Title: Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group Presentation to the Environmental Efficiency Study Commission
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00000824/00001
 Material Information
Title: Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group Presentation to the Environmental Efficiency Study Commission
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group Presentation to the Environmental Efficiency Study Commission
General Note: Box 7, Folder 2 ( Vail Conference 1987 - 1987 ), Item 100
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00000824
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text











FLORIDA ELECTRIC POWER COORDINATING GROUP
PRESENTATION TO THE
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFICIENCY STUDY COMMISSION


A. Overview

1. Identify speaker and FCG

2. Discuss the root causes of the environmental
permitting duplication problem

(a) Natural overlapping caused by multiplicity of
agencies with different statutory resource
protection mandates regulating the same
resource use

(b) Natural overlap caused by several agencies
performing same functions -- standard setting,
permitting, enforcing, etc.

(c) Legislative practice of adopting legislation
aimed at curing an identified environmental
problem without fully integrating the solution
into the existing regulatory scheme

Illustrations:

1983 Water Quality Assurance Act

1984 Warren S. Henderson Wetlands Protection
Act

1986 State Underground Petroleum Environmental
Response Act

3. Result: Conflicting, inefficient and duplicative
regulations which are wasteful of limited private
and public resources


B. The Commission's Goal Should Be Efficient,
Nonduplicative Management of Florida's Natural
Resources.










Page 2





As Sid Martin, Chairman of the House Natural Resources
Committee has observed:

"Efficient management focuses on making
and implementing effective decisions in
the simplest manner and in the shortest
length of time ... one which eliminates
unnecessary duplications and requirements
of time or costs." (June 24, 1985,
management overview of water resources by
Sid Martin.)


All admit there are very serious management problems
which should be solved. Many alternative solutions have
been proposed in the past. These range from creating a
super agency to one stop permitting legislation. Some
say we should concentrate all regulation at the state
level, while others say we should encourage more local
government regulation.


C. Suggested Approach to the Commission's Responsibilities

1. The Commission should direct its primary efforts
toward the identification of and elimination of
duplication in environmental permitting and
regulation.

2. To this end, the Commission should adopt a series
of principles by which its recommendations and the
regulatory system may be judged.


D. Suggested Principles Designed to Enhance the "Efficient
Management" of Florida's Natural Resources

1. Florida should continue its strong efforts to
protect the state's natural resources.

2. That "efficient management" should not become a
code phrase for decreased protection of our
environment.

3. That agency accountability for resource management
and protection should be the hallmark of the
Commission's recommendations. f\


ii









Page 3






4. That on a program by program basis, the
Commission's recommendations should clearly
identify what agency or agencies should perform the
following environmental protection functions:

(a) Adoption of substantive environmental
protection standards. Standards include both
numerical and narrative type standards. See
403.803(13), F.S.

(b) Adoption of procedural rules;

(c) Issuing of permits or approvals;

(d) Enforcement of permit conditions and
standards;

(e) Management of resources.

5. That to the greatest extent possible, program and
permitting duplication should be eliminated.

6. That it would improve efficiency, accountability,
and eliminate duplication if all substantive
environmental standards were adopted by a single
state agency.

7. That unless harm would result to a natural resource
being protected, only one state, regional or local
agency should have the responsibility of permitting
or approving a particular activity.

8. That activities involving complex industrial
activities, manufacture or disposal of hazardous
materials, locally unpopular land uses, NPDES or
other discharge permits, and major air pollution
source permits should be permitted and approved at
the state level by the DER.

9. That although "permitting" should only be the
responsibility of one agency, using memorandum of
understanding, delegation or other such mechanisms,
several agencies could have significant roles in
enforcement of permit conditions.














Page 4


E. Specific Problems and Their Possible Solutions:

1. Illustrative problems

(a) A real life example of wetland regulation
duplication

(b) A real life example of redundant state,
federal, regional and local regulation

2. Possible solutions to the problem

(a) Problem area No. 1.

--- competing and overlapping definitions of
what or how a resource is to be regulated
(i.e., the extent of an agency's
jurisdiction) leads to conflicting
regulatory approaches.

a corollary problem is the fact that many
agencies issue permits for or approve
what is from an applicant's viewpoint a
single activity

(b) Suggested solutions to problem area No. 1

1. Designate the Environmental Regulation
Commission as the sole standard setting
agency for all environmental
regulations. Adequately staff and fund
the ERC to peform this role.

2. Create a single definition of the state's
wetlands jurisdiction for use by all
agencies.

3. "Collect up" and redistribute
environmental regulatory duties in a more
efficient fashion with a goal that only
one agency will regulate and permit a
particular activity.

