduced over time due to the decrease in temporal loss and risk, making advance mitigation more cost effective. Proposing Advance Mitigation In order to qualify for the enhanced compensation ratios associated with advance mitigation, agency verification of baseline conditions is necessary, so pre -approval of a Mitigation Plan prior to commencing the mitigation effort is required. When proposing an advance mitigation site, applicants should consider the anticipated location of future projects that will require mitigation so an appropriate location near potential impacts can be selected. The mitigation should be designed to achieve a self-sustaining site where appropriate. The type of mitigation proposed should consider future needs so the mitigation type can offset expected functional losses of future aquatic impacts. In cases where WDFW mitigation is required, the site should benefit the same fish stocks impacted by the project. Fish stocks are defined as "a group of fish that return to spawn in a given area at the same time and are, for the most part, reproductively isolated from other such groups. A stock may include several Iocal spawning populations." The risk of advance mitigation is borne by the permittee planning to use the mitigation site. Establishing a mitigation effort generating advance credits provides no entitlement to, or guarantee of, use of those credits as compensation for any particular project causing impact to aquatic resources. The following information is required for agency review and conditional approval when proposing an advance mitigation site: 1. Applicants shall submit a mitigation plan for agency review and approval. The plan shall be in accordance with 33 CFR 332.4(c) (see Appendix 2), and the current Joint Guidance, "Wetland Mitigation in Washington State — Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans", March 2006 Interagency Guidance, Ecology Publication #06-06-01 lb, and WDFW POL-M5002 for fish habitat as applicable. The advance mitigation plan shall contain the requirements of a concurrent mitigation plan and the following additional information: a. Disclosure that the proposal is to construct a permittee -responsible advance mitigation site. b. The site location must be selected using a watershed approach. The watershed needs should be identified in the plan, and include an explanation of how the mitigation will improve the watershed. c. Detailed and adequate documentation of baseline conditions (e.g., wetland delineation and functional assessments, wetland category based on the Ecology rating form, condition of riparian or wetland buffers, and condition of stream and fish species if present), from which future ecological lift can be determined and adequate credit identified. The baseline must be thoroughly documented as it is the foundation for determining a site's potential for functional lift, and therefore the advance mitigation credits that may be generated. d. The size/acreage and type of mitigation proposed to be established, restored, rehabilitated, enhanced, and/or preserved.