Florida 2024 2024 Regular Session

Florida House Bill H1073 Analysis / Analysis

Filed 02/26/2024

                    This docum ent does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives. 
STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
 
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS 
 
BILL #: CS/CS/HB 1073    Mitigation 
SPONSOR(S): Infrastructure Strategies Committee, Water Quality, Supply & Treatment Subcommittee, 
Truenow 
TIED BILLS:   IDEN./SIM. BILLS: CS/CS/CS/SB 1532 
 
REFERENCE 	ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR or 
BUDGET/POLICY 
CHIEF 
1) Water Quality, Supply & Treatment 
Subcommittee 
15 Y, 0 N, As CS Guy-Hudson Curtin 
2) Agriculture & Natural Resources Appropriations 
Subcommittee 
13 Y, 0 N Byrd Pigott 
3) Infrastructure Strategies Committee 22 Y, 0 N, As CS Guy-Hudson Harrington 
SUMMARY ANALYSIS 
There are a number of tools available to address negative impacts to waters and wetlands. Mitigation banking 
is a practice in which an environmental enhancement and preservation project is conducted by a public agency 
or private entity to mitigate unavoidable environmental impacts to wetlands and other surface waters 
associated with a permitted project. There are currently 131 state-authorized mitigation banks in Florida that 
cover 227,496 acres. Water Quality Enhancement Areas (WQEA) provide regional treatment and address 
pollutants in a watershed, basin, sub-basin, targeted restoration area or waterbody in which the WQEA is 
located that do not meet applicable state water quality criteria. The Department of Environmental Protection 
(DEP) awards water quality enhancement credits, each of which represent a quantity of pollutant removed. 
Currently, credits may only be sold to governmental entities.  
 
The bill creates a process for the establishment and operation of a private mitigation bank using local 
government-owned land, including lands acquired for conservation, when such land is located in a credit-
deficient basin as defined in the bill. Habitat type credits provided by the private mitigation bank would be used 
to address the unavailability or deficiency of certain habitat type credits.  
 
The bill requires the local government to execute a use agreement with the private applicant at which time the 
credit deficiency is confirmed. However, once the use agreement is executed the mitigation bank application 
may proceed, even if the credit deficiency is relieved. Among other things, the use agreement requires the 
private applicant to provide financial assurance which will be used for long-term management of the land and 
agree to operate and maintain the private mitigation bank until final permit success criteria are met. When 
determining the number of mitigation bank credits to award to a private mitigation bank, the bill prohibits 
increasing the location factor assessment and scoring value in the uniform mitigation assessment method 
(UMAM) when the proposed private mitigation bank is located in or adjacent to the local government’s 
conservation lands. The bill authorizes DEP, in coordination with the water management districts (WMD), to 
adopt rules to implement the requirements of the bill relating to mitigation banking. 
 
The bill authorizes private sector entities to apply to purchase water quality enhancement credits and 
authorizes the use of WQEAs for certain areas where environmental resource permit performance standards 
are not being met.  
 
The bill will have an indeterminate fiscal impact on state and local government. See Fiscal Analysis.   
 
The bill provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.   STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 2 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
FULL ANALYSIS 
I.  SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS 
 
A. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES: 
Background  
 
Wetlands are transitional areas between land and deep water, and they are sufficiently inundated with 
water so that they support vegetation which grows in saturated soils.
1
 “Florida wetlands generally 
include swamps, marshes, bayheads, bogs, cypress domes and strands, sloughs, wet prairies, riverine 
swamps and marshes, hydric seepage slopes,
2
 tidal marshes, mangrove swamps and other similar 
areas.”
3
 Prior to development, wetlands covered approximately one half of Florida.
4
 Today, 
approximately 11 million acres of wetlands cover Florida and the state boasts more wetlands than any 
of the other 47 conterminous States.
5
 
 
Regulation of Activities in Wetlands 
The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law that regulates water pollution in the United 
States and it prohibits the discharge of any pollutant
6
 into waters of the United States (WOTUS).
7
 The 
discharge of dredged or fill material into WOTUS, including wetlands, is regulated by a program 
established in Section 404 of the CWA.
8
 States may apply to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) to assume the federal dredge and fill permitting program; Florida assumed the 404 permitting 
program in 2020.
9
 On February 15
th
 of this year a judge in the United States District Court for the 
District of Columbia vacated the EPA’s approval of Florida’s assumption package as violative of the 
Endangered Species Act.
10
 The ruling applies to pending and future 404 permit applications; however, 
the State 404 Program may be preserved for those applications which are not likely to adversely affect 
listed species.
11
 
