Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596-2838
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2012-07-02T04:00Z

EPA Responses to Public Comments
"Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters"

This document is a compilation of the public comments received by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from its proposed rule entitled, "Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters", which was published in the Federal Register (Volume 77, Number 96) on May 17, 2012.  The 30-day public comment period ended on June 18, 2012.  The EPA's responses have been inserted directly into each comment letter.  The original comments letters and any supporting documentation submitted by the public can be found in the official docket for this rulemaking at http://www.regulations.gov/ under Docket ID EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596.

 
MN Crop Production Retailers
William E Bond

         [Comment submitted electronically to docket on May 17, 2012]

MCPR suports [sic] the delay to allow resolution of an administrative challenge filed with the Florida Department of Administrative Hearings. EPA said it expects an administrative judge to issue a ruling in May. The extension also would allow time for Florida to notify EPA, if the state prevails, that numeric nutrient criteria consistent with the Clean Water Act have been officially adopted as revisions to the state's water quality standards. State Government are a much preferrable [sic] level of government to monitor and address clean water issues.

	EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule. As stated in previous rulemakings on extension of EPA's inland waters rule effective date, EPA prefers that the State of Florida implement its own numeric nutrient water quality criteria and is prepared to withdraw federal rules for any waters that become covered by State law that meets the requirements of the Clean Water Act.

---------------------------------------------

                                                       2980 Old Chemstrand Road
                                                           Cantonment, FL 32533
                                              ph: 850 9693380 fax: 850 969-6675
                                                                               
May 25, 2012
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0598
Water Docket
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington DC 20460

Submitted via email to ow  - docket@epa.gov

RE: 	PROPOSED EXTENSION OF EFFECTIVE DATES FOR EPA
	NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA RULES

To Whom It May Concern:

On May 18, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed
to extend the effective date of its final rule setting numeric water quality
criteria for inland waters in Florida from July 6, 2012 until October 6, 2012.
77  Fed. Reg. 29271 (May 17, 2012). The notice also solicited comments on
the prospect of an additional extension out to July 6, 2013 or further.

On behalf of Emerald Coast Utilities Authority (ECUA), I appreciate the
opportunity to submit these comments strongly supporting EPA's proposed
effective date extension. Of the two alternative dates provided, ECUA
supports the extension to July 6, 2013. ECUA would also support any
further delay deemed necessary to allow the full consideration of the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP's) alternative nutrient
criteria rules and withdraw of all federal numeric nutrient criteria
rulemakings in Florida.

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  
      

ECUA believes that FDEP's comprehensive nutrient criteria rules should
render moot EPA's nutrient rules as well as EPA's planned rulemakings for
canals, estuaries, and coastal waters. The state rules are stringent and will
lead to significant environmental improvements. Importantly, the state
rules also take into account the diversity of Florida's water systems and will
work in concert with existing state nutrient reduction programs. The state
rules thereby will avoid the unintended negative environmental and
economic consequences associated with EPA's nutrient rules.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

Elizabeth S. Campbell 	Lois Benson 	Ehrin McCorvey 	Dale Perkins 	Lany Walker
District One 		District Two 	Distrid Three 		District Four	District Five

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Re: Proposed Extension of Effective Dates for EPA
Numeric Nutrient Criteria Rules
May 25, 2012

Page 2

In addition to delaying the effective date of its final criteria, ECUA also
recommends that EPA suspend its planned nutrient criteria rulemakings for
Florida's estuaries, coastal waters, and canals. FDEP has promulgated a
holistic numeric nutrient criteria program that obviates the perceived need
for additional federal rulemakings. The state rules should be evaluated
without the complication of any additional and unneeded federal
rulemakings.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

ECUA appreciates the opportunity to submit these comments.

Sincerely,

Donald C. Palmer, P.E.
Water Reclamation Director

pc: Stephen E. Sorrell, PE/MPA, Executive Director, ECUA
Edward T. McMath, Deputy Executive Director-Utility Operations, ECUA

DCP:sm

3c:\word\l2admin\epa nnc rules extension
                                                                               
---------------------------------------------------------

[LOGO]

Water Docket
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460

Attention:	 Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 

Subject: 	Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's 				Lakes and Flowing Waters. 
	
	We are in receipt of the attached EPA notice in the Federal Register, Volume 77, dated May 17, 2012, regarding the above referenced topic. We want to go on record as supporting the EPA's proposal to delay the effective date of the implementation of the EPA NNC rule, as it would be very counterproductive to proceed with the implementation of the EPA NNC rule, only to revert to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) NNC rule if it is approved by the EPA. We believe the extension to July 6, 2013 would make the most sense and would give all parties the necessary time to finalize any modification that may occur if the FDEP's version of the rule is adopted. 

            EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule to January 6, 2013, but not to July 6, 2013 because EPA has not yet taken action on FDEP's NNC rule at this time, which if EPA had taken and approved the rule, would have justified an extension until July 6, 2013.

	As a little background, the Clay County Utility Authority, through its attorney Mr. Fred Aschauer of the firm of Sundstrom, Friedman and Fumero, LLP (then Rose, Sundstrom and Bentley, LLP), filed substantial comments on the original draft EPA NNC rule. While the EPA chose not to implement any of our suggested changes to the EPA NNC rule, many of our comments and concerns are addressed by the FDEP version of the proposed NNC rules.
 
	As you know, part of the outcry against the EPA rule was the anticipated cost to comply with same. Indeed, based upon many expert's opinions, compliance with the EPA NNC rule would require treatment beyond the current AWT technology, the technology which we have spent millions of dollars investing in and installing at many of our various wastewater treatment facilities. The EPA has explained, however, that the EPA's rule offers several exceptions and other means to recognize special circumstances that may not require treatment to the levels defined by the criteria promulgated in the EPA rule; while these exceptions may be applied for under the EPA rule, the cost of background data required of the applicant for such an exception would be outrageous, with no assurance to the applicant that the relief would be granted in the end. This unreasonable approach, potentially requiring needless expenditure of funds (both private and public), is part of what has caused the tremendous public objection to the EPA's proposed NNC rule.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.
 
	We respectfully request that you allow the Florida Rule process to run its course through a final decision by EPA. Although the Florida DEP rule may still be a very expensive hit to the economy of the State of Florida, it does offer some flexibility and a reasonable approach to the implementation of the criteria (e.g. requiring the confirmation of nutrient impact before we are required to cure a problem that may not exist). 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective 	date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

Respectfully Submitted
CLAY COUNTY UTILTIY AUTHORITY

[Signature]

Ray O Avery,
Executive Director

               [Copy of proposed rule attached without comment]

--------------------------------------------------------------

[Logo]

Raymond E. Hanson, P.E., Director
9150 Curry Ford Road
Orlando. Florida 32825-7600
Telephone: 407-254-9809
Fax: 407-254-9899
Email: Ray.Hanson@octl.net

May 29, 2012

Attention: Docket ID No EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0598
Water Docket
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460

Submitted via email to ow-docket@epa.qov

Re: Proposed Extension of Effective Dates for EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Rules

To Whom It May Concern:

On May 18, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to extend the effective date of its final rule setting numeric water quality criteria for inland waters in Florida from July 6, 2012 until October 6, 2012.  77 Fed. Reg. 29271 (May 17, 2012). The notice also solicited comments on the prospect of an additional extension out to July 6, 2013 or further.

On behalf of Orange County Utilities, I appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments strongly supporting EPA's proposed effective date extension. Of the two alternative dates provided, Orange County Utilities supports the extension to July 6, 2013. Orange County Utilities would also support any further delay deemed necessary to allow the full consideration of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP's) alternative nutrient criteria rules and withdraw of all federal numeric nutrient criteria rulemakings in Florida.

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

Orange County Utilities believes that FDEP's comprehensive nutrient criteria rules should render moot EPA's nutrient rules as well as EPA's planned rulemakings for canals, estuaries, and coastal waters. The state rules also take into account the diversity of Florida's water systems and will work in concert with existing state nutrient reduction programs. The state rules thereby will avoid the unintended negative environmental and economic consequences associated with EPA's nutrient rules.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.
In addition to delaying the effective date of its final criteria, Orange County Utilities also recommends that EPA suspend its planned nutrient criteria rulemakings for Florida's estuaries, coastal waters, and canals. FDEP has promulgated a holistic numeric nutrient criteria program that obviates the perceived need for additional federal rulemakings. The state rules should be evaluated without the complication of any additional and unneeded federal rulemakings.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

Orange County Utilities appreciates the opportunity to submit these comments.

Sincerely, 

[Signature]

Raymond E. Hanson, P.E.

----------------------------------------------------------
[LOGO]
                             FWEA Utility Council
                 Protecting Florida's Clean Water Environment
         P.O. Box 10755. Tallahassee, Florida 32302 .. (850) 425-3428
                                www.fweauc.org

Attention: Docket ID No, EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0598
Water Docket 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Mail Code: 2822T 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington DC 20460 

Submitted via email to ow-docket@epa.gov. 

	Re: 	Proposed Extension of Effective Dates/or EPA Numeric Nutrient 			CriteriaRules 

To Whom It May Concern: 

The FWEA Utility Council is Florida's statewide umbrella organization of community utilities that own and operate domestic wastewater treatment, disposal, reuse, and recycling facilities. Protecting the environment is our members' core business.  

On May 18, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to extend the effective date of its final rule setting numeric water quality criteria for inland waters in Florida from July 6, 2012 until October 6, 2012. 77 Fed. Reg. 29271 (May 17, 2012). The notice also solicited comments on the prospect of an additional extension out to July 6, 2013 or further. For the reasons provided below, the FWEA Utility Council requests that EPA extend the effective date of its criteria till July 6, 2013, or even further, if more time is needed to withdraw its federal nutrient rules. 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

The FWEA Utility Council has been supportive of the Florida Department of  Environmental Protection's'(FDEP's) alternative nutrient rules. The state rules include important-implementing provisions such as biological verification steps and clearer alternative criterion methodologies to help ensure that public investments are well-targeted and result in meaningful environmental benefits. The state nutrient rules will lead to environmentally beneficial reductions in nutrient discharges from both point sources and non-point sources. The state rules also take into account the diversity of Florida's water systems and will work in concert with existing state nutrient reduction programs, including the extensively implemented and successful nutrient total maximum daily load program.  EPA's approval of the state rules will thereby avoid the unintended negative environmental and economic consequences associated with EPA's nutrient rules. 

      This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

We understand that EPA expects to be evaluating that alternative rule in the near future, and that if approved, EPA would formally withdraw its federal nutrient rule for Florida. Accordingly, the Utility Council appreciates EPA's efforts to avoid the regulatory dysfunction that would occur by having newly promulgated federal nutrient rules take effect at the same time EPA is expecting to consider FDEP's alternative state rules. 

In addition to delaying the effective date of its final criteria, the FWEA Utility Council also recommends that EPA suspend its planned nutrient criteria rulemakings for Florida's estuaries, coastal waters, and canals. FDEP has promulgated a holistic numeric nutrient criteria program that obviates the need for any additional federal rulemakings. The state rules should thus be evaluated without the complication of any additional and unneeded federal rulemakings. 

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

The FWEA Utility Council appreciates the opportunity to submit these comments. 

Sincerely, 

[SIGNATURE]

David Richardson, P.E. 
President, FWEA Utility Council 

----------------------------------------

[Logo]

									June 14, 2012 

The Honorable Lisa Jackson 
Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20460
 
	RE: 	Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of 			Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters; Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-			0596; FRL-9670-7 

Dear Administrator Jackson: 

The National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) is pleased to provide the following comments on the proposed rule entitled Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters (EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596; FRL-9670-7; published in the Federal Register Thursday May 17, 2012). Initiated in 1898, NCBA is the marketing organization and trade association for America's beef cattle producers. With offices in Denver and Washington, DC, NCBA is a consumer-focused, producer-directed organization representing tens of thousands of America's cattlemen and women, including those located in the state of Florida. Our members are proud of their tradition as stewards and conservators of America's land, and good neighbors to their communities. Florida cattlemen utilize the state's rivers, lakes, streams and springs to raise cattle to feed a growing world. These producers have a significant interest in this rulemaking because the proposed rule will directly affect their legal obligations regarding the waters that are essential to their operations. 

NCBA supports the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed rule to extend the implementation deadline for the federal nutrient criteria for Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters. The agency's proposal is necessary in light of multiple litigation actions and state rule development. Without the delay in the implementation date, it will be impossible for cattle producers in the state to adequately understand and implement the final federal criteria following the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida in Tallahassee's order invalidating the federal criteria for Florida streams and downstream protection values. This action by the federal district court alone has left cattlemen with large uncertainties about their obligations under the law. The short amount of time remaining before the implementation deadline is not enough to address these uncertainties. 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

Additionally, with litigation over the state-developed nutrient criteria rule just completed and slated to proceed through EPA's approval process, not extending the deadline to allow for completion of that process could leave cattle producers in Florida with a misunderstanding of what rules apply to them. The approval/disapproval process at the federal level can take many months. The state-developed rule has been upheld through the state's administrative appeals process and is near finalization, but to avoid a confusing and inconsistent process, a delay in the implementation date for the federal criteria is warranted. 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

