[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74923-74985]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30117]

Vol. 77

Tuesday,

No. 243

December 18, 2012

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 131

Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Estuaries, Coastal
Waters, and South Florida Inland Flowing Waters; Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida's Streams and Downstream Protection
Values for Lakes: Remanded Provisions; Proposed Rules

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2012 /
Proposed Rules

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 131

[EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0222; FRL-9759-3]
RIN 2040-AF21

Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Estuaries,
Coastal Waters, and South Florida Inland Flowing Waters

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is
proposing numeric water quality criteria to protect ecological systems,
aquatic life, and human health from nitrogen and phosphorus pollution
in estuaries and coastal waters within the State of Florida not covered
by EPA-approved State rulemaking, and south Florida inland flowing
waters. These proposed criteria apply to Florida waters that are
designated as Class I, Class II, or Class III waters and they are
intended to protect these designated uses as well as implement for the
purposes of the Clean Water Act the State's narrative nutrient
provision at Subsection 62-302.530(47)(b), Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.), which provides that ``[i]n 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.''

DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 19, 2013.
Because of EPA's obligation to sign a notice of final rulemaking on or
before September 30, 2013 under Consent Decree, the Agency regrets that
it will be unable to grant any requests to extend this deadline.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2010-0222, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail to: Water Docket, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Mail code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460,
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0222.
    4. Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, EPA West Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0222. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2010-
0222. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at a docket facility. The Office
of Water (OW) Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. until 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The OW Docket Center
telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the Docket address is OW
Docket, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20004. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erica Fleisig, U.S. EPA Headquarters,
Office of Water, Mailcode: 4305T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460; telephone number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Executive Summary
    B. Which water bodies are affected by this rule?
    C. What entities may be affected by this rule?
    D. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
    E. How can I get copies of this document and other related
information?
II. Background
    A. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution
    B. Statutory and Regulatory Background
    C. Water Quality Criteria
    D. EPA Determination Regarding Florida and Consent Decree
    E. EPA's Rulemaking and Subsequent Litigation
    F. Florida Adoption of Numeric Nutrient Criteria and EPA
Approval
III. Proposed Numeric Criteria for Florida's Estuaries, Coastal
Waters, and South Florida Inland Flowing Waters
    A. General Information and Approaches
    B. Proposed Numeric Criteria for Estuaries
    C. Proposed Numeric Criteria for Coastal Waters
    D. Proposed Numeric Criteria for South Florida Inland Flowing
Waters
    E. Applicability of Criteria When Final
IV. Under what conditions will EPA either not finalize or withdraw
these Federal standards?
V. Alternative Regulatory Approaches and Implementation Mechanisms
    A. Designating Uses
    B. Variances
    C. Site-Specific Alternative Criteria
    D. Compliance Schedules
VI. Economic Analysis
    A. Incrementally Impaired Waters
    B. Point Source Costs
    C. Non-Point Source Costs
    D. Governmental Costs
    E. Summary of Costs
    F. Benefits
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and
13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    F. Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments)
    G. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks)
    H. Executive Order 13211 (Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use)
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act of 1995
    J. Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in

Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations)

I. General Information

A. Executive Summary

1. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
    The primary purpose of this rule is to propose numeric water
quality criteria to protect ecological systems, aquatic life, and human
health within the State of Florida from nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution. The criteria proposed in this rule apply to certain
estuaries and coastal waters within the State of Florida and south
Florida inland flowing waters (e.g., rivers, streams, canals),\1\ with
the exception of waters within the lands of the Miccosukee and Seminole
Tribes, the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA), and the Everglades
Protection Area (EvPA).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA has distinguished south Florida inland flowing waters as
waters in the South Florida Nutrient Watershed Region (SFNWR). The
SFNWR was defined previously in EPA's final rule for lakes and
flowