The proposed revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., are intended to provide additional clarity in the assessment of recently adopted or concurrently proposed water quality criteria in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C. The rule revisions are adopted as part of ...
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
RULE NO.: RULE TITLE:
62-303.100 Scope and Intent
62-303.150 Relationships Among Planning, Study and Verified Lists
62-303.200 Definitions
62-303.300 Methodology to Develop the Planning List
62-303.310 Evaluation of Aquatic Life Use Support
62-303.320 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria
62-303.330 Biological Assessment
62-303.350 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criteria
62-303.351 Nutrients in Freshwater Streams
62-303.352 Nutrients in Freshwater Lakes
62-303.353 Nutrients in Estuaries and Open Coastal Waters
62-303.354 Nitrate-nitrite in Freshwater Spring Vents
62-303.360 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support
62-303.370 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support
62-303.380 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health
62-303-390 The Study List
62-303.400 Methodology to Develop the Verified List
62-303.420 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria Assessment
62-303.430 Biological Impairment
62-303.450 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criteria
62-303.460 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support
62-303.470 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support
62-303.480 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health
62-303.500 Prioritization
62-303.600 Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms
62-303.700 Listing Cycle
62-303.710 Format of Verified List and Verified List Approval
62-303.720 Delisting Procedure
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: The proposed revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., are intended to provide additional clarity in the assessment of recently adopted or concurrently proposed water quality criteria in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C. The rule revisions are adopted as part of the Triennial Review of Florida water quality standards.
SUMMARY: The Department proposes a number of revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., designed to clarify the assessment methodology for identifying impaired surface waters. New provisions primarily relate to: (1) the assessment of the concurrently proposed bacteria criteria and (2) clarification of the scope of waters on the Study List. There are some changes to the rule text describing the listing cycle and the delisting requirements for certain parameters, as well as some formatting changes and changes to text related to documents incorporated by reference.
The Department conducted an initial set of public workshops on June 10 and June 11, 2015, in Tallahassee and Orlando, respectively, followed by public workshops on September 15, September 16, and September 17, 2015, in West Palm Beach, Orlando, and Tallahassee, respectively.
OTHER RULES INCORPORATING THIS RULE: Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., is referenced by the following rules: 62-40.210, 62-40.430, 62-40.540, 62-302.300, 62-302.530, 62-302.531, 62-302.800, 62-303.100, 62-303.150, 62-303.200, 62-303.300, 62-303.310, 62-303.320, 62-303.330, 62-303.350, 62-303.351, 62-303.352, 62-303.353, 62-303.354, 62-303.360, 62-303.370, 62-303.380, 62-303.390, 62-303.400, 62-303.410, 62-303.420, 62-303.430, 62-303.450, 62-303.460, 62-303.470, 62-303.480, 62-303.500, 62-303.600, 62-303.700, 62-303.710, 62-303.720, 62-303.810, 62-304.100, 62-305.200, 62-672.780, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.100 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.300, and 62-303.100, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.150 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.150, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.200 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.200, 62-303.330, and 62-303.430, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.300 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.300, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.310 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.310, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.320 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.310, 62-303.320, 62-303.330, 62-303.350, 62-303.360, 62-303.370, 62-303.380, 62-303.420, 62-303.460, 62-303.470, 62-303.480, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.330 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.310, 62-303.330, 62-303.420, 62-303.430, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.350 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.300, 62-303.310, 62-303.350, and 62-303.450, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.351 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.350, 62-303.351, 62-303.352, 62-303.353, 62-303.450, and 62-303.390, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.352 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.352, 62-303.390, and 62-303.450, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.353 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.300, 62-303.353, 62-303.390, and 62-303.450, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.354 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.350, 62-303.354, 62-303.390, and 62-303.450, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.360 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.360, 62-303.390, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.370 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.370, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.380 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.380, 62-303.480 and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.390 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.300, 62-303.200, 62-303.390, and 62-303.450, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.400 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.400, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.420 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.390, 62-303.400, 62-303.410, 62-303.420, 62-303.460, 62-303.470, 62-303.480, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.430 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.390, 62-303.430, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.450 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.300, 62-303.450 and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.460 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.406, 62-303.470, 62-303.480, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.470 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.470 and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.480 is referenced by the following rules: 62-303.480 and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.500 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.500, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.600 is referenced by the following rules: 62-302.531, 62-303.390, 62-303.600, and 62-303.720, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.700 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.700, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.710 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.710, F.A.C. Rule 62-303.720 is referenced by the following rule: 62-303.720, F.A.C.
EFFECT ON THOSE OTHER RULES: These amendments are not expected to have an effect on other rules because the amendments are primarily clarifying in nature.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION:
The Agency has determined that this will not have an adverse impact on small business or likely increase directly or indirectly regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate within one year after the implementation of the rule. A SERC has not been prepared by the Agency.
The Agency has determined that the proposed rule is not expected to require legislative ratification based on the statement of estimated regulatory costs or if no SERC is required, the information expressly relied upon and described herein: Chapter 62-303, F.A.C. sets forth a scientific assessment methodology for the identification of impaired surface waters. The Department’s proposed revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., are primarily designed to simply clarify existing assessment methodologies or to address the assessment methodology for recently adopted numeric nutrient criteria or new water quality criteria being concurrently proposed in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C. The rule chapter is implemented by existing Department staff, and there is no additional cost to the public or the Department as a result of the proposed revisions. The placement of waters on the Planning and Study Lists are precursors to confirming an impairment (in addition to its cause) and inclusion on the Verified List of impaired waters. Waters on the Verified List are prioritized for development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). The Department adopts TMDLs by rule in Chapter 62-304, F.A.C. Costs to develop TMDLs for verified impaired waters will be borne by the Department using existing staff, and costs to implement resultant TMDLs will be addressed as part of individual TMDL rulemakings. Therefore, the proposed amendments to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., are not anticipated to have adverse impact on economic growth, private sector job creation or employment, private sector investment, business competitiveness, or regulatory costs. Any person who wishes to provide information regarding a statement of estimated regulatory costs, or provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative must do so in writing within 21 days of this notice.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY: 403.061, 403.067 FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 403.021(11), 403.062, 403.067 FS.
A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
DATE AND TIME: Wednesday, December 9, 2015, 9:00 a.m.
PLACE: Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Marjory Stoneman Douglas Building, Conference Room A, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida
Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days before the workshop/meeting by contacting: Eric Shaw at (850)245-8429 or the below information. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE PROPOSED RULE IS: Eric Shaw, Department of Environmental Protection, Water Quality Standards Program, MS 6511, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400, (850)245-8429 or e-mail: eric.shaw@dep.state.fl.us.
THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE IS:
CHAPTER 62-303
IDENTIFICATION OF IMPAIRED SURFACE WATERS
PART IGENERAL
62-303.100 Scope and Intent
62-303.150 Relationships Among Planning, Study and Verified Lists
62-303.200 Definitions
PART IITHE PLANNING LIST
62-303.300 Methodology to Develop the Planning List
PART IITHE PLANNING LIST
62-303.310 Evaluation of Aquatic Life Use Support
62-303.320 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria
62-303.330 Biological Assessment
62-303.340 Toxicity (Repealed)
62-303.350 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criteria
62-303.351 Nutrients in Freshwater Streams
62-303.352 Nutrients in Freshwater Lakes
62-303.353 Nutrients in Estuaries and Open Coastal Waters
62-303.354Nitrate-nitrite in Freshwater Spring Vents
62-303.360 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support
62-303.370 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support
62-303.380 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health
PART IIITHE STUDY LIST
62-303.390The Study List
PART IV THE VERIFIED LIST
62-303.400 Methodology to Develop the Verified List
62-303.410 Determination of Aquatic Life Use Support
PART IV THE VERIFIED LIST
62-303.420 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria Assessment
62-303.430 Biological Impairment
62-303.440 Toxicity (Repealed)
62-303.450 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criteria
62-303.460 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support
62-303.470 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support
62-303.480 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health
PART VMISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
62-303.500 Prioritization
62-303.600 Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms
62-303.700 Listing Cycle
PART VMISCELANEOUS PROVISIONS
62-303.710 Format of Verified List and Verified List Approval
62-303.720 Delisting Procedure
62-303.810 Impairment of Interstate and Tribal Waters (Repealed)
PART I
GENERAL
62-303.100 Scope and Intent.
(1) This chapter establishes a methodology to identify surface waters of the state that will be included on the state’s Planning List planning list of waters that will be assessed pursuant to Sections 403.067(2) and (3), Florida Statutes (F.S.), and a methodology to identify surface waters that will be included on the Study List . It also establishes a methodology to identify impaired waters based on representative data that will be included on the state’s Verified List verified list of impaired waters, for which the Department will calculate Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), pursuant to Section 403.067(4), F.S., and which will be submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to paragraph 303(d)(1) of the Clean Water Act (CWA).
(2) Subsection 303(d) of the CWA and Section 403.067, F.S., describe impaired waters as those not meeting applicable water quality standards, which is a broad term that includes designated uses, water quality criteria, the Florida antidegradation policy, and moderating provisions. However, as recognized when the water quality standards were adopted, Mmany waterbodies water bodies naturally do not meet one or more established water quality criteria at all times, even though they meet their designated use. It is not the intent of this chapter to include waters that do not meet otherwise applicable water quality criteria solely due to natural conditions or physical alterations of the waterbody water body not related to pollutants. Similarly, it is not the intent of this chapter to include waters on the Verified List where designated uses are being met and where water quality criteria exceedances are limited to those parameters for which permitted mixing zones or other moderating provisions [(such as site-specific alternative criteria (SSAC)] are in effect. Waters that do not meet otherwise applicable water quality standards due to natural conditions or to pollution not related to pollutants shall be noted in the state’s water quality assessment prepared under subsection 305(b) of the CWA [305(b)/303(d) Integrated Report].
(3) This chapter is intended to evaluate attainment of water quality standards as set forth in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C., for the purposes of identifying waterbodies water bodies or segments for which TMDLs will be established. It is the intent of this chapter to establish requirements that would apply solely for purposes of assessment and listing under CWA sections 303(d) and 305(b). However, it is not the intent of this chapter to establish requirements for other purposes under Florida law. In cases where this chapter relies on numeric indicators of ambient water quality as part of the methodology for determining whether existing narrative criteria are being met and the numeric indicators have not been adopted as numeric criteria, these numeric values are intended to be used only in the context of developing the lists a planning list and identifying an impaired water pursuant to this chapter. As such, exceedances of these numeric values shall not, by themselves, constitute violations of Department rules that would warrant enforcement action.
(4) No change.
(5) Pursuant to Section 403.067, F.S., impaired waters shall not be listed on the Verified List verified list if reasonable assurance is provided that, as a result of existing or proposed technology-based effluent limitations and other pollution control programs under local, state, or federal authority, they will attain water quality standards in the future and reasonable progress towards attainment of water quality standards will be made by the time the next 303(d) list for the basin is scheduled to be submitted to EPA.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.021(11), 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, .
62-303.150 Relationships Among Planning, Study and Verified Lists.
(1) The Department shall follow the methodology in Part II to develop a Planning List planning list and the methodology in Part III to develop a Study List study list pursuant to subsection 403.067(2), F.S. As required by Section 403.067(2), F.S., the Planning List planning list and the Study List study list shall not be used in the administration or implementation of any regulatory program. The Planning List planning list shall be submitted to EPA for informational purposes only. Waters on the Planning List this planning list will be assessed pursuant to Section 403.067(3), F.S., as part of the Department’s watershed management approach. During this assessment, the Department shall determine whether the waterbody is impaired and whether the impairment is due to pollutant loads discharges using the methodology in Part IV. In cases where a waterbody on the Planning List planning list is determined to be impaired but the Department cannot determine the cause of the impairment, the waterbody shall be placed on a Study List study list for further analysis to determine the causative pollutant(s) or other factors contributing to the impairment. The Study List study list also addresses increasing nutrient or nutrient response variable trends in waterbodies. The Department shall only place a waterbody on the Verified List verified list if pollutant loading or concentrations cause or contribute to nonattainment of water quality standards. The resultant Verified List verified list of impaired waters, which is the list of waters for which TMDLs will be developed by the Department pursuant to Section 403.067(4), F.S., will be adopted by Secretarial Order and will be subject to challenge under Sections 120.569 and 120.57, F.S. Once adopted, the list will be submitted to the EPA pursuant to paragraph 303(d)(1) of the Federal Clean Water Act.
(2) Consistent with state and federal requirements, opportunities for public participation, including workshops, meetings, and periods to submit comments on draft lists, will be provided as part of the basin assessment cycle development of planning, study, and verified lists.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Repromulgated 1-2-07, Amended 7-2-12, .
62-303.200 Definitions.
As used in this chapter:
(1) “Biological Health Assessment” shall mean one of the following aquatic community-based biological evaluations: Stream Condition Index (SCI), Lake Vegetation Index (LVI), or Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index.
(2) “Biological Reconnaissance (BioRecon)” shall mean a biological assessment that measures stream health in predominantly fresh waters using benthic macroinvertebrates, performed and calculated using the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the Biological Reconnaissance BioRecon as described in Rule 62-160.800, F.A.C. in the document titled BRN 1000: Biological Reconnaissance Field Method (DEP-SOP-003/11 BRN 1000), dated 10-24-11, which is incorporated by reference herein. Copies of the SOP may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(3) “Clean techniques” shall mean those applicable field sampling procedures and analytical methods referenced in “Method 1669: Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels, July 1996, USEPA, Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division, Washington, D.C.,” (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-06032) which is incorporated by reference. Copies of the procedures and methods may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(4) through (8) No change.
(9) “Lake Vegetation Index (LVI)” shall mean a Biological Health Assessment that measures lake biological health in predominantly freshwaters lakes using aquatic and wetland plants, performed and calculated using the Standard Operating Procedures for the LVI as described in Rule 62-160.800, F.A.C. in the document titled LVI 1000: Lake Vegetation Index Methods (DEP-SOP-003/11 LVI 1000) and the methodology in Sampling and Use of the Lake Vegetation Index (LVI) for Assessing Lake Plant Communities in Florida: A Primer (DEP-SAS-002/11), both dated 10-24-11, which are incorporated by reference herein. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(10) No change.
(11) “Open coastal waters” shall mean all gulf or ocean waters that are not classified as estuaries or open ocean waters.
(11)(12) “Nutrient” shall mean total nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP), nitrate-nitrite (NO3 + NO2), or other their organic or inorganic forms of nitrogen or phosphorus.
(12)(13) “Nutrient response variable” shall mean a biological variable, such as chlorophyll a, or biomass, or structure of the phytoplankton, periphyton or vascular plant community, that responds to nutrient load or concentration in a predictable and measurable manner. For purposes of interpreting paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., dDissolved oxygen (DO) shall also be considered a nutrient response variable if it is demonstrated for the waterbody that DO conditions result in biological imbalance and the DO responds to a nutrient load or concentration in a predictable and measurable manner.
(13)(14) “Nutrient Watershed Region” shall mean a drainage area over which the nutrient thresholds in paragraph 62-302.531(2)(c), F.A.C., apply.
(a) through (e) No change.
(f) The South Florida region consists of those areas south of the Peninsula region, such as the Cocohatchee River Watershed, Naples Bay Watershed, Rookery Bay Watershed, Ten Thousand Islands Watershed, Lake Worth Lagoon Watershed, Southeast Coast – Biscayne Bay Watershed, Everglades Watershed, Florida Bay Watershed, and the Florida Keys.
A map of the Nutrient Watershed Regions (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-06033) is incorporated by reference herein and may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(14) “Open coastal waters” shall mean all gulf or ocean waters that are not classified as estuaries or open ocean waters.
(15) through (16) No change.
(17) “Planning Llist” shall mean the list of potentially impaired surface waters or segments identified pursuant to Part II of this chapter where additional information is needed for which assessments will be conducted to evaluate whether the water is impaired and a TMDL is needed, as provided in Section 403.067(2), F.S.
(18) No change.
(19) “Pollution” shall be as defined in subsection 502(19) of the CWA and Section 403.031(7)(2), F.S.
(20) “Predominantly fresh waters” shall mean surface waters in which the chloride concentration is less than 1,500 milligrams per liter or specific conductance is less than 4,580 µmhos/cm. Measurements for making this determination shall be taken within the bottom half of the water column.
(21) “Predominantly marine waters” shall mean surface waters in which the chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 1,500 milligrams per liter or specific conductance is greater than or equal to 4,580 µmhos/cm. Measurements for making this determination shall be taken within the bottom half of the water column.
(22) through (26) No change.
(27) “Stream” shall mean a predominantly fresh surface waterbody that the flows in a defined channel with banks., Streams do not include wetlands or portions of streams that exhibit lake characteristics (e.g., long water residence time, increased width, and predominance of biological taxa typically found in non-flowing conditions).
(28) “Stream Condition Index (SCI)” shall mean a Biological Health Assessment that measures stream biological health in predominantly fresh waters using benthic macroinvertebrates, performed and calculated using the Standard Operating Procedures for the SCI as described in Rule 62-160.800, F.A.C. in the document titled SCI 1000: Stream Condition Index Methods (DEP-SOP-003/11 SCI 1000) and the methodology in Sampling and Use of the Stream Condition Index (SCI) for Assessing Flowing Waters: A Primer (DEP-SAS-001/11), both dated 10-24-11, which are incorporated by reference herein. Copies of the documents may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400. For water quality standards purposes, the Stream Condition Index shall not apply in the South Florida Nutrient Watershed Region.
(29) “Study Llist” shall mean the list of surface waters or segments where additional information is needed, as identified in Rule 62-303.390, F.A.C., that do not attain surface water quality standards, but the cause of nonattainment is unknown and requires further study to identify the cause of nonattainment, or exhibit a clear adverse trend in nutrients or nutrient response variables where a site specific numeric interpretation has not been established pursuant to paragraph 63-302.531(2)(a), F.A.C.
(30) No change.
(31) “Total Maximum Daily Load” (TMDL) for an impaired waterbody or waterbody segment shall mean the sum of the individual wasteload allocations for point sources and the load allocations for nonpoint sources and natural background. Prior to determining individual wasteload allocations and load allocations, the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody or waterbody segment can assimilate from all sources without exceeding water quality standards must first be calculated. A TMDL shall include either an implicit or explicit margin of safety and a consideration of seasonal variations.
(32) “Verified Llist” shall mean the list of impaired waterbodies water bodies or segments for which TMDLs will be developed calculated, as provided in Section 403.067(4), F.S., and which will be submitted to EPA pursuant to paragraph 303(d)(1) of the CWA.
(33) No change.
(34) “Water quality standards” shall mean standards composed of designated present and future most beneficial uses (classification of waters), the numerical and narrative criteria, including Site Specific Alternative Criteria, applied to the specific water uses or classification, the Florida antidegradation policy, and the moderating provisions, such as variances, mixing zone rule provisions, or exemptions.
(35) “Water segment” shall mean a portion of a waterbody that the Department will assess and evaluate for purposes of determining whether the waterbody is impaired and whether the impairment is due to pollutant discharges. a TMDL will be required. Water segments previously evaluated as part of the Department’s 1998 305(b) Report are depicted in the map titled “Water Segments of Florida,” which is incorporated by reference.
(36) No change.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 6-5-06, 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
PART II
THE PLANNING LIST
62-303.300 Methodology to Develop the Planning List.
This part establishes a methodology for developing a Planning List planning list of waters to be assessed pursuant to Sections 403.067(2) and (3), F.S. Unless information presented to the Department demonstrates otherwise, data older than 10 years are not representative of current conditions and shall not be used except to evaluate historical trends. Any determinations by the Department to use data older than 10 years shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the basis for the decision.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 8-1-13, .
PART II
THE PLANNING LIST
62-303.310 Evaluation of Aquatic Life Use Support.
A Class I, II, or III, or III-Limited water shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for assessment of aquatic life use support (propagation and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife) if, based on sufficient quality and quantity of data, the waterbody it:
(1) through (2) No change.
(3) Exceeds nutrient impairment thresholds or numeric nutrient standards as outlined in Rules 62-303.350 through 62-303.354, F.A.C.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.320 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria Assessment.
(1) Water segments shall be placed on the Planning List planning list if, using objective and credible data, as defined by the requirements specified in this section, the number of samples that do not meet an applicable water quality criterion due to pollutant discharges is greater than or equal to the number listed in Table 1 for the given sample size. For sample sizes up to 500, waters are placed on the Planning List planning list when 10 percent or more of the samples do not meet the applicable criteria with a minimum of an 80 percent confidence level using a binomial distribution. For sample sizes greater than 500, the Department shall calculate the number of samples not meeting the criterion that are needed to list the waterbody with an 80 percent confidence level for the given sample size using the binomial distribution.
Table 1: Planning List
Minimum number of samples not meeting an applicable water quality criterion needed to put a water
on the Planning List planning list with at least 80% confidence.
Sample sizes
Are listed if they have at least this # of samples that do not meet a criterion
Sample sizes
Are listed if they have at least this # of samples that do not meet a criterion
From
To
From
To
10
15
3
256
264
31
16
23
4
265
273
32
24
31
5
274
282
33
32
39
6
283
292
34
40
47
7
293
301
35
48
56
8
302
310
36
57
65
9
311
320
37
66
73
10
321
329
38
74
82
11
330
338
39
83
91
12
339
348
40
92
100
13
349
357
41
101
109
14
358
367
42
110
118
15
368
376
43
119
126
16
377
385
44
127
136
17
386
395
45
137
145
18
396
404
46
146
154
19
405
414
47
155
163
20
415
423
48
164
172
21
424
432
49
173
181
22
433
442
50
182
190
23
443
451
51
191
199
24
452
461
52
200
208
25
462
470
53
209
218
26
471
480
54
219
227
27
481
489
55
228
236
28
490
499
56
237
245
29
500
500
57
246
255
30
(2) The Department’s Florida Storage and Retrieval (FLASTORET) database, or its successors, shall be the primary source of data used for determining whether samples do not meet water quality criteria. As required by subsection 62-40.540(3), F.A.C., the Department, other state agencies, the Water Management Districts, and local governments collecting surface water quality data in Florida shall enter the data into FLASTORET, or its successors, within one year of collection. Other sampling entities that want to ensure their data will be considered for evaluation should ensure their data are entered into FLASTORET. The Department shall consider data submitted to the Department from other sources and databases if the data meet the sufficiency and data quality requirements of this section.
(3) Unless information presented to the Department demonstrates otherwise, data older than ten years at the time the water segment is proposed for listing on the planning list are not representative of current conditions and shall not be used to develop Planning Lists planning lists, except to evaluate historical trends in chlorophyll a or TSIs. Any determinations by the Department to use data older than 10 years shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the basis for the decision that the data are representative of current conditions. Further, more recent data shall take precedence over older data if:
(a) The newer data indicate a change in water quality and this change is related to changes in anthropogenic pollutant loading to the watershed or improved pollution control mechanisms in the watershed contributing to the assessed area, or
(b) No change.
