Offsetting Impacts to Wetlands and Waters in the United States. Palmer Hough U.S. Environmental Protection Agency November 2013

Transcription

1 Offsetting Impacts to Wetlands and Waters in the United States Palmer Hough U.S. Environmental Protection Agency November

2 Problem: Wetlands Loss Approximately 221 million acres in 1700 (lower 48) million acres today (~size of CA) was a time of major losses Rate of loss has decreased over last 40 years 2

3 Part of the Solution: Regulate Clean Water Act of 1972 Section 404 requires a permit to discharge dredged or fill materials into waters of the US Includes lakes, rivers, streams and wetlands Primary agencies involved: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National goal of No Net Loss of wetlands established in 1989* 3

4 Mitigation Sequence* 1. Avoid 2. Minimize Evaluate alternative project locations and designs Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative 3. Compensate offset unavoidable wetland losses through wetland: 1. Restoration 2. Establishment 3. Enhancement 4. Preservation 4

5 What is Good Compensation? Ecological replacement Appropriate location in landscape Cumulative impacts Margin of safety to reflect the expected degree of success Temporal loss of functions Success measures/monitoring plan 5

6 Providing Compensation/Offsets 1. Mitigation Banks (Preferred): Initiated in advance of impacts* All credit release tied to performance Sponsors: private, government, non-profit 2. In-Lieu Fee (ILF) programs: Generally, initiated after impacts Sponsors: government or non-profit 3. Permittee-Responsible Mitigation (PRM): Generally initiated concurrent/after impacts Permittee retains responsibility

7 Bank Example: Virginia* 7

8 Bank Credit Ledger 8

9 Approval of Bank Sites Number of Banks Single Client Commercial Steve Martin - USACE/IWR,

10 Status and Distribution of Bank & ILF sites Banks 1,839 Bank sites loaded: 66% operational 15% pending 12% sold out 1% suspended 6% terminated or withdrawn ILF 33 Approved programs 32 Pending programs 301 ILF program sites loaded Steve Martin - USACE/IWR, 2013

11 Compensation (Offset) Mechanism, Compensation for Impacted Acres (as a % of Impacted Acres Requiring Compensation) Compensation for Impacted Linear Feet (as a % of Impacted Linear Feet Requiring Compensation) 100% 100% 90% 26% 90% 80% 42% 80% 42% 70% 60% 22% 70% 60% 63% 50% 40% 21% 10% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 10% 0% 7% 42% 29% % 20% 10% 0% 18% 10% 6% 19% 13% Key Permittee Responsible Offsite Permittee Responsible Onsite In Lieu Fee Mitigation Bank Katherine Birnie - Ecosystem Investment Partners, 2013

12 2008 Federal Regulations Mitigation Plan Components (33 CFR 332.4(c)) 1. Objectives 2. Site protection instrument 3. Baseline information 4. Work plan 5. Maintenance plan 6. Performance standards 7. Monitoring requirements 8. Financial assurances 9. Site selection factors 10. Credit determination 11. Long-term management plan 12. Adaptive management plan

13 Additionality Baseline Information requirements May occur on private or public lands Public lands: no credit for work that is already planned or in place No double-dipping Limits on preservation as offset Wetland Stream Species Number of bank credit withdrawal transactions 1995 to 2012 Steve Martin - USACE/IWR,

14 Credit determination rationale Amount of compensation Should use assessment methods If not available, minimum 1:1 ratio* Mitigation type Equivalency In-kind preferred over outof-kind 14

15 Performance and Monitoring Ecological performance standards Monitoring Requirements: Parameters to be monitored Length of monitoring period Party responsible Content of monitoring reports Frequency of report submittal 15

16 Permanence Site protection instrument Goal permanent protection Conservation easement, title transfer, restrictive covenant Long-term management Identify responsible party Describe necessary tasks and funding arrangements 16

17 Agriculture and Wetland Offset Program Can a farmer provide Section 404 wetland compensation/offset credits? Are there wetland restoration, establishment, enhancement and/or preservation opportunities on the property? Will the property be retired from crop production and restored wetland functions and values permanently protected? Was any of the work paid for with federal funds? 17

18 Regular Program Evaluation Self audits Independent audits: Government Oversight Agencies Academic institutions Non-profits Highlight strengths and weaknesses Prompt and direct reform 18

19 Clear Market Drivers 35,000 30,000 # of Permits 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 25,152 23,122 25,757 28,693 Acres of Fill 5,000-50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000-3,000 5,397 4,877 3,633 3, ,835 34,962 13,645 9,142 25,033 10,224 13,291 8, Compensation (Offset) Required 2,500 Miles of Fill 2,000 1,500 1, ,523 1,852 1, Katherine Birnie - Ecosystem Investment Partners, 2013

20 Questions epa.gov/wetlandsmitigation geo.usace.army.mil/ribits 20