Re: FPL Port Everglades Energy Center Audra Livergood to: Andrew Parks 11/09/2012 01:24 PM Dear Andrew, I agree with their "likely to adversely affect" determinations for loggerhead, green, and hawksbill sea turtles. I believe they were too broad in their "no effect" determinations for some species under our purview; however, it would be premature for me to make my determinations at this time since our biological opinion will serve as NMFS' official effect determinations for listed species under our purview. I will make a note in the record and in our biological opinion that EPA concurs with the effect determinations that were made in the BA. This consultation is a bit unorthodox. Technically, it is the Action Agency who is supposed to make the initial effect deteminations, and NMFS either concurs (or not) with those determinations. Best regards, Audra

On Fri, N ov 9, 2012 at 12:41 PM, < Parks.Andrew@epamail.epa.gov > wrote:

OK, as I said I have no reason not to concur with the BA determinations, as they seem to be straight forward. However, we are really relying upon you and your specialized experience to advise us on what might be cause for not agreeing with the determinations, if anything. If you think the determinations are adequate, I believe we would agree.
Andrew B. Parks, P.E. Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 Phone: 404-562-8122 Fax: 404-562-9019
Audra Livergood ---11/09/2012 11:00:04 AM---Hi Andrew, This is a formal consultation because take is occurring at the plant,

From: Audra Livergood < audra.livergood@noaa.gov > To: Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US@EPADate: 11/09/2012 11:00 AM Subject: Re: FPL Port Everglades Energy Center

Hi Andrew, This is a formal consultation because take is occurring at the plant, regardless of whether the turtles are previously injured or not prior to entering the intake wells. They are still getting entrained in the wells. Some are able to leave the wells on their own, others are not. The point is FPL does not have authorization for the take that is occurring and will continue to occur at the plant, which is why we need to write a biological opinion with an Incidental Take Statement (ITS). Once they have our biological opinion, they will be authorized to take turtles so long as they are in compliance with the ITS, Reasonable and Prudent Measures, and Terms & Conditions within the biological opinion. If any of this is unclear, we can discuss further. FPL acknowledged in their BA that the p roposed action "may affect and is likely to adversely affect" loggerhead, green, and hawksbill sea turtles. Because the ESA Section 7 consultation is between NMFS and EPA, we need to know if EPA concurs with FPL's determinations in the BA. We also need to know if EPA concurs with FPL's determination that the proposed action "will not jeopardize the continued existence" of green, loggerhead, and hawksbill sea turtles. In addition, we need a statement from the EPA requesting formal consultation with NMFS. Thank you, Audra On Fri, N ov 9, 2012 at 9:12 AM, < Parks.Andrew@epamail.epa.gov > wrote: Hey Audra, assuming there is an agreed determination of no adverse impact, why would there need to be a formal consultation with NMFS?
Andrew B. Parks, P.E. Environmental Engineer U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IV 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 Phone: 404-562-8122 Fax: 404-562-9019Audra Livergood ---11/08/2012 02:58:51 PM---Dear Andrew, In the attached August 31, 2012 cover letter to FPL's Biological Assessment
From: Audra Livergood < audra.livergood@noaa.gov > To: Andrew Parks/R4/USEPA/US@EPA Date: 11/08/2012 02:58 PM Subject: FPL Port Everglades Energy Center

Dear Andrew, In the attached August 31, 2012 cover letter to FPL's Biological Assessment (BA) and in their BA, FPL determined that the proposed action would have no effect on 13 species under NMFS' p urview (see page 2 of attached letter). Furthermore, FPL determined that the proposed action "may affect, and is likely to adversely affect" green, loggerhead, and hawksbill sea turtles. Because the ESA Section 7 consultation is between NMFS and EPA, we need to know if EPA concurs with FPL's determinations. We also need to know if EPA concurs with FPL's determination that the proposed action "will not jeopardize the continued existence" of green, loggerhead, and hawksbill sea turtles. In addition, we need a statement from the EPA requesting formal consultation with N MFS. You may provide your response in an e-mail. Thank you, Audra

-- 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 "PEEC

_ Biological Assessment

_ 2012

_ Rev. 0. p df" 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

-- 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