Title: Agenda Quarterly Meeting June 20, 1980
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/WL00002738/00001
 Material Information
Title: Agenda Quarterly Meeting June 20, 1980
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
Abstract: Agenda Quarterly Meeting June 20, 1980
General Note: Box 10, Folder 26 ( SF WMD Quarterly Meetings VOL III - 1979-1991 ), Item 97
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: WL00002738
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







AGENDA


Quarterly Meeting of the Water Management Districts
and the

Department of Environmental Regulation

June 20, 1980
8:00 a.m.


1. Call to Order by Robert Clark

2. Comments by Secretary Varn

3. Status of the Auditor General's Report

Purpose: To review the Auditor General's Report and to exchange
views on the comments that were submitted. ,Determine
DER's position on the Report and discuss the problem
of having a written document that is critical of the
water management districts.

Objective: To leave the Quarterly Meeting with an agreement on a
Plan of Action regarding followup on the Auditor General's
Report; or let things die for lack of interest by
legislators.

4. Legislation for 80's

A. TRIM Bill Requirements

B. Development of State Water Policy; DER and WMD Roles

Purpose: To outline a procedure and time frame for developing
State Water Policy, establish the roles of DER and
WMD's in policy formulation, andreach consensus on
the general purpose, scope, and format of state water
policy.

Objective: To leave the Quarterly Meeting with an agree upon
Plan of Action and commitment of staff, to meet
the commitment made by the Secretary.

5. Status of Proposed New Rules and Amendments to Existing Rules of the DER

Purpose: To brief the WMD's on the status of proposed new rules
and amendments to existing rules of the Department,
particularly those of concern to the WMD's.


I






0 0

Agenda for Quarterly Meeting of WMD's and DER
June 20, 1980
Page Two


Objective: To leave the Quarterly meeting with an understanding
of the rule development activity of the DER, and to
reaffirm WMD assistance on specific rules.
A. Chapter 17-3, F.A.C. Water Quality Standards:
-Dissolved Oxygen Standard
-Redesignation of segment of the Suwannee River as
an Outstanding Florida Water
-status of the Groundwater Task Force
B. Chapter 17-4, F.A.C., Permits:
-Dissolved Oxygen Standard Mixing Zones
-Stormwater
C. Chapters 17-20 and 17-21, F.A.C., Water Wells and Water Well
Contractors
-Presentation by Mr. Fred Mixon, President,
Florida Water Well Contractors Association
D. Proposed Rule 17-X, F.A.C., Water Resources Development and
Management Portion of State Public Works Program Basis
of State Review
6. Water Management Districts Submitted Agenda Items
A. Proposed Curriculum Evaluation Task Force
Purpose: To evaluate the curriculum of the State University
System regarding water resources management and
make recommendations to the Board of Regents for
needed changes in courses and degree programs to
meet the employment needs of the WMD.s.
Objective: To establish a task force of WMD staff members and a
Plan of Action toeivaluate the State University System
curriculum and propose recommendations to be
considered at a future quarterly meeting.
B. Establishing a Mechanism for Maintaining Uniform Rule Numbers.
C. Chapter 17-1
DER's delegation of authority to Water Management Districts.
7. Announcements
A. Next quarterly meeting
B. Other


8. Adjournment








Chapters 17-3 and 17-4, F.A.C.
Dissolved Oxygen Standard and Mixing Zones


In the day to day activities of the Department relating to the permitting of dis-
chargers to surface waters of the State, the Department has encountered a problem
in the application of the dissolved oxygen (DO) standards of Sections 17-3 and
17-4 of the Florida Administrative Code (FAC). This problem arises mainly in
the implementation of dissolved oxygen (00) standards for Class III waters that
are contained In Section 17-3.121(14), F.A.C., and i Section 17-4.244(1)(1) 1
relating to mixing zones.
Many bodies of water in the State do not presently meet these standards for
three basic causes: (1) point source pollution; (2) natural conditions; and
(3) non-abatable, ml induced pel;ltiion. To address the first cause, the Depart-
ment issues water quality baed effluent limits to each contributing point source
discharger. However, the problem Is encountered In dealing with the latter two
causes.; Where'waters are net presently meeting the- 0 standards due to natural
or non-abatable, man-induced causes, the facility may not discharge oxygen demand-
ing wastes unless the effluent will bring'the anbient witer quality tp to standard
or the facility petitions for and is granted administrative relief from the rule
through variances, exceptions, exemptions, etc. (see for example 17-3.01 Part 1(7),
17-3.031(1), 17-3.031(5), 17-4.242(2) and 17-4.243(4) (a)). Very few facilities
which presently or propose to discharge into waters that" do not meet D8 standards
can bring ambient water qUality up to standard and therefore, are forced to seek
relief from the standard ..'
This situation would not be a formidable problem if most State waters presently
met the DO standards.; However, data is available to indicate that many of the
facilities discharging in the following St4te waters may need to seek relief in
order to continue discharge: most wetlands parts of the St. Johns River, Tampa Bay,
the controlled canals 4n South~ lorida, th Intracoastal Waterway oh the eastcoast,
and most of the rivers and streams in: uval County. In all, potentially 40 to 60%
of the surface water dischargers in the St te are affected.
Proposed changes to the DO standards have been drafted. The purpose of the changes
is to allow the'Department further discretion in lowering the DO standards to back-
ground values without formal petition. With these changes facilities would be
able to discharge as long as-further degradation is not caused. Formal requests
for relief requests from dischargers;would not be required. The Environmental
Regulation Commission recently gave conceptual approval on this change and the
Department is now beginning formal rule amendment procedures.


