The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Nov. 15 issued a final rule to establish numeric nutrient criteria for nitrogen and phosphorus for lakes, rivers, streams, and springs in the state of Florida. The move, which marks the first time that EPA has set such standards for a state, was sharply criticized by The Fertilizer Institute (TFI).
TFI cited estimates that the rule, which was issued by EPA’s Office of Water in Washington, D.C., will cost U.S. farmers between $272 million and $1.1 billion by 2040. “This rule has an enormous cost and little benefit, and we are urging EPA to reconsider this action,” said TFI President Ford West. “We advocate smart and targeted policies that address water quality without placing an undue economic burden on farmers and the industries that support them. Such policies can achieve both environmental and food security goals.”
A Nov. 15 press release by EPA said the agency was acting to reduce excess loads of nitrogen and phosphorus that cause harmful algae blooms. EPA said there are currently more than 1,900 rivers and streams, 375,000 acres of lakes, and 500 square miles of estuaries known to be impaired by excess nutrients in Florida. The federally directed nutrient rule would replace nutrient criteria already under development by Florida’s Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP).
The nutrient standards establish nutrient criteria for lakes and streams by requiring that total nitrogen and total phosphorus be no higher than set levels for five different watershed regions and three different classes of lakes. For streams, the phosphorus criteria range is from .06 mg/l to .49 mg/l, and for nitrogen the range is .67 mg/l to 1.87 mg/l. The rule states that the annual geometric mean of these concentrations cannot be exceeded more than once in a three-year period.
TFI says the rule is precedent setting and of national significance because it marks the first time that EPA has attempted to displace a state’s efforts to manage nutrients by establishing federal criteria. According to TFI, EPA has already stated that it intends to adopt a similar approach in the Gulf of Mexico drainage basin watershed.
“EPA has issued a landmark water rule without establishing a science-based threshold for water quality impairment,” said West. “In many cases, EPA fails to demonstrate that its nutrient standards will have a beneficial effect. Unlike standards for toxic chemicals, increasingly stringent water quality standards for nutrients may not lead to improved water quality. In fact, there is a point at which such standards could actually harm water quality because nutrients occur naturally at various levels in the environment and are essential to healthy ecosystems. By subjecting previously-approved TMDL (Total Maximum and Daily Load) standards to another review, EPA is fostering an environment where uncertainty may inhibit ecologically and economically beneficial projects.”
TFI is not alone in its criticism of the rule. The Florida Water Environment Association Utility Counsel, FDEP, the Florida Water Quality Coalition, and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies all voiced concerns about the costs to implement the rule and the science behind it.
The EPA nutrient rule becomes effective 15 months after publication in the Federal Register, but the rule’s site-specific alternative criteria process will take effect in 60 days. “While TFI appreciates EPA’s efforts to remedy some of the arbitrary effects of its rule by delaying implementation, the fact remains that, with 12 percent unemployment and job recovery uncertain, this rule is a threat to many sectors of Florida’s economy, including the fertilizer industry,” said West.
In a Consent Decree signed on Aug. 19, 2009, with the Florida Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, and St. Johns Riverkeeper, EPA also agreed to promulgate nutrient water quality standards for Florida estuarine and coastal waters by Jan. 14, 2011. That date was subsequently extended to Nov. 14, 2011, for the proposed rule, and Aug. 15, 2012, for the final rule.