UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

JAN 1 ~ 2009 

Mr. Michael Sole, Secretary 

Florida Department of Environmental Protection 

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Stop 49 

Tallahassee, F 32399-3000 

, 

Dear Se 

OFFICE OF 

WATER 

This letter constitutes a determination under Clean Water Act (CWA) section 

303(c)(4)(8) that new or revised water quality standards for nutrients are necessary to 

meet the requirements of the CWA for the State of Florida. I am gratified to have learned 

that your Department supports EPA's detennination that numeric nutrient water quality 

criteria are necessary to meet the requirements of the CW A for the State of Florida. 

In considering whether new or revised standards are necessary, EPA recognizes 

that Florida has invested over $20 million in collecting and analyzing data on the 

relationship between nutrient levels and biological impacts for purposes of developing 

numeric nutrient criteria and that Florida has implemented some of the most progressive 

nutrient management strategies in the Nation. Moreover, for over a decade, the State has 

developed and demonstrated an impressive track record of commitment, innovation, and 

stakeholder outreach and collaboration in its efforts to manage nutrient-related pollution. 

Florida achieved this record not only as a result of its longstanding commitment to 

environmental protection but also because it recognized the widespread and very 

substantial nutrient pollution challenges it faces. 

Despite Florida's widely recognized efforts, substantial water quality degradation 

from nutrient over-enrichment remains a significant challenge in the State and one that is 

likely to worsen with continued population growth and environmental and land-use 

changes. EPA has determined that nwneric nutrient water quality criteria are necessary 

for the State of Florida to meet the CWA requirement to have criteria that protect 

applicable designated uses. Additionally, numeric nutrient criteria will create clear water 

quality goals and easily measurable quantitative baselines to support stronger 

collaboration and more effective partnerships with both point and nonpoint source 

dischargers of nutrient pollution. 

@ Printed on Recycled Paper 
2

Today’s determination affirms the wisdom of the substantial investments that 

Florida has made to date in nutrient data collection, analysis, and stakeholder 

involvement, and is fully consistent with the State’s commitment to a stronger nutrient 

control program through a greater emphasis on the development of numeric nutrient 

criteria. Today’s determination will support Florida in building upon its already strong 

record of water quality protection, result in criteria protective of applicable designated 

uses, and further expand and strengthen the numerous partnerships and collaborative 

projects Florida has led and supported to date. 

Statutory and Regulatory Background 

 Section 303(c) of the CWA requires States and authorized Tribes (hereafter, 

collectively referred to as “States”) to adopt water quality standards for waters of the 

United States within their applicable jurisdictions. Section 303(c)(2)(A) and EPA’s 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 131 require, among other provisions, that State 

water quality standards include the designated use or uses to be made of the waters and 

the criteria necessary to protect those uses. EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR § 131.11(a)(1) 

provide that States shall “adopt those water quality criteria that protect the designated 

use” and that such criteria “must be based on sound scientific rationale and must contain 

sufficient parameters or constituents to protect the designated use.” 

 

States are also required to review their water quality standards at least once every 

three years and, if appropriate, revise or adopt new standards (CWA section 303(c)(1)). 

States are required to submit these new or revised water quality standards to EPA for 

review and approval or disapproval (CWA section 303(c)(2)(A)). Finally, CWA section 

303(c)(4)(B) authorizes the Administrator to determine, even in the absence of a State 

submission, that a new or revised standard is needed to meet the CWA’s requirements. 

When deciding whether a CWA section 303(c)(4)(B) determination is warranted for a 

particular state, EPA considers each situation based on its particular facts and 

circumstances. The CWA does not specify particular information or factors that EPA 

must consider when deciding to exercise its discretion under section 303(c)(4)(B), and 

EPA thus considers each individual case on its merits. The authority to make a 

determination under CWA section 303(c)(4)(B) is discretionary and resides exclusively 

with the Administrator, unless delegated by the Administrator. For the purposes of 

today’s determination, the Administrator has delegated this authority to me, Benjamin H. 

Grumbles, EPA’s Assistant Administrator for Water. 

Florida’s Current Nutrient Program 

Florida has taken a number of steps to control nutrient pollution within the State. 