NCBA further supports EPA's proposal to move the implementation deadline from July 6, 2012 to July 6, 2013, instead of the short extension of Oct. 6, 2012. Considering the length of time that went into the development of the streams criteria that was struck down by the federal district court, a three month delay is an inadequate amount of time for the agency to revise their streams criteria to be scientifically defensible. While NCBA believes even a delay of one year is an inadequate amount of time to revise the federal criteria, that length of time would allow for conclusion of the approval/disapproval process of the state-developed rule and, in the case of approval, would allow for a withdrawal of the federal criteria. A simple three month delay, however, is not sufficient for this process to reach completion. 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

NCBA urges EPA to quickly adopt a delay to the implementation date of the federal criteria for Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters and further encourages EPA to set that date for July 6, 2013 to protect Florida ranchers from being caught in the middle of a confusing and unclear process. 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

Sincerely, 

[Signature]

Ashley Lyon McDonald 
Deputy Environmental Counsel 
National Cattlemen's Beef Association 
1301 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 300 
Washington, D.C. 20004 

Government Affairs :: 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue NW :: Suite 300 :: Washington, DC 20004 :: 202.347.0228 :: www.BeefUSA.org

-----------------------------------------------------------
									
				Georgia-Pacific LLC
                                                               Traylor Champion
                                          Vice President, Environmental Affairs
                                                        133 Peachtree Street NE
                                                         Atlanta, Georgia 30303
                                                             btchampi@gapac.com
                                                                 (404) 652-4776

June 15, 2012

Submitted to Regulations.gov

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC)
Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20460

Subject: 	Comments on Proposed Rule to Extend the Effective Date for the 			Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing 		Waters Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596

To those concerned:

Georgia-Pacific LLC (GP) appreciates the opportunity to submit the following comments on the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposal to extend the effective date for the Water Quality Standards (WQS) for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters (40 CFR 131, Subpart D, Section 131.43).

Georgia-Pacific is one of the world's leading manufacturers of tissue, pulp, paper, packaging, consumer products, building products and related chemicals. GP has over 300 manufacturing facilities across North America, South America and Europe, ranging from large facilities, such as pulp, paper and tissue operations; to moderately sized facilities, such as gypsum plants, chemical plants, and building products complexes; to small facilities, such as Dixie(R) product plants and box plants. Georgia-Pacific has several operating facilities in Florida including a major pulp and paper mill, woodyards, wood products plants, and a chip mill. GP also operates pulp and paper mills in Georgia and Alabama that discharge into water bodies that flow into Florida waters. Many of these facilities possess NPDES permits and will be affected by implemented numeric nutrient water quality criteria for the State of Florida.

Georgia-Pacific strongly supports the efforts by the State of Florida and specifically, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in developing a state regulatory program for numeric nutrient criteria (NNC). The DEP has worked diligently to develop a sound program that has involved substantial technical and regulatory input from affected stakeholders and EPA. However, since the state rule was administratively challenged and the challenge has just been resolved in favor of the DEP, additional time is still needed as EPA describes to "avoid the confusion and inefficiency" of having State standards in a state of uncertainty simultaneously while Federal standards become  effective.

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

EPA has proposed a three month extension of the effective date of the EPA regulations from July 6, 2012 to October 6, 2012. The extension EPA previously granted from March 6, 2012 to July 6, 2012 was quickly consumed by administrative and legal proceedings. Because of the significant im implications of the State or Federal standards, Georgia- Pacific fully supports an extension of the effective date. However, instead of the three months proposed by EPA, we strongly support a year's extension of the effective date of the EPA regulations until July 6, 2013 as outlined in the alternative extension that EPA proposed. A full year's extension will allow sufficient time for the completion of all administrative and legal 

                                                                         Page 2

proceedings, State notifications to EPA, submittal of final rules, EPA review and approval and State final promulgation. A rule of this significance and scope should not be rushed.

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

We again appreciate the opportunity to submit comments on the above proposed amendments. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact me at (404) 652-4776.

Sincerely,

B. Traylor Champion
Vice President  -  Environmental Affairs
Georgia-Pacific LLC

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
[LOGO]

                                       
                                 June 15, 2012

Water Docket 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Mail Code 2822T 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, DC 20460 
Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 

	Re: AF&PA Comments on Comments on Proposed Rule to Extend the Effective Date 	for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters 
	(Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596) (77 FR 29271, May 17, 2012)

Dear Sir or Madam: 

