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.

1. What is the Southeast Alaska
Mitigation Fund?
An In-Lieu Fee Program
Of Course!

2. Clean Water Act
(Compensation for
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 impact a 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 the Southeast 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 Desire to 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. Pat Creek

11. West Fork Assessment
(160 meter reach)

12. Project Name
Assessment Area Name
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
($130,000 to $150,000)

18. Final Credit Calculation