(4) To place a water segment on the Planning List planning list using Table 1, a water segment shall have a minimum of ten samples for the ten-year period, with at least five temporally independent samples. To be treated as a temporally independent sample, samples shall be at least one week apart, regardless of whether the samples are collected at different locations within the segment.
(a) No change.
(b) For lakes, the daily average DO level shall be calculated as the average of measurements collected in the upper two meters of the water column at the same location and on the same day. For all other fresh waters, the daily average freshwater DO level shall be calculated as the average of all measurements collected in the water column at the same location and on the same day. If any individual DO measurement is greater than 100 percent saturation, 100 percent shall be substituted for that value for the purpose of calculating daily averages.
(c) through (f) No change.
(g) In making the determination to list water segments, the Department shall consider ambient background conditions, including seasonal and other natural variations.
Table 2. Acutely Toxic Levels for Parameters with Aquatic Life-Based Criteria
Parameter
Units
Freshwater Value
Marine Value
Aldrin
ug/L
3
1.3
Aluminum
ug/L
750
N/A
Arsenic
ug/L
340
69
Cadmium
ug/L
exp((1.0166*(lnH))-3.924)
40
Carbaryl
ug/L
2.1
1.6
Chlordane
ug/L
2.4
0.09
Chlorine
ug/L
19
13
Chlorpyrifos
ug/L
0.083
0.011
Chromium III
ug/L
exp((0.8190(lnH))+3.7256)
N/A
Chromium VI
ug/L
16
1100
Copper
ug/L
exp((0.9422*(lnH))-1.700)
5.8
Cyanide
ug/L
22
1
DDT
ug/L
1.1
0.13
Diazinon
ug/L
0.17
0.82
Dieldrin
ug/L
0.24
0.71
Endosulfan
ug/L
0.22
0.034
Endrin
ug/L
0.086
0.037
Heptachlor
ug/L
0.52
0.053
Lead
ug/L
exp((1.273(lnH))-1.460)
221
Lindane
ug/L
0.95
0.16
Nickel
ug/L
exp((0.8460(lnH))+2.255)
75
Nonylphenol
ug/L
28
7
Parathion
ug/L
0.065
N/A
Pentachlorophenol
ug/L
exp(1.005(pH)-4.869)
13
Selenium
ug/L
N/A
290
Silver
ug/L
exp((1.72(lnH))-6.59)
2.2
Toxaphene
ug/L
0.73
0.21
Zinc
ug/L
exp((0.8473(lnH))+0.884)
95
(5) For assessment of the portions of the Suwannee, Withlacoochee (North), and Santa Fe Rivers utilized by the Gulf Sturgeon, and in the portions of the Santa Fe and New Rivers utilized by the Oval Pigtoe Mussel, waters will be listed on the Planning List planning list when more than 50 percent of the measurements are below the applicable median or more than 10 percent of the daily average values are below the applicable 10th percentile value at a minimum of a 80 percent confidence level using the binomial distribution. The applicable median and 10th percentile values are specified by river segment in Appendix I of the “Technical Support Document: Derivation of Dissolved Oxygen Criteria to Protect Aquatic Life in Florida’s Fresh and Marine Waters” (DEP-SAS-001/13), dated March, 2013 (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02961), which is incorporated by reference herein. Copies of Appendix I may be obtained by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(6) For predominantly marine waters, the Department shall evaluate the daily average DO criterion using Table 1 set forth in subsection 62-303.320(1), F.A.C., above, and shall also evaluate whether the 7-day seven-day and 30-day average criteria have been achieved during the planning period. A water segment shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for potential DO impairment if the number of samples that do not meet the daily average DO criterion is greater than or equal to the number listed in Table 1 for the given sample size, or if it has a weekly average value below the 7-day weekly average DO criterion or a monthly average value below the 30-day monthly average DO criterion in the planning period.
(a) through (b) No change.
(c) For assessment purposes, the 7-day seven-day average DO percent saturation shall be calculated as a weekly average using a minimum of three full days of diel data collected within a week, or a minimum of ten grab samples collected over at least three days within a week, with each sample measured at least four hours apart.
(d) through (e) No change.
(7) Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (4), water segments shall be included on the Planning List planning list if:
(a) through (b) No change.
(8) No change.
(9) The Department shall consider all readily available water quality data collected and analyzed in accordance with Chapter 62-160, F.A.C. If requested, the sampling agency must provide to the Department all of the data quality assessment elements listed in Table 2 of the Department’s Guidance Document “Data Quality Assessment Elements for Identification of Impaired Surface Waters” (DEP EAS 01-01, April 2001) (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-06034), which is incorporated by reference herein. Copies of the document may be obtained by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(10) No change.
(11) For the assessment of the DO criteria, any DO data collected as a concentration in mg/l shall be converted to percent saturation using the temperature and salinity measured at the same location within fifteen minutes of the DO measurement. Percent DO saturation shall be calculated using the method in Section 5.4 of the “Technical Support Document: Derivation of Dissolved Oxygen Criteria to Protect Aquatic Life in Florida’s Fresh and Marine Waters,” (DEP-SAS-001/13), dated March, 2013 (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02958), which is incorporated by reference herein. Copies of Section 5.4 may be obtained by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(12) Surface water data with values below the applicable practical quantification limit (PQL) or method detection limit (MDL) shall be assessed in accordance with paragraphs 62-4.246(6)(b) and (c)(d) and subsection 62-303.320(8), F.A.C. Results reported by a laboratory with the “U” data qualifier code according to rule 62-160.340, F.A.C., shall be assessed as half the reported result or half the criterion, whichever is lower.
(a) If sampling entities want to ensure that their data will be considered for evaluation, they should review the Department’s list of approved MDLs and PQLs developed pursuant to Rule 62-4.246, F.A.C., and, if available, use approved analytical methods with MDLs below the applicable water quality criteria. If there are no approved methods with MDLs below a criterion, then the method with the lowest MDL should be used. Analytical results listed as below detection or below the MDL shall not be used for developing Planning Lists planning lists if the MDL was above the criteria and there were, at the time of sample collection, approved analytical methods with MDLs below the criteria on the Department’s list of approved MDLs and PQLs.
(b) No change.
(13) No change.
(14) A water segment shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for DO impairment if there has been a statistically significant decreasing trend in DO levels or increasing trend in the range of daily DO fluctuations over the planning period at the 90 percent confidence level using a one-sided Seasonal Kendall test for trend, as described in Helsel, D.R. and R.M. Hirsch, 2002, Statistical Methods in Water Resources, USGS, pages 338 through though 340 (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02962), which are incorporated by reference herein, after controlling for or removing the effects of confounding variables, such as climatic and hydrologic cycles, quality assurance issues, and changes in analytical methods, and except as provided for under Rules 62-302.300 and 62-4.242, F.A.C. A copy of pages 338 through 340 may be obtained by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
(15) For assessment of the 30-day average total ammonia criterion, the monthly average total ammonia shall be calculated for a station using a minimum of four samples collected within the month. A water segment shall be placed on the Planning List for potential total ammonia impairment if a station within the segment has a monthly average value above the 30-day average criterion in the planning period.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 8-1-13, .
62-303.330 Biological Assessment.
(1) No change.
(2) Biological Health Assessments used to evaluate predominantly freshwater fresh water streams and lakes under this rule shall include the Stream Condition Index (SCI), the Lake Vegetation Index (LVI), and the Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index. BioRecons can also be used to evaluate predominantly freshwater fresh water streams under this rule. Because these Biological Health Assessment procedures require specific training and expertise, persons conducting a BioRecon, SCI or LVI must comply with the quality assurance requirements of Chapter 62-160, F.A.C. (including adherence to Sampling and Use of the Stream Condition Index (SCI) for Assessing Flowing Waters: A Primer (DEP-SAS-001/11), which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.200(29), F.A.C., and Sampling and Use of the Lake Vegetation Index (LVI) for Assessing Lake Plant Communities in Florida: A Primer (DEP-SAS-002/11), which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.200(9), F.A.C.), attend at least eight hours of Department field training, and pass a Department field audit that verifies the sampler follows the applicable SOPs, as set forth in Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., before their Biological Health Assessment data will be considered valid for use under this rule.
(3) A water segment shall be included on the Planning List planning list if it meets any of the following conditions, given a minimum sample size of one bioassessment:
(a) No change.
(b) One of the two most recent SCI Stream Condition Index scores is:
1. through 2. No change.
(c) One of the two most recent BioRecon has a scores is < ≤ 4.
(d) No change.
(4) The “historic maximum value” shall be the highest mean of any three consecutive, temporally independent Stream Condition Index (SCI) scores or Lake Vegetation Index (LVI) scores at the same location that are collected prior to the most recent sample being considered for evaluation with this provision. For the purposes of setting historic maximum values, the “same location” for a stream shall be defined as being within 200 meters.
(5) To qualify as temporally independent samples, each Biological Health Assessment shall be conducted at least three months apart. Biological Health Assessments collected at the same location water segment less than three months apart shall be considered one sample, with the mean value used to represent the sampling period.
(6)(5) Other information relevant to the biological health of the water segment, including toxicity tests and information about alterations in the type, nature, or function of a waterbody, shall also be considered when assessing aquatic life use support.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.350 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criterion Criteria.
(1) The numeric interpretations of the narrative nutrient criterion in sections 62-302.531 and 62-302.532, F.A.C., and the nutrient impairment thresholds identified in Rules 62-303.351 through 62-303.354, F.A.C., shall be the primary means for assessing whether a water should be assessed further for nutrient impairment. Other information indicating an imbalance in flora or fauna due to nutrient enrichment, such as algal blooms or mats, excessive nuisance macrophyte growth, decrease in the distribution (either in density or areal coverage) of seagrasses or other submerged aquatic vegetation, adverse changes in algal species composition, and excessive diel oxygen swings, shall also be considered for placing waters on the Planning List planning list.
(2) To be used to determine whether a waterbody should be assessed further for nutrient enrichment, data
(a) Data must meet the requirements of subsections and paragraphs (2), (3), (4)(a), (4)(e)-(g), (2)-(4), (7), and (8), (9), (12), and (13) in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C.;
(3)(b) To calculate an annual geometric or arithmetic mean for TN, TP, NO3-NO2, or chlorophyll a, there shall be at least four temporally-independent samples per year with at least one sample collected between May 1 and September 30 and at least one sample collected during the other months of the calendar year. To be treated as temporally-independent, samples must be collected at least one week apart. ; and
(4) To assess nutrient criteria expressed as a long-term average of annual means for TN, TP, NO3-NO2, or chlorophyll a, the long-term average of annual means shall be based on data from at least 3 years meeting the minimum data requirements of subsection 62-303.350(3), F.A.C.
(5) To assess nutrient criteria expressed as a long-term average for TN, TP, NO3-NO2, or chlorophyll a, the long-term average for nutrients shall be based on a minimum of 10 data points over at least 3 years, with at least two temporally independent samples per year, with at least one sample collected between May 1 and September 30 and at least one sample collected during the other months of the calendar year.
(6)(c) To be assessed under this chapter, except for data used to establish historical chlorophyll a levels, chlorophyll a data shall be determined using Department-approved methods as measured according to the DEP document titled, “Applicability of Chlorophyll a Methods” (DEP-SAS-002/10), dated October 24, 2011, incorporated by reference herein, unless an alternative method is specifically approved by the Department under Chapter 62-160, F.A.C. Copies of the chlorophyll a document may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400. Chlorophyll a data shall be corrected for or free from the interference of pheophytin.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.351 Nutrients in Freshwater Streams.