* a











Redesignation of a Segment of the Suwannee River
as an Outstanding Florida Water



Effective March 1, 1984, B per revisions to Chapter 17-3, F.A.C.,
the Environmental Regulation Commission designated the Suwannee River
as an "Outstanding Florida Water" (OFW). As a result of this designa-
tion, the Suwannee receives special water quality protection through
the permitting activities- of the Department of Environmental Regulation,
..as described in Section 17-4,242, F.A.C. The intent of the Environmental
Regulation Commission in making this designation was to prevent deterior-
ation of water quality in the Suwannee River. In practice, this means
that the Department of.Environmental Regulation is prohibited from issuing
permits for future discharges which would significantly degrade the Suwannee.

When the. Commission designated the Suwannee as OFW, however, it >
Included a,4 proviso that this- designation would automatically lapse on,.
March 1, 1,981 ,'for that, portion of-the Suwannee River from State Road 6
to Suwannee Springs, unless the Commission acts to-contihue the designa-
tion prior to that date-(Section 17-3.041(3)(g)). ,Since the Suwannee River,
was included as a "Special Water" under the OFW designation, the Commission
must make the following two findings before-it can continue the designation:
1) that this segment of the Suwannee River is of exceptional recreational
or ecological significance, and 2);that the environmental, social, and
economic benefits ofithe,action outweigh the environmental, social, and
economic costs (Section n -3.041(1)(h)(6)).
The Department conducted a public fac.finding workshop on this issue
on February 12, 1980 in White Springs a required by the rule.- In addition,
Department staff have analyzed water.quality.trends and the recreational
and ecological significance of this segment of the river, and have prepared
an Economic Impact Assessmnt of the redesignatian, The results of these
analyses are included in a-Department-report which was presented to the :
Environmental Regulatibn Commission. The report concludes that the segment
of the Suwannee River from State Road 6 to Suwannee Springs has both recrea-
tional and ecological significance and that the benefits of the proposed
action exceed the costs. ,jhus, the Department recommends redesignation
of this segment as an OFW. The Environmental Regulation Commission has
scheduled a public hearing for June 18, 1980 to take further action on
this proposal and to obtain additional public input.
Occidental Chemical Company conducts phosphate mining and chemical
processing operations adjacent to this segment of the Suwannee and is the
area's largest industrial discharger to the river. The Company is concerned
about potential economic impacts of the proposed OFW redesignation and has
filed for an administrative hearing challenging the rule change. The hearing
should commence sometime in June.


_~~~~~__~___~i.~YIY II-IIILII-LYL--jY--- ---.^. UY_--LI~1LMI~-~CI_~.I~ ~~m-~


I II I


..,,, ..i.~..~ ..........~7n~




I -


Status of the Groundwater Tsk. Force
The Task Force held several meetings since its inception in 1979.
None of these meetings were successful in res6lvifjg the differences of
opinion Panongmthe various members of the Task Force.
In view of this record and since a final recommendation by the Task
Force to the Environmental Regulations Commission must be made In September,
it was decided that additional meetings of the Task force would not be
productive at this time. Consequently, the DER has assumed the rresponsi-
bility of writing a rough draft for the groundwater regulations segment of
CH. 17-3-4. The Chairman of the Task Force in cooperation with the Ground-
water Section and several individuals from universities- consulting firms,
and the USGS are preparing such a draft which is expected to be completed
towards the end of June. This draft will be submitted to the Task Force
membership for comments, revisions or approval,: Once that is done, a meeting
of the Task Force will b bbheld(tentative date mid-July) to finalize a set
of recommendations to the ERC.




a '.


Water Resources Development and iManagement
Portion of the State Public Works Program -
Basis of State Review

This rule is being developed to more clearly define the roles and responsibilities
of the Department and local sponsors in the development of the Public Works Pro-
gram. Chapter 373 is somewhat general ih its authorizing language and the rule
is designed to focus on those actions necessary to meet the Legislative require-
ments.