In addition to adopting a narrative nutrient criterion and implementing that criterion 

through NPDES permits, water body assessments, and TMDLs, Florida has established 

other programs and laws to control nutrient pollution in the State. Despite the State’s 

substantial efforts, however, EPA concludes that, based on the available data, 

information, and trends, Florida’s narrative nutrient criterion alone is not sufficient to 
3

protect applicable designated uses, and that numeric nutrient criteria are necessary to 

meet the requirements of the CWA.

With respect to addressing nutrient pollution, Florida: 

 

(1) has adopted a nutrient-specific narrative criterion in its water quality 

standards, in addition to detailed nutrient-specific assessment procedures in its 

Impaired Waters Rule (IWR), 

(2) encourages individual watershed management plans through the State’s Basin 

Management Action Plans (BMAPs), and 

(3) has enacted other State laws and programs regarding point and nonpoint 

source control such as the Grizzle-Figg Act of 1990. 

Florida’s Narrative Water Quality Criterion for Nutrients and the IWR 

Florida’s narrative water quality criterion for nutrients provides, in relevant part, 

that “in no case shall nutrient concentrations of a body of water be altered so as to cause 

an imbalance in natural populations of aquatic flora or fauna.”1

 Florida’s implementation 

of the criterion is based on site-specific detailed biological assessments and analyses 

together with site-by-site outreach and stakeholder engagement in the context of specific 

CWA-related actions, specifically National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) permits, total maximum daily loads (TMDLs), and assessment and listing 

decisions. 

When deriving NPDES permit limits, Florida initially conducts a site-specific 

analysis to determine whether a proposed discharge has the reasonable potential to cause 

or contribute to an exceedance of the narrative water quality criterion in the receiving 

water or any other affected water. This analysis first involves examining the proposed 

discharge to determine, in the case of nutrients, whether the discharge contains 

phosphorus or nitrogen and second, determining the ambient water quality of the 

receiving water and any other affected waters with regard to nutrient levels and biological 

impacts. In Florida’s case, the State then determines what levels of nutrients would 

“cause an imbalance in natural populations of aquatic flora or fauna” and translates those 

levels into numeric “targets” for the receiving water and any other affected waters. If 

Florida finds that there is reasonable potential, the State calculates permit limits stringent 

enough to ensure that such a discharge will not cause or contribute to an exceedance of 

the nutrient target levels (and therefore cause an “imbalance in natural populations of 

aquatic flora and fauna”) for the water body and any other affected water bodies. 

Accurately determining, on a water-by-water basis for thousands of waters, the 

levels of nutrients that would “cause an imbalance in natural populations of aquatic flora 

or fauna” is a difficult, lengthy, and data-intensive undertaking. This work involves 

performing detailed site-specific analyses of the receiving water and any other affected 

waters. If the State has not already completed this analysis for a particular water, it can be 

very difficult to accurately determine, in the context and timeframe of the NPDES 

 

1 See Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C. rule 62-302-530(47)(b)). 
4

permitting process, the levels of nutrients that would “cause an imbalance in natural 

populations of aquatic flora or fauna” and process NPDES permits in a timely manner. 

For example, in some cases, adequate “cause and effect” data may take several years to 

collect and therefore may not be available for a particular water at the time of permitting. 

 Numeric nutrient criteria in Florida would enhance the effectiveness of NPDES 

permits in protecting designated uses and enable Florida permit writers to derive effluent 

limitations without the resource intensive and burdensome process of conducting sitespecific analyses to determine the appropriate numeric target value. Therefore, numeric 

nutrient criteria would ensure that criteria are in place that will protect the designated 

uses of Florida’s waters as required by the CWA and EPA’s implementing regulations. 

 

Having numeric nutrient criteria in place would have a similar effect in 

development of TMDLs. When developing TMDLs, Florida translates, as it does when 

determining reasonable potential and deriving limits in the permitting context, the 

narrative nutrient criterion into a numeric target that the State determines is necessary to 

meet the narrative criterion and protect applicable designated uses. This process also 

involves a site-specific analysis to determine the nutrient levels that would “cause an 

imbalance in natural populations of aquatic flora or fauna” in a particular water. Each 

time a site-specific analysis is conducted to determine what the narrative criterion means 

for a particular water body in developing a TMDL, the State takes site-specific 

considerations into account and devises a method that works for the data and information 

available. EPA maintains that numeric criteria for nutrients would enable the State to, in 

a more timely manner, establish TMDLs that identify nutrient reductions necessary to 

protect the designated uses. These resource intensive efforts to interpret the State’s 

narrative criterion contribute to delays in implementing the criterion and therefore affect 

the State’s ability to provide the needed protections for applicable designated uses. 