 
DEP regulates surface water flows via the Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) Program, a permitting 
process that addresses and regulates impacts to the landscape including clearing, grading, 
construction of structures and filling and dredging, whether the work occurs in uplands, wetlands or 
other surface waters.
12
 An ERP permit may be issued by DEP, a WMD or a local government to which 
DEP delegated ERP permitting authority.
13
 ERPs are designed to prevent flooding, protect wetlands 
and other surface waters and protect Florida’s water quality from stormwater pollution.
14
 
                                                
1
 Melanie R. Darst, Helen M. Light, and Benjamin F. McPherson, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water-Supply Paper 2425, Florida 
Wetland Resources, https://www.fws.gov/media/wetland-resources-florida, p. 153 (last visited Jan. 25, 2024); S. 373.019(27), F.S. 
2
 Seepage slopes are wetlands located on the sides of rolling hills. “Unusual hydrology and frequent fires combine to create an 
environment that supports a variety of carnivorous and other sun-loving herbaceous plants” and “there are many rare or endemic 
species . . . that can be found in seepage slopes in the Florida Panhandle.” UF, IFAS Extension, Florida’s Seepage Slope Wetlands 
(Apr. 11, 2018), https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/UW367 (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
3
 S. 373.019(27), F.S.; see also Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Wetland Evaluation and Delineation (last updated 
Feb. 17, 2023), https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-environmental-resources-coordination/content/wetland-evaluation-and 
(last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
4
 Darst, supra note 1. 
5
 Id. 
6
 33 U.S.C. § 1311(a). The definition of the term “pollutant” is quite broad. 33 U.S.C. § 1362(6). 
7
 33 U.S.C. § 1362(12)(A). “The term ‘navigable waters’ means the waters of the United States, including the territorial seas.” 33 
U.S.C. §1362(7). 
8
 EPA, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, Permit Program under CWA Section 404 (last updated Mar. 31, 2023), 
https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/permit-program-under-cwa-section-404 (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
9
 40 C.F.R. § 233.1. See also DEP, State 404 Program (last updated Oct. 17, 2023), https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-
environmental-resources-coordination/content/state-404-program (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
10
 Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. Regan, No. 21-119 (D.C. Feb. 15, 2024), on file with the Water Quality, Supply & Treatment 
Subcommittee. 
11
 Id. 
12
 DEP, Environmental Resource Permitting Online Help (last updated Feb. 8, 2022), https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-
environmental-resources-coordination/content/environmental-resource-0 (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
13
 Id.  
14
 Id.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 3 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
 
While the State 404 Program and the ERP Program are separate programs, approximately 85 percent 
of review requirements of the two programs overlap.
15
 DEP’s Submerged Lands and Environmental 
Resources Coordination Program is responsible for the consistent implementation of both the State 404 
Program and the ERP Program.
16
 Both programs require avoidance and minimization measures to 
reduce impacts to wetlands and any remaining adverse impacts to be offset by mitigation. The 
methodology ratified by the Legislature for identifying and delineating the extent of wetlands and 
surface waters
17
 is also the methodology used to establish the boundary of state-assumed waters 
under the State 404 Program.
18
 Provisions of state law that conflict with federal requirements under the 
CWA do not apply to state-administered 404 permits.
19
  
 
ERP permitting is governed by s. 373.4131, F.S. DEP implements this section of law in ch. 62-330, 
F.A.C., which provides for the permitting rules, application process and standards by which applications 
are considered and approved or denied. The ERP Applicant’s Handbook, which is incorporated by 
reference into DEP rules, provides guidance on DEP’s ERP program, which includes all permitted 
activities governed by ch. 373, part IV, F.S., relating to management and storage of surface waters.
20
 
Applicants for an ERP must adhere to requirements in both the ERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. I, 
which governs general permitting while WMD-specific permitting requirements are contained in the 
ERP Applicant’s Handbook, Vol. II, for which there is one per WMD.
21
   
 
Mitigation Banks 
Some permitted projects result in unavoidable adverse impacts to wetlands and other surface waters. 
Mitigation activities for such projects include activities that preserve, create, enhance and/or restore 
wetlands and other surface waters.
22
 Mitigation banking is a practice in which an environmental 
enhancement and preservation project is conducted by a public agency or private entity to provide 
mitigation for unavoidable environmental impacts within a defined region referred to as a mitigation 
service area.
23
  
 
A mitigation bank consists of a wetland, stream or other aquatic resource area that has been restored, 
established or preserved to offset such environmental impacts.
24
 Mitigation banks are an alternative to 
permittee-responsible mitigation.
25
 Permittee-responsible mitigation refers to mitigation undertaken by 
the permittee to provide compensatory mitigation for which the permittee retains full responsibility.
26
 If 
mitigation credits are not available, state law allows permittee-responsible mitigation consisting of the 
restoration and enhancement of lands owned by a local government.
27
 
