EPA made news last week when it set water-quality standards for the state of Florida—the first time the agency has done so. The pollutants in question are nutrients, not sediment, but the action sets a precedent for federal action in individual states.
Previously, the state used a narrative guideline for limiting nutrients in rivers, lakes, and estuaries, somewhat similar to the narrative water-quality standards that existed in most states under NPDES Phase II. EPA had ordered the state, more than 10 years ago, to set nutrient limits; Florida had been studying the problem, gathering data, and proposing some limits. But after environmental groups sued the federal government in 2008 for its failure to enforce the Clean Water Act in Florida, EPA stepped in and set its own limits for nitrogen and phosphorus, which are generally more stringent that the ones the state was considering.
Articles that appeared in two Florida newspapers last week provide details of the limits and local reactions. EPA also issued a news release.
Although there would have been a cost for complying with state-set limits, many local groups believe the price tag will be higher for complying with the federal standards. Public hearings will be held next month in several Florida cities. The limits are scheduled to go into effect in October.
Do you think EPA’s actions are justified, given the situation, or should the federal government allow states to set their own water-quality standards? Do you think this sets a precedent for federally mandated limits on other pollutants as well?