We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments on EPA's proposal to extend the effective date for the federal water quality standards for certain Florida waters (the "Proposal"). The American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) is the national trade association of the forest products industry, representing pulp, paper, packaging and wood products manufacturers, and forest landowners. Our companies make products essential for everyday life from renewable and recyclable resources that sustain the environment. The forest products industry accounts for approximately 5 percent of the total U.S. manufacturing GDP. Industry companies produce about $175 billion in products annually and employ nearly 900,000 men and women, exceeding employment levels in the automotive, chemicals and plastics industries. The industry meets a payroll of approximately $50 billion annually and is among the top 10 manufacturing sector employers in 47 states. AF&PA recently established a new initiative, Better Practices, Better Planet 2020, the next phase in the forest products industry's efforts to build on our legacy as a leader in sustainability. The initiative includes one of the most extensive set of quantifiable sustainability goals for a major U.S. manufacturing industry, with a commitment to transparently report progress towards achieving those goals. 

AF&PA members own and operate facilities subject to Clean Water Act permits in the State of Florida. AF&PA, therefore, has a direct interest in this rulemaking. 

AF&PA supported EPA's previous rulemaking to extend the effective date of the federal rule which is the subject of this extension proposal--numeric nutrient criteria (NNC) for inland waters. At the time, the State of Florida was in the final stages of its regulatory and legislative process for adopting its own NNC, but the administrative proceeding in response to the challenge brought by environmental organizations had not yet concluded and the 

Page 2
 
June 15, 2012 state legislature had not yet ratified the rule. Previously, EPA had indicated in a November 2011 letter to DEP that it was inclined to approve the draft NNC rule Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had developed, and that if it approved the final DEP rules, the agency would initiate a subsequent rulemaking to withdraw the federal NNC. 

1111 Nineteenth Street, NW, Suite 800 ▪ Washington, DC 20036 ▪ 202 463-2700 Fax: 202 463-2785 ▪ www.afandpa.org

[LOGO]

AF&PA again supports EPA providing sufficient time for this process to reach an orderly conclusion. An administrative law judge ruled on June 7 in favor of DEP in the state administrative proceeding and the state legislature has already ratified the rule. EPA should extend the effective date of the federal rule to allow an orderly conclusion of the rulemakings that are needed. 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.
            
EPA in this proceeding has proposed a three month extension of the effective date of the EPA regulations from July 6, 2012 to October 6, 2012. While we support an extension, instead of the three months proposed by EPA, we strongly support a year's extension of the effective date of the EPA regulations until July 6, 2013 as outlined in the alternative extension that EPA proposed. A full year's extension will allow sufficient time for EPA to approve the Florida rule and to withdraw the federal rule. It would be a better use of resources and prevent further confusion if EPA provided extra time now, instead of the agency having to initiate another rulemaking to extend the effective date because the 90-day extension did not provide sufficient time to complete these remaining steps. 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

If you have any questions about this request, please contact me at (202) 463-2581 or jerry_schwartz@afandpa.org. 

					
					Respectfully, 

					

Jerry Schwartz 
					Senior Director, Energy and Environmental Policy

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[LOGO]

CF Industries, Inc. 
Phosphate Operations 
PO Drawer L 
Plant City, FL 33564 
813-782-1591 
www.cfindustries.com 

June 18, 2012
 
Water Docket, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Mail Code: 2822 1T 
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 
Washington, D.C. 20460 

RE: 	Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters, Proposed Delay of 	Effective Date; 77 Federal Register 29271 -29275, May 17, 2012 

Attention: Docket ID No.: EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 

To Whom It May Concern: 

CF Industries appreciates the opportunity to provide the following comments in response to EPA's notice of proposed agency action, published in the Federal Register May 17, 2012, that would delay the implementation of EPA's numeric nutrient criteria for Florida lakes and flowing waters from July 6, 2012, to October 6, 2012, or to July 6, 2013. 

CF Industries, Inc. 

CF Industries, Inc. (CF) is a global leader in nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer manufacturing and distribution, serving both agricultural and industrial customers throughout the world. CF maintains substantial operations in Florida, for which CF is required to maintain numerous state and federal environmental permit authorizations, including surface water discharge approvals under the NPDES permitting program. Accordingly, CF is directly and substantially affected by the Agency's nutrient water quality standards (WQS) rule associated with this docket. 