 
State law directs DEP and the WMDs “to participate in and encourage the establishment of private and 
public mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation.”
28
 In general, a governmental entity may not 
                                                
15
 DEP, State 404 Program, supra note 9. 
16
 DEP, Submerged Lands and Environmental Resources Coordination Program, https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-
environmental-resources-coordination (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
17
 S. 373.4211, F.S. 
18
 R. 62-331.010(3), F.A.C. 
19
 S. 373.4146(3), F.S.  
20
 DEP, Environmental Resource Permit Applicant’s Handbook Volume I (General and Environmental), p. 1-4 (Dec. 22, 2020) 
Modified Document, 1/6/2021, https://www.flrules.org/gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-12078 (last visited Jan. 21, 2024). 
21
 DEP, ERP Stormwater (last updated June 7, 2022), ERP Stormwater | Florida Department of Environmental Protection (last visited 
Jan.. 25, 2024). 
22
 DEP, Mitigation and Mitigation Banking (last updated May 31, 2023), https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-
environmental-resources-coordination/content/mitigation-and-mitigation-banking (last visited Jan. 24, 2024).  
23
 Id. “Mitigation service area” means the geographic area within which mitigation credits from a mitigation bank may be used to 
offset adverse impacts of activities regulated under this part. S. 373.403(21), F.S. 
24
 EPA, Mitigation Banks under CWA Section 404 (last updated Oct. 31, 2023), Mitigation Banks under CWA Section 404 | US EPA 
(last visited Jan. 25, 2024).  
25
 S. 373.4135(1)(b), F.S. 
26
 EPA, Mechanisms for Providing Compensatory Mitigation under CWA Section 404 (last updated Apr. 6, 2023), 
https://www.epa.gov/cwa-404/mechanisms-providing-compensatory-mitigation-under-cwa-section-404 (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
27
 S. 373.4135(1)(b), F.S. 
28
 S. 373.4135(1), F.S.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 4 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
create or provide mitigation for a project other than its own except when a local government has 
allowed a public or private mitigation project to be created on land it purchased for conservation 
purposes.
29
 
 
The mitigation bank is the site itself and the currency sold by the banker to the impacted permittee is a 
credit, representing the wetland ecological value equivalent to the complete restoration of one acre.
30
 
The permitting agencies determine the number of potential credits permitted for the bank and the credit 
debits required for impact permits.
31
  
 
Mitigation banks are authorized by an ERP permit issued by DEP, the St. Johns River WMD, the 
Southwest Florida WMD, and/or the South Florida WMD, depending on the location of the bank and the 
Operating and Delegation Agreements between DEP and the WMDs.
32
 DEP is responsible for 
permitting mitigation banks within the Northwest Florida WMD and the Suwannee River WMD.
33
 
Mitigation banks also require federal authorization
34
; a number of agencies are involved in processing 
the federal authorization
35
 - called a Mitigation Banking Instrument - and the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (USACE) typically serves as the lead agency.
36
 
 
Requirements for mitigation bank permits differ between mitigation bank instruments issued by the 
USACE and state permits issued by DEP or the WMDs. Under the federal process, a mitigation 
banking instrument serves as the legal document for the establishment, operation and use of a 
mitigation bank.
37
 They are approved by an interagency review team, through procedures involving 
public notice and comment.
38
 Mitigation banking instruments must include certain detailed elements, 
such as a comprehensive mitigation plan including financial assurances and a credit release schedule 
that is tied to the achievement of specific milestones.
39
 
 
Once mitigation credits have been awarded to a mitigation bank, the permitting agency is required to 
establish a schedule, in the permit, for the release of credits.
40
 Once a credit is released it may be sold 
or used to offset adverse impacts associated with a permitted project.
41
 The permitting agency is 
prohibited from releasing all of a mitigation bank’s credits until the bank meets the mitigation success 
criteria established in its mitigation bank permit.
42
 In addition, with certain exceptions, credits may only 
be withdrawn and used to offset impacts in the mitigation service area.
43
 
 
                                                