A stream or stream segment shall be included on the Planning List planning list for nutrients if:
(1) The applicable numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion established in subsection 62-302.531(2), F.A.C., is exceeded for any parameter;
(2) For streams meeting the definition in subsection 62-302.200(36), F.A.C., that do not have a site specific numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion, the nutrient thresholds in subparagraph 62-302.531(2)(c)2., F.A.C., are exceeded and insufficient Biological Health Assessment data are available to fully assess achievement of the nutrient provisions in subparagraph 62-302.531(2)(c)1., F.A.C.;
(3) No change.
(4) An aAnnual geometric mean chlorophyll a is concentrations are greater than 20 ug/l; or
(5) There is a statistically significant increasing trend in the annual geometric means at the 95 percent confidence level in TN, TP or chlorophyll a over the planning period using a Mann’s one-sided, upper-tail test for trend, as described in Nonparametric Statistical Methods by M. Hollander and D. Wolfe (1999 ed.), pages 376 and 724, which are incorporated by reference herein. Copies of these pages may be obtained from the Department’s internet site at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/swq-docs.htm or by writing to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Standards and Assessment Section, 2600 Blair Stone Road, MS 6511, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Repromulgated 1-2-07, 7-2-12, .
62-303.352 Nutrients in Freshwater Lakes.
(1) Lakes or lake segments shall be included on the Planning List planning list for nutrients if:
(a)(1) The numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion established in subsection 62-302.531(2), F.A.C., is exceeded for any parameter;
(2) through (3) renumbered as (b) through (c) No change.
(d) There are insufficient data to calculate the long-term geometric mean for color, alkalinity or specific conductance for a lake, the lake shall be included on the Planning List if the annual geometric mean chlorophyll a value is greater than 20 ug/L in at least one year.
(2) Color, alkalinity, and specific conductance data used to establish the applicable lake criteria are subject to the data sufficiency requirements in sub-subparagraph 62.302.531(2)(b)1.c., F.A.C.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.353 Nutrients in Estuaries and Open Coastal Waters.
Estuaries, estuary segments, or open coastal waters shall be included on the Planning List planning list for nutrients if:
(1) The numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion established in subsection 62-302.531(2) or 62-302.532(2), F.A.C., is exceeded for any parameter; or
(2) For estuaries, including tidal creeks, or open coastal waters without a numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion, their annual geometric mean chlorophyll a for any year is greater than 11 ug/l,
(3) No change.
(4) There is a statistically significant increasing trend in the annual geometric means at the 95 percent confidence level in TN, TP, or chlorophyll a over the planning period using a Mann’s one-sided, upper-tail test for trend as described in Nonparametric Statistical Methods by M. Hollander and D. Wolfe (1999 ed.), pages 376 and 724, which were incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.351(5), F.A.C., or
(5) For estuaries with nutrient criteria expressed as not to be exceeded in more than 10 percent of the samples, the nutrient data exceed the listing thresholds in Rule 62-303.320(1), F.A.C.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, 8-1-13, .
62-303.354 Nitrate-nitrite in Freshwater Spring Vents.
A spring vent in predominantly fresh waters shall be included on the Planning List planning list for nitrate-nitrite if:
(1) The numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion established in subsection 62-302.531(2), F.A.C., is exceeded; or
(2) No change.
(3) There is a statistically significant increasing trend in the annual geometric means at the 95 percent confidence level in nitrate-nitrite over the planning period using a Mann’s one-sided, upper-tail test for trend, as described in Nonparametric Statistical Methods by M. Hollander and D. Wolfe (1999 ed.), pages 376 and 724, which were incorporated by reference in Rule 62-303.351, F.A.C.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 7-2-12, Amended .
62-303.360 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support.
(1) A Class I, II, III or III-Limited (if primary contact and recreational use is not limited) water shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for evaluating primary contact and recreation use support based on bacteriological data if:
(a) There is a sufficient number of samples from the water segment that do not meet the applicable water quality criteria for E. coli for predominantly freshwaters or enterococci for predominantly marine waters expressed as a Ten Percent Threshold Value (TPTV) bacteriological quality based on the methodology described in subsection Rule 62-303.320(1), F.A.C. Data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e) – (4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. ,with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and samples Samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged, or
(b) The waterbody includes a sampling location that has one or more monthly geometric mean values above the monthly geometric mean E. coli criterion for predominantly freshwaters or enterococci criterion for predominantly marine waters during the planning period. To calculate a monthly geometric mean, there shall be at least ten samples collected within that month, with at least one sample from each full week of the month. Data must meet the requirements of Rules 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e) – (4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C., and samples collected on different days will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged.
(2) A Class I, II, III, or III-Limited water shall be placed on the Planning List for evaluating primary contact and recreation use support based on bathing area closures, advisories, or warnings issued by a local health department or county government if:
(a)(b) The water segment includes a bathing area that was closed by a local health Department or county government for more than one week or more than once during a calendar year based on bacteriological data, or
(b)(c) The water segment includes a bathing area for which a local health Department or county government has issued closures, advisories, or warnings totaling 21 days or more during a calendar year based on bacteriological data, or
(c)(d) The water segment includes a bathing area that was closed or had advisories or warnings for more than 12 weeks during a calendar year by a local health Department or county government based on previous bacteriological data or on derived relationships between bacteria levels and rainfall or flow., or
(e) The water segment includes a sampling location that has one or more monthly geometric mean values above the monthly geometric mean fecal coliform or enterococci criterion during the planning period. To calculate a monthly geometric mean, there shall be at least ten samples collected within that month, with at least one sample from each full week of the month, or
(2) When evaluating a water segment for bacteriological quality under paragraph (1)(a), the criterion used for fecal coliforms shall be that the Most Probable Number (MPN) or Membrane Filter (MF) shall not exceed 400 counts per 100 ml.
(3) For data collected after August 1, 2000, Tthe Florida Department of Health (DOH) database shall be the primary source of data used for determining bathing area closures, advisories, and warnings.
(4) Advisories, warnings, and closures based on red tides, rip tides, dangerous aquatic life sharks, hurricanes, or short-term releases of pollutants, such as sewage spills, sewer line breaks, that have been repaired and medical wastes, shall not be included when assessing primary contact and recreation use support. However, the Department shall note for the record that closures, advisories, or warnings data were excluded and explain why they were excluded.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
62-303.370 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support.
(1) A Class I, II, III or III–Limited water shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for fish and shellfish consumption if:
(1) There is a sufficient number of samples from the water segment that do not meet the applicable Class II water quality criteria for bacteriological quality based on the methodology described in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C., with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples, or
(2) there There is either a limited or no consumption fish consumption advisory, issued by the DOH, or other authorized governmental entity, in effect for the water segment., or
(2) A Class II water shall be placed on the Planning List for shellfish consumption based on its shellfish harvesting classification if
(3) For Class II waters, the water segment includes an area that is classified by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services’ Shellfish Environmental Assessment Section (SEAS) in one of the following shellfish harvesting classifications:
(a) through (c) No change.
(3) A Class II water shall be placed on the Planning List for shellfish consumption based on bacteriological data if:
(a) There is a sufficient number of samples from the water segment that do not meet the applicable Class II water quality criteria for fecal coliforms based on the methodology described in subsection 62-303.320(1), F.A.C. Data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C., with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and samples collected on different days will be assessed as individual samples, or
(b)(4) For Class II waters, tThe water segment includes a sampling location that has a median fecal coliform Most Probable Number (MPN) or Membrane Filter (MF) value that exceeds 14 counts per 100 ml for the planning period. To calculate a median value for a sampling location, there shall be at least 10 samples collected during the planning period. Data must meet the requirements of subsections (2)-(4), (8), and (9) in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C., however samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged.
(c)(5) When evaluating a water segment for bacteriological quality under subsection (1), the criteria criterion in paragraph subsection 62-302.530(6)(a), F.A.C., used for fecal coliform shall be that the MPN shall not exceed 43 counts per 100 ml and the MF shall not exceed 31 counts per 100 ml.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
62-303.380 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health.
(1) A Class I water shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for potential impairment of drinking water use support and the protection of human health based on bacteriological data if:
(a) There is a sufficient number of E. coli samples from the water segment that do not meet the applicable Class I water quality criteria for bacteriological quality expressed as a Ten Percent Threshold Value (TPTV) based on the methodology described in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C. Data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. ,with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and samples Samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged, or
(b) A public water system demonstrates to the Department that either:
1. Treatment costs to meet applicable drinking water criteria have increased by at least 25% to treat contaminants that exceed Class I criteria or to treat blue-green algae or other nuisance algae in the source water, or
2. The system has changed to an alternative supply because of additional costs that would be required to treat their surface water source.
(b)(c) The water segment includes a sampling location that has one or more monthly geometric mean values above the monthly geometric mean E.coli fecal coliform criterion during the planning period. To calculate a monthly geometric mean value for a sampling location, there shall be at least five samples collected within that month, with at least one sample from each full week of the month. Data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. Samples collected on different days will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged.
(2) A Class I water shall be placed on the Planning List for potential impairment of drinking water use support and the protection of human health based on information provided by public water systems if a public water system demonstrates to the Department that either:
(a) Treatment costs to meet applicable drinking water criteria have increased by at least 25% to treat contaminants that exceed Class I criteria or to treat blue-green algae or other nuisance algae in the source water, or
(b) The system has changed to an alternative supply because of additional costs that would be required to treat their surface water source.
(2)When determining increased treatment costs described in paragraph (b), costs due solely to new, more stringent drinking water requirements, inflation, or increases in costs of materials shall not be included.
(3) A water shall be placed on the Planning List planning list for assessment of the threat to human health if:
(a) No change.
(b) For human health-based criteria expressed as annual averages, the annual average concentration for any year of the assessment period exceeds the criteria. To be used to determine whether a water should be assessed further for human-health impacts, data must meet the requirements of paragraphs or subsections (2), (3), (6), and (7)(a), (8) and (9) in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C.
(4) When evaluating a water segment for bacteriological quality under paragraph (1)(a), the criterion used for fecal coliforms shall be that the MPN or MF shall not exceed 400 counts per 100 ml.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
PART III
THE STUDY LIST
62-303.390 The Study List.
(1) The Study List contains waters where additional information or Department review is needed before the water is placed on the Verified List for TMDL development but available evidence indicates there is a clear adverse trend in nutrients or nutrient response variables with a reasonable expectation that the water will become impaired within 10 years, or evidence indicates nonattainment of water quality standards or stream nutrient thresholds. ,but the Department does not have enough information to determine the causative pollutant(s) and therefore cannot determine the appropriate remedy, and waters where a site specific numeric interpretation has not been established pursuant to paragraph 63-302.531(2)(a), F.A.C., and there is a clear adverse trend in nutrients or nutrient response variables. Causes of nonattainment can include excess pollutant loading or concentrations, habitat or hydrologic alterations, or natural conditions. Waters that do not attain water quality standards due to natural conditions pursuant to paragraph 62-303.420(1)(b), F.A.C., shall not be added to the Study List. To conform to the expectations of Section 303(d) of the Federal Clean Water Act and federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. 130.7(b), waters and associated parameters identified indentified in the Study List will be submitted to EPA as water quality limited segments. However, pursuant to paragraph 403.067(2)(a), F.S., the Study List cannot be used in the administration or implementation of any regulatory program. A TMDL shall not be established for a waterbody placed on the Study List pursuant to subsection 62-303.390(2), F.A.C., until such time as it is placed on the Verified List verified list pursuant to Part IV of this chapter.
