Protecting the Quality of Our Water Resources: A presentation to the 2009 Southwest Florida Water Resources

Conference

Presented by Jennifer Hecker, Natural Resources Policy Manager

The Economic Value of Good Water Quality

Sportsfishing in Florida generates an estimated 6 billion dollars per year and

supports 100,000 jobs.

Beach tourism in Florida generates $19.3

billion per year!

Manifestations of Policies that aren’t working

Loss of natural freshwater storage and filtration from filling of wetlands

Degraded water quality from stormwater runoff

Water shortages despite having some of highest rainfall in country

Focus on Prevention

“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure…”

In order to encourage prevention, we need to:

1. Maintain the highest standards possible closest to the source (i.e. Designated Uses, Numeric Nutrient Standards)

2. Credit pollution prevention (i.e. Statewide Stormwater Rule)

Designated Uses

Designated Use

Water Quality Standard

Not Meeting It Meeting It

If “impaired” → then Total Maximum Daily Load Set

To meet TMDL, Basin Management Action Plan Created

Designated Use Changes

Currently, DEP classifies waters as:Class I - drinking water Class II - shellfish harvesting Class III - recreational uses (swimming/boating/fishing) Class IV - agricultural

Class V - industrial (there are no waters in this classification at this time)

New proposed classifications would include: HU1 - drinking water HU2 - shellfish harvesting HU3 - fishing and swimming - full body contact ok HU4 - fishing and limited human

contact (*NEW* “splashable” standard) HU5 - limited fishing and no human contact

(*NEW* “unswimmable but fishable” standard) HU6 - agricultural = Class IV HU7 - industrial = Class V

Proposal is to redesignate ditches, canals and other manmade waterbodies to these new HU4&5 classifications.

“HU5” = safe to fish consumption…

but not safe for human contact?

Designated Use Changes

Canals run into rivers and estuaries… indeed the upper portion of the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie Rivers are canals.

Designated Use Changes

How will affect the waterbody’s watershed?

• lowering standards closer to source will lessen ability to promote or require source controls

• less source control passes more costs from the private sector to the public sector

Designated Use Changes

What about downstream?

• unswimmable/splashable standards upstream will make it more difficult to meet swimmable/fishable standards downstream

• more pollution clean-up costs passed onto coastal communitieswhere swimmable/fishable standards will still apply

Flexibility in Existing Regulation

Site Specific Alternative Criteria:Allows a waterbody to deviate from the state quality standards for its designated use if scientifically demonstrated it should.

• Would alleviate expending of resources for TMDL or BMAP development for naturally impaired waterbodies.

• However, does not officially change its designated use. Need UAA…

Use Attainability Analysis:

Allows a waterbody to change its designated use to another category if demonstrated that it has not and cannot attain its current use.

• Would allow downgrading where justified.

• However, would only allow change to another existing category like Ag or Industrial.

&

Our two-fold concern with current proposal

(1) Adding broad undefined use classifications not safe for human contact

(2) Revamping the whole framework for determining impairment and regulating water quality

Another path to Use Changes

For potential downgrading:

Step 1: Identify which specific types of waterbodies cannot attain swimmable/fishable standards

Step 2: Determine which water quality standards associated with the existing Class IV or Class V are appropriate for that type of waterbody

Step 3: Amend existing Class IV and Class V definitions to include those specific types of waterbodies

This would allow downgrading of specific waterbodies where justified, without leaving other types of

waterbodies vulnerable to downgrading as well.

Another path to Use Changes

For potential upgrading:

Step 1: Identify which specific types of waterbodies are pristine and should have greater protection than their existing classification affords (ex. Springs, coral reefs)

Step 2:Award those waterbodies the supplemental “Outstanding Resource Waters” designation

This would allow upgrading of specific waterbodies where justified, without radically changing the fundamental

framework for determining impairment or leaving other types of waterbodies vulnerable to downgrading.

Numeric Nutrient Criteria are

Water Quality Standards

How Numeric Standards and Designated Use Changes Relate

Water Quality Standards differ in stringency

based on their designated use.

Lower designated uses equal lower numeric

nutrient criteria

Nutrient Pollution

• Excess nutrients stem from:– Ag. Runoff– Untreated stormwater

runoff– Waste-water treatment

plant discharge• Causing:

– Harmful algal blooms– Large “dead zones”

Current Nutrient Standards

Narrative Standard• “Imbalance of flora and

fauna” • Extremely difficult to

apply• Cannot effectively

control what we cannot effectively measure.

Thus, Numeric Nutrient Standards are needed…

Is Florida the only state required to develop numeric nutrient standards?

No. 7 Other States have adopted numeric nutrient criteria for estuarine waterbodies.

History of Stormwater Regulation from 2000-2007

• Southwest Florida EIS

• Emerging Science

• Southwest Florida Basin Rule

• Initiated in 2007• Includes optional BMPs in

addition to wet retention• Could provide credit for

LID and preventative BMPs (ex. Pervious pavement)

• Would require the lesser of not exceeding natural load rates for site or removing 85%TP development will generate

Statewide Stormwater Rule

BMP Treatment Train

Final Treatment

and Attenuation

Runoff & Load

Generation

Additional Treatment &Attenuation

Conveyanceand

Pretreatment

Source controls Public edErosion controlRoof runoffFlorida YardsLID

SwalesCatch basinsFilter inletsOil/water separators

Storage tankSediment sumpAlum/PAM

RetentionDetention ConstructedWetlands

Statewide Stormwater Rule

Concerns:• Is a presumptive standard• Potential pre-emption of local

government or water management district

• Insufficient TN removal – pollutant of concern for estuaries

• Does not address groundwater protection outside Karst areas

Statewide Stormwater Rule Concerns cont…

• Counts wetlands as pollutant sources – inflating “natural” load rate target

• Encourages use of natural wetlands for stormwater treatment

• Exempts redevelopments from improved stormwater treatment

How the Statewide Stormwater Rule and Designated Uses Relate

Current

Impairment of current designated use

Proposed

Justification for more source control required

prior to discharge in stormwater regulation

Waterbody downgraded based on lower designated use

No longer impaired

No justification for

increased source control

Questions