29
 S. 373.4135(1)(b), F.S. 
30
 DEP, Mitigation and Mitigation Banking, supra note 22. 
31
 Id. 
32
 R. 62-342.100(2), F.A.C.; DEP, Mitigation Banking Rule and Procedure Synopsis (last updated Feb. 17, 2023), 
https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-environmental-resources-coordination/content/mitigation-banking-rule-and (last visited 
Dec. 20, 2023). 
33
 DEP, Mitigation Banks and Mitigation Banking (last updated Feb. 17, 2023), https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-
environmental-resources-coordination/content/mitigation-and-mitigation-banking (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). 
34
 DEP, Mitigation and Mitigation Banking, supra note 22. 
35
 33 C.F.R. § 332.8(b)(2). 
36
 33 C.F.R. § 332.8(b)(1). 
37
 33 C.F.R. s. 332.2. 
38
 33 C.F.R. s. 332.8; 40 C.F.R. s. 230.98. 
39
 See generally 33 C.F.R. s. 332.8(d)(6); see also 40 C.F.R. s. 230.98(d)(6). 
40
 S. 373.4136(5), F.S. 
41
 Id. 
42
 S. 373.4136(5)(b), F.S. 
43
 S. 373.4136(6), F.S.; S. 373.4136(6)(d), F.S.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 5 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
Currently, there are 131 state-authorized mitigation banks in Florida that cover 227,496 acres.
44
 
 
45
 
 
Water Quality Credit Trading 
Water quality credit trading is a market-based approach that can be used to attain water quality 
improvements.
46
 Water quality credit trading allows one source of pollution to control a pollutant at 
levels greater than required and sell credits to another source, the buyer, which uses the credits to 
supplement their level of water treatment in order to comply with regulatory requirements.
47
 Pollutant 
reductions achieved through water quality credit trading must result in water quality that is as good as 
or better than what would be achieved through treatment.
48
 
 
DEP is responsible for regulating water quality credit trading.
49
 Water quality credits
50
 can only be 
traded within the boundaries of a basin management action plan
51
 (BMAP) or a Reasonable Assurance 
Plan (RAP) area.
52
 Credits cannot be generated for a reduction in nutrient loading that is required under 
a regulatory program, including BMAPs or RAPs, but can be generated if reductions are made beyond 
what is required in the BMAP or RAP.
53
 Additionally, credits cannot be generated from the 
                                                
44
 Presentation by Christine Wentzel, Regulatory Manager, Environmental Resource Program, St. Johns River WMD, Mitigation 
Banks, to the House Water Quality, Supply & Treatment Subcommittee (Sept. 19, 2023), 
https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?PublicationType=Committees&CommitteeId=3251&Session=20
24&DocumentType=Meeting+Packets&FileName=wst+9-19-23.pdf, slide 24, (last visited Jan. 25, 2024).  
45
 Id. 
46
 EPA, Water Quality Trading (last updated Nov. 28, 2023), https://www.epa.gov/npdes/water-quality-trading (last visited Jan. 25, 
2024).  
47
 Id. 
48
 Id. 
49
 S. 403.067(8), F.S.  
50
 R. 62-306.200(3), F.A.C. defines “credit” to mean the amount of an entity’s nutrient load reduction below the baseline that will be 
available for trading purposes. Credits are in units of pounds per year or kilograms per year. 
51
 A BMAP is a restoration plan for the watersheds and basins connected to an impaired waterbody. S. 403.067(7)(a)1., F.S.    
52
 R. 62-306.300(1), F.A.C. A Reasonable Assurance Plan is a control measure the DEP may implement for Category 4b impaired 
waterbodies. DEP, Alternative Restoration Plans, Alternative Restoration Plans | Florida Department of Environmental Protection 
(last visited Jan. 25, 2024).  
53
 R. 62-306.400(2)(a), F.A.C.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 6 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
implementation of best management practices (BMP)
54
 that are required under a BMAP or RAP.
55
 An 
entity must fully comply with its baseline nutrient load to be eligible for credits resulting from 
management actions that reduce the nutrient load below the baseline.
56
 In the past, water quality 
credits have been traded in the state; however, currently there are no water quality credits available for 
trade.
57
 
 
Water Quality Enhancement Areas
58
 
Water quality enhancement areas (WQEA) are “natural systems constructed, operated, managed, and 
maintained for the purpose of providing offsite regional treatment for which enhancement credits may 
be provided pursuant to a WQEA permit . . . .”
59
 Awarded by DEP, an enhancement credit represents a 
quantity of pollutant removed.
60
 An enhancement credit may be sold only to governmental entities 
seeking to meet an assigned BMAP or RAP, or for the purpose of achieving net improvement of water 
quality when existing, ambient water quality does not meet standards.
61
 It may be sold only after the 
governmental entity provides reasonable assurance of meeting DEP rules for design and construction 
of all onsite stormwater management.
62
  
 
A WQEA is used to address pollutants in a watershed, basin, sub-basin, targeted restoration area or 
waterbody in which the WQEA is located that do not meet applicable state water quality criteria.
63
 
