The EPA seal (Photo: sentryjournal.com)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced that it had issued Consent Agreements and Final Orders against 25 entities throughout the Southeast for violations of the Clean Water Act. Three Florida wastewater utilities were also penalized, for improperly disposing of sewage sludge.

As part of the settlements, the responsible parties have agreed to pay $184,317 in civil penalties, and spend  an additional $284,791 to come into compliance.

Ten entities were cited for alleged stormwater-related violations of the Clean Water Act, which are a leading cause of impairment to the nearly 40 percent of water bodies nationwide which are not currently meeting water quality standards.

Wastewater utilities in 14 municipalities, including Florida, were also penalized for “failing to provide biosolids reports and/or otherwise failing to comply with Section 503 of the CWA covering requirements for land disposal of sewage sludge.” Plantation, Lake City and Starke were each fined $900 for their failure to comply.

“By taking these enforcement actions, we are sending a strong message about the importance of protecting rivers, lakes and streams,” said EPA Regional Administrator Gwen Keyes Fleming in a press release. “By addressing the violations noted in our inspections, these entities will prevent millions of pounds of pollution from entering the environment, in addition to protecting the quality of life for families across the Southeast.”

Pollutants of concern include nutrients, sediment, oil and grease, chemicals and metals. When left uncontrolled, water pollution can deplete needed oxygen and/or otherwise result in the destruction of aquatic habitats, as well as the fish and wildlife that depend on them. Water pollution can also contaminate food, drinking water supplies and recreational waterways, and thereby pose a threat to public health.

A coalition of environmental groups, including the St. Johns Riverkeeper and Sierra Club, recently filed a petition against a set of water standards recently drafted by the state Department of Environmental Protection. The groups allege that the standards are not strong enough to comply with the Clean Water Act, since they allow waterways to further degrade before they are cleaned up.

The Environmental Protection Agency has come under fire for its decision to allow the state of Florida to write its own water pollution rules (known as “numeric nutrient criteria”). EPA Regional Administrator Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming is now firing back, writing that the Agency commends the state Department of Environmental Protection for its draft of a proposed standard.

The EPA seal (Pic via sentryjournal.com)

A host of environmental groups filed suit in 2008, seeking to compel the EPA to implement a strict set of water pollution standards in Florida, arguing that the state was in violation of the Clean Water Act. In 2009, following what many have deemed years of stalling on the part of the state department, the EPA agreed to implement its criteria.

Industry leaders and lawmakers have blasted the EPA’s mandate, arguing that the state of Florida should implement its own standards, without federal intervention. The state did have its chance, however: As early as 1998, the EPA told the state to develop its own standards.

Fast-forward to 2011, and the state is finally developing its own criteria — with the approval of the EPA.

A recent St. Petersburg Times editorial accused the EPA of rewarding Florida “for dragging its feet on cleaning up dirty waters,” a sentiment shared by environmentalists who have championed tougher water standards in the state. Not so, says the EPA’s Keyes Fleming, in a response to the editorial published today.

“The Clean Water Act envisions — and the EPA agrees — that states should have the primary role in establishing and implementing water quality standards for their waters, allowing them to innovate and respond to local water quality needs,” she writes. “These standards must meet the requirements of the act, but they need not be identical to standards the EPA would adopt on its own. The FDEP’s proposed standards, in our judgment, meet this test.”

According to Keyes Fleming, the Florida standards don’t mirror every aspect of the federal standards, but they come awfully close.

“The FDEP’s proposed criteria for estuaries are based on methodologies similar to what the EPA has been using in developing its own criteria,” she writes. “The FDEP’s numeric criteria for streams are very close to the EPA’s criteria but will be applied in combination with biological information. Although the EPA did not adopt this approach, we believe it is reasonable to factor in site-specific information.”

Florida currently relies on a narrative water quality standard, the wording of which (.pdf) has been criticized as too vague to be effective. The rule reads: ”In no case shall nutrient concentrations of a body of water be altered so as to cause an imbalance in natural populations of aquatic flora or fauna.”

Stricter criteria would specifically govern the amounts of phosphorus and nitrogen present in state waterways, and should lessen the amount of fish kills and large-scale algal blooms across Florida.

Earlier this week, in a statement released on the Florida Department of Environmental Protection website, department Secretary Herschel Vinyard authorized his staff to move forward with its draft of a set of water pollution standards. The standards, known as “numeric nutrient criteria,” will likely take the place of a similar set of rules mandated by the EPA. Critics argue that the EPA’s rules will prove to be too expensive to implement, so the EPA is allowing the state to create its own set of rules.

“The future of Florida’s environment depends on the health of our water resources, and no one knows our waters better than us,” said Vinyard. “This is the right thing for Florida, and the right thing to do.”

In a letter (.pdf) penned on Nov. 2, EPA Acting Assistant Administrator Nancy Stoner applauded the department’s decision to move forward with its own rules, saying that the majority of the state’s draft rules appear to be consistent with the Clean Water Act.