Comments Concerning EPA's May 17, 2012, Proposal 

CF supports EPA's proposal to delay the effective date of its criteria, as published in the Federal Register on December 6, 2011, and agrees with EPA that extending the effective date to July 6, 2013 (and potentially beyond) "would avoid the confusion and inefficiency that may occur should Federal criteria become effective while EPA reviews State criteria for approval or disapproval under CWA section 303(c)." Extending the date to July 6, 2013, would avoid similar confusion, should federal criteria become effective, as noted in the May 17 notice, "after State criteria have been approved and while EPA is in the process of withdrawing Federal criteria for corresponding waters." 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  
            
EPA Water Docket #EPA-HQ-02-2009-0596
June 18, 2012 
Page 2 

CF believes that the basis for the delay in implementation to July 6, 2013, (or later) articulated by EPA in the May 17, 2012, notice -i.e., the confusion caused by federal criteria becoming effective after EPA has approved State criteria -is exactly the same reason that EPA should withdraw its January 14, 2009, necessity determination or, at the very least, publish a clear statement that EPA's obligations under the January 2009 determination have been fully discharged upon EPA approval of State nutrient criteria. 

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

CF supports EPA's delay in implementing the federal criteria in order to (1) allow the State to complete its administrative process; (2) allow EPA time to review and approve the State standards under § 303(c) of the Clean Water Act; (3) allow EPA time to withdraw its federal criteria; and (4) allow EPA an opportunity to withdraw its January 14, 2009, determination. 

To provide adequate opportunity to accomplish these tasks, CF believes that EPA's proposed date of July 6, 2013, is preferable to and more appropriate than the short term alternative of October 6, 2012, also proposed for consideration in the May 17 notice. 

      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  

Finally, CF notes that letter writing campaigns in opposition to this necessary delay in effective date from entities involved in dilatory litigation over the State's nutrient rules, which rules were just upheld by the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings on June 7, 2012, are uncompelling if not disingenuous. 

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

CF appreciates the opportunity to provide these comments and supports EPA's proposal to appropriately delay implementation of its inland waters rule to July 6, 2013, or later. 
	
                              Sincerely, 
						
                              [Signature]
						

						 For Craig A. Kovach 
						Director, Environmental Affairs 

----------------------------------------------

[LOGO]			[Return address and contact information]

June 18, 2012 

VIA EMAIL [OW-DOCKET@EPA.GOV] 

Water Docket 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20460
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009
 0596 

Re: 	Proposed Delay of Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of 	Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters; Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596. 

Dear Sir/Madam: 

	Mosaic Fertilizer, LLC ("Mosaic") supports EPA's proposed three-month delay of the effective date for EPA' s rule establishing numeric nutrient criteria for lakes and flowing waters in Florida ("Inland Waters Rule"), as described in 77 Fed. Reg. 29,271-29,272 (May 17, 2012). EPA's proposed action would defer the effective date of the inland waters rule until October 6, 2012. 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

	As EPA noted, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("FDEP") has developed its own proposal for addressing the impacts of nutrients in Florida waters ("FDEP Nutrient Rule"). See 77 Fed. Reg. at 29273. The FDEP Nutrient Rule --after approval by the Florida Environmental Review Commission and after being upheld by an Administrative Law Judge in the State Division of Administrative Hearings upon hearing the matter of a petition challenging the Rule's validity --was submitted to EPA for approval on June 13, 2012. However, absent an extension, the Inland Waters Rule would become effective July 6, 2012. This means that during the period of time that EPA is considering approval of the FDEP Nutrient Rule, Florida regulated entities or other affected parties in Florida would be subject to the Inland Waters Rule temporarily, with the possibility of shortly thereafter becoming subject to the FDEP Nutrient Rule instead. 

 	This inherent uncertainty and lack of constancy would, absent an extension, impose unnecessary and burdensome obligations on affected parties and would create regulatory confusion, without enhancing the protection of Florida's lakes and flowing waters. As EPA recognizes, implementation of the FDEP and/or EPA nutrient rules will be complex, costly and time-consuming. Dischargers subject to nutrient regulations will need to develop new technical compliance measures and compliance strategies, where appropriate. It is highly inefficient to undertake compliance measures for one rule if it likely will be superseded by another. Moreover, now that the FDEP Nutrient Rule has been approved by the State of Florida, there 

June 18, 2012 
U.S. EPA, Water Docket Comments 
Page 2 

may be confusion among dischargers as to whether FDEP requirements or EPA requirements are applicable. See id. at 29,273-29,274. As EPA has noted, deferral of the effective date of the inland waters rule by 90 days will provide the short additional time needed to enable EPA to review and approve the FDEP Nutrient Rule and avoid any confusion created during this interim period. Id. Accordingly, in the interest of ensuring regulatory stability and clarity, we support EPA's proposal to defer the effective date for the Inland Waters Rule. 

      EPA agrees with the comment supporting the proposed extension of the effective date and has promulgated an extension in the final rule.

