1,000 Friends of Florida * Arthur R. Marshall Foundation * Audubon of Southwest Florida Clean Water Action * Conservancy of Southwest Florida * Everglades Foundation

Florida Billfish, Inc. * Friends of the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge Florida Oceanographic Society * Friends of the Everglades * Sierra Club Loxahatchee Group

Sierra Club * Snook and Gamefish Foundation * South Florida Audubon Society South Florida Wildlands Association * Urban Environment League

August 11, 2011 Dr. Laura Ehlers, Senior Staff Officer Water Science and Technology Board 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 607 Washington, D.C. 20001 Senator Bill Nelson United States Senate 716 Senate Hart Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510 Lisa Jackson, Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 61 Forsyth Street, South West Atlanta, GA 30303 Re: Scope of Charge to the National Academies in Reviewing EPA’s Economic Analysis of Final Water Quality Standards for Nutrients for Lakes and Flowing Waters in Florida Dear Dr. Elhers, Senator Nelson and Administrator Jackson: We the undersigned organizations are writing to comment on the scope of review for the ongoing National Academies assessment of EPA’s economic analysis of numeric nutrient water quality standards for Florida’s lakes and flowing waters. We understand the specific charge to the National Academies Water Science and Technology Board is to evaluate the EPA’s analysis based exclusively on cost of implementation. We believe this narrow scope is biased, and will not yield accurate results as to the net economic impacts of the proposed regulation. Only by considering the cost of polluted waters to other leading industries in Florida if these criteria are not implemented, as well as the benefits that will be yielded from their implementation, can the National Academies produce a correct assessment of its impacts to Florida’s economy. While we fully understand the charge given to the Water Science and Technology Board with regard to this ongoing assessment and the limitations that accompany such a narrow scope, we feel strongly that these imposed limitations will prevent the assessment from fulfilling its intended role. Certain information – such as revenue and jobs lost in the commercial and recreational fishing industries due to fish kills and

harmful algae outbreaks resulting from nitrogen and phosphorous overloads – is critical to a thorough understanding of the impacts that nutrient pollutants have on Florida’s economy and the effect that established and enforceable numeric water quality standards will subsequently have. Additionally, it is important to understand that whether Florida maintains its existing regulatory system, adopts the EPA’s proposed numeric nutrient criteria, or adopts DEP’s proposed nutrient criteria, there will be costs incurred. The question remains as to who will bear the burden of these costs; industries that cause the pollution, or those whose livelihoods depend on the availability of unpolluted water? While the cost of pollution cleanup may be substantial, the implementation policies that are known and outlined in Florida’s Impaired Waters Rule and other state regulations ensure that they will be implemented in a way that is both reasonable and cost feasible. Moreover, without these criteria, the financial burden caused by nutrient pollution can represent a much greater cost to impacted industries and the numerous residents who rely on the success of these businesses to support their families and bolster Florida’s economy. We urge the EPA and National Academies to re-evaluate the scope of this charge to ensure that an accurate assessment will be done to determine the true net economic impact of EPA’s numeric nutrient criteria for freshwater lakes and flowing waters outside South Florida. We look forward to providing you additional comments and data to offer insight as to the costs associated with polluted waterways on Florida’s economy and the economic returns that investments in clean water can provide. Sincerely, Charles Pattison John Arthur Marshall President Chairman of the Board 1,000 Friends of Florida Arthur R. Marshall Foundation Sarah Larsen Kathleen E. Aterno President Florida Director Audubon of Southwest Florida Clean Water Action Jennifer Hecker Kirk Fordham Director of Natural Resource Policy Chief Executive Officer Conservancy of Southwest Florida Everglades Foundation Dan Kipnis Stephen E. Horowitz, President Captain Friends of the Arthur R. Marshall Florida Billfish, Inc Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge Mark D. Perry Alan Farago Executive Director President Florida Oceanographic Society Friends of the Everglades

Frank Jackalone Drew Martin Senior Organizing Manager Conservation Chair Sierra Club Sierra Club Loxahatchee Group Rick Roberts Grant Campbell Executive Director Director of Wildlife Policy Snook and Gamefish Foundation South Florida Audubon Society Matt Schwartz Barbara Falsey Executive Director President South Florida Wildlands Association Urban Environment League CC: Dr. Glen T. Daiger, Chair Dr. Otto C. Doering, Vice-Chair National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Dr. Leonard Shabman, Vice-Chair Mr. Walter Baker National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Dr. Allen Davis Dr. Wendy Graham National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Dr. Arturo Keller Dr. David Mulla National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Dr. Kevin Sherman Dr. Kurt Stephenson National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Mr. Michael Tate Mr. Alan Vicory National Academies National Academies Water Science and Technology Board Water Science and Technology Board Ms. LaJuana Wilcher National Academies Water Science and Technology Board