(2) A Class I, II, III or Class III-Limited water shall be placed on the Study List study list if:
(a) For waters with a statistically-significant increasing trend in TN, TP, nitrate-nitrite, or chlorophyll a pursuant to subsection 62-303.351(5), 62-303.352(3), 62-303.353(4), or 62-303.354(3), F.A.C., the Department confirms the water does not exceed an applicable numeric nutrient criterion and there is:
1. through 2. No change.
(b) A waterbody segment does not achieve the Biological Health Assessment provisions in Rule 62-303.430, F.A.C., but a cause has not been identified;
(c) A waterbody segment is verified as not meeting the dissolved oxygen criterion pursuant to Part IV of this chapter, but a cause has not been identified;
(d) A waterbody segment where pollution control mechanisms are in place or planned that meet the requirements of subsection Rule 62-303.600(1) and (3), F.A.C., except that there is uncertainty when water quality standards will be attained and the waterbody segment requires additional study; or
(e) For streams meeting the definition in subsection 62-302.200(36), F.A.C., that do not have a site specific numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion, the nutrient thresholds in subparagraph 62-302.531(2)(c)2., F.A.C., are exceeded based on data from the last 7.5 years and insufficient Biological Health Assessment, chlorophyll a, or other response variable data are available to fully assess achievement of the nutrient provisions in paragraph 62-302.531(2)(c), F.A.C.; A TMDL shall not be established for the waterbody prior to the collection of additional response variable data and the conclusion of the next assessment cycle.
(f) There are fewer than twenty samples for a bacteriological water quality criterion expressed as a TPTV, but there are five or more samples that do not meet an applicable water quality criterion based on data from at least five temporally independent sampling events;
(g) A waterbody segment is verified as not meeting the bacteriological water quality criterion pursuant to Part IV of this Chapter, but the Department determines that additional study is needed to evaluate whether the exceedances are due to natural sources given the predominance of natural land uses in the watershed or based on information submitted to the Department; or
(h) A waterbody exceeds a generally applicable criteria, but the Department receives a petition for a SSAC pursuant to Rule 62-302.800, F.A.C., and additional time is needed to review and process the petition.
(3) For wWaters placed on the Study List based on an increasing trend in nutrients or chlorophyll a pursuant to that fall under paragraph 62-303.390(2)(a), F.A.C., the Department shall notify local stakeholders about the increasing trend. and do not have a site specific numeric interpretation of the narrative pursuant to paragraph 62-302.351(2)(a), F.A.C., A water shall be removed from the Study List upon development of a new site-specific interpretation of the narrative nutrient criteria for the waterbody that would address the trend, determination that there was a flaw in the original analysis, determination that the trend is no longer statistically significant, development of a restoration plan meeting the requirements of subsection 62-303.600(1), F.A.C., or placement of the water on the Verified List. Those waters subject to a site specific interpretation of the narrative that meet the provisions of subparagraph 62-303.390(2)(a)1., F.A.C., will be reevaluated by the Department to determine whether adjustments are necessary to provide for the attainment and maintenance of water quality standards in downstream waterbodies.
(4) For waters that meet the listing requirements fall under paragraph 62-303.390(2)(b) or (c), F.A.C., above, a stressor identification study shall be conducted to identify the causative pollutant(s) or other factor(s) responsible for nonattainment. A stressor identification study includes collection and analysis of physical, chemical, and biological data necessary to determine the causative pollutant(s) or other factor(s) causing nonattainment.
(5) For waters placed on the Study List pursuant to paragraph 62-303.390(2)(d), F.A.C., the Department shall evaluate progress towards attainment of water quality standards.
(6) For waters placed on the Study List based on exceedances of the nutrient stream thresholds pursuant to paragraph 62-303.390(2)(e), FA.C., sufficient biological health assessments shall be collected to determine whether the stream attains the stream nutrient standard in paragraph 62-302.531(2)(c), F.A.C.
(7) For waters that fall under paragraph 62-303.390(2)(f), F.A.C., above, additional samples shall be collected to meet a minimum of 20 samples to re-assess the waterbody.
(8) For waters that fall under paragraph 62-303.390(2)(g), F.A.C., above, a bacterial source tracking study shall be conducted to evaluate whether anthropogenic sources are causing exceedances of the bacteriological criteria. The water shall be removed from the Study List if the Department confirms the exceedances are due to non-anthropogenic sources or shall be verified as impaired if at least ten percent of the exceedances are demonstrated to be due to anthropogenic sources.
(9) For waterbodies placed on the Study List to provide time to complete the review and otherwise process a petition for a SSAC, the Department shall reassess the waterbody during the next applicable assessment cycle for the basin.
(10)(5) It is the Department’s goal to collect the additional data needed for waters placed on the Study List pursuant to paragraphs 62-303.390(2)(a)-(c), and (2)(e)-(h), F.A.C., as part of its watershed management approach, with the data collected during either the same cycle that the water is initially listed on the Study List study list or during the subsequent cycle. After collecting the additional data, the Department shall either list the waterbody on the Verified List or remove the waterbody from the Study List, as appropriate.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 7-2-12, Amended_ .
PART IV
THE VERIFIED LIST
62-303.400 Methodology to Develop the Verified List.
(1) Waters shall be verified as being impaired if they meet the requirements for the Planning List planning list in Part II and the additional requirements of Rules 62-303.420-.480, F.A.C. A waterbody water body that fails to meet the minimum criteria for surface waters established in Rule 62-302.500, F.A.C.; any of its designated uses, as described in this part; or applicable water quality criteria, as described in this part, shall be determined to be impaired.
(2) Additional data and information collected after the development of the Planning List planning list will be considered when assessing waters on the Planning List planning list, provided it meets the requirements of this chapter. In cases where additional data are needed for waters on the Planning List planning list to meet the data sufficiency requirements for the Verified List verified list, it is the Department’s goal to collect this additional data as part of its watershed management approach, with the data collected during either the same cycle that the water is initially listed on the Planning List planning list (within 1 year) or during the subsequent cycle (six years).
(3) Unless information presented to the Department demonstrates otherwise, data more than 7.5 years old at the time the water segment is assessed proposed for listing on the verified list are not representative of current conditions and shall not be used except to evaluate historical trends in chlorophyll a or TSIs. Any determinations by the Department to use data older than 7.5 years shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the basis for the decision.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, .
PART IV
THE VERIFIED LIST
62-303.420 Aquatic Life-Based Water Quality Criteria Assessment.
(1) The Department shall reexamine the data used in Rule 62-303.320, F.A.C., to determine whether water quality criteria are met.
(a) If values exceeding the criteria are not due to pollutant discharges or reflect natural background conditions, including seasonal or other natural variations, the water shall not be listed on the Verified List verified list. In such cases, the Department shall note for the record why the water was not listed and provide the basis for its determination that the exceedances were not due to pollutant discharges.
(b) If the Department has information suggesting that the values not meeting the dissolved oxygen (DO) criterion are due to natural background conditions, it is the Department’s intent to support that conclusion through the use of Biological Health Assessment procedures referenced in Rule 62-303.330, F.A.C. The waterbody or segment shall not be included on the Verified List verified list for DO if two or more temporally independent Biological Health Assessments indicate the waterbody supports the protection and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife. In addition, tThe Biological Health Assessments shall be conducted either in the same waterbody segment, or for streams, in the contiguous adjacent downstream waterbody segment downstream of the segment where the water quality samples were taken. These Biological Health Assessments shall be conducted on the same day or after the water quality samples were collected.
(2) If the water was listed on the Planning List planning list and there were insufficient data from the most recent last five years of preceding the Planning List planning list assessment to meet the data distribution requirements of subsection 62-303.320(4), F.A.C., and to meet a minimum sample size for verification of twenty samples, additional data will be collected as needed to provide a minimum sample size of twenty. Once these additional data are collected, the Department shall re-evaluate the data using the approach outlined in subsection 62-303.320(1), F.A.C., but using Table 3, and place waters on the Verified List verified list when 10% or more of the samples do not meet the applicable criteria, with a minimum of a 90% confidence level using a binomial distribution. The Department shall limit the analysis to data collected during the last 7.5 five years preceding the planning list assessment and the additional data collected pursuant to this paragraph. For sample sizes greater than 500, the Department shall calculate the number of samples not meeting the criterion that are needed for the given sample size using the binomial distribution.
Table 3: Verified List
Minimum number of samples not meeting an applicable water quality criterion needed to put a water on the Verified List list with at least 90% confidence.
Sample sizes
Are listed if they have at least this # of samples that do not meet a criterion
Sample sizes
Are listed if they have at least this # of samples that do not meet a criterion
From
To
From
To
20
25
5
254
262
33
26
32
6
263
270
34
33
40
7
271
279
35
41
47
8
280
288
36
48
55
9
289
297
37
56
63
10
298
306
38
64
71
11
307
315
39
72
79
12
316
324
40
80
88
13
325
333
41
89
96
14
334
343
42
97
104
15
344
352
43
105
113
16
353
361
44
114
121
17
362
370
45
122
130
18
371
379
46
131
138
19
380
388
47
139
147
20
389
397
48
148
156
21
398
406
49
157
164
22
407
415
50
165
173
23
416
424
51
174
182
24
425
434
52
183
191
25
435
443
53
192
199
26
444
452
54
200
208
27
453
461
55
209
217
28
462
470
56
218
226
29
471
479
57
227
235
30
480
489
58
236
244
31
490
498
59
245
253
32
499
500
60
(3) If the waterbody was placed on the Planning List planning list based on worst case values used to represent multiple samples taken during a four day period, the Department shall evaluate whether the worst case value should be excluded from the analysis pursuant to subsections (4) and (5). If the worst case value should not be used, the Department shall then re-evaluate the data following the methodology in subsection 62-303.420(2), F.A.C., using the more representative worst case value or, if all valid values are below acutely toxic levels, the median value.
(4) If the waterbody was listed on the Planning List planning list based on samples that do not meet water quality criteria for metals, the metals data shall be excluded if it is determined that the quality assurance requirements of subsection 62-303.320(10)(8), F.A.C., were not met or that the sample was not collected and analyzed using clean techniques, if the use of clean techniques is appropriate. The Department shall re-evaluate the remaining valid data using the methodology in subsection 62-303.420(2), F.A.C., excluding any data that cannot be validated.
(5) Values that exceed possible physical or chemical measurement constraints (pH greater than 14, for example) or that represent data transcription errors, outliers the Department determines are not valid measures of water quality, water quality criteria exceedances due solely to violations of specific effluent limitations contained in state permits authorizing discharges to surface waters, water quality criteria exceedances within permitted mixing zones for those parameters for which the mixing zones are in effect, and water quality data collected during extended drought or following contaminant spills, discharges due to upsets or bypasses from permitted facilities, or rainfall in excess of the 25-year, 24-hour storm, shall be excluded from the assessment carried out under this rule. However, the Department shall note for the record that the data were excluded and explain why they were excluded.
(6) Once the additional data review is completed pursuant to subsections (1) through (5), the Department shall re-evaluate the data and shall include waters on the Verified List verified list that meet the criteria in subsection 62-303.420(2) or paragraph 62-303.320(7)(6)(b), F.A.C.