In adopting the IWR, Florida took important steps toward improving 

implementation of its narrative nutrient criterion by establishing and publishing an 

assessment methodology to identify waters impaired for nutrients. This methodology 

includes numeric nutrient impairment “thresholds,” above which waters are automatically 

deemed impaired. For all other waters, the IWR specifies a process for conducting sitespecific assessments to enable Florida to determine on a site-specific basis whether there 

is an imbalance in flora or fauna, before a formal impairment or listing decision can be 

made for these waters. This site-specific process necessarily results in additional delays 

in identifying all waters impaired by nutrients; such a delay would not exist with numeric 

criteria. 

The thresholds of impairment used in the IWR are expressed as an increasing 

annual trend in trophic state index (TSI) for lakes and chlorophyll-a mean values for 

streams, estuaries, and open coastal waters. While these impairment thresholds and the 

site-specific assessment processes are useful for identifying impaired waters, significant 

delays in identifying all nutrient-impaired waters unavoidably result from the need to 

implement the narrative criterion on a site-specific basis for many waters. Numeric 

nutrient criteria are necessary to facilitate and expedite the identification of all nutrient 
5

impaired waters in Florida; thereby providing necessary protection for the State’s 

designated uses, as required by the CWA. 

Implementation of the State’s Basin Management Action Plans (BMAPs) and Other 

Florida Laws and Programs for Nutrient Control 

As mentioned above, Florida has other innovative and important State programs 

designed to control nutrient pollution, such as those adopted to limit nutrient pollution in 

geographically specific areas. Numeric nutrient criteria will provide more precise, predetermined targets that will facilitate more effective implementation of these programs 

and provide greater certainty as to the level of water quality necessary to protect the 

State’s designated uses. 

One of the State’s innovative programs is the development of Basin Management 

Action Plans (BMAPs) through which Florida assembles groups of stakeholders to 

develop plans in order to implement State-adopted and EPA-approved TMDLs. These 

BMAPs outline strategies to implement TMDLs once they are established and include an 

implementation schedule, a method for evaluating the effectiveness of the BMAP, and 

funding strategies, as well as ways to address any future increases in pollutant loadings. 

NPDES permits may also be revised as necessary in order to implement BMAPs, and 

permitted dischargers (including storm water and other nonagricultural dischargers) 

implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) “to the maximum extent practicable” to 

reduce pollution. Nonpoint source dischargers are also covered by BMAPs, and may 

demonstrate compliance with the Plan by implementing BMPs or conducting water 

quality monitoring.2

 An essential prerequisite for successful implementation of this 

critical watershed approach is that the State first must undertake the process of 

determining impairments and then developing a TMDL. Timely development of TMDLs, 

established at levels necessary to protect designated uses, will be facilitated by having 

numeric nutrient criteria in place so that the State can more effectively and expeditiously 

implement the State’s BMAP program. 

In addition to BMAPs, Florida has implemented additional innovative approaches 

to address nutrient pollution. A good example is the 1990 Grizzle-Figg Act, (see Florida 

Statutes 403.0863

), which requires limits of 5/5/3/1 mg/l (BOD5/SS/TN/TP4) for all 

domestic wastewater treatment facilities in the Tampa Bay area. In 1999, the Florida 

State Legislature established Advanced Wastewater Treatment (AWT) limits at 5/5/3/1 

mg/l (BOD5/SS/TN/TP) for wastewater facilities in the Florida Keys (see Laws of Florida 

Chapter 99-3955). Florida has also adopted other rules to limit nutrient pollution in 

geographically specific areas like the Indian River Lagoon System, the Everglades 

Protection Area, and Wekiva Springs. In these cases, Florida has either specifically 

limited nutrient pollution in the water body, from point and nonpoint source discharges, 

limited discharges altogether, or, in the case of the Everglades Protection Area, 

 

2 http://www.waterinstitute.ufl.edu/research/projects/downloads/p001-Ch7_SpringsNutrients.pdf 3

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0403/Sec086.H

TM 

4

 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD5), Suspended Solids (SS), Total Nitrogen (TN), and Total Phosphorus (TP) 5

 http://laws.flrules.org/files/Ch_1999-395.pdf 
6

constructed stormwater treatment areas that can remove nutrients from runoff. 

