News from the

A Newsletter of LG2 Environmental Solutions, Inc.
Volume 1 Number 3	June/July 2003

In This Newsletter:

• New Bill in Congress Seeks to Expand Jurisdiction by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

• U.S. Army Corps Plans to Dredge Palm Valley ICWW, Trouble for Non-Compliant Docks

• FWC Feral and Free-Ranging Cats Policy Passed

• Georgia Fair Credit Lending Act, New Legislation Paves the Way for Development                        

• Alternative and Performance Based Septic Systems - Your Lot is Buildable!

New Bill in Congress Seeks to Expand Jurisdiction by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers  Back to top

On 27 February, 2003, a new bill, called the Clean Water Authority Restoration Act of 2003, was referred to the Committee on Environmental and Public Works.  This bill is sponsored by Senators Feingold, Boxer, Jeffords, and Lieberman.  This bill is meant to “…clarify the jurisdiction of the United States over waters of the United States.”  Specifically, the bill states that its purpose is to “reaffirm the original intent of Congress in enacting the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 … to clearly define the waters of the United States… [, and] to provide protection to waters of the United States to the fullest extent of the legislative authority of Congress under the Constitution”.  Specifically, the Act seeks to amend Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1362) by removing paragraph (7) and adding a definition of Waters of the United States under a new paragraph (23).  Paragraph (7) simply refers to Navigable Waters and defines them as Waters of the United States.  Paragraph (23) will define Waters of the United States as “…all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the foregoing, to the fullest extent of these waters, …”.   It appears that the main objective of this change is to remove the term “navigable waters” from the definition of Waters of the United States.

What does this all mean?  According to Mr. Jerry Howard of the National Association of Home Builders, this act would  “…in effect, elevate roadside ditches to the same level as wetlands connected to the Everglades.”  By removal of the term Navigable Waters from the definition, this expands the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).  The tie to Navigable Waters has been the limiting factor in the Corps jurisdiction for the past 30 years.  This may have the direct effect of bringing isolated wetlands back into jurisdiction as reaction to the recent SWANCC case decision that ruled that the USACE could not regulate isolated wetlands based on a migratory bird use.

Should you wish to write your Senators to let them know your feelings on this matter.  Here are their addresses:

U.S. Army Corps Plans to Dredge Palm Valley ICWW-Trouble for Non-Compliant Docks Back to top

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is planning to maintain, via dredging, the existing Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW) channel in St. Johns County, Florida.  Dredging will likely occur throughout the full length of ICWW in St. Johns County in order to restore the channel to its original or intended depths of 12 feet.  Shoaling has caused some areas to “fill-in” to depths of 8 feet or less. 

Although dredging the ICWW could be considered good news to most people, especially those with large watercraft, some folks may not appreciate the repercussions of such an activity on docks that may be considered non-compliant.  A dock may be considered non-compliant if it has never received a permit from the USACE for its construction, it was not constructed as per permitted plans, and/or it exceeds normal permitting thresholds such as height or distance from channel.  Those affected most by this activity are those along narrow reaches of the waterway including Palm Valley.  In these areas, dock owners seek to extend their docks to the maximum lengths allowed in order to have enough water at low tides to support their boats in their boat slips. 

The USACE is planning Town Meetings inviting all interested parties to comment on the project sometime in the 3^rd or 4^th quarter this year.  During this meeting, the maintenance dredging project will be described in detail and non-compliant docks will be identified according to Mr. Ridel.  The dredging activity is planned for early 2004.

Although the Corps is focusing on docks that encroach upon the minimum setback, this activity may open all other docks to more scrutiny as to their compliance with regulatory and permitting laws.  Owners of illegal or non-compliant docks should be aware of this activity and take steps to bring their structures into compliance.  This may be as easy as requesting an after-the-fact permit or permit modification.  Then again, this could mean physically removing or modifying all or a portion of your dock.

Should you have any questions about your dock’s compliance with the USACE and Florida Department of Environmental Protections regulations, please call Lee Gerald at (904) 824-8633.