(7) Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (2), water segments shall also be included on the Verified List verified list if, based on representative data collected and analyzed in accordance with Chapter 62-160, F.A.C.:
(a) For parameters other than bacteriological water quality criteria, there There are less than twenty samples, but there are five or more samples that do not meet an applicable water quality criterion based on data from at least five temporally independent sampling events, or
(b) No change.
(c) For any water chemistry data used to list waters under this paragraph 62-303.420(7)(b), F.A.C., the Department shall include in the administrative record all of the applicable data quality assessment elements listed in Table 2 of the Department’s Guidance Document “Data Quality Assessment Elements for Identification of Impaired Surface Waters” (DEP EAS 01-01, April 2001), which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.320(9), F.A.C.
(8) For lakes, the daily average DO level shall be calculated as the average of measurements collected in the upper two meters of the water column at the same location on the same day. For all other fresh waters, the daily average freshwater DO level shall be calculated as the average of all measurements collected in the water column at the same location and on the same day. If any individual DO measurement is greater than 100 percent saturation, 100 percent shall be substituted for that value for the purpose of calculating daily averages.
(9) The daily average freshwater DO criteria shall be assessed preferentially using daily average values calculated from full days of diel monitoring data. A full day of diel data shall consist of 24 hours of measurements collected at a regular time interval of no longer than one hour. If diel monitoring data are not available, instantaneous samples may be used to assess the DO criterion by comparing the instantaneous instantaeous value with a time-of-day-specific translation of the daily average criterion. To determine the time-of-day-specific translation of the daily average criterion, the time (T) at which the DO sample was taken (in minutes past midnight) is entered into the appropriate equation below for the applicable region and waterbody type. The actual DO measurement collected at a given time is assessed against the calculated time-of-day-specific translation for that time, and if the instantaneous DO is greater than or equal to the calculated value, the daily average DO criterion is achieved.
RegionEquations for Time-of-Day-Specific Translation of the Daily Average DO Criterion
Streams
Northeast + Big Bend 1.1844 x 10-13 • T5 – 4.1432 x 10-10 • T4 + 4.7729 x 10-7 • T3 – 1.9692 x 10-4• T2 + 0.02314 • T + 31.24
Peninsula + Everglades 1.9888 x 10-13 • T5 – 6.8941 x 10-10 • T4 + 7.8373 x 10-7 • T3 – 3.1598 x 10-4• T2 + 0.03551 • T + 33.43
Panhandle West 9.0851 x 10-14 • T5 – 2.9941 x 10-10 • T4 + 3.1560 x 10-7 • T3 – 1.0851 x 10-4• T2 + 0.006285 • T + 65.61
Lakes
Northeast + Big Bend 1.4578 x 10-13 • T5 – 5.5607 x 10-10 • T4 + 7.0683 x 10-7 • T3 – 3.1879 x 10-4• T2 + 0.02817 • T + 34.19
Peninsula + Everglades 1.3709 x 10-13 • T5 – 5.0496 x 10-10 • T4 + 6.1352 x 10-7 • T3 - 2.5817 x 10-4• T2 + 0.01960 • T + 37.14
Panhandle West7.1190 x 10-14 • T5 – 2.6420 x 10-10 • T4 + 3.2247 x 10-7 • T3 – 1.3607 x 10-4• T2 + 0.01071 • T + 66.35
If multiple instantaneous DO samples are available in a day, the time-of-day-specific translation of the daily average criterion will be calculated for each individual sample. Achievement of the daily average DO criterion will be assessed by comparing the average of the actual DO measurements collected at each time against the average of the calculated time-of-day-specific translations for each time. If the average of the measured DO values is greater than or equal to the average of the time-of-day- specific translations of the criteria, the daily average DO criterion is achieved. An average of multiple daily values calculated in this manner will be considered as a single sample for assessment purposes.
(10) For predominantly marine waters, the Department shall evaluate the daily average DO criterion using Table 3 set forth in subsection 62-303.420(1), F.A.C., above, and shall also evaluate whether the seven-day and 30-day average criteria have been achieved during the verified period. A water segment shall be placed on the Verified List verified list for DO impairment if the number of samples below that do not meet the daily average DO criterion is greater than or equal to the number listed in Table 3 for the given sample size, or if there is more than one weekly average value below the weekly average DO criterion in any twelve week period of the verified period or more than one monthly average value below the monthly average DO criterion in any calendar year of the verified period. Prior to placing a waterbody on the Verified List verified list, the Department shall identify the causative pollutant(s) responsible for the exceedances of the DO criteria. Before assessing the weekly and monthly average DO criterion, the DO data shall be evaluated pursuant to subsections 62-303.420(3) and (5), F.A.C.
(a) through (e) No change.
(11) For assessment of the DO criteria for the portions of the Suwannee, Withlacoochee (North), and Santa Fe Rivers utilized by the Gulf Sturgeon, and in the portions of the Santa Fe and New Rivers utilized by the Oval Pigtoe Mussel, waters will be placed on the Verified List verified list when more than 50 percent of the measurements are below the applicable median or more than 10 percent of the daily average values are below the applicable 10th percentile values, specified in Appendix I of the “Technical Support Document: Derivation of Dissolved Oxygen Criteria to Protect Aquatic Life in Florida’s Fresh and Marine Waters,” (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02972) which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.320(5), F.A.C, at a minimum of a 90 percent confidence level using the binomial distribution.
(12) No change.
(13) A water segment shall be placed on the Verified List verified list for DO impairment if there has been a statistically significant decreasing trend in DO levels or an increasing trend in the range of daily DO fluctuations over the verified period at the 95 percent confidence level using a one-sided Seasonal Kendall test for trend, as described in Helsel, D.R. and R.M. Hirsch, 2002, Statistical Methods in Water Resources, USGS, pages 338 through 340 (http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02973), which were incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.320(14) F.A.C., after controlling for or removing the effects of confounding variables, such as climatic and hydrologic cycles, quality assurance issues, and changes in analytical methods. Water segments shall not be placed on the Verified List verified list for DO impairment until the Department has identified a pollutant causing the decrease or if the decrease in DO levels was authorized under Rules 62-302.300 and 62-4.242, F.A.C.
(14) For assessment of the 30-day average total ammonia criterion, the monthly average total ammonia shall be calculated for a station using a minimum of four samples collected within the month. A water segment shall be placed on the Verified List for total ammonia impairment if a station within the segment has more than one monthly average value above the 30-day average criterion in any calendar year of the verified period.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.021(11), 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, 8-1-13, .
62-303.430 Biological Impairment.
(1) All Biological Health Assessments used to list a water on the Verified List verified list shall be conducted and interpreted in accordance with Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., including Department-approved Standard Operating Procedures and the Department documents that are incorporated by reference in Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., for the SCI, LVI, and Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index. Sampling and Use of the Stream Condition Index (SCI) for Assessing Flowing Waters: A Primer (DEP-SAS-001/11), which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.200(29), F.A.C., and Sampling and Use of the Lake Vegetation Index (LVI) for Assessing Lake Plant Communities in Florida: A Primer (DEP-SAS-002/11), which was incorporated by reference in subsection 62-303.200(9), F.A.C. To be used for placing waters on the verified list, any Biological Health Assessments conducted before the adoption of applicable SOPs for such Biological Health Assessments as part of Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., shall substantially comply with the subsequent SOPs. Biological Health Assessments conducted during conditions inconsistent with the applicable primer shall be excluded from the assessment.
(2) If the water met the requirements for placement on the Planning List was listed on the planning list based on Biological Health Assessment results, the water shall be determined to be biologically impaired if any of the following conditions occur, given a minimum sample size of two temporally independent bioassessments:
(a) The average score of all the at least two temporally independent SCIs Biological Health Assessments is below 40, for the SCI or if either of the two most recent temporally independent SCI scores is less than 35, or 43 for the LVI. If there are only two SCIs Biological Health Assessments and the difference between the two scores is greater than 20 points, then an additional SCI or LVI shall be required and the average of all three scores shall be used.
(b) The average score of all the temporally independent LVIs is below 43 for a lake segment. If there are only two LVIs for a lake segment and the difference between the two scores is greater than 20 points, then an additional LVI shall be required and the average of all three scores shall be used.
(c)(b) The historic maximum SCI value, as defined in subsection 62-303.330(4), F.A.C., is above 64 and the average of the two most recent temporally independent SCI scores is 20 or more points below the historic maximum value.
(d)(c) The historic maximum value LVI, as defined in subsection 62-303.330(4), F.A.C., is above 78 and the average of the two most recent temporally independent LVI scores is 20 or more points below the historic maximum value.
(d) renumbered as (e) No change.
(3) If the water was listed on the Planning List planning list based on BioRecon data, two or more temporally independent SCIs shall be conducted. If the water segment was listed on the Planning List planning list based on other information specified in subsection 62-303.330(6) (5), F.A.C., indicating biological impairment, two or more temporally independent Biological Health Assessments appropriate for the waterbody type shall be conducted in the waterbody segment to verify whether the water is impaired. If available, the Department shall consider other scientifically credible biological assessment methods in predominantly marine waters to verify that the water is biologically impaired. Results from these biological assessments shall be evaluated in accordance with subsection 62-303.430(2), F.A.C., as applicable.
(4) If a waterbody was listed on the Planning List planning list based on failure of the Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index under subsection 62-302.530(10), F.A.C., a minimum of two Biological Health Assessments shall be conducted in accordance with the methodology in Rule 62-303.330, F.A.C., to verify whether the water is impaired. If an SCI or LVI is not applicable for the waterbody type, then the Biological Health Assessment shall be the Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index or other scientifically credible method.
(5) Following verification that a waterbody is biologically impaired, a waterbody shall be included on the Verified List verified list for biological impairment if:
(a) through (b) No change.
(6) If a waterbody is verified as biologically impaired, but a causative pollutant has not been identified, the waterbody shall be included on the Study List study list.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.450 Assessments of Numeric Interpretations of Narrative Nutrient Criteria.
(1) A stream or estuary without applicable numeric criteria in subsection 62-302.531(2), F.A.C., shall be placed on the Verified List verified list for impairment due to nutrients if it exceeds the chlorophyll a thresholds in subsection 62-303.351(4), F.A.C., or subsection 62-303.353(2), F.A.C., more than once in any consecutive three year period, and there are sufficient data from the last 7.5 years, combined with historical data (if needed to establish historical chlorophyll a levels), to meet the data sufficiency requirements of subsections 62-303.350(2)-(6), F.A.C. If there are insufficient data, additional data shall be collected as needed to meet the requirements. Once these additional data are collected, the Department shall determine if there is sufficient information, including paleoecological data, to develop a site-specific chlorophyll a threshold that better reflects conditions beyond which an imbalance in flora or fauna occurs in the water segment. If there is sufficient information, the Department shall re-evaluate the data using the site-specific thresholds. If there is insufficient information, the Department shall re-evaluate the data using the thresholds provided in subsections 62-303.351(4) and 62-303.353(2) (1), F.A.C., for streams and estuaries and verify impairment if there is more than one exceedance in any consecutive three year period. In any case, the Department shall limit its analysis to the use of data collected during the last 7.5 years. If alternative thresholds are used for the analysis, the Department shall provide the thresholds for the record and document how the alternative threshold better represents conditions beyond which an imbalance in flora or fauna is expected to occur.
(2) If the waterbody was listed on either the Pplanning or Study List study list for nutrient enrichment based on other information indicating an imbalance in flora or fauna, as provided in paragraphs or subsection 62-303.350(1), 62-303.351(3), 62-303.352(1)(b) (2) or 62-303.353(3), F.A.C., the Department shall verify the imbalance before placing the water on the Verified List verified list for impairment due to nutrients and shall provide documentation supporting the imbalance in flora or fauna.
