Re: FPL Port Everglades Energy Center Audra Livergood to: Andy Flajole 08/30/2012 10:27 AM

Cc: Andrew Parks, "Cathy.Tortorici@noaa.gov", "David.Bernhardt@noaa.gov", "Gless, Jodie", "Sobol, Justin", "Raffenberg, Matthew", "Foster, Stacy" Dear Andy,
Andrew Parks and I had a good conversation the other day about the section 7 p rocess. As a follow up to that conversation, Andrew and I thought it would be helpful if I outlined some important considerations for FPL. As we have discussed previously, when NMFS receives a request for consultation that may affect and is likely to adversely affect listed species under our p urview, it our responsibility to discuss alternatives with the Action Agency that, if implemented, would result in a project that is not likely to adversely affect (i.e., no take) listed species. In these cases, we can issue a concurrence letter and the process is simplified and usually shorter. This outcome also behooves our species, so it is the preferred outcome in our view.
The worst-case scenario is that we cannot make a "not likely to adversely affect" determination, and we would have to consult formally. A formal consultation requires us to write a biological opinion (BO) that includes the following: Incidental Take Statement (ITS), Reasonable and Prudent Measures (RPMs), and Terms & Conditions (T&Cs). The ITS is an estimate of the type and amount of take that we anticipate from the Action Agency carrying out the proposed action as described in the BO. The RPMs and the T&Cs are non-discretionary, meaning that they are required. The Action Agency is responsible for implementing the RPMs and T&Cs in the BO. As Andrew and I discussed, the RPMs and T&Cs in the BO would be incorporated into the GHG license. N ote that the Action Agency in this case is the EPA.

We are hopeful that FPL will consider modifications to the proposed action that would lead to a "not likely to adversely affect" outcome. We are open to considering any proposed changes that FPL puts on the table, and we will very likely be making some recommendations after we have an opportunity to review the BA. Again, I want to emphasize that a "not likely to adversely affect" determination by NMFS is the preferred outcome for the reasons stated above.
If you have any questions, p lease let me know.
Thank you, Audra

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Andrew Parks < Parks.Andrew@epamail.epa.gov > wrote: Based upon the information and our discussions to date, this schedule seems to be a reasonable estimate.
Andrew B. Parks, P.E.Environmental Enginee r U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303

Phone: 404-562-8122 Fax: 404-562-9019

Audra Livergood ---08/28/2012 11:29:26 AM---Dear Andy, Please see attached minor modifications to FPL's suggested schedule.

From: Audra Livergood < audra.livergood@noaa.gov > To: "Flajole, Andy" < Andy.Flajole@fpl.com > Cc: " David.Bernhardt@noaa.gov " < David.Bernhardt@noaa.gov >, " Cathy.Tortorici@noaa.gov " < Cathy.Tortorici@noaa.gov >, "Sobol, Justin" < Justin.Sobol@fpl.com >, "Raffenberg, Matthew" < Matthew.Raffenberg@fpl.com >, "Foster, Stacy" < Stacy.Foster@fpl.com >, "Gless, Jodie" < Jodie.Gless@fpl.com >, Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 08/28/2012 11:29 AM Subject: Re: FPL Port Everglades Energy Center

Dear Andy,
Please see attached minor modifications to FPL's suggested schedule. Please let me know if FPL and EPA concur with the proposed changes.
Thanks, Audra
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Flajole, Andy < Andy.Flajole@fpl.com > wrote: Hi David, Cathy, and Audra,

Thank you again for taking time to meet with us yesterday regarding the Port Everglades Energy Center (PEEC) Project. As discussed, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region IV has initiated a consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service ( N MFS) associated with the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) p ermi t application submitted by Florida Power & Light Company (FPL). FPL has been designated by EPA as the non-federal representative and thus is preparing a Biological Assessment (BA). The additional insight you provided regarding the BA will help to ensure we submit a more complete BA.

FPL understands that NMFS staff will be discussing the Section 7 consultation processas it relates to the PEEC project with EPA in the near future. FPL would appreciate the opportunity to participate in future meetings during the consultation process between EPA and NMFS. In addition, to help facilitate the inter-agency collaboration, FPL p roposes the following conceptual schedule of next steps for your consideration:

8/31/12 FPL provides EPA the BA for submittal to NMFS for review
9/14/12 Meeting with EPA, N MFS, and FPL to discuss the BA

10/1/12 N MFS sends EPA a Request for Additional Information (RAI)
10/8/12 Meeting with EPA, N MFS, and FPL to discuss the RAI
10/29/12 FPL provides EPA the RAI Response for submittal to NMFS for review
11/12/12 Meeting with EPA, N MFS, and FPL to discuss the RAI Response

11/22/12 N MFS determines the BA is “complete”; if necessary EPA enters formal consultation; statutory clocks start for NMFS and EPA
4/10/13 Statutory timeline date for NMFS to issue a Biological Opinion (if necessary)
5/1/13 Potential target date for EPA to issue the final GHG permit to FPL
11/21/13 Statutory deadline date for EPA to issue the GHG permit for PEEC (assumes BA “complete” 11/22/12)

As we discussed yesterday, maintaining the schedule is critical to the success of this p roject. FPL is committed to working with the EPA and NMFS to expedite the necessary reviews and ultimately the issuance of the GHG permit. The approximately year-long dismantlement of the existing facility is scheduled to begin April 1, 2013, with PEEC expected to be operational in June 2016. The proposed schedule above would minimize schedule risk to the PEEC Project by providing more certainty to FPL that dismantlement and construction activities can proceed on time, thus ensuring FPL can meet its obligation to provide reliable, cost-effective new power generation.

FPL looks forward to hearing your thoughts on the draft schedule. Again, it was nice meeting you yesterday.Thank You,



## Andy Flajole

Environmental Services
(561) 691-2766

-- Audra Livergood Marine Resource Manager N OAA National Marine Fisheries Service SERO Protected Resources Division Fort Lauderdale Field Office 299 East Broward Blvd., Suite 328 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Office (954) 356-7100 Fax (954) 356-7108

For if one link in nature's chain might be lost, another might be lost, until the whole of things will vanish by piecemeal. Thomas Jefferson
[attachment " N MFS suggested consultation schedule.docx" deleted by Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US]-- Audra Livergood Marine Resource Manager N OAA National Marine Fisheries Service SERO Protected Resources Division Fort Lauderdale Field Office 299 East Broward Blvd., Suite 328 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Office (954) 356-7100 Fax (954) 356-7108

For if one link in nature's chain might be lost, another might be lost, until the whole of things will vanish by piecemeal. Thomas Jefferson