Implementation of these types of programs could be refined and enhanced if decision 

makers are aware of the numeric nutrient criteria that are necessary to protect designated 

uses. 

Magnitude of Nutrient Over-Enrichment in Florida

 Water quality degradation due to nutrient over-enrichment is a significant 

environmental issue in Florida. Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection has 

acknowledged and documented the magnitude of over-enrichment. According to 

Florida’s 2008 Integrated Report,6

 approximately 1,000 miles of rivers and streams, 

350,000 acres of lakes, and 900 square miles of estuaries are impaired for nutrients in the 

State. To put this into context, these values represent approximately 16% of the assessed 

river and stream miles, 36% of the assessed lake acres, and 25% of the assessed square 

miles of estuaries that Florida has listed as impaired under the IWR. The actual number 

of miles and acres of waters impaired for nutrients is likely higher, as many waters 

currently classified as “unassessed” may also be impaired. 

This conclusion is based upon a range of available information, including the vast 

amounts of monitoring data that exist on nutrient-related parameters in Florida waters. 

With almost 800,000 nutrient-related data points in STORET (including nitrogen, 

phosphorus, chlorophyll-a, and turbidity), Florida has substantially more data points than 

any other State or Territory to clearly characterize the magnitude of its nutrient 

challenges.

 

Monitoring Data and Impairments Indicate that Nutrient Problems Persist in Florida 

An analysis of United States Geological Survey (USGS) monitoring data for 

nutrients in certain locations in Florida shows that levels of nutrient pollution have not 

significantly improved since 1980 despite strong efforts to control nutrient pollution. 

Concentrations of Total Phosphorus (TP) and Total Nitrogen (TN) have remained 

relatively constant at an average of 0.15mg/L and 1.4mg/L, respectively.7

 Additionally, 

Florida’s recurrent harmful algal blooms continue to pose threats to public drinking water 

supplies and recreational sites. Harmful algal blooms that occur inland and near shore 

are typically caused by excess nutrients.8

 

Nutrient pollution in Florida has a predictable and widespread impact. The extent 

of this impact has been well documented and tracked for many years. According to 

Florida’s most recent EPA-approved CWA section 303(d) list from 2002,9 of the 823 

waters listed as impaired in Florida, over 60% (over 550 waters) are impaired for 

nutrients. 

 

6 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2008_Integrated_Report.pdf 7

 USEPA. 2000. STORET Legacy Data Center. http://www.epa.gov/storet/dbtop.html 8

 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/docs/2006_Integrated_Report.pdf 9

 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/tmdl/adopted_gp1.htm 
7

Florida’s Environment is Unique and Presents Special Challenges 

Florida’s natural physical factors, including flat topography and numerous 

wetlands, a warm and humid climate, nutrient-rich soils, hydrology, and erosion caused 

by tropical storms and hurricanes make controlling nutrient pollution particularly 

challenging because these conditions are especially conducive to nutrient overenrichment. In addition, human caused impacts such as hydrological modifications (i.e., 

canals), intensive agricultural production, population growth and associated urban and 

suburban development have had a broad and widespread effect. Effectively addressing 

current nutrient impairments in the State represents a significant challenge and is 

compounded by a projected population growth of almost 80 percent in Florida from 2000 

to 2030.10 Further development and urbanization will likely result in increased nutrient 

runoff and pressure to utilize remaining agricultural lands more intensively.11 

Within the continental United States, Florida possesses unique and nationally 

valued aquatic ecosystems, including shallow coral reefs, freshwater and salt marshes, 

swamps, and mangroves.12 These aquatic ecosystems are particularly sensitive to the 

effects of excessive nutrients which threaten the State’s significant biological diversity. 