FWC Feral and Free-Ranging Cats Policy Passes  Back to top

On May 30, 2003, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) passed a policy regarding feral and free-ranging cats (http://www.floridaconservation.org/feral_cats_review.htm).  A free-ranging cat is defined as all cats that spend the majority of their time outdoors and a feral cat as one that has escaped from domestication or has been abandoned to the wild and has become wild, and the offspring of such animals.  These free-ranging or feral cats can pose a significant threat to native wildlife in the form of predation and the transmittance of feline diseases. 

According to extensive studies on feeding habits of these free-ranging or feral cats, 70 percent of the cats’ prey consists of small mammals and 20 percent of birds.  The FWC estimates that feral and free-ranging cats may be killing as many as 271 million small mammals and 68 million birds in Florida each year, http://spacecoastfelinenetwork.com/fc_pages.rtf. In Florida, federally listed species known or suspected to be depredated by feral and domestic cats include six subspecies of beach mice, the Key Largo cotton mouse, Key Largo woodrat, Lower Keys marsh rabbit, Florida scrub-jay, and several species of sea turtles.  In addition, unvaccinated cats can transmit diseases to wildlife including leukemia, discovered in western lions, and panleukopenia, found in the endangered Florida panther. 

The policy that was passed was formed “to protect native wildlife from predation, disease and other impacts presented by feral and free-ranging cats.”  According to FWC Commissioners, “the FWC is not making drastic plans to kill cats, nor does it outlaw the practice of Trap-Neuter-Release (TNR).”  TNR is a method of regulating and maintaining feral cat colonies; the method is self-explanatory.  This technique is not endorsed by the FWC on Commission-managed lands because the primary purpose is to “manage for the well-being of wildlife”.  Otherwise, the control of nuisance or feral cats and issues of local public concern will be left up to local governments.  

The FWC is focusing on developing strategies including:

·               A public-awareness campaign focusing on responsible cat ownership and to inform cat owners of laws prohibiting the release or abandonment of cats to the wild.

·               Forming science based, humane solutions for situations where cats impact rare wildlife-particularly on lands the Commission owns or manages. 

·               To eliminate the threat of cats on local populations of wildlife, particularly listed   species.

·               Prohibiting the release, feeding or protection of cats on lands managed by the FWC and oppose programs and policies that allow the release, feeding or protection of cats on public lands that support wildlife habitat (http://www.ecofloridamag.com/archived/spring03_news.htm).

Georgia Fair Credit Lending Act, New Legislation Paves the Way for Development Back to top

The Georgia Fair Lending Act (GAFLA) was a bill passed and signed into Georgia law on October 1, 2002.  This act was designed to protect uninformed borrowers from crooked lenders.  Specifically it was designed to give lenders the power to sue brokers, lenders, servicers, and even the investment companies who purchase the bundled loans.  What does this mean for our business?  Standard and Poor’s refused to rate bundled mortgage loans, which eliminate a secondary market for mortgage loans coming out of Georgia.  When banks can no longer sell off the loans they make, they stop making loans.  When mortgage loans are no longer made, land development does not occur. 

The loans in question are; small denomination, short-term or temporary loans, FHA, VA, and GHFA loans; variable rate loans, mid-priced loans defined as “covered” loans, tax advantage loans for boats, cars, RV’s and other consumer purposes, certain bridge loans, loans refinanced within five years, and loans sold in the secondary market.  Considering the median value of an owner-occupied home in Georgia is $111,200 (US Census Bureau, 2000 data), and the large amount of military households in southeast Georgia, one can plainly see the far reaching implications of this bill.  Any person violating this act is subject to legal action for actual damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, and costs and reasonable attorney fees.  This has not halted the mortgage industry in Georgia, yet… 

On March 6, 2003 The Georgia Senate approved Substitute SB 53, which removed some of the bite from the bill in question, and on March 7, 2003, the Governor signed this bill into law.  Of all states with a Predatory Lending Act on the books, Georgia is still the toughest.  It appears the political lobbyist in conjunction with others in the financial lending industry have successfully saved the mortgage industry in Georgia from coming to a screeching halt.  Many lenders now have procedures for dealing with the GAFLA and we can all rest easier at night knowing that our legislators are protecting us from predatory lending agencies. 

