40D-4.091: Publications and Agreements Incorporated by Reference
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: The purpose of the proposed amendment is to reference Chapter 62-345, F.A.C., which sets forth the Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM). The proposed amendment also clarifies that for those projects for which the UMAM does not apply, the existing District rules for calculating wetland mitigation requirements continue to apply.
SUMMARY: The UMAM has been adopted statewide as the methodology for calculating mitigation requirements for projects which must offset adverse impacts to wetlands and other surface waters. The proposed amendments to the District's Environmental Resource Permitting Information Manual Part B, Basis of Review (BOR) Section 3.3.2 will reference the adopted UMAM rule and clarify that for those projects for which UMAM is not applicable, existing District rules for calculating mitigation requirements will continue to be applicable. The proposed amendment to Rule 40D-4.091, F.A.C., will reflect the date that the revision to the BOR is adopted and correct the title of the document.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS: No Statement of Estimated Regulatory Cost was prepared.
Any person who wishes to provide information regarding a statement of estimated regulatory costs, or provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative must do so in writing within 21 days of this notice.
SPECIFIC AUTHORITY: 373.044, 373.046, 373.113, 373.171, 373.414 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 373.0361, 373.114, 373.171, 373.403, 373.413, 373.414, 373.416, 373.429, 373.441 FS.
IF REQUESTED WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS NOTICE, A HEARING WILL BE SCHEDULED AND ANNOUNCED IN FAW.
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE PROPOSED RULE IS: Martha A. Moore, Senior Attorney, Office of General Counsel, 2379 Broad Street, Brooksville, FL 34604-6899, (352)796-7211, extension 4651
THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE IS:
40D-4.091 Publications and Agreements Incorporated by Reference.
The following documents are hereby incorporated into this chapter and Chapters 40D-40 and 40D-400, F.A.C.:
(1) Environmental Resource Permitting Information Manual Part B, Basis of Review, for Environmental Resource Permit Applications within the Southwest Florida Water Management District, ________ May 2, 2006. This document is available from the District upon request.
(2) through (5) No change.
Specific Authority 373.044, 373.046, 373.113, 373.171, 373.414 FS. Law Implemented 373.0361, 373.114, 373.171, 373.403, 373.413, 373.414, 373.416, 373.429, 373.441 FS. HistoryNew 4-2-87, Amended 3-1-88, 9-11-88, 10-1-88, 4-1-91, 11-16-92, 1-30-94, 10-3-95, 12-26-95, 5-26-96, 7-23-96, 4-17-97, 4-12-98, 7-2-98, 12-3-98, 7-28-99, 8-3-00, 9-20-00, 6-12-01, 10-11-01, 2-27-02, 7-29-02, 3-26-03, 7-23-03, 8-3-03, 3-11-04, 6-7-04, 2-1-05, 6-30-05, 10-19-05, 2-8-06, 5-2-06,________.
Environmental Resource Permitting Information Manual Part B, Basis of Review, Environmental Resource Permit Applications within the Southwest Florida Water Management District
3.3.2 Mitigation Ratio Guidelines
(a) Except as provided in Rule 62-345, F.A.C., subsections 3.3.2 through 3.3.2.3 are superceded by Rule 62-345, F.A.C.
(b) Subsections 3.3.2 through 3.3.2.2 establish ratios for the acreage of mitigation required compared to the acreage which is adversely impacted by regulated activities and are applicable as provided in Rule 62-345, F.A.C. Ranges of ratios are provided below for certain specific types of mitigation, including creation, restoration, enhancement and preservation. The difference between the ranges of ratios provided for mitigation types is based on the degree of improvement in ecological value expected from each type. Creation and restoration are assigned the lowest range of ratios as these activities, when successfully conducted, add new wetlands or other surface waters which provide the same or similar functions as the areas adversely impacted. The range of ratios established for enhancement is higher than that for creation and restoration, as the area being enhanced currently provides a degree of the desired functions, and this type of mitigation serves to increase, rather than create, those functions. Preservation differs from the other types of mitigation in that it does not serve to improve the existing ecological value of an area in the short term. However, preservation does provide benefits as it can ensure that the values of the preserved area are protected and maintained in the regulatory programs. Therefore, the range of ratios established for preservation is higher than those for other types of mitigation. These ratios are provided as guidelines for preliminary planning purposes only. The actual ratio needed to offset adverse impacts may be higher or lower based on a consideration of the factors listed in subsections 3.3.2.1 and 3.3.2.2. For example, in instances where the proposed system results in only a small loss of ecological value in the impacted area, such as cases involving impacts to areas of low ecological value or cases where the proposed system results in a small reduction of ecological value of the impacted area, then the actual mitigation ratio would normally be in the lower end of or below the range. For other types of mitigation, ratios will be determined based upon the reduction in quality and relative value of the functions of the areas adversely impacted as compared to the expected improvement in quality and value of the functions of the mitigation area.