“While EPA’s final decision to approve or disapprove any nutrient criteria rule submitted by FDEP will follow our formal review of the rule and record under section 303(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), our current review of the October 24, 2011 draft rule, guidance, and other scientific and technical information supporting the draft rule, leads us to the preliminary conclusion that EPA would be able to approve the draft rule under the CWA,” writes Stoner. “Should EPA formally approve FDEP’s final nutrient criteria as consistent with the CWA, EPA would initiate rulemaking to withdraw federal numeric nutrient criteria for any waters covered by the new and approved state water quality standards.”

That determination followed litigation brought on by Florida environmental groups that alleged the state wasn’t meeting the requirements of the Clean Water Act. Pollution brought on by failing septic tanks, home fertilizers, utility companies and agricultural interests often leads to large-scale algal blooms and fish kills — occurrences that wouldn’t be so frequent, say some, if Florida had stricter water pollution rules.

The EPA’s 2009 decision to force Florida to implement the so-called “numeric nutrient criteria” was not without controversy. Both Putnam and Bondi have argued, much like affected industries do, that the standards would be nearly impossible to meet and extremely costly. Environmentalists have argued that the new rules might not be strict enough.

In Monday’s filing, Putnam and Bondi argue that the EPA “failed to provide a record to support” its 2009 decision, “manufactured the basis for federal intervention” and “made the determination to settle a lawsuit.”

“EPA manufactured a basis for the significant shift in its policy toward Florida in order to justify making the … determination,” reads the filing. “The agency exaggerated the impact and threat of nutrients generally, and the situation in Florida specifically.”

The filing is signed by attorneys for the State of Florida, White Springs Agricultural Chemicals, the Florida Pulp and Paper Association and other industry agencies.

The EPA has committed to propose water quality standards for Florida’s estuarine coastal, and southern inland flowing waters by Nov. 14, and to establish final standards by Aug. 15, 2012, unless the state Department of Environmental Protection comes up with its own set of rules (which must then be approved by the EPA).

“Florida collects more water quality data than any other state in the nation … [and] we have the most advanced reuse,” said Budell, who has criticized the EPA’s numeric nutrient criteria in the past.

Among Budell’s concerns with the EPA’s version of the water pollution rules? “The science is weak,” “we don’t think they do an adequate job considering the diversity of waters in Florida” and “many biologically healthy waters under the EPA rule would be determined impaired.”

As for claims that Florida’s agricultural industry (whose fertilizer-laden effluent often contributes to algal blooms and fish kills) wouldn’t be affected by the rules, Budell told the panel it’s an assertion that “is at best naive.”

Budell claims that point-source polluters like pulp and paper mills, dairy operations and hog farms would definitely be impacted, despite EPA claims to the contrary.

“EPA has made it very clear in other parts of the country … [and] clearly indicated the direction they are taking is to require states to implement programs to regulate agricultural stormwater flow,” he said. “The Clean Water Act may not give them permitting authority over agriculture  [but] they have other mechanisms. … That’s the connection we make from what we see the agency doing in other parts of the country.”

Though Budell himself admitted that much about the rules remains uncertain, he made clear his stance that “no sector of agriculture can comply with the … criteria as proposed.”

Budell did say that the ag industry in general supports the state’s efforts to write its own rules, which he said would be “infinitely more palatable” than the EPA’s version.

As head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Jackson has faced harsh criticism from House Republicans and GOP presidential candidates who say the agency’s regulations are an undue burden on businesses that have to cut jobs simply to comply with clean water and air rules. Presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann has pledged to end the EPA if she takes office.

“Since the beginning of this year, Republicans in the House have averaged roughly a vote every day the chamber has been in session to undermine the Environmental Protection Agency and our nation’s environmental laws,” writes Jackson. “They have picked up the pace recently – just last week they voted to stop the EPA’s efforts to limit mercury and other hazardous pollutants from cement plants, boilers and incinerators – and it appears their campaign will continue for the foreseeable future.”

In Florida, attacks on Jackson and the agency she represents have been especially harsh.

The agency has mandated a set of Florida-specific water pollution standards that are being decried as “unfair” and “burdensome” by lawmakers and industry alike. Companies that would be forced to comply with the rules have been especially hard on the agency and have fiercely campaigned against their implementation. In his criticism of the rules, Associated Industries of Florida CEO Barney Bishop even went so far as to say Jackson “thinks she talks to God and she’s the only one who knows exactly what is the right thing to do about our environment.”

From Jackson’s op-ed:

Using the economy as cover, and repeating unfounded claims that “regulations kill jobs,” they have pushed through an unprecedented rollback of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and our nation’s waste-disposal laws, all of which have successfully protected our families for decades. We all remember “too big to fail”; this pseudo jobs plan to protect polluters might well be called “too dirty to fail.”

The House has voted on provisions that, if they became law, would give big polluters a pass in complying with the standards that more than half of the power plants across the country already meet. The measures would indefinitely delay sensible upgrades to reduce air pollution from industrial boilers located in highly populated areas. And they would remove vital federal water protections, exposing treasured resources such as the Gulf of Mexico, Lake Erie, the Chesapeake Bay and the Los Angeles River to pollution.

How we respond to this assault on our environmental and public health protections will mean the difference between sickness and health – in some cases, life and death – for hundreds of thousands of citizens.

