period. In cases where all performance standards are expected to be achieved prior to impacts, no temporal loss should be assessed (for permittee-responsible only). Similarly, in cases where interim performance standards are expected to be achieved, a lower ratio adjustment may be appropriate. Unexpected delays in compensatory mitigation project implementation should be handled as compliance actions. For scheduled, known delays between impacts and construction of mitigation: multiply delay (in months) by 0.05; To account for time required for full replacement of functions during monitoring period: generally, if mitigation is comprised of trees/woodlands or saltmarsh, +3; if shrubs, +2; if herbaceous, +1; Add adjustments from steps (a) and (b). 9 Column A: Column B: Column C: Final mitigation ratio(s): Project manager 1. Baseline ratio (step 2.a, 2.b, or 2.c) 1. Baseline ratio (step 2.a, 2.b, or 1. Baseline ratio (step 2a, 2.b, or 2.c) should enter the final mitigation ratio(s) arrived = __:__ 2.c) = __:__ = __:__ at after consideration of the above factors 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ (either qualitative OR quantitative). Project 3. Final ratio: __ : __ 3. Final ratio: __ : __ 3. Final ratio: __ : __ manager should enter the extent of authorized impacts and required mitigation by area Proposed impact (total): Remaining impact: ___________ Remaining impact: ___________ (acreage) and/or distance (linear feet), as well ___ acre as the corresponding resource type (lake, ___ linear feet Required mitigation: Required mitigation: tidal wetland, other, pond, stream/river/ocean, to ___ acre ___ acre wetland) and Cowardin or
period. In cases where all performance standards are expected to be achieved prior to impacts, no temporal loss should be assessed (for permittee-responsible only). Similarly, in cases where interim performance standards are expected to be achieved, a lower ratio adjustment may be appropriate. Unexpected delays in compensatory mitigation project implementation should be handled as compliance actions. For scheduled, known delays between impacts and construction of mitigation: multiply delay (in months) by 0.05; To account for time required for full replacement of functions during monitoring period: generally, if mitigation is comprised of trees/woodlands or saltmarsh, +3; if shrubs, +2; if herbaceous, +1; Add adjustments from steps (a) and (b). 9 Final mitigation ratio(s): Project manager should enter the final mitigation ratio(s) arrived at after consideration of the above factors (either qualitative OR quantitative). Project manager should enter the extent of authorized impacts and required mitigation by area (acreage) and/or distance (linear feet), as well as the corresponding resource type (lake, wetland, other, pond, stream/river/ocean, tidal wetland) and Cowardin or Column A: 1. Baseline ratio (step 2.a, 2.b, or 2.c) = __:__ 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ 3. Final ratio: __ : __ Proposed impact (total): ___ acre ___ linear feet to Column B: 1. Baseline ratio (step 2.a, 2.b, or 2.c) = __:__ 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ 3. Final ratio: __ : __ Remaining impact: ___________ Required mitigation: ___ acre Column C: 1. Baseline ratio (step 2a, 2.b, or 2.c) = __:__ 2. Total adjustments (steps 3-8) = ___ 3. Final ratio: __ : __ Remaining impact: ___________ Required mitigation: ___ acre