The number of species in Florida (3,500 native vascular plants and 1,500 vertebrates) is 

higher than in all but three other states. Further, Florida also has many endemic species 

(410 invertebrates, 258 plants and vertebrates) that are not found anywhere else on 

Earth.13 Florida has many water-filled caves and sinkholes that serve as hotspots of 

biological diversity and provide homes to many species of aquatic life, some unique to 

particular Florida locations.14 Additionally, Florida is the only state in the continental 

United States to have extensive shallow coral reef formations near its coasts (i.e. within 

five miles).15 A recent study initiated by the United Nations Food and Agriculture 

Organization found that the single richest concentration of marine life in the Atlantic 

Ocean lies some 10 miles off the tip of Southern Florida within the Florida Straits.16 This 

biological diversity relies on sufficient quality habitat and other natural resources, 

including clear, transparent waters low in phosphate and nitrogen nutrients.13, 14 

Especially in the case of coral reefs and flora and fauna in natural spring environments, 

clear water with plenty of light and oxygen available is critical to the protection of the 

species that inhabit these locations. Nutrient enriched water can have reduced 

transparency and low dissolved oxygen levels that are not protective of the natural 

biology in Florida. Effectively managing nutrient levels in Florida’s lakes, flowing 

waters, estuaries and coastal waters through numeric nutrient criteria is important to 

maintaining the ecosystems in these waters and important ecosystems that are near shore. 

The combined impacts of urban and agricultural activities along with Florida’s 

physical features and important and unique aquatic ecosystems make it clear that the 

 

10 http://www.census.gov/population/projections/SummaryTabA1.pdf 11 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2008_Integrated_Report.pdf 12 http://sofia.usgs.gov/publications/ofr/2005-1021/ 

13 http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/CR004 

14 http://www.floridasprings.org/anatomy/life/ 

15 http://www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal/habitats/coral.htm 16 http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2003/D/20031748.html 
8

current use of the narrative nutrient criterion alone is insufficient to ensure protection of 

applicable designated uses. Numeric nutrient criteria will strengthen the foundation for 

identifying impaired waters, preparing TMDLs and developing NPDES permits, as well 

as support the State’s ability to effectively partner to with point and nonpoint sources to 

control nutrients, thus providing the necessary protection for the State’s designated uses. 

Determination

Nutrient pollution in Florida remains a significant and growing challenge. 

Recognizing this, Florida has invested tens of millions of dollars in the collection of data 

to establish the cause and effect relationship between nutrients and biological conditions 

in order to be well positioned to establish what the State, itself, believes are much needed 

numeric nutrient water quality criteria. As discussed above, despite Florida’s 

considerable data collection and analysis efforts and outreach with stakeholders to date, 

the State is relying on its narrative nutrient criterion, the application of which is resource 

intensive, time consuming, and less than effective in implementing programs to protect 

water quality and prevent impairments of designated uses due to nutrient overenrichment. The very substantial and widespread nature of nutrient challenges faced by 

the State and the barriers to effective implementation associated with narrative nutrient 

criteria in Florida, such as the need for numerous, highly technical site-specific analyses 

prior to the development of water quality-based effluent limitations in NPDES permits 

and TMDLs, strongly support the need in this case for numeric nutrient criteria to 

effectively protect designated uses and prevent impairments. In many circumstances, 

narrative criteria can be an effective tool for protecting designated uses, particularly when 

the scope and nature of the environmental problem is easily and clearly defined and 

derivation of appropriate control measures can be effectively and expeditiously 

accomplished (e.g., toxic pollutants and bioassessments). However, achieving faster and 

more effective progress in water quality protection with regard to nutrients is critical in 

Florida due to the significant and far-reaching impacts of nutrient pollution on the unique 

and highly valued aquatic ecosystems that exist in the State. In this case, numeric 

nutrient criteria are needed to protect Florida’s designated uses. 

While Florida has made headway on this issue by developing a methodology in 

the IWR that allows the State to automatically list certain waters with higher levels of 

nutrients, Florida still must conduct case-by-case assessments to determine if an 

imbalance in flora or fauna exists for waters below the IWR impairment thresholds. The 

existence of numeric nutrient criteria will facilitate Florida’s efforts to identify all 

nutrient-impaired waters. Quantifiable nutrient criteria also will facilitate Florida’s 

efforts to establish TMDLs and appropriate WQBELs in NPDES permits as necessary to 

adequately protect applicable designated uses. It will also create a strong and clear 

baseline against which to measure progress and upon which to support stronger and more 

effective point and nonpoint partnerships. 