	EPA also solicited comment on a proposal to extend the effective date of the Inland Waters Rule for one year, to July 6, 2013. See 77 Fed. Reg. at 29,274. Mosaic supports further extensions so that, in the event that EPA does not approve the FDEP Nutrient Rule, the effective dates for the Inland Waters Rule are consistent with the schedule for proposing and finalizing criteria for streams established by the Court in Florida Wildlife Federation v. Jackson, Case No. 4:08cv324-RH/WCS (N.D. Fla.). The Court-ordered schedule calls for EPA to propose criteria for streams and downstream protection criteria for unimpaired lakes by November 30, 2012, and to finalize these criteria by August 31, 2013. It will greatly facilitate both efficient regulation and the achievement of compliance to establish the same effective dates for all of the criteria (i.e., lakes, spring and streams). Absent that consistency, there will be considerable confusion about the extent and nature of obligations imposed under these related rules. Accordingly, Mosaic supports setting effective dates for all elements of the Inland Waters Rule for a date in 2013 at least 90 days after the final criteria for streams and downstream protection values for unimpaired lakes are published in final form in the Federal Register, consistent with the schedule established in Florida Wildlife Federation v. Florida. 

      
      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  
      
      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action. 

Thank you for your consideration.

							Sincerely,
							
                                    [Signature]
							
                                    James Voyles
							Director U.S. Environmental Affairs

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              

338 Baronne St., Suite 200 			1152 15th Street NW, Suite 300
New Orleans, LA 				Washington, DC 20005
504-525-1528 					(202) 289-2361
matt@healthygulf.org 			jdevine@nrdc.org

May 25, 2012

Water Docket
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Mail Code: 2822T
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20406
ATTN: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-2596
ow-docket@epa.gov

RE: Comments on "Effective Date for the Water Quality Standards for the State of
Florida's Lakes and Flowing waters," Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-2596

To Whom It May Concern:

On behalf of the Gulf Restoration Network (GRN) and Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC)[1], please accept these comment regarding "Effective Date for the Water
Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing waters," Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OW-2009-2596, as noticed in the Federal Register, Vol 77, No. 96, May 17,
2012.

GRN and NRDC have worked for several years to promote protective numeric nutrient
criteria for Florida, Gulf States, and the Nation. The proposed extensions, especially
the extension to July 6, 2013, are unacceptable. The reason EPA promulgated the
rules in the first place was because Florida was not timely in its own development of
protective standards. Further, the original deadline has already been extended to give
Florida more time.

[1] GRN is a diverse coalition of individual citizens and local, regional, and national organizations committed to
uniting and empowering people to protect and restore the resources of the Gulf of Mexico. Members of GRN
are located in each of the states along the Gulf of Mexico, including Florida.

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization
with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other
environmental specialists have worked to protect the world's natural resources, public health, and the
environment.

If Florida wants to promulgate truly protective numeric standards for nutrient pollution, a
July 6, 2012 deadline, or an October 6, 2012 deadline will not prevent this. Currently,
Florida is experiencing nitrogen and phosphorus-fueled algae blooms throughout the
state.[2] The sooner numeric criteria are put in place, the sooner Florida waters will be on
the path to being fishable, swimmable, and drinkable.

EPA agrees with the commenter that control of excess nitrogen and phosphorus is important, however, EPA is finalizing this six-month extension of the effective date to allow EPA time to review the submitted Florida nutrient standards (discussed earlier) for approval or disapproval under CWA section 303(c).  As mentioned earlier, having EPA's criteria take effect while EPA is reviewing the State standards could cause confusion and administrative inefficiency for the State and regulated entities, something the EPA wants to avoid.

Further, EPA should not grant a year extension due to the fact that the current draft of
the proposed Florida numeric nutrient criteria are not adequately protective of Florida's
waters. We have submitted comments to the Florida Regulation Commission stating
our objections, and they are attached for your reference (Attachment B). This draft,
which is even worse than the draft that was presented to EPA and which was the
subject of the November 2, 2011 letter of Acting Assistant Administrator for Water
Nancy Stoner, plainly cannot be legally approved by U.S. EPA under Section 303(c) of
the Clean Water Act. There is, thus, no reason to believe that legal and protective
Florida standards are anywhere in sight.

EPA agrees with the commenter that a one-year extension is too long and has finalized a six-month extension. EPA acknowledges and thanks the commenter for the comments on the FL numeric nutrient criteria; however, these comments are outside the scope of this rule.

Due to nutrient pollution, many of Florida's waters are not fishable, swimmable, and
drinkable. Postponing implementation of criteria, or approving Florida's proposal would
not move us forward towards the goals of the Clean Water Act.

