Proposed Revisions to the State’s Surface Water Classification System February 22, 2010 Public Workshop Daryll Joyner Bureau of Assessment and Restoration Support Phone (850)

Summary of Presentation   A Few General Notes   Overview of Scope of Rulemaking   Review Latest Substantive Revisions   Clarified recreational uses for Class III-Limited   Revised text describing waters eligible for Class III- Limited subcategory   Added text to clarify that reclassifications cannot allow for the lowering of existing water quality nor result in the nonattainment of water quality standards in downstream waters   Added “biological integrity” to list of parameters eligible for a SSAC

General Notes   Revised rule in response to public comments Latest version ed to interested parties on 2/16/10, and is available as a hand-out No additional changes (since last week)   Presentation focuses on substantive changes since previous public workshop Made analogous changes to the “Process Document”, which Russ will review   Comment period on Rule and Process Document runs through March 24, 2010 Planning for May 20 ERC meeting

What we are doing with this rulemaking   Propose to refine the existing classification system by a dding subclassification to Class III Class III-Limited   Subclassification of Class III more appropriate than Class IV While expected use is lower, have same water quality criteria except for up to 9 parameters Nutrients, bacteria, DO, alkalinity, specific conductance, transparency, turbidity, biological integrity, and pH   Also revising process for reclassifications

What we are NOT doing with this rulemaking We are NOT reclassifying ANY waters And we are NOT planning to allow categorical reclassifications in the future We are NOT establishing any new water quality criteria or Site Specific Alternative Criteria (SSAC) for the Class III-Limited subclassification Scientifically justified Class III-Limited SSACs must accompany any reclassification petition, and would be separately reviewed and acted on by the ERC and EPA May establish criteria for selected waterbody types at a later date

Revisions to Rule (1)   In subsection (1), added “Recreation or” to the text describing Class III-Limited uses Some waterbodies may be reclassified to Class III- Limited based only on limited aquatic life use, while others may be reclassified to Class III- Limited based on limited recreation Must remain full “recreation” unless demonstrated to not be an existing use and SSAC adopted for bacteriological criteria

Surface Water Classifications Class IPotable Water Supplies Class IIShellfish Harvesting or Propagation Class IIIFish Consumption; Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife Class III-Limited Fish Consumption; Recreation or Limited Recreation; Propagation and Maintenance of a Limited Population of Fish and Wildlife Class IV Agricultural Water Supplies Class V Navigation, Utility, and Industrial Use

Revisions to Rule (5)   Revisions to subsection (5) are meant to clarify our intent to limit scope of waters eligible for Class III-Limited to “artificial waters” with human-induced physical or habitat conditions that prevent full attainment of Class III use Basically combined text from December version of the rule with text from January version, and added some text from “Process Document”, which provides yet more detail

Revisions to Rule (5)   Added text to clarify that Class III-Limited waters are restricted to waters with human- induced physical or habitat conditions that prevent attainment of Class III uses   Kept text stating Class III-Limited waters are either: (a) Wholly artificial waterbodies that were created by excavation; or (b) Altered waterbodies that were dredged or filled prior to November 28, 1975.

Revisions to Rule (5) (continued)   Added text defining “altered waterbodies” “those portions of natural surface waters that were dredged or filled prior to November 28, 1975, to such an extent that they exhibit separate and distinct hydrologic and environmental conditions from any waters to which they are connected.   Did not include definition of “Wholly Artificial Waterbodies”, but there is a definition in Process Document

Process Document Text on Artificial Waterbodies   “the term “artificial waterbody” as used in this document is different from the definition in Rule , F.A.C., that is used in OFW determinations. In this document, wholly artificial waterbodies do not include those portions of a natural surface water that have been dredged or filled. Natural surface waters are those waterbodies that, in their undisturbed state, originally were all or part of the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico; a bay, bayou, sound, estuary, or lagoon, including natural channels and natural tributary thereto; a river, stream, or natural tributary thereto; a natural lake; and any natural wetland connected to any of the above waters.”

Revisions to Rule (8)   In subsection (8), we Moved text from subsection (9) that refers to Process Document and incorporates by reference This is better location because document describes process rather than lists requirements Added information about where interested parties can obtain a copy of document Department’s internet site at By writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL

Revisions to Rule (9)   In paragraph (9)(c), added text reiterating that “The proposed reclassification does not allow for the lowering of existing water quality nor result in the nonattainment of water quality standards in downstream waters”   Added here to better highlight the requirements given concerns expressed on issue Important to note that this subsection addresses both types of reclassifications, but these specific findings should be readily demonstrated for reclassification to higher use

Revisions to Rule (11)   In subsection (11),   Revised text to clarify that the Department can initiate reclassification   Kept language in paragraph (a) about protecting existing uses and protecting downstream waters, but changed wording slightly   Was - “not result in the nonattainment of the present and future most beneficial uses of downstream waters”   Now - “not result in the nonattainment of water quality standards in downstream waters”   “Standards” include uses and water quality criteria

Revisions to Rule (11) (continued)   In subsection (11),   Also did some minor wordsmithing to language in (c) that lists the “factors” in 40 CFR (g) eligible for reclassification   Wording in subparagraph 1 changed from Naturally occurring pollutant concentrations prevent the attainment of the use Concentrations of naturally occurring substances prevent the attainment of the use Only change from federal language

Revisions to Rule (12)   In subsection (12), added “biological integrity” to list of parameters for which SSACs can be established that meet Class III-Limited use   Limited to   Nutrients (and nutrient response variables), bacteria, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, specific conductance, transparency, turbidity, biological integrity, or pH   Note that SSAC can be issued for other parameters, but they must be set at levels that are protective of full Class III use

Revisions to Rule (12) (continued)   Kept language in (12) stating that any SSAC for these parameters cannot be set at levels less stringent than existing water quality conditions, but changed wording from “existing water quality” to “water quality conditions at the time of reclassification”   Process Document generally describes data needed to establish water quality conditions at the time of reclassification

Revisions to Rule (14)   In subsection (14), kept text related to protection of Outstanding Florida Waters Reclassifications cannot result in degradation of OFWs or ONRWs   But deleted proposed text that stated that reclassifications cannot “cause failure to meet special standards in any waterbody” This protection provided in subsection (13)