FDEP workshop suggests the agency will recommend ineffective water quality standards

Pollution in the St. Johns

In the wake of a rash of fish and bird deaths likely due to toxic blue-green algal blooms in the St. Johns River, there are renewed calls for standards that dictate how much nutrient runoff citizens and businesses can dump into Florida’s fresh water. The recent gulf oil spill brought to light the fragility and importance of waters on the state’s economy and ecology, but the ocean isn’t our only at-risk body of water.

The St. Johns has long suffered the effects of nutrient pollution, but the past several months have been undoubtedly worse than usual. Those fish and bird deaths, plus the sudden appearance of a bizarre foam, are just a few of the symptoms of nutrient overload, and it is becoming apparent that the agencies governing Florida’s water bodies need to accelerate the adoption of a stringent set of rules to protect them.of rules to protect them.

A lawsuit filed by EarthJustice in 2008 alleged that better standards for nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen — two of the culprits behind many of the area’s toxic algal blooms — were needed in Florida waterways. That suit led to a 2009 determination by the EPA that a set of standards was “necessary” under The Clean Water Act.

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection has been working on a draft of numeric nutrient standards for almost 10 years, but is still scrambling to finalize them before they are handed over to the EPA for approval. Part of the critera (for lakes and flowing waters) must be finalized by next month; the criteria affecting estuaries (like the lower St. Johns River basin) must be proposed by January and then finalized by October 2011.

As it stands now, the FDEP has created reports for almost 30 estuarine systems, summarizing all available water quality data and selecting an approach for the development and eventual implementation of the numeric nutrient standards.

In November, the FDEP must propose the criteria for several Florida waterways and estuaries and the EPA must finalize the criteria for estuaries by October 2011. That this date could potentially change.

About a month ago, the EPA released a note soliciting more comment before it finalized the standards. Members of the FDEP, who have essentially worked side by side with the EPA on developing the standards in the past, seemed less confident about their relationsip with the federal agency in an agency workshop held yesterday in Bunnell, Fla.

One FDEP representative said that, since last month’s note, the relationship between the FDEP and the EPA has been slightly strained: “We have been feeding them considerations … but lately, not so much. … We really don’t know what they’ll propose.”

At least 50 area scientists and professors attended yesterday’s workshop, whose purpose was two-fold. It was intended as an information session on numeric nutrient criteria, but was also meant to garner suggestions on how to further improve the criteria.

Ken Weaver, the FDEP rep described the lengthy scientific process of testing estuarine waters for nutrients, and said that several considerations need to be made before the effectiveness of the criteria can be ensured. “Data sufficiency is an issue,” he said. “We’re looking at about nine years of data collection to allow for seasonal adjustments and temporal variability.”

Seasonal adjustments present problems in measuring blue-green algae. During a particularly harsh winter (like Florida’s most recent one), algal blooms become aggravated, which has led some to blame the weather for recent fish kills and foam.

The FDEP has identified seven known or potentially toxic algal species in the lower St. Johns thus far, and has a list of likely culprits, including springs and groundwater, atmospheric deposition, non-point source discharges (like the 12 major tributary watersheds off of the river) and wastewater. There are currently 112 facilities authorized to discharge into the lower St. Johns through National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits.

Another controversy involves the mathematics of how nutrient presence is measured. The lower St. Johns River’s nutrient levels are currently measured in terms of overall loads — Total Maximum Daily Load or TMDL, to be more specific — rather than concentrations. This means that measurements are taken about once a month in various parts of the water, and the overall nutrient content of the river is then assessed.

For some, including St. Johns Riverkeeper Neil Armingeon, this simply won’t do. Following a brief report on the system and how TMDL is used to measure its nutrient load, the FDEP’s Wayne Magley met harsh criticism from Armingeon.

“Correct me if I’m wrong,” Armingeon said. “What you’ve just presented is the TMDL and you’ve retitled it the Numeric Nutrient Standard. … You’re really not developing anything new; you’re just repackaging it.”

After citing recently installed Beemats — floating wetlands designed to soak up excess nutrients in surrounding waters — and other projects as good attempts at improving the basin’s water quality, Magley said that the TMDL “should be sufficient for a nutrient criteria.”

In essence, the FDEP is planning to present to the EPA its current system of nutrient measurement as the system to be used permanently, which poses problems. One FDEP rep admitted that the EPA “has expressed interest in terms of a concentration measurement rather than a load measurement. We’d like feedback on how to do that.”

After Armingeon expressed concern that concentration measurements would likely be more enforceable, and therefore more effective, the rep admitted that concentration measurements “help with assessments because loads can’t be measured instantaneously.”

With little time left, the FDEP still has much to accomplish. In addition to determining which criteria to use to develop nutrient standards, they still need to determine how to asses and enforce them.

Another problem? Consensus within the scientific community. While it is tough to argue that the St. Johns hasn’t seen the effects of nutrient runoff, one FDEP rep made a rash claim in yesterday’s meeting. When speaking about the St. Marys River Estuary, which the department determined to be in healthy shape, he said this: “These systems can handle lots of nutrients without any adverse effects.”

Unfortunately, there are some dead fish that would beg to differ.