If you have any questions about the GAFLA or about current land development issues in southern Georgia, call Ryan Spohn, the Georgia Office Manager at 912-577-0465.

Alternative and Performance Based Septic Systems - Your Lot is Buildable Back to top

A pond to the east,. . . a wet ditch to the west,. . . a surface water wetland to the north,. . . and a county easement setback to the south and no available sanitary sewer.  What is a small residential or commercial lot developer to do?  Don't fret!  There still may be hope with some creative planning and use of various available products and methods to either reduce the drainfield height, size, and/or setbacks.

An On-site Sewage Treatment and Disposal System is typically the most limiting structure when planning on small lots.  It must be 75 feet from a private drinking water well, 50 or 75 feet from surface water (depending on when the lot was platted), and 5 feet from building foundations.  However, these setbacks can’t always be met on every lot with a standard septic system.  So, how can you build on a lot where setbacks simply can not be met? 

The answer to the above questions may lie in alternative septic systems.  There are many types of alternative septic systems that achieve different goals.  Some alternative systems are approved for a reduced drainfield area, others are approved for reduced height, while others can be approved for reduced setbacks. 

Area Reduction

The most common type of alternative system involves the use of an alternative product such as PTI (bundles of pipes), E Z Flow (bundles of Styrofoam), or Infiltrator (plastic chambers).  All of these products have been deemed more efficient than the traditional rock drainfield, so all are approved for a drainfield area reduction of up to 25%.  This means that if your permit states you need a 462 sq. ft. drainfield, the resulting size may be approximately 347 sq. ft.  These drainfield products are commonly used because they can be adapted to a standard septic system.  Also, some legal alternatives to reduce overall drainfield size includes retaining walls around 50% of the perimeter.  The above can usually be accomplished without a variance. 

Height Reduction

Some alternative systems can achieve a reduction in the height of the mound.  Only one common product is approved to do this – PTI.  The use of PTI can drop your drainfield height by approximately 3 ½ inches which can sometimes mean the difference between 2:1 or 3:1 slopes.  This can also result in a reduction in total footprint of the drainfield.

There are other alternative systems that can dramatically reduce the height of your drainfield.  They are, however, engineered systems, and therefore are not cheap and require periodic maintenance.  These include aerobic systems in combination with filters such as peat moss.  When all is said and done, these systems can cost $20,000 or more.  But, if you’re willing to spend the money you can get rid of that “Florida Mountain”.  The most widely used systems for height reduction are the “No Mound” system which uses thick liners and pumps to reduce the water table, or the Biofilter peat moss system.  The peat moss system also receives a 40% reduction in drainfield area. 

Setback Reduction

Beautiful lots have been deemed unbuildable because setbacks to surface water or wells can not be met.  However, a savvy planner can find some ways of reducing setbacks by utilizing one or a combination of the methods and products described above.  The system will require an engineer’s design to prove the appropriate nutrient reduction levels.  Each system must be engineered specifically for the lot in question after the appropriate environmental work is complete. 

All engineered septic systems require a little extra time and money, but if you have a lot that is surrounded by water on 3 sides or don’t want a septic drainfield blocking your view of  the waterway, then consider an alternative system.  Call Leila Baruch at (904) 824-8633 for details.

Please send us your Email Addresses for future issues of  “News from the Cypress Stump” Back to top

We at LG²ES strive to keep our costs down in order to provide the best services available at the lowest fees possible.  One way to save costs is to distribute this newsletter via Email. If you are interested in assisting us in our paperless endeavor, please call us with your Email address, or visit www.lg2es.com and select “contact us or ask a question”.

It is the purpose of this newsletter to share information with our clients and with those who would have a professional or academic interest in environmental and regulatory issues.  If you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe to this free bimonthly newsletter, please contact us.