For all of these reasons, EPA hereby determines under CWA section 303(c)(4)(B) 

that new or revised water quality standards for nutrients in the form of numeric nutrient 

criteria are necessary in the State of Florida to meet the requirements of the CWA (CWA 
9

section 303(c)(2)(A) and 40 CFR § 131.11(a)(1)). Numeric nutrient criteria will enable 

the State to implement nutrient controls more broadly, effectively, and expeditiously to 

protect applicable designated uses and meet the challenge of the extent and severity of 

nutrient pollution in Florida. EPA notes that it has not previously made a determination 

on whether numeric nutrient criteria are necessary in Florida, and clarifies this point so as 

to resolve any questions that may previously have arisen on this issue. 

EPA’s Expectation Regarding a Remedy to this Situation

 Section 303(c)(4) of the CWA requires that the Administrator promptly prepare 

and publish proposed regulations setting forth a new or revised water quality standard 

when the Administrator makes a determination. EPA will move forward to develop 

federal proposed regulations setting forth numeric nutrient criteria for Florida and expects 

that these criteria will be developed in a manner that ensures that there will be no 

imbalance in natural populations of flora and fauna in Florida waters. EPA will work 

collaboratively with Florida’s technical experts to generate data and conduct analyses. 

EPA understands that Florida has an extensive stakeholder outreach and comment 

process underway and has already committed to share with EPA the public comments 

and stakeholder input received by Florida in this process, so that EPA may consider this 

input as it develops the federal proposal. EPA intends that the criteria will be protective 

of applicable designated uses, based on sound scientific rationale, responsive to the 

specific needs of Florida’s waters, and sufficient to meet the needs of the State’s 

complete suite of water quality management tools. 

 

 In terms of schedule, the State of Florida has made significant progress in 

collecting data needed to adopt nutrient criteria for its lakes and flowing waters. Florida 

expects to complete data collection, laboratory analysis of the data, and compilation of 

the data by March 2009. EPA anticipates that six months will then be required to 

complete detailed analyses of the data to identify the relationships between nutrient 

causal variables, e.g. nitrogen and phosphorus, and key response variables, e.g., 

chlorophyll a, Secchi depth, periphyton, and dissolved oxygen (DO). This analysis will 

be an important step in developing the numeric nutrient criteria. EPA expects that an 

additional four months will be needed to organize, document and assemble the complex 

technical analysis and administrative record to support and prepare the preamble and 

federal proposal for publication. 

For estuaries and coastal waters, Florida is working to compile and assess the 

adequacy of the data available to develop nutrient criteria. EPA has reviewed the State’s 

progress and assessed the remaining work associated with this analysis and estimates that 

12-24 months will be necessary to develop these criteria values, reflecting the broader 

technical uncertainties and additional evaluation that will be necessary to determine cause 

and effect relationships between nutrients and biological response parameters in these 

waters. Additionally, there is a possibility that additional data collection may be needed 

should the analyses yield inconclusive results. 
In conclusion, EPA expects to propose numeric nutrient criteria for lakes and 

flowing waters within 12 months, and for estuari es and coastal waters, within 24 months. 

EPA expects to work closely and collaboratively with the State of Florida to ensure that 

these numeric nutrient criteria are protective of applicable designated uses, based on 

sound scientific rationale, responsive to the specific needs of Florida's waters, responsive 

to available public and stakeholder input, and sufficient to meet the needs of the State's 

complete suite of water quality management tools. As always, in the event that Florida 

adopts and EPA approves new or revised water quality standards that sufficiently address 

this determination before EPA promulgates federal water quality standards, EPA would 

no longer be obligated to promulgate federal water quality standards. 

in ~4~ 1j amin I-I. Grumbles 

Assistant Administrator 

cc: Mr. Jimmy Palmer, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 4 

Mr. James D. Giattina, Director, Water Management Division, EPA Region 4 

10