(3) If the waterbody was listed on the Planning List planning list based on paragraphs or subsections 62-303.351(1), 62-303.352(1)(a) and (d), 62-303.353(1) and (5), or 62-303.354(1), F.A.C., upon confirming the imbalance of flora or fauna based on the last 7.5 years of data, the Department shall place the waterbody on the Verified List verified list for exceedances of the narrative nutrient criteria in paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., if the applicable numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion is exceeded based on the last 7.5 years of data.
(4) If a lake was listed on the Planning List based on subsection 62-303.352(2), F.A.C., and there are still insufficient data to determine the long-term geometric mean color or alkalinity, the Department shall place the lake on the Verified List for exceedances of the narrative nutrient criterion in paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., if the annual geometric mean chlorophyll a exceeds the applicable criterion for a colored lake in subsubparagraph 62-302.531(2)(b)1.b., F.A.C., more than once in a three year period in the last 7.5 years.
(5)(4) If the waterbody was listed on the Study List study list for an adverse trend in nutrient response variables pursuant to paragraph 62-303.390(2)(a), F.A.C., the Department shall analyze the potential risk of nonattainment of the narrative nutrient criteria in at paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C. This analysis shall take into consideration the current concentrations of nutrient response variables, the slope of the trend, and the potential sources of nutrients (natural and anthropogenic). If there is a reasonable expectation that the waterbody will become impaired within 5 years, the Department shall place the waterbody on the Verified List verified list to develop a TMDL that establishes a numeric interpretation pursuant to paragraph 62-302.531(2)(a), F.A.C.
(6)(5) The thresholds for impairment due to nutrients in paragraph 62-302.531(2)(c) and subsections 62-303.351(4) and 62-303.353(2) (1), F.A.C., are not required to be used during development of wasteload allocations or TMDLs where a site-specific interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion in paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., is established.
(7)(6) When assessing waters for nutrient impairment, the Department shall evaluate whether the data were collected under extreme climatic conditions, such as floods, droughts, and hurricanes. If the needed supporting information is provided to the Department, the Department shall also evaluate whether the data were collected under conditions that are representative of the type of waterbody used to derive the applicable criteria, and whether the samples are biased towards specific non-representative flow conditions. When assessing estuary specific numeric interpretations of the narrative nutrient criterion in Rule 62-302.532, F.A.C., the Department shall also evaluate whether the current ambient monitoring network is representative of the network that was the basis for the numeric interpretation of the narrative nutrient criterion in Rule 62-302.532, F.A.C. The Department will consider this information when developing the final Verified List verified list and shall not list waters as impaired based solely on extreme climatic conditions, non-representative data, or changes in the monitoring network.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, 8-1-13, .
PART V
MISCELLANEIOUS PROVISIONS
62-303.460 Primary Contact and Recreation Use Support.
(1) The Department shall review the data used by the DOH as the basis for bathing area closures, advisories or warnings and verify that the values exceeded the applicable DOH thresholds and the data meet the requirements of Chapter 62-160, F.A.C. If the segment is listed on the Planning List planning list based on bathing area closures, advisories, or warnings issued by a local health department or county government, the closures, advisories, or warnings based on red tides, rip tides, sewage spills, sewer line breaks, dangerous aquatic life sharks, medical wastes, hurricanes, or other factors not related to chronic discharges of pollutants shall not be included when verifying primary contact and recreation use support. The Department shall then re-evaluate the remaining data using the methodology in subsection paragraph 62-303.360(2)(1)(c), F.A.C. Water segments that meet the criteria in subsection paragraph 62-303.360(2)(1)(c), F.A.C., shall be included on the Verified List verified list as impaired.
(2) If the water segment was listed on the Planning or Study List planning list due to samples that do not meet water quality criteria for bacteriological quality, the Department shall, to the extent practical, evaluate the source of bacteriological contamination and shall verify that the impairment is due to chronic sources discharges of human-induced bacteriological pollutants before verifying listing the water segment is impaired on the verified list. The Department shall take into account the proximity of municipal stormwater outfalls, septic tanks, and domestic wastewater facilities, and other anthropogenic discharges when evaluating potential sources of bacteriological pollutants. For water segments that contain municipal stormwater outfalls, the impairment documented for the segment shall be presumed to be due, at least in part, to chronic discharges of bacteriological pollutants. The Department shall then re-evaluate the data using the methodology in subsection 62-303.320(1), F.A.C., excluding any values that have been demonstrated to be are elevated solely due to non-anthropogenic sources wildlife, or for enterococci in coastal recreational waters, adjusting the values based on the human health-related risk factors for wildlife-based enterococci upon meeting the relevant requirements of 40 CFR 131.41(c)(2). If information is provided to the Department indicating that the exceedances may be due to natural sources but there is uncertainty whether anthropogenic sources contributed to the exceedances, the water segment shall be placed on the Study List pursuant to paragraph 62-303.390(2)(g), F.A.C.
(3) Water segments shall be included on the Verified List verified list if:
(a) The number of samples that exceed do not meet the applicable single-sample bacteriological water quality criteria expressed as a TPTV meets the requirements in subsection 62-303.420(6), F.A.C. Data must meet the data requirements of subsections and paragraphs 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. ,with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and samples Samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged, or
(b) There are one or more exceedances of a bacteriological water quality criterion expressed as a monthly geometric mean during the verified period. Data must meet the requirements of subsections and paragraphs 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e) – (4)(g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. Samples collected on different days will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged. To assess the monthly data for a sampling location, there shall be at least ten samples collected within that month, with at least one sample from each full week of the month.
(4) When evaluating a water segment for bacteriological quality under paragraph 62-303.460(3)(a), F.A.C., the criterion used for fecal coliforms shall be that the Most Probable Number (MPN) or Membrane Filter (MF) shall not exceed 400 counts per 100 ml.
(5) renumbered (4) No change.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
62-303.470 Fish and Shellfish Consumption Use Support.
(1) In order to be used under this part, the The Department shall review the fish consumption advisories and the data used by the DOH as the basis for the fish consumption advisories and shall only use the advisories and data under this part if the following requirements are met determine whether it meets the following requirements:
(a) The advisory is based on the statistical evaluation of fish tissue data from at least twelve fish collected from the specific water segment or waterbody water body to be listed,
(b) through (c) No change.
(2) Waters with advisories determined to meet the requirements of this section or waters where scientifically credible and compelling information meeting the requirements of Chapter 62-160, F.A.C., indicates the applicable human health-based water quality criteria are not met shall be listed on the Verified List verified list. Any determinations to list waters based on this provision shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the basis for the decision.
(3) Class II waters shall be included on the Verified List verified list for fecal coliform impairment if, following review of the available data as described in subsection 62-303.460(2), F.A.C.:
(a) The number of samples above 43 counts per 100 ml meet the requirement in subsection 62-303.420(6), F.A.C. Data must meet the data requirements of subsections and paragraphs 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(4) (g), (8), and (9), F.A.C. ,with the exception that paragraph 62-303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and sSamples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples, or
(b) The water segment includes a sampling location that has a median fecal coliform MPN or MF value that exceeds 14 counts per 100 ml for the verified period. To calculate a median value for a sampling location, there shall be at least 20 samples collected during the verified period.
(4) Waters that qualify for placement on the Planning List planning list based on shellfish harvesting classification information shall be verified as impaired for fecal coliforms.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
62-303.480 Drinking Water Use Support and Protection of Human Health.
If the water segment was listed on the Planning List planning list due to exceedances of a human health-based water quality criterion, the Department shall re-evaluate the data using the methodology in subsections 62-303.380(1) and (3), F.A.C., and limit the analysis to data collected within 7.5 years of the time the water segment is proposed for listing on the Verified List verified list. Data older than 7.5 years shall be used if it is demonstrated to be representative of current conditions. Any determinations to use older data shall be documented by the Department, and the documentation shall provide the basis for the decision that the data are representative of current conditions. For this analysis, the Department shall exclude any data meeting the requirements of subsection 62-303.420(5), F.A.C. The following water segments shall be listed on the Verified List verified list:
(1) through (2) No change.
(3) For bacteriological water quality criteria, water segments shall be included on the verified as impaired list if, following review of the available data as described in subsections 62-303.460(2) and (5), F.A.C.:
(a) The number of months samples that do not meet the applicable single-sample bacteriological water quality criteria expressed as a TPTV meet the requirements in subsection 62-303.420(6), F.A.C. Data must meet the data requirements of subsections 62-303.320(2), (3), (4)(e)-(4)(g), and (8), F.A.C. ,with the exception that paragraph 62- 303.320(4)(a), F.A.C., does not apply and s Samples collected on different days within any four day period will be assessed as individual samples and samples collected on the same day shall be averaged, or
(b) No change.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 8-1-13, .
PART V
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
62-303.500 Prioritization for TMDL Development.
(1) When establishing the TMDL development schedule for water segments on the Verified List verified list of impaired waters, the Department shall prioritize impaired water segments according to the severity of the impairment and the designated uses of the segment, taking into account the most serious water quality problems; most valuable and threatened resources; and risk to human health and aquatic life. Impaired waters shall be prioritized as high, medium, or low priority.
(2) No change.
(3) The following waters shall be designated low priority:
(a) No change.
(b) Water segments that are not designated as high priority, and the Department has concluded that local stakeholders are diligently working on a demonstration per subsection 62-303.600(1) and (2), F.A.C., by the next listing cycle for the basin. were not on a planning list of impaired waters, but which were identified as impaired during the second phase of the watershed management approach and were included in the verified list, unless the segment meets the criteria in subsection (2) for high priority.
(4) All segments not designated high or low priority shall be medium priority and shall be prioritized based on the following factors:
(a) through (b) No change.
(c) The presence of water segments with greater than twenty-five percent of the samples not meeting an applicable water quality criterion or alternative threshold with a minimum of a 90 percent confidence level.
(d) renumbered as (c) No change.
(d)(e) Administrative needs of the TMDL program, including meeting a TMDL development schedule agreed to with EPA, focusing TMDL development where it is the most effective approach to restoration, and basin priorities related to following the Department’s watershed management approach, and the number of administratively continued permits in the basin.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 8-1-13, .
62-303.600 Evaluation of Pollution Control Mechanisms.
(1) Upon determining that a waterbody water body is impaired or determining there is an increasing trend in nutrients with a reasonable expectation that the waterbody will become impaired within 5 years, the Department shall evaluate whether existing or proposed technology-based effluent limitations and other pollution control programs under local, state, or federal authority are sufficient to result in the attainment of applicable water quality standards.
(2) If, after evaluation of the pollution control mechanisms as a result of the factors set forth in subsection (1), the water segment is expected to attain water quality standards in the future and is expected to make reasonable progress towards attainment of water quality standards by the time the next 303(d) list for the basin is scheduled to be submitted to EPA, the segment shall not be listed on the Verified List verified list. The Department’s shall document the basis for its decision shall be based on a plan that provides reasonable assurance that, noting any proposed pollution control mechanisms and expected improvements in water quality in that provide reasonable assurance that the water segment will attain applicable water quality standards.
(3) For water segments with planned or on-going restoration activities that will address the non-attainment of water quality standards, stakeholders may submit information to the Department demonstrating pollutant reduction mechanisms to address the non-attainment.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Repromulgated 1-2-07, Amended .
62-303.700 Listing Cycle.
