Stakes are rising in Florida's brewing water war with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
"Potentially, this will cost businesses $100 billion to $200 billion, just in capital costs," Kurt Spitzer, executive director of the Florida Stormwater Association, told Sunshine State News Monday.
"Frankly, we're mystified by the (proposed) rules."
Even with that massive price tag, Spitzer calls compliance with the EPA's numeric nutrient criteria "unattainable."
"They will create a sense of impossibility. There will be lawsuits on all sides," he predicts. "If the DEP (Florida Department of Environmental Protection) tries to adopt this, there will be years of litigation."
The rules -- which would sharply reduce the release of nitrogen and phosphorous in waterways -- already are the subject of pending litigation in federal district court in Tallahassee. A consortium of business and agricultural groups is challenging both the fairness of the proposed regulations and the criteria on which they are based.
"For the EPA to act, there needed to be a determination of necessity (to override state standards)," Spitzer notes. "That was done in less than two weeks in Washington."
More legal filings are expected in October when the EPA says it will implement its new rules. Due to heavy response, the agency extended its public comment period 30 days to April 28. Additional public hearings also are planned, though not yet scheduled.
Adam Babbington, spokesman for the Florida Chamber of Commerce, said there seems to be a "disconnect" between the EPA and the state's citizens and businesses.
"Seventy-six percent of the comments so far have been against the EPA plan, but that hasn't been reflected in what they're putting out," Babbington said.
While the DEP is on record supporting "sound" numeric criteria for measuring nutrients, the state agency has not endorsed all aspects of the plan.
"There are elements of the EPA proposed rule that need serious review because they appear disconnected with the true nature of Florida water bodies," the DEP said in a statement.
Of particular concern is the so-called SPARROW (Spatially Referenced Regressions on Watersheds) model that the EPA wants to use for downstream protection.
The U.S. Geological Survey has stated that SPARROW is "not appropriate" for Florida, because that model was designed for very large bodies of water, such as the Mississippi River Delta.
Jerry Brooks, director of the state Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration, told a legislative committee on Monday that the DEP disagrees with EPA methodology on analyzing lakes, streams and downstream water bodies.
Though acknowledging that many waterways need help, some EPA proposals are "not as protective" as current DEP rules, Brooks testified at the Legislative Committee on Intergovernmental Relations.
Comparing the DEP and EPA approaches, Brooks cited a "significant" difference the rules will have on Florida.
"We are investing a lot of time informing everyone what we know," Brooks said.
The DEP also is required to consider the economic impact of any new rules. And with businesses just beginning to total up the costs, that calculation gets evermore complex.
Barney Bishop, president of Associated Industries of Florida, says the state has "one of the best water standards in the country. So how good does it have to be and how much does it cost?"
"Environmentalists don't care what it costs. They just want to impose it. I respectfully suggest that if they don't like it, they move to another state with cleaner water," Bishop added.
Though praising Florida's data collection, EPA says the state has a long way to go in cleaning up its waterways.
A 2008 DEP report revealed that about 1,000 miles of rivers and streams, 350,000 acres of lakes and 900 square miles of estuaries are not meeting the state's water quality standards because of excess nutrients.
These represent approximately 16 percent of Floridas assessed river and stream miles, 36 percent of assessed lake acres and 25 percent of assessed estuary square miles.
The agency noted that the actual number of miles and acres of waters impaired for nutrients is likely higher, as there are waters that have not yet been assessed.
DEP spokeswoman Dee Ann Miller said her agency could not provide yearly regional or statewide comparisons on nitrogen and phosphorous loads on Monday.
Whatever the nutrient figures, the EPA says opponents' cost estimates are vastly overblown -- whether it's the $50 billion projected by the Florida Water Environment Association Utility Council or the $200 billion pegged by the Stormwater Association.
"A reasonable estimate based on EPA and DEP is that actions needed to control nutrients and meet water quality standards will cost at least a billion dollars over time, but it would not cost tens of billions of dollars as some have estimated," the EPA stated.
"Because Floridas current 'case-by-case' approach ultimately would result in the need to put in place the same types of controls at some point, implementing numeric nutrient criteria will likely save money in the long run by restoring waters quicker and preventing healthy waters from deterioration that would end up costing more to remedy.
"EPA will continue to work with the state and stakeholders to determine the most affordable, commonsense methods to achieve the numeric nutrient standards."
The DEP's Brooks agreed that the cost to Florida would be "in the billions."
David Guest, managing attorney for Earth Justice in Tallahassee, which sued the EPA over nutrient releases, sides with the EPA's lower price estimates.
Guest said that fertilizer runoff from residential lawns -- more than any particular business -- is a chief polluter, and that lower nitrogen and phosphorous compounds, as well as liquid applications, would reduce nutrient loads in a cost-efficient way.
Still, critics allege that unless Washington is prepared to substantially increase its grant disbursements, the EPA's numeric initiative would put an onerous financial burden on the state.
Rep. Jimmy Patronis, R-Panama City, said at Monday's committee meeting that he views the federal rules as "unfunded mandates that would basically bankrupt cities and counties."
Meanwhile, the Stormwater Association points to several success stories under the DEP's current regulations, as well as to regulatory pitfalls in the EPA's proposed rules:
Sarasota Bay: Sarasota County developed a long-term action plan to improve water quality and restore sea grass coverage in the bay to documented levels from 1950. This year, sea grasses recovered to a degree that the current coverage exceeds the observed baseline condition from 60 years ago.
"The EPA standard would reduce nutrient loads by 50 percent more, which raises the question: What are we trying to fix?" Spitzer asks.
The Econlockhatchee River and Little Econlockhatchee in Seminole County: Classified as Outstanding Florida Waters, neither is classified as impaired for nutrients under current DEP criteria. They have had additional levels of regulatory protection for decades and are recreational treasures that exemplify "fishable and swimmable" standards. Neither one of these water bodies would meet the new EPA standard.
"If these near-pristine sites are considered impaired, then every other water body within Seminole County will also be impaired," the Stormwater Association states.
Stormwater treatment investments: The city of Tallahassee stormwater management program, recognized as one of the most proactive in Florida, imposed user fees to fund its program. The current fee ranks among the highest in the nation at $7.95 per equivalent residential unit -- with $1.70 earmarked to generate an additional $50 million over 20 years to improve water quality.
Note: Generating about $3 million a year, the Tallahassee fund is equivalent to about one-third of the EPA's 319 stormwater grant budgets for the entire state of Florida.
Over the past 10 years, Tallahassee has spent $74 million to fund 45 capital projects. Even so, this targets only about 20 of the 145 watersheds within the jurisdiction, producing a 10 percent reduction in nutrient loads.
Total maximum daily loads based on the proposed EPA standards would mandate an additional 75 percent removal of phosphorous and require more than doubling the monthly charges, the Stormwater Association said.
