WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 5556

Natural resources: wetlands; purchase of wetland credits by industrial construction permit applicants; allow. Amends secs. 30311b & 30311d of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.30311b & 324.30311d) & adds sec. 30311e.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Greg Alexander and 14 co-sponsors

Provides flexible, time-adjusted wetland mitigation schedules alongside oversight to ensure mitigation is completed effectively and financially secured if delayed.

bill electronically reproduced 02/19/2026
#naturalresources:wetlands
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 5556

Summary of HB 5556 (2025-2026) – Michigan

Jurisdiction: Michigan | Committee: Natural Resources and Tourism

Purpose and Intent

  • The bill amends the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act (NREPA) to establish an alternative schedule for wetland mitigation activities associated with permits.
  • It creates a new Section 30311e and makes targeted amendments to Sections 30311b and 30311d.
  • The central aim is to provide flexibility in when and how wetland mitigation is completed, while maintaining oversight and ensuring wetlands are adequately protected.

Key Provisions and Changes

Section 30311b (permits and general conditions)

  • Permits issued under this part shall not be valid for more than 5 years.
  • The department may set a reasonable time for completion or termination of activities authorized by a permit.
  • The department may impose conditions on permits (including general permits) to:
    • Remove or reduce wetland impairments caused by the project.
    • Improve water quality impacted by the project.
    • Mitigate effects of discharge of fill material.
  • Any mitigation-related conditions imposed under subsection (3) must comply with new 30311e.
  • Interpretation and procedural notes reference consultation with the applicant before imposing conditions.

Section 30311d (compensatory wetland mitigation)

  • The department may require compensatory wetland mitigation as a condition on non-general permits.
  • Methods of compensatory mitigation include:
    • Acquisition of credits from a wetland mitigation bank (preferred if eligible).
    • Restoration of previously existing wetlands (preferred over creation where feasible).
    • Creation of new wetlands if ecological conditions support a self-sustaining ecosystem.
    • Preservation of exceptional wetlands.
  • If a mitigation plan is required, the department must approve it with attention to watershed-level benefits and provide for permanent protection of the mitigation site (e.g., via conservation easement).
  • If mitigation is conducted in cooperation with public/private partners, the permittee remains responsible for the mitigation outcomes.
  • The department may require financial assurance to ensure mitigation occurs, with release tied to monitoring and compliance, per a defined schedule.
  • Mitigation ratio considerations include method, likelihood of success, function equivalence, temporary losses, restoration difficulty, and distance to the mitigation site.
  • For agricultural activities, protections include potential use of conservation easements or payment into a stewardship fund as alternatives to financial assurances.

Section 30311e (new—mitigation schedule flexibility)

  • Mitigation activities must generally be completed concurrently with other permitted activities unless EGLE and the permittee agree to an alternative schedule.
  • Mitigation may occur on a time-adjusted schedule due to seasonal hydrology or construction conditions, or in stages aligned with development phasing plans.
  • If time-adjusted or staged mitigation is chosen, the permittee must provide a justification and start dates (time-adjusted) or performance deadlines for each stage (phasing plan).
  • Financial assurance may be required for high-risk or delayed mitigation activities (except for small sites ≤ 0.25 acres and mitigation on the same site as permitted activities).
  • Definitions provided:
    • Development phasing plans: identifies discrete construction/development stages and mitigation coordination per phase.
    • High-risk mitigation: factors increasing likely failure to meet performance standards (e.g., complex hydrology, novel designs, limited long-term management, uncertain soil/groundwater conditions).
    • Mitigation activities: actions to avoid, minimize, rectify, reduce, or compensate for wetland impacts ( restoration, creation, enhancement, preservation, relocation, monitoring, maintenance, adaptive management, etc.).
  • Financial assurances for alternative schedules: if delaying mitigation, a bond may be required to cover remaining costs (cost estimates by a third party).
  • The bill authorizes the department to require and manage financial assurances accordingly.

Other Provisions

  • Allows use of wetland mitigation banks, temporary mitigation credits, and related credit transfers once site conditions are met (with rules to be promulgated).
  • Economic/administrative mechanisms include a potential stewardship fund to support mitigation activities, with the department administering and auditing fund use.

Affected Parties

  • Permit applicants seeking authorization under NREPA.
  • The Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) as the approving/oversight agency.
  • Wetland mitigation banks, private and public partners involved in mitigation projects.
  • Municipalities and other entities participating in wetland mitigation funding programs (stewardship fund).

Procedural and Timeline Aspects

  • Effective date language indicates new provisions would apply to permits subject to these changes.
  • By 1 year after enactment, rules governing mitigation and mitigation banking considerations (Sections 30311b/d/e interplay) are to be reviewed/promulgated, with further rulemaking on mitigation banks and related credits.
  • Additional rulemaking or updates are anticipated to align with the administrative Procedures Act and the Office of Regulatory Reform review process.

Potential Impacts

  • Increased flexibility in timing and sequencing of wetland mitigation, potentially accelerating project timelines when appropriate.
  • Enhanced emphasis on on-site or watershed-relevant mitigation outcomes, and encouragement of mitigation banking.
  • Financial assurances and staged/phase-based mitigation introduce clearer risk management for permittees and stricter accountability for mitigation performance.
  • Small sites and on-site mitigation remain exempt from financial assurance requirements, reducing barriers for minor projects.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.