4. Although redistribution "models" are
infinite, one possible scenario for the
Commission's consideration might be:


P-









Page 5





(a) DER to issue all permits for:

Air pollution sources

Complex industrial activities

Industrial discharges, including
NPDES approvals

Hazardous and solid waste sources

Power plants and transmission lines

Domestic wastewater treatment
systems

Docks, marinas, and submerged land
uses, including aquatic preserve
permits

Underground storage tanks

Mining regulations

(b) Water management districts to issue
all permits for:

Consumptive water uses

Stormwater and surface water
management systems

Dredge and fill and wetland
activities, except those permitted
by DER as part of licensing of items
4(A) above

All wells, injection and potable

Groundwater use permits

(c) DNR to issue all permits for:

Beach renourishment and all work
waterward of the coastal
construction control line





r




Page 6




Where Trustees' approval is required,
including the use of state owned submerged
lands, a statutory or rule based delegation
from the Trustees to the DER could be used to
give authority to the DER to issue the
necessary permits and approvals. Such
delegation could be in the form of clearly
established Trustee adopted guidelines.
Section 253.77, F.S., would need to be amended
to conform to the above solution.

We recognize the list of redistributed duties
is far from complete. For a list of
additional activities, see Attachment A.
Nevertheless, it represents a "start" which
you may wish to consider. The intent is to
create a "checklist" of permitting assignments
so that Florida ends up with an effective
permitting process without duplicated
permitting.

(c) Problem area No. 2. Lack of an effective
mechanism to resolve conflicts between
agencies or between agencies and permit
applicants.

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) has not
proved to be an effective conflict resolution
mechanism. Administrative hearings are
expensive ($150,000 $250,000) and time
consuming (six months to two years, if the
case is appealed). Furthermore, multiple
agency permitting gives rise to multiple
points of entry for dedicated project
opponents to retry in different forums various
aspects of a project

(d) Suggested solutions to problem area No. 2

1. The Commission should revisit Chapter
120, F.S., and consider changes which
would:









Page 7


(a) Make findings of fact, once adopted
by a state agency, binding on other
agencies and intervenors in
subsequent permit proceedings before
the same agency and before other
agencies on the same project.

(b) Provide that prevailing parties
shall be paid their costs by the
losing parties in all cases.

2. A state level "conflict resolution"
mechanism should be created along the
lines of the Growth Management Advisory
Committee recommendation or as a
"mandatory" measure. Consideration
should be given to using the ERC for this
role if the "mandatory" approach is
selected.


F. Summary and Recommendations









Page 7


(a) Make findings of fact, once adopted
by a state agency, binding on other
agencies and intervenors in
subsequent permit proceedings before
the same agency and before other
agencies on the same project.

(b) Provide that prevailing parties
shall be paid their costs by the
losing parties in all cases.

2. A state level "conflict resolution"
mechanism should be created along the
lines of the Growth Management Advisory
Committee recommendation or as a
"mandatory" measure. Consideration
should be given to using the ERC for this
role if the "mandatory" approach is
selected.


F. Summary and Recommendations












Program


Industrial Waste

Sewage Treatment

Wastewater Reuse

Injection Wells

Drinking Water


Septic Tanks

Sol id Waste

Hazardous Waste

Ground Water

Storage Tanks




Oi1 Terminals
(coastal)

Air Pollution

Consumpti ve Use

Surface Water
Management


Primary Aoency(ies)


OER

OER

DER/MD)

OER

DER/HRS/WMD
Water Supply Auth.

HRS

DER

DER

DER

OER




DNR


Secondary Agency(ies)
(State or Regional)


WO

HRS/WMD/Local Govt.









OER

WMD

ONR (oil spills)

WMH/Local Govt.

DACS/01
DACS inspects pumps
/Flre Marshal,
Installation codes.

OER


Conf ict/Duplilcation?
Yes/No Permit/Plan/Enforcemnt


Y X


X

X X

x



x
X









X X

X
X
x

x




X


DER

WMD

WMO


Stormiater

Well Drilling


Coastal Construction

Dredge-Fill (wetlands)

Power Plant/Trans-
mission Line Siting


DER/WMD

WMD


DNR

DER

DER


DACS/ Local Govt.

DER (Drinking Water)
(monitoring wel Is)

OER

WMD/DNR

WMD/DCA/DNR/G&F/
Local Govt.


X

x x


* Attachment 1


-,.r


* r











Primary Agency(ies)


Mining & Reclamation


Oil & Gas Regulation

Development of
Regional Impact

Area of Critical
State Concern

Environmental Lands

Outstanding Florida
Waters

Coastal Managwennt



Public Works

Treatment Plant
49rants

Pesticides

Marine Species

Fish & Wildlife

Endangered Species

Mitigation of
Dredge and Fill


NR/WMD

DER


ER



ER




DACS

DNR

GSF *

G9F/DACS/DNR

ER


Secondary Agency(es)
(State or Regional)


OER/VMD/RPC/DCA/
Local govt.

DER

DCA/OER/WV /O/NHRS


DER/G&F/DCA

DNRWG&F/DCA


DCA/OPB/DNR/P F/
DT/HRS/Forestry/
State

DNR/DCA/WMD/DOC




OEWGR F/DNR/HRS-

DER



DER/WMD

WMD/Local Govt.


Conf lict/Duplication?
Yes/No Penmit/Pan/Enfo


Y X X X


x

x x


Y X *X X


x x





x




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs