protecting the quality of our water resources: a presentation to the 2009 southwest florida water...
TRANSCRIPT
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