Transcript Document

Mitigation Planning Association:
Contact: Kurt Stephenson
Dept of Ag and Applied Economics
List of researchers
Kurt Stephenson
Leonard Shabman
Virginia Tech Deartment
Resources for the Future
A Cooperative Approach to Stream Mitigation Requirements from Mining Activities
Background
The mining process can cause adverse impacts on
local streams. Mining companies are required to
offset those impacts by improving aquatic habitat or
stream conditions elsewhere. These stream
improvements are called compensatory mitigation.
Concerned is sometimes expressed that regulatory
conditions placed on compensatory mitigation are
unnecessarily costly or do not make sufficient
ecological improvements in the streams.
Project Objective
Identify different ways mining (primarily coal)
companies could organize and work cooperatively to
meet compensatory stream mitigation requirements
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act in order to reduce
costs to industry and improve or maintain mitigation
quality
Fed & State
Agency
Staff
Local
Watershed
Associations
Possible Benefits/Advantages
NGOs
• Enhanced timeliness and reduced permitting costs
through 1) advanced mitigation planning; 2)
economies of scale in planning; 3) enhanced
coordination on site selection and access
Mining Co. 1
Advisory
Committee
Mining Co. 2
Mitigation
Planning
Association
Mining Co. 3
Portfolio of
Watershed-based
Compensatory
Mitigation
Plans
•Limited financial commitment/obligations from
companies to forming an planning association
Project Output
• Possible coordination benefit with other regulatory
programs (SMCRA, TMDLs, etc)
Mining Co. 1
Mining Co. 2
Mitigation
Planning
Association
Mining Co. 3
Landholding
Co
Method
This effort used a process to jointly develop and
assess different mitigation association designs with
industry representatives, state and federal regulatory
officials, and nongovernmental organizations. This
process included:
1. Gain participant buy-in
2. identify existing needs and explore options
with small group of industry and agency
collaborators
3. Develop mitigation association options paper
based on information collected in 2.
4. Circulate report and obtain feedback, direction,
comments from a diverse group of interested
parties.
5. Refine and iterate steps 3 and 4.
6. Identify viable mitigation association alternative
to by both industry and agencies
• Mitigation project costs lowered through greater
flexibility in mitigation project selection
•Better match of compensatory mitigation project
with identified watershed needs.
Landholding Co
Identify mitigation association designs with potential
“value added” to industry in order to facilitate further
development/implementation by industry. Of four
different designs, industry and agency representatives
identified the “Mitigation Planning Association” as
the most viable and potentially beneficial.
• Greater political support for greater compensatory
stream mitigation options. Stream mitigation options
might include stream habitat improvement projects
but also include efforts to improve water quality
(sediment stabilization, reduced nonpoint effluent
discharge, etc)
Fed & State
Agency
Staff
Local
Watershed
Associations
NGOs
Advisory
Committee
Portfolio of
Watershedbased
Compensatory
Mitigation
Plans
A mitigation association is an independent organization created exclusively to coordinate and/or
provide compensatory mitigation for a group of mining companies who are members. The
mitigation planning association would be responsible for producing a portfolio of acceptable
watershed mitigation project plans. The compensatory stream mitigation plans in the portfolio
would identify possible projects that would improve and enhance aquatic ecosystem services in
watersheds impacted by mining activities.
In developing a set of watershed-based mitigation plans, the mitigation planning association would
need to work closely with state/fed state permitting agency staff, local watershed groups, and other
NGOs. To serve the needs of the industry and improve mitigation effectiveness, the association
would need feedback on watershed needs, preferences of local citizens, as well as agreement on
acceptable forms of compensatory mitigation from permitting agencies.
A member company would select among a set tentatively approved compensatory mitigation
project plans. Once a plan is selected, the mining company (not the association) would be legally
and financially responsible for completing the mitigation. The services provided by a mitigation
planning association to its members include:
Develop Portfolio of Mitigation Projects
• Assess Permit Needs of Members
• Identify mitigation areas (scope)
• Assess Watershed Needs/plans; Assess
mitigation opportunities
• Work with agencies to identify acceptable
mitigation project plans
Develop Mitigation Project Plans
• Project site, baseline conditions
• Project design
• Performance standards for project
• Monitoring plans
• Site protection plans
• Credit determination
• Post construction monitoring
Challenges and Possible Drawbacks
• Benefits contingent on plans being “certified” by
regulatory agencies as acceptable compensatory
mitigation.
• Insufficient regulatory flexibility on range and
type of permissible mitigation
• Insufficient demand for mitigation services within
the area
• Limited history of cooperative ventures between
companies
This effort was sponsored by the
Powell River Project
(http://www.cses.vt.edu/PRP/)