1 / 13

EPA, FLORIDA SPAR OVER AGENCY BID TO CRAFT NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA

What are nutrients

Mia_John
Download Presentation

EPA, FLORIDA SPAR OVER AGENCY BID TO CRAFT NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. “EPA, FLORIDA SPAR OVER AGENCY BID TO CRAFT NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA” “State and industry officials in Florida are strongly resisting EPA efforts to craft landmark numeric nutrient water quality criteria …” “DEP’s Sole said the numeric nutrient criteria will drive millions of dollars in useless cleanup costs.” “…EPA charges that Florida’s proposal was not strict enough and would likely not protect downstream water quality.” http://InsideEPA.com (OCT 2009)

    2. What are nutrients & Why are they a problem?

    3. Negatives of too much algae: Reduced dissolved oxygen in water as algae dies and consequential reduction in animal life. Changes to bottom sediment from dead algae. Reduction of other aquatic plant life, like seagrass. Potential of harmful algal blooms like red tide. Odor, taste and appearance issues.

    4. Historic Approach to Nutrient Regulation Since the 1970s, Florida has regulated nutrients by a “narrative” criteria: “In no case shall the nutrient concentrations of a body of water be altered so as to cause an imbalance in flora or fauna.”

    5. The New Approach to Nutrient Regulation Numeric Limits – example “The yearly average total nitrogen concentration in rivers shall not exceed 0.824 mg/l” The value – the water is protected “before” the imbalance of flora or fauna appears. Both EPA & FDEP agree on the need for this approach.

    6. The State Numeric Criteria Development Process 1998 – EPA initiated “National Strategy for Development of Regional Nutrient Criteria.” 2004 to present – FDEP working on numeric nutrient criteria development for Florida. Work in progress was heading toward two tiers: Numeric nutrient limits Confirmed with a biological effect

    7. Connection between nutrient concentrations and biological effects is very complex Significant “natural” differences between water bodies throughout the State based on: Temperature pH Color Flow Residence Time Turbidity Depth Grazing

    8. The EPA Numeric Nutrient Criteria Development Process July 2008 – Earthjustice, representing a number of other environmental groups filed a lawsuit against EPA claiming FDEP was taking too long to set numeric standards and argued EPA should take over. January 2009 – EPA determined lawsuit was right and signed a consent degree in August 2009 agreeing to: Proposing numeric standards for lakes and flowing waters by Jan 2010 and implementing by Oct 2010 Proposing numeric standards for estuaries and coastal waters by Jan 2011 and implementing by Oct 2011

    9. EPA’s Jan 2010 Proposed Standards Lake, stream, and canal criteria for the protection of aquatic life in each water body further subdivided by type of lake or location in State for streams; and Additional stream criteria for the protection of aquatic life in downstream water bodies. In any given water body, the more stringent criteria applies. Contains Additional Provisions including site specific alternative criteria, mixing zone and time for restoration up to 20 years.

    10. 80% of what FDEP currently considers good will be affected - local examples: EPA Proposed Standard for our area: TN not to exceed 0.53 mg/l, and TP not to exceed 0.043 mg/l. Aucilla – TN=0.89, TP=0.076 Econfina – TN=0.93, TP=0.088 Rocky Creek –TN= Insuff. Data, TP=0.16 Woods Creek –TN= Insuff. Data, TP=0.11 Pimple Creek - TN= Insuff. Data, TP=0.09 Spring Creek - TN= Insuff. Data, TP=0.15 Spring Warrior – Insufficient Data Steinhatchee - TN=0.79, TP=0.065 Every stream in the area fails the criteria!

    11. Who will be affected: Industrial discharges. Publicly owned wastewater treatment discharges. Stormwater Discharges Non-point source contributors (examples include agriculture, managed landscapes, and urban areas) Everyone!

    12. Assessment of EPA’s Proposed Standards Based on a false starting point that the majority of the water bodies in the State need their nutrients concentrations reduced. Did not make a good connection between the ecological condition of the water bodies and the level of nutrients. Incomplete utilization of existing data. Use of inadequate modeling tools for standard setting. Underestimated the time and cost to either provide treatment or support site specific alternative criteria. (FPPA estimates $900,000/MG for the nine 9 P&P mills in Florida versus EPA $273/MG)

    13. More information: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/nutrients/index.htm http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/standards/rules/florida/ Public comment period closes April 28, 2010.

More Related