Construction, operation, management and maintenance of a WQEA must be approved through the 
ERP permit process
64
 and must be used to create, improve or use natural systems to improve water 
quality.
65
 A WQEA permit provides for the assessment, valuation and award of credits based on units of 
pollutants removed.
66
 DEP must base its determination of the award of enhancement credits on 
standard numerical models or analytical tools that establish the WQEA’s ability to remove pollutants or 
constituents.
67
 If the watershed within the WQEA has a BMAP, then the applicant must use the BMAP 
numerical models and analytical tools.
68
  
 
“To obtain a WQEA permit, the applicant must provide reasonable assurances that the proposed 
WQEA will be used to:  
 Meet the requirements for issuance of an ERP; 
 Benefit water quality in the watershed in which the WQEA is located; 
 Meet defined performance or success criteria for the reduction of one or more pollutants or 
other constituents that prevent receiving waters from meeting applicable state water quality 
criteria; 
                                                
54
 The EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) regulations include a definition of BMPs as applied to water 
quality protection to mean, “[s]chedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management 
practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of ‘waters of the United States.’ BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating 
procedures, and practices to control plant site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material 
storage.” 40 C.F.R. §122.2 
55
 R. 62-306.400(2)(b), F.A.C. 
56
 R. 62-306.400(4), F.A.C. 
57
 DEP, Florida Water Quality Credit Trading Registry (last updated Feb. 21, 2023), https://floridadep.gov/dear/water-quality-
restoration/content/florida-water-quality-credit-trading-registry (last visited Feb. 19, 2024).  
58
 The Water Quality Enhancement Area Program (Program) was created in Ch. 2022-215, Laws of Fla., and required DEP to initiate 
rulemaking to implement the Program. DEP held one rule development workshop on Nov. 8, 2023. DEP, Water Quality Enhancement 
Are Rulemaking (last updated Dec. 7, 2023) Water Quality Enhancement Area Rulemaking | Florida Department of Environmental 
Protection (last visited Feb. 19, 2024). Until rules are adopted, the Program is not operational.  
59
 S. 373.4134(2)(d), F.S. 
60
 S. 373.434(2)(a), F.S.  
61
 S. 373.4134(3)(b), F.S.  
62
 Id.  
63
 S. 373.4134(3)(c), F.S. 
64
 S. 373.4134(3(a), F.S. 
65
 S. 373.4134(3)(d), F.S. 
66
 S. 373.4134(4)(b), F.S. 
67
 S. 373.4134(4)(c), F.S. 
68
 S. 373.4134(4)(c)1., F.S.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 7 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
 Ensure long-term pollutant reduction through effective operation and maintenance in perpetuity 
by designation of a responsible long-term maintenance entity supported by an endowment or 
other long-term financial assurance sufficient to ensure perpetual operation and maintenance; 
 Demonstrate sufficient legal or equitable interest in the property to ensure access and perpetual 
protection and management of the land within the WQEA; and, 
 Provide for permanent preservation of the WQEA . . . .”
69
 
 
The WQEA permit applicant must propose performance and success criteria monitoring and a 
verification plan and protocols for once the WQEA is operational.
70
 The protocols must be appropriate 
for the WQEA and sufficient to demonstrate that the area is meeting defined performance or success 
criteria for the reduction of pollutants or contaminants for which credits are awarded.
71
 Permit 
applications must include site-specific water data and conditions information to assist DEP in 
determining the number of credits to issue.
72
 An applicant for a WQEA permit or an applicant proposing 
to use enhancement credits must comply with all requirements pertaining to adverse impacts to water 
quality in receiving waters and adjacent lands or wetlands.
73
 If a permittee fails to comply with the 
conditions of a WQEA, DEP must revoke the ability of the permittee to sell enhancement credits until 
the WQEA complies with the conditions of the permit.
74
 
 
DEP must establish a water quality enhancement service area for each WQEA.
75
 Enhancement credits 
may be withdrawn and used only to address adverse impacts in the enhancement service area.
76
 The 
boundaries of such enhancement service areas depend on the geographic area in which the WQEA 
could reasonably be expected to address adverse impacts.
77
 
 
DEP must track the award, release and use of enhancement credits by maintaining a ledger.
78
 If credits 
are sold or used, the WQEA operator must notify DEP within 30 days after the date the enhancement 
credit transaction is completed.
79
 A WMD that authorizes applicants seeking permits to use 
enhancement credits to address water quality impacts must report to DEP the amount of enhancement 
credits used by the applicants.
80
 
 
A WQEA may not be located on lands purchased for conservation pursuant to the Florida Forever Act 
or the Florida Preservation 2000 Act.
81
 Pollutant loading reductions required under any state regulatory 
program are not eligible to be considered as enhancement credits.
82
 Credits may not be used by point 
source dischargers to satisfy regulatory requirements other than those necessary to obtain an ERP for 
construction and operation of the surface water management system of the site.
83
  
  
                                                
