Subsection 373.414(18), F.S., directed the Department and water management districts to develop a uniform mitigation assessment method for wetlands and other surface waters and the Department to adopt the assessment method by rule. The rule (Chapter 62-345, F.A.C.) was developed and became effective on February 2, 2004. The rule applies to water management districts and local government in addition to the Department. The proposed rule will clarify certain provisions of the rule, including guidance on establishing the reference community in Part I, when an assessment area is scored zero in Part II, and providing a clearer mathematical formula to address multiple impact and mitigation sites. Assessment Method Overview and Guidance (62-345.300). Chapter 62-345 was designed to assess the function of impact and mitigation areas relative to naturally occurring communities and to provide that basis of comparison in Part I. The proposed amendments are intended merely to clarify the Department’s original intent by referring to “native community type”. An additional change to this section clarifies where listed species and other site-specific information is noted. Qualitative Characterization – Part I (62-345.400). This section of the rule is proposed to be clarified through use of reference to “native community type” when providing frame of reference for assessment, particularly when classifying a site and identifying the anticipated functions. When the assessment area is currently an artificial system, guidance is provided to refer to the native system it most closely resembles. Assessment and Scoring – Part II (62-345.500). Paragraph (1)(c) is a new addition to clarify that if the activity will result in the elimination of the wetland or surface water area by converting it to upland, then all of the indicators of wetland function are scored zero under the “with impact” scenario. Similarly, a sentence is added to paragraph (2)(c) to clarify that if the community structure attribute of an upland is scored a zero due to the loss of that natural system, then the location and landscape is also scored zero. Time Lag, Risk, and Mitigation Determination (62-345.600). Paragraph (1)(a) is modified to provide guidance for the time lag determination by referring to the anticipated mitigation outcome, which is the scenario that is scored in Part II as “with mitigation”. Subsection (3) has a series of changes intended to simplify and clarify the formulas, which is particularly important for those projects with multiple impacts and mitigation areas. The changes begin with a definition of a new term, Functional Gain, referring to the increase in function provided by the mitigation area. Paragraph (3)(c) is modified to state the relationship between functional gain and functional loss for single impact and mitigation areas. Paragraph (3)(d) is new and provides the mathematic relationship between functional gain(s) and functional loss(es) for projects with multiple impacts and mitigation assessment areas. Forms (62-345.900) The form adopted by reference in subsection (3) Mitigation Determination Formulas is modified to reflect the changes in 62-345.600(3), as described above.