EPA has previously acknowledged the need for control of excess nitrogen and phosphorus to improve Florida's ambient waters.  EPA is finalizing this six-month extension of the effective date to allow EPA time to review the submitted State standards (discussed earlier) for approval or disapproval under CWA section 303(c).

Sincerely,

 

Matt Rota
Science and Water Policy Director
Gulf Restoration Network

Jon Devine
Senior Attorney, Water Program
Natural Resources Defense Council

CC:

Kay Buchanan, FDEP
Albert Ettinger, Attorney
Jennifer Hecker, Southwest Florida Conservancy
Cris Costello, Sierra Club
David Guest, EarthJustice
Linda Young, Clean Water Network of Florida

                                       2

[2] Many recent pictures of these algae blooms can be found in Attachment A and at
http://www.flickr.com/photos/slime_crimes/#.

                                 ATTACHMENT A

      [Attachment A (containing pictures of recent blooms) remains in the original comment letter in the docket to this rulemaking; however was not included in this document.  EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This information on recent algal blooms is outside the scope of this action.]
  

                                 ATTACHMENT B

      [Attachment B (containing comments to the Florida Regulation Commission) remains in the original comment letter in the docket to this rulemaking; however; was not included in this document.  EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). These comments to the Florida Regulation Commission are outside the scope of this action.]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[LOGO]
May 31, 2012 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue; Mail Code:  2822T
Washington, D.C. 20460

Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0598 Water Docket 
    Submitted via email to ow-docket@epa.gov. 
    Re: Proposed Extension of Effective Dates for EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Rules 
To Whom It May Concern: 
On May 17, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed to extend the effective date of its final rule setting numeric water quality criteria for inland waters in Florida from July 6,2012 until October 6, 2012 (77 FR 29271). The notice also solicited comments on extending the July6th effective date by an additional extension to July 6, 2013. 
On behalf of Palm Beach County Water Utilities Department (PBCWUD), we strongly support EPA's proposed effective date extension to July 6, 2013. PBCWUD would also support any further delays deemed necessary to allow full consideration of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (FDEP's) alternative nutrient criteria rules and withdrawal of all federal numeric nutrient criteria rulemakings in Florida. Furthermore, this time extension should provide ample time to further the development of a full range of appropriate implementation guidelines for regulated industries. 
      EPA agrees that an extension of the effective date longer than the proposed three month-extension is needed.  This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  
      
PBCWUD believes that FDEP's comprehensive nutrient criteria rules should render moot EPA's nutrient rules as well as EPA's planned rulemakings for canals, estuaries, and coastal waters. The state rules are stringent and will lead to significant environmental improvements. Importantly, the state rules also take into account the diversity of Florida's water systems and will work in concert with existing state nutrient reduction programs. The state rules thereby will avoid the unintended negative environmental and economic consequences associated with EPA's nutrient rules. 
      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action.

In addition to delaying the effective date of its final criteria; PBCWOD also recommends that EPA suspend its planned nutrient criteria rulemakings for Florida's estuaries, coastal waters, and canals.

      EPA requested comment on and is limiting this final action to only the issue of extending the effective date of the inland waters rule (except for the site-specific alternative criteria provision, which became effective on February 4, 2011). This comment on another EPA rulemaking concerning waters not covered under the inland waters rule is outside the scope of this action. 

May 31, 2012 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Attn: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0596 Water Docket RE:  Proposed Extension of Effective Dates for EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Rules Page Two 
      FDEP has promulgated a holistic numeric nutrient criteria program that obviates the perceived need for additional federal rulemakings. The state rules should be evaluated without the complication of any additional and unneeded federal rulemakings. 
      
      This six-month extension will provide EPA time to review and approve or disapprove Florida's rule under CWA section 303(c).  If EPA approves Florida's rule, this six-month extension will also allow EPA to request permission from the Court to finalize a further extension of the January 6, 2013, effective date for a period of time for EPA to withdraw the Federal criteria corresponding to those State criteria approved by EPA.  
        

Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments. 

Sincerely,

[Signature]

Bevin Beaudet, P.E.
Director of Palm Beach County Water Utilities Department

cc:  	Rober Weisman, P.E., County Administrator, PBC 
	Shannon LaRocque-Baas, P.E., Assistant County Administrator, PBC 
	Michael Jones, Assistant County Attorney, PBC 
	Brian Shields, P.E., Deputy Director, PBC Water Utilities
	Thomas Miller, Legislative Affairs Manager, PBC Water