It has become apparent that potential local' sponsors who have not had- past exper-
ience in programs of this type are not aware of the series of steps necessary to
have a project authorized or the review process required to receive the support
of the state. In addition, the type of responses received on application forms
indicate that there is a lack of understanding or lack of concern to the data
needs state. reviewing agencies require in order to make their recommendations.
The rule will clearly define the sequence of'steps"in the overall process andt
the application form points out the specific information needs.

Finally, the rule clearly defines the appeals. process that has always been avail-
able to local sponsors or substantially affected third patiles-a6 well as the
criteria that will be used in the decision making process of the Department.

It is important to note that the rule does not substantially change the process
currently utilized by the Bepartment; 'The time-table and"dates very closely
approximate current conditions. The rule simply places them on record for refer-
ence by interested persons or agencies.

The proposed rule has.undergone extensive Department review and has been through
numerous drafts. It is currently being reviewed by the Rule Development Comnit-
tee. A workshop is being planned for the end of June. "A hearing on the adoption
of the proposed rule will be held by August 1, 1980.


PmYliii~L1"4rmrru--~^-111~ L~-- _a~--s~ ___I_III______I___









Water Resource; Development and Management
Portion of the State Public Works Program -
Basi! of State Review

This rule is being,developed to more clearly define the roles -and responsibilities
of the Department and local sponsors in the development of the Public Works Pro-
gram. Chapter 373 is somewhat general in its authorizing language and the rfle
is designed to focus on those actions necessary to meet the Legislative require-
ments.
It has become apparent that potential local sponsors who have not ad past exper-
ience in programs of this type are not aware of the series of steps necessary to
have a project authorized or the review process required to recefve'the support
of the state.' In addition, the, type of responses-received on application forms
indicate that there is a lack of understanding or lack of concern tothe data
needs state reviewing agencies equire.inorder tp.make their recommendations.
The rule will. clearly define the sequence of "steps..in the overall process and
the application form points out the speci-fic tnforntiton needs.

Finally, the rule clearly defines the appeals, process .that has always tbeen avail-
able to local sponsors or, substantially affected third parties au well as the
criteria that will be used in the decision making process of the Department.
It is important to note that the rudl does not substantially change the process
currently utilized by the Department. The time-table and dates very closely
approximate current conditions. The rule simply places them on record for refer-
ence by interested persons or agencies.-
The proposed rule has undergone extensive Department :review and has been through
numerous drafts. It is currently being reviewed by the Rule Development Commit-
tee. A workshop is being planned fpr the end of,4ne. A hearing on the adoption
of the proposed rule will be held by August 1, 1980.










Status of Revision of Chapter 17-4.248, Stormwater Rule


Since the adoption of 17-4:248 in March 1979 by the Environmental Regulation
Commission, the FDER, working with a statewide Stormwater Task Force, has been
involved in a revision process. The goals of the revisions to 17-4.246 was
to:; 1) clarify the requirements set forth In the initial rule; 2) include,
exemption provisions for waters conveyed over grassed lined ditches and
sheetflow; and 3) provide for more effective and practical guidelines for
both the Department and permit applicants. This revision process has to
date included seven (7) draft revisions of the rule and three (3) drafts
of the application forms. Followi-g the completion of each draft or set
of drafts (rule, and forms) the statewide Task Force met, discussed, and
recommended further changes. This Task Force is' composed of engineers,
planners, water managers, and public officials' from city, county, joint
state and federal agencies; special interest groups Including, environmental
and development interest groups; organizations such as the Florida Engineer-
--ing Society and consulting firms; and other interested parties. The most
recent draft (dated 2/11/80) was presented'March 26, 1980. Issues raised
at that. time and/or 'received though May,. 1980 serve as a basis for a draft
to be presented to FDER's internal rule development committee; RDC (Assistant
Secretary, Division Directors and General Counsel) at the end of June or
July for comment.. At this meeting, unresolved issues between the. staff and
the Task Force will be presented a'nd the RDC will decide whether to Dr.sent,
the rule to the ERC or make further modifications.. Assuming the RDC
gives the staff.the "go ahead", the draft and modifications resulting from
this meeting will be presented to the ERC for the first time in August or
.September of 1980. Major issues left tdb ~ resolved include:"
1) Status of the tliense; either as a construction or operational permit,
or both. .
2) Delegation of authority to other state agencies and the conditions
thereof.
3) Consideration whether the new abatement controls should be required
for existing and new stormwater discharge facilities.
4) Additional exemption categories.

5) Structure of the application forms
6) Staffing capabilities of the Department to handle, permitting, monitoring,
and enforcement of the existing and proposed rule.






T Fen Prr" r

WEST PAU
PALM B
0 05 I
Bonnettes "U"
Hunting a'AD
Preserve
DROAD
5309 HooD RD
622.-5/80




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