The Department shall, to the extent practical, develop basin-specific Verified Lists verified lists of impaired waters as part of its watershed management approach, which rotates through the State’s surface water basins on a five year cycle. At the end of the first phase of the cycle, which is designed to develop a preliminary assessment of the basin, the Department shall update the planning list for the basin and shall include the planning list in the status report for the basin, which will be noticed to interested parties in the basin. If the specific pollutant(s) or response variables contributing to causing the impairment in a particular water segment is not known at the time the Planning or Study List planning list is prepared, information in the lists shall provide the basis for including the water segment on the applicable planning list. In these cases, tThe pollutant and concentration(s) causing the impairment shall be identified before the water segment is included on the Verified List verified list to be adopted by Secretarial Order. During the listing second phase of the cycle, which is designed to collect additional data on waters in the basin, interested parties shall be provided the opportunity to work with the Department to collect and evaluate additional water quality data and provide comments to the Department on the basin-specific lists. At any time during the listing cycle Alternatively, interested parties may develop proposed water pollution control mechanisms that may affect the final Verified List verified list adopted by the Secretary at the end of the second phase. To ensure that data or information will be considered in the preliminary basin assessment, it must be submitted to the Department or entered into FLASTORET, or its successors, or, if applicable, the DOH database no later than 60 days after the end of the verified period September 30 during the year of the assessment.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, .
62-303.710 Format of Verified List and Verified List Approval.
(1) The Department shall follow the methodology established in this chapter to develop basin-specific Verified List verified lists of impaired water segments. The Verified List verified list shall specify the pollutant or pollutants causing the impairment and the concentration of the pollutant(s) causing the impairment. If the water segment is listed based on numeric water quality criteria, then the Verified List verified list shall provide the applicable criteria. However, if the listing is based on narrative or biological criteria, or impairment of other designated uses, and the water quality criteria are met, the list shall specify the concentration of the pollutant relative to the water quality criteria and explain why the numerical criterion is not adequate.
(2) Segments impaired for pollutants that are no longer legally allowed to be used or discharged shall not be placed on the Verified List verified list because the TMDL will be zero for the pollutant.
(3) For waters impaired for biological health or dissolved oxygen, the Department shall identify the pollutants causing or contributing to the impairment and list both the pollutant and dissolved oxygen on the Verified List verified list. If the factor(s) causing the impairment cannot be identified, the water shall be placed on the Study List study list.
(4) For waters impaired by nutrients, the Department shall identify whether nitrogen or phosphorus, or both, are the limiting nutrients for the verified period, and specify the limiting nutrient(s) in the verified list.
(4)(5) The Verified List verified list shall also include the priority and the schedule for TMDL development established for the water segment, as required by federal regulations.
(6) The verified list shall also note any waters that are being removed from the current planning list and any previous verified list for the basin.
(5)(7) The Verified List verified basin-specific 303(d) list shall be approved by order of the Secretary, and the order shall also note any waters that are being removed from the Verified List.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 7-2-12, .
62-303.720 Delisting Procedure.
(1) Waters on Planning planning or Study Lists study lists developed under this chapter that are verified to not be impaired during development of the Verified List verified list shall be removed from the State’s Planning planning or Study List study list. Once a waterbody segment is verified to not be impaired pursuant to Part IV of this chapter, the data used to place the waterbody on the planning or study list shall not be the sole basis for listing that waterbody segment on future planning lists.
(2) Waterbody segments shall be removed from the State’s Verified List verified list only after adoption of a TMDL, a Department determination that pollution control programs provide reasonable assurance that water quality standards will be attained pursuant to Rule 62-303.600 F.A.C., or upon a demonstration that the waterbody meets the waterbody quality standard that was previously established as not being met.
(a) For waters listed due to failure to meet aquatic life use support based on water quality criteria or due to threats to human health based on single sample water quality criteria, the water shall be delisted when:
1. through 2. No change.
3. Following demonstration that the water was inappropriately listed due to flaws in the original analysis, evaluation of available data indicates the water does not meet the criteria for listing established in Rule 62-303.420, F.A.C.
(b) New data evaluated under subparagraph 62-303.720(2)(a)1., F.A.C., must meet the following requirements:
a. through b. renumbered as 1. through 2. No change.
3. c. The data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.320(4), (8)(6) and (9)(7), F.A.C.
(c)(b) For waters listed due to failure to meet aquatic life use support based on biological data pursuant to Rule 62-303.430, F.A.C., the waterbody shall be delisted when two temporally independent follow-up Biological Health Assessments have been conducted and the waterbody no longer qualifies for the Planning List planning list pursuant to subsection 62-303.330(3), F.A.C. The follow-up tests must meet the following requirements:
1. No change.
2. The Biological Health Assessments must be conducted during similar conditions (same seasons and general flow conditions) under which the previous Biological Health Assessments used to determine impairment were collected.
2.3. The data must meet the requirements of subsections 62-303.330(1) and (2), F.A.C.
(c) through (f) renumbered as (d) through (g) No change.
(h)(g) For waters listed based on bacteriological water quality criteria expressed as a monthly geometric mean or a median pursuant to paragraph 62-303.460(3)(b), 62-303.470(3)(b), or 62-303.480(3)(b), F.A.C., the water shall be delisted when:
1. For listings based on bacteriological water quality criteria expressed as a monthly geometric mean, tThe criteria applicable to those sections are met for three consecutive years and there are sufficient new data available to calculate monthly values for at least the same seasons in which the exceedances occurred, or
2. For listings based on bacteriological water quality criteria expressed as a median, the criteria applicable to those sections are met for the verified period, or
3.2. Following a demonstration that the water was inappropriately listed due to flaws in the original analysis, including the use of a non-representative sample set.
(i)(h) For waters listed based on single-sample bacteriological water quality criteria pursuant to paragraph 62-303.460(3)(a), 62-303.470(3)(a), or 62-303.480 (3)(a), F.A.C., the water shall be delisted upon meeting the delisting provisions in paragraph 62-303.720(2)(a), F.A.C.
(j)(i) No change.
(k)(j) For waters listed based on nutrient impairment, the waterbody shall be delisted if:
1. It was listed based on exceedances of a nutrient threshold in subsection 62-303.450(1), F.A.C., but it does not meet the listing thresholds in subsection Rule 62-303.450(1), F.A.C., for three consecutive years; , or
2. It was listed based on exceedances of a numeric nutrient criterion expressed as an annual geometric mean or annual mean, and the water attains the criterion for three consecutive years;
3. It was listed based on other information indicating an imbalance in flora or fauna pursuant to subsection 62-303.450(2), F.A.C, and it is demonstrated to not exceed the narrative nutrient criteria at paragraph 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C., pursuant to the provisions of subsection 62-303.450(2)(3), F.A.C.;
4. It was listed based on exceedances of a numeric nutrient criterion expressed as a long-term average or long-term average of annual means, and the long-term average over the verified period no longer exceeds the criterion;
5. It was listed based on exceedances of a numeric nutrient criterion expressed as not to be exceeded in more than 10 percent of the measurements, and the water meets the delisting requirements of subsection 62-303.720(2)(a)1., F.A.C.;
6. It was listed based on exceedance of a loading based numeric nutrient criterion and the water attains the criterion for three consecutive years; or
7. It was listed based on an increasing trend in chlorophyll a and based on additional data and analysis the trend is no longer statistically significant or the water is no longer expected to become impaired within 5 years.
(l)(k) No change.
(m)(l) For waters listed due to failure to meet aquatic life use support based on paragraph 62-303.420(7)(b), F.A.C., or due to failure to meet fish consumption use support based on subsection 62-303.470(2)(3), F.A.C., the waterbody shall be delisted if the Department determines the waterbody is no longer impaired, based on scientifically credible and compelling information comparable in quantity and quality to the information used to make the initial listing decision. Any determinations to delist waters based on this provision shall be documented, and the documentation shall include the basis for the decision.
Table 4. Delisting
Maximum number of samples that do not meet an applicable water quality criterion allowable to DELIST with at least 90% confidence.
Sample Sizes
Maximum # of Samples not meeting a criterion allowable for delisting
Sample sizes
Maximum # of Samples not meeting a criterion allowable for delisting
From
To
From
To
30
37
0
279
289
21
38
51
1
290
300
22
52
64
2
301
311
23
65
77
3
312
323
24
78
90
4
324
334
25
91
103
5
335
345
26
104
115
6
346
356
27
116
127
7
357
367
28
128
139
8
368
378
29
140
151
9
379
389
30
152
163
10
390
401
31
164
174
11
402
412
32
175
186
12
413
423
33
187
198
13
424
434
34
199
209
14
435
445
35
210
221
15
446
456
36
222
232
16
457
467
37
233
244
17
468
478
38
245
255
18
479
489
39
256
266
19
490
500
40
267
278
20
(n)(m) For waters listed due to failure to meet aquatic life use support pursuant to paragraph 62-303.320(7) (6)(b), F.A.C., the water shall be delisted when the applicable criteria are met for at least three consecutive years and there are new data available for the same seasons in which the previous exceedances occurred.
(o)(n) For waterbodies listed on the Verified List verified list, the water shall be delisted from the Verified List verified list for a given parameter and added to the Study List study list when subsequent analysis demonstrates that the cause of the impairment was incorrect and therefore, the cause of the impairment is unknown or otherwise demonstrates that a TMDL is not appropriate.
(p)(o) For waters listed based on the 30-day monthly average DO criterion for predominantly marine waters or the 30-day average ammonia criterion, the waterbody shall be delisted when the monthly average meets the DO criterion is met for at least three consecutive years and there are new data available for the same seasons in which the criterion was previously not achieved.
(q)(p) No change.
(3) Any delisting of waters from the Verified List verified list shall be approved by order of the Secretary at such time as the requirements of this section are met.
Rulemaking Authority 403.061, 403.067 FS. Law Implemented 403.062, 403.067 FS. History–New 6-10-02, Amended 12-11-06, 9-4-07, 7-2-12, 8-1-13, .
NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE: Tom Frick
NAME OF AGENCY HEAD WHO APPROVED THE PROPOSED RULE: Jonathan P. Steverson
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED BY AGENCY HEAD: October 23, 2015
DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT PUBLISHED IN FAR: May 19, 2015
Document Information
- Comments Open:
- 11/4/2015
- Summary:
- The Department proposes a number of revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., designed to clarify the assessment methodology for identifying impaired surface waters. New provisions primarily relate to: (1) the assessment of the concurrently proposed bacteria criteria and (2) clarification of the scope of waters on the Study List. There are some changes to the rule text describing the listing cycle and the delisting requirements for certain parameters, as well as some formatting changes and changes ...
- Purpose:
- The proposed revisions to Chapter 62-303, F.A.C., are intended to provide additional clarity in the assessment of recently adopted or concurrently proposed water quality criteria in Chapter 62-302, F.A.C. The rule revisions are adopted as part of the Triennial Review of Florida water quality standards.
- Rulemaking Authority:
- 403.061, 403.067 FS.
- Law:
- 403.021(11), 403.062, 403.067 FS.
- Contact:
- : Eric Shaw, Department of Environmental Protection, Water Quality Standards Program, MS 6511, 2600 Blair Stone Road, Tallahassee, FL 32399-2400, (850)245-8429 or e-mail: eric.shaw@dep.state.fl.us.
- Related Rules: (15)
- 62-303.100. Scope and Intent
- 62-303.150. Relationship Between Planning and Verified Lists
- 62-303.200. Definitions
- 62-303.300. Methodology to Develop the Planning List
- 62-303.310. Evaluation of Aquatic Life Use Support
- More ...