69
 S. 373.4134(4)(a)1.-6., F.S. 
70
 S. 373.4134(6)(a), F.S. 
71
 Id.  
72
 S. 373.4134(4)(C)4., F.S. 
73
 S. 373.4134(3)(g), F.S.  
74
 S. 373.4134(6)(b), F.S.  
75
 S. 373.4134(5), F.S. 
76
 Id.  
77
 Id.  
78
 S. 373.4134(7)(d), F.S. 
79
 S. 373.4134(7)(d)2., F.S.  
80
 S. 373.4134(7)(d)1., F.S. 
81
 S. 373.4134(7)(c), F.S. 
82
 S. 373.4134(7)(e), F.S. 
83
 S. 373.4134(7)(e) and (f), F.S.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 8 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
Effect of the Bill  
 
The bill authorizes private sector entities to apply to purchase water quality enhancement credits, 
currently only governmental entities are authorized to make such purchases, and authorizes the use of 
WQEAs for certain areas where ERP performance standards are not being met. 
 
The bill defines an “applicant” to mean:  
 a government entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement credits to satisfy an 
assigned BMAP allocation or RAP; or,  
 a governmental entity or private sector entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement 
credits for the purpose of achieving net improvement according to s. 373.414(1)(b)3., F.S.,
84
 or 
ERP performance standards.  
The bill requires that prior to the sale of enhancement credits, an applicant must provide reasonable 
assurances for the design and construction of all onsite stormwater management, as required by law.   
 
The bill clarifies that water quality enhancement credits are available for permits issued pursuant to ss. 
373.403 – 373.443, F.S., and not the whole of ch. 373, pt. IV, F.S. 
 
The bill revises requirements related to mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation to allow the 
establishment of a private mitigation bank or offsite regional mitigation on land owned by a local 
government that is located in a credit-deficient basin and the proposed private mitigation bank would 
provide one or more of the deficient habitat type credits described below that are unavailable or 
insufficient in the basin. Local government-owned land which was acquired for conservation may also 
be used for this purpose.  
 
The bill prohibits DEP and the WMDs from participating in this type of mitigation banking and prohibits 
private sector mitigation banks from using lands owned by DEP or the WMDs.  
 
The bill defines a “credit-deficient basin” to be a drainage basin or a corresponding hydrologic unit,
85
 
with all the following features:  
 At least one mitigation bank has been permitted and established on land not owned by a 
governmental entity and that mitigation bank no longer has available for purchase one of the 
habitat type credits for which there is a documented shortage;  
 There is a documented shortage of either forested freshwater; non-forested freshwater; forested 
saltwater; or, non-forested saltwater habitat type credits; and 
 Pending mitigation bank applications on private land or pending credit releases from mitigation 
banks on nongovernment land are unlikely to alleviate the credit shortage. 
The bill authorizes a local government, with land in a credit-deficient basin, to consider a private entity’s 
proposal to establish a mitigation bank on the local government land, including land purchased for 
conservation, if acquisition encumbrances do not exist on such land to the contrary. The local 
government must use the public procurement process in ch. 287, F.S., or another established, 
competitive procurement process to accept proposals from a private entity to establish a mitigation 
bank on local government land.  
 
The bill requires a “use agreement” to be executed between the local government and the private 
mitigation bank applicant at which time the credit deficiency must be confirmed. However, once the use 
                                                
84
 S. 373.414, F.S., relating to additional criteria for activities in surface waters and wetlands, requires an ERP applicant to provide 
reasonable assurance that its activities will not be violative of applicable state water quality standards and that such activity is not 
contrary to the public interest. If an applicant is unable to meet such state water quality standards due to existing, ambient water 
quality, then DEP or the WMD, as the permitting authority, must consider mitigation strategies the applicant proposes or will accept 
that produce net improvement of the water quality in the receiving body of water, limited to those elements that do not meet standards. 
S. 373.414(1)(b)3., F.S.  
85
 A hydrologic unit is a geographic area defined by an area’s natural hydrological properties, primarily its drainage patterns. U.S. 
Geological Survey (USGS), Hydrologic Unit Maps (last updated Jan. 9, 2024), https://water.usgs.gov/GIS/huc.html (last visited Jan. 
25, 2024). The U.S. is divided and sub-divided into successively smaller hydrologic units which are classified into four levels: regions, 
subregions, accounting units, and cataloging units. Id.  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 9 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
agreement is executed the mitigation bank application may proceed, even if the credit deficiency is 
relieved. The use agreement requires the local government to be identified as the long-term steward of 
the property and grant a conservation easement or substantially similar recordable instrument
86
 in favor 
of the permitting agency, if one does not already exist. The use agreement requires the private 
applicant to:  
 Establish and operate the mitigation bank according s. 373.4136, F.S., relating to mitigation 
bank permitting requirements. 
 Provide bid and performance security instruments for a minimum five percent of the total bid 
amount to ensure that the use agreement is executed and the private entity applies for a 
mitigation bank permit. 
 Operate and maintain the private mitigation bank until final permit success criteria are met. 
 Agree to provide a financial assurance amount for long-term management in an amount 
agreeable to the local government and pursuant to administrative rules. The financial assurance 
shall be used by the local government for land management after the ERP permit success 
criteria are met. An endowment may be used to provide financial assurance; however, public 
funds may not be used to satisfy this requirement.  
 Acknowledge that denial of the permit application will terminate the use agreement. 
 Acknowledge that failure to obtain a permit within two years after the agreement has been 
executed will terminate the use agreement, unless the local government extends it for good 
cause. 
The bill prohibits public funds from being used to fund financial assurances for construction and 
implementation of the private mitigation bank.  
 