This is not hyperbole. The link between health issues and pollution is irrefutable. Mercury is a neurotoxin that affects brain development in unborn children and young people. Lead has similar effects in our bodies. Soot, composed of particles smaller across than a human hair, is formed when fuels are burned and is a direct cause of premature death. Nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds contribute to the ozone alert days when seniors, asthmatics and others with respiratory problems are at serious risk if they do nothing more dangerous than step outside and breathe the air.

Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., will accept an award for his conservation efforts at an assembly this Friday in Lake Mary.

Audubon of Florida’s Theodore Roosevelt Award goes to lawmakers whose conservation efforts have made a notable impact on Florida’s ecosystems and wildlife. Roosevelt was one of the founding members of the Florida Audubon Society and established the first National Wildlife Refuge at Pelican Island.

“The very name Theodore Roosevelt stands for resilience, resolve and courage in the face of fire,” said Audubon Executive Director Eric Draper in a press release. “No public figure in Florida embodies those values like Senator Bill Nelson.”

Nelson has been vocal about protecting Florida’s coasts from offshore oil drilling in Cuba, and has worked to restore the Everglades. In a press release, Audubon called him “the most reliable champion of Florida’s environment” for the past three decades, “willing to stand up to oil companies and other powerful interests while bringing leaders from across the country to view the Everglades and elicit widespread support for protecting Florida’s environment.”

Nelson has also been a leading advocate for the RESTORE Act (.pdf), which requires that 80 percent of Clean Water Act fines paid by BP and other parties responsible for last year’s oil spill go directly to restoring the health of the Gulf Coast. Typically, Clean Water Act fines go directly into the U.S. treasury, where they are then used for a variety of projects.

Sixty percent of the funds will go to the Gulf Coast Ecosystem Restoration Council, 35 percent will be equally divided among the five Gulf Coast states and 5 percent will go toward a science and fisheries program. Republican Sen. Marco Rubio also played a role in getting that legislation to the Senate floor.

The health department conducts weekly samples of the beaches waters at 13 locations from Boca Raton to Jupiter, testing specifically for Enterococcus. Infections of Enterococcus can lead to urinary tract infections, bacteremia, bacterial endocarditis, diverticulitis and even meningitis — a potentially deadly infection in the brain.  Last month, 16-year old Courtney Nash suffered a fatal parasitic infection — amoebic meningoencephalitis — after swimming in the St. Johns River. Though still incredibly rare, such infections do seem to be occurring more often than usual, especially since bacteria thrives in water during warmer months.

Water pollution in Florida waterways has been a hot topic as of late. A set of standards to govern estuaries, lakes and streams in the state have been especially controversial, with industry opposing more stringent pollution standards. Environmentalists maintain that stricter standards are needed to meet provisions of the Clean Water Act, and to protect the health of citizens across the state.

According to his press release, Ross’ conversation with Jackson centered mostly on the federally mandated numeric nutrient criteria and the future of radiation flyovers.

The nutrient criteria were mandated by the EPA after a lawsuit brought by several environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and the St. Johns Riverkeeper, due to Florida’s failure to meet requirements of the Clean Water Act. Ross said the implementation of the criteria was akin to “bowing to a lawsuit by a radical environmental group” and was “unacceptable.”

Ross also lashed out at the agency for conducting radiation monitoring at mining sites in Central Florida. “I made clear that decades of study, from industry to University, show that radiation levels at mining sites in central Florida contain less radiation than living in the suburbs of Denver, and that any radiation monitoring must be done with agreed upon benchmarks based on accepted scientific standards,” Ross said.

“EPAs commitment to conduct no future radiation flyovers was a giant step in the right direction,” Ross said about commitments made by Jackson at the meeting. ”The commitment to transparency with all parties when it comes to the data collected will also benefit all the parties involved. In addition, EPAs commitment to work with industry, from Agriculture to Phosphate, as well as with the Florida DEP, is something I believe will alleviate many of EPAs concerns.”

According to his Twitter account, Ross will be meeting with EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson today, one-on-one. Jackson has been criticized for her role as the head of the agency now often deemed a “job killer” and has been especially scrutinized for her role in a set of numeric nutrient criteria that are mandated for the state of Florida. The criteria would place more stringent limitations on nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen, which are often found in industry effluent and are largely responsible for the growth of harmful algal blooms and fish kills.

The numeric nutrient criteria were actually mandated under the Bush administration and came about as a result of Florida’s failure to meet requirements of the Clean Water Act. Critics of the criteria often mistakenly argue that they are a result of the Obama administration, and that they are based on “bad science.”

During a January subcommittee meeting, Ross said that the regulatory risk that exists is “almost not manageable” and would cost millions to the phosphate, property and agriculture industries. Ross failed to mention the cost that water pollution poses to the fishing, tourism or waterfront real estate.

In a June press release, Ross said that the EPA needed to “take the plunge and end numeric nutrient nonsense” and that Floridians can take care of their own water. “Water is Florida’s lifeblood and no one knows how to take care of that lifeblood better than Floridians,” said Ross. “We welcome anyone from EPA to Florida – as a tourist.”