Article about MFLs in todays (11/12/14) Gainesville Sun: DEP adds missing data to proposed protections for Lower Santa Fe, Ichetucknee In this June 18, 2014 file photo, tubers enjoy Ichetucknee Springs State Park in Fort White. Erica Brough/The Gainesville Sun By Christopher Curry Staff Writer Published: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 2:40 p.m. Last Modified: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 at 3:25 p.m. Two months after an administrative law judge threw out the states proposed protections for the Lower Santa Fe and Ichetucknee rivers on narrow and technical grounds, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection is moving ahead with slight changes to the rule establishing minimum flows and levels for the two rivers. On Nov. 7, the DEP added two pieces of technical data that the agency had left out of the prior proposed rule, an omission that led an administrative law judge to rule the MFLs invalid as too vague. That judges Sept. 11 ruling dismissed the vast majority of the arguments that the environmental group the Ichetucknee Alliance and water activist Paul Still, with the Bradford Soil & Water Conservation District, had raised in their legal challenges. They said the MFLs were too weak to protect the rivers and their springs and improperly grandfathered in existing permitted water uses that already had impacted the rivers with their groundwater pumping. The MFLs establish acceptable flows for rivers after which any additional pumping of the rivers will lead to significant environmental harm. The DEP has said both the Ichetucknee and Lower Santa Fe are already flowing below their proposed MFLs. But after a coalition of water utilities considered a legal challenge, the department adopted rules that did not address the impact on the rivers from the groundwater pumping of utilities, agricultural operations or other users who currently hold water-withdrawal permits. Under DEP rules, any existing groundwater pumping permit that comes up for renewal without a requested increase to allowable withdrawal levels shall be approved for up to 20 years, with the caveat that they will be revisited after a new computer groundwater flow model for North Florida and South Georgia is in place. In a 54-page ruling released Sept. 11, Administrative Law Judge Bram D.E. Canter said the proposed rules setting minimum flows and levels for the two rivers did not include enough technical information to support them. Specifically, Canter said the rules were invalid because the DEP left out the period of record, or the time span covered, for the flow duration curve of the rivers. That curve shows the percentage of time that the flow of a river, as measured in cubic feet per second, equals or exceeds a specific level. In his ruling, Canter said the DEP also left out synthetic data, or numbers used to fill in gaps in data obtained by direct measurement, or a reference to a technical report that contained all of that information. Last Friday, the DEP added that information, which was compiled in other reports, to the proposed rule. The period of record for the flows in the Ichetucknee at U.S. 27 and the Lower Santa Fe near Fort White covers the time span from Oct. 1, 1932, to Sept. 30, 1990. In September, a representative of the Ichetucknee Alliance said the group hoped the judges ruling would prompt the DEP to sit down with environmental groups and take their concerns into account before revisiting the MFLs. Late last month, a high-ranking DEP official indicated that the agencys plan was to add the information the judge said was lacking into the proposed rule. We are currently looking at a means to include the technical information in the rule, DEP Deputy Secretary for Water Quality and Ecosystem Restoration Drew Bartlett said in an Oct. 28 statement. Our goal is to do so in a manner that minimizes procedural delays in establishing more environmental protection for the Santa Fe and Ichetucknee Rivers and associated springs. Still said Tuesday afternoon that he is considering another legal challenge. He said he feels the MFLs are based on bad science and does not want them to become a precedent. He also objects to the fact that, for the next few years, the MFLs will only be taken into account on new groundwater pumping applications, not existing permits. If there is a shortage of water, any user contributing to that shortage should be affected, no matter how long theyve had a permit, Still said. gainesville/article/20141111/ARTICLES/141119936/0/?p=all&tc=pgall
Posted on: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 13:07:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015