When determining the number of mitigation credits to be awarded to a private mitigation bank 
established according to the bill’s requirements, the bill prohibits increasing the location factor 
assessment and scoring value in the uniform mitigation assessment method,
87
 when the proposed 
private mitigation bank’s location is in or adjacent to the local government’s conservation lands. This 
prohibition also applies when the conservation status of the private mitigation bank land is improved 
due to such location.  
 
The bill authorizes DEP, in coordination with the WMDs, to adopt rules to implement the requirements 
of the bill relating to mitigation banking. 
 
B. SECTION DIRECTORY: 
Section 1: Amends s. 373.4134, F.S., relating to water quality enhancement areas. 
 
Section 2:  Amends s. 373.4135, F.S., relating to mitigation banks and offsite regional mitigation.  
 
Section 3: Reenacts s. 403.9332, F.S., relating to mitigation and enforcement.  
 
Section 4: Provides an effective date of July 1, 2024. 
 
                                                
86
 S. 704.06, F.S., relating to the creation, acquisition and enforcement of conservation easements describes the instruments and 
process used to demonstrate title to the property.  
87
 The Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) is a methodology set forth in state law to determine the amount of 
mitigation needed to offset adverse impacts to wetlands and other surface waters and to award and deduct mitigation bank credits. S. 
373.414(18), F.S. See also DEP, The Uniform Mitigation Assessment Method (UMAM) (last updated Feb. 8, 2022), 
https://floridadep.gov/water/submerged-lands-environmental-resources-coordination/content/uniform-mitigation-assessment (last 
visited Jan. 25, 2024).  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 10 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
II.  FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT 
 
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT: 
 
1. Revenues: 
The bill may have an indeterminate positive fiscal impact to the state from additional WQEA 
permitting fees. 
 
2. Expenditures: 
The bill may have an insignificant negative fiscal impact relating to the expansion of the WQEA 
Program. DEP indicated the additional workload can be absorbed within existing resources.  
 
B. FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: 
 
1. Revenues: 
The bill may have an indeterminate positive fiscal impact on local governments from the collection 
of usage fees from private sector sponsors who operate a mitigation bank.  
 
2. Expenditures: 
The bill may have an indeterminate negative fiscal impact on local governments through the 
additional workload associated with the procurement process and entering into agreements with 
private sector sponsors.  
 
C. DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT ON PRIVATE SECTOR: 
There may be a positive fiscal impact to private entities participating in the expanded WQEA program 
and maintaining mitigation banks on public lands. The fiscal impact is indeterminate.  
 
D. FISCAL COMMENTS: 
None.  
III.  COMMENTS 
 
A. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES: 
 
 1. Applicability of Municipality/County Mandates Provision: 
Not applicable. This bill does not appear to require counties or municipalities to spend funds or take 
action requiring the expenditure of funds; reduce the authority that counties or municipalities have to 
raise revenues in the aggregate; or reduce the percentage of state tax shared with counties or 
municipalities. 
 
 2. Other: 
None.  
 
B. RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY: 
C. The bill authorizes DEP, in coordination with the WMDs, to adopt rules to implement the requirements 
of the bill relating to mitigation banking.  
 
D. DRAFTING ISSUES OR OTHER COMMENTS: 
None.  
  STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 11 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
IV.  AMENDMENTS/COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE CHANGES 
On January 29, 2024, the Water Quality, Supply & Treatment Subcommittee adopted a Proposed Committee 
Substitute (PCS) and reported the bill favorably as a committee substitute. The PCS:  
 Adds a definition of “private sector sponsor” in s. 373.403, F.S., relating to the management and 
storage of surface waters, and “applicant” to s. 373.4134, F.S., relating to WQEAs, to expand mitigation 
banking and the Water Quality Enhancement Area Program, respectively, to include private sector 
entities. For both, the bill requires any participating private sector entities to comply with all laws, 
regulations, permits and/or authorizations.  
o For a wetland mitigation project permitted pursuant to ch. 373, pt. IV, F.S., the bill requires the 
private sector sponsor to provide certain financial assurances and any required monitoring, 
reporting and maintenance of the mitigation bank. 
o For a private entity purchasing WQEA credits, the bill authorizes such an entity to do so to meet 
an assigned BMAP allocation or RAP or for the purpose of achieving the net improvement 
performance standard. 
 Clarifies that permittee-responsible mitigation may be included in a mitigation project authorized for 
land a local government purchased for conservation purposes.  
 Authorizes a local government, through a public procurement process, to solicit proposals from private-
sector sponsors for a mitigation bank on public lands purchased for conservation purposes. If a private-
sector sponsor is going to operate a mitigation bank, then the local government and the private-sector 
sponsor must enter into an agreement that requires the private-sector sponsor to:  
o Establish and operate the mitigation bank according to mitigation banking permitting 
requirements.  
o Pay a usage fee to the local government which reflects the market value of the public land and 
assures that the cost of the use of the public land is fully accounted for in the pricing of 
mitigation credits. 
 Reenacts s. 409.9332, F.S., relating to mitigation and enforcement, to incorporate the amendment 
made by the bill and conforms cross-references in ss. 330.41, 373.414 and 373.461, F.S.  
 
On February 22, 2024, the Infrastructure Strategies Committee adopted a strike-all amendment and reported 
the bill favorably as a committee substitute. The amendment:  
 Removes the definition of “private sector sponsor” in s. 373.403, F.S., relating to the management and 
storage of surface waters.  
 Removes the authorization and associated requirements for a local government to solicit proposals 
from private-sector sponsors to establish a mitigation bank on public lands purchased for conservation 
purposes in drainage basins or hydrologic unit codes when the private-sector sponsor demonstrates to 
DEP or a WMD that in-kind credits are not available. 
 Adds a process for the establishment and operation of a private mitigation bank using local 
government-owned land, including lands acquired for conservation. The bill prohibits the use of state or 
WMD-owned land for this purpose. Land used for private mitigation banking under the bill must be 
located in a credit-deficient basin or hydrologic unit code with specific features including a documented 
shortage of specific habitat type credits.  
 Requires the local government and private applicant to execute a use agreement at which time the 
credit deficiency is confirmed. However, the bill also provides that once the use agreement is executed 
the mitigation bank application may proceed, even if the credit deficiency is relieved. 
 Requires the use agreement to identify the local government as the long-term steward of the property 
and grant a conservation easement in favor of the permitting agency. Among others, the use 
agreement requires the private applicant to:  
o Establish and operate the private mitigation bank according to statutory mitigation banking 
requirements and operate and maintain it until final permit success criteria are met. 
o Provide bid and performance security instruments for a minimum five percent of the total bid 
amount and financial assurances for the local government’s long-term management and for 
construction and implementation of the private mitigation bank.  
 The bill prohibits public funds from being used for the required financial assurances.  
 Prohibits increasing the location factor assessment and scoring value in the uniform mitigation 
assessment method (UMAM) when determining the number of mitigation bank credits awarded to a 
private mitigation bank located in or adjacent to local government-owned conservation land.   STORAGE NAME: h1073d.ISC 	PAGE: 12 
DATE: 2/26/2024 
  
 Authorizes DEP, in coordination with the WMDs, to adopt rules to implement the requirements of the bill 
relating to mitigation banking. 
 Removes the definition of “applicant” in s. 373.4134, F.S., relating to WQEAs.  
 Removes the authorization for permittee-responsible mitigation to be included in a mitigation project 
authorized for land purchased by a local government for conservation purposes. 
 Authorizes the use of WQEAs for certain areas where ERP performance standards are not being met. 
 Authorizes private sector entities to apply to purchase water quality enhancement credits; currently, 
only governmental entities are authorized to make such purchases. 
 Defines an “applicant” for the purchase of water quality enhancement credits to mean:  
o a government entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement credits to satisfy an 
assigned BMAP allocation or RAP; or,  
o a governmental entity or private sector entity that seeks to purchase water quality enhancement 
credits for the purpose of achieving net improvement over the receiving water body’s current 
water quality or satisfying ERP performance standards.  
 Requires an applicant, prior to the sale of enhancement credits, to provide reasonable assurances for 
the design and construction of all onsite stormwater management, as required by law. 
 Removes conforming cross-references in ss. 330.41, 373.414 and 373.461, F.S.  
This analysis is drafted to the committee substitute as approved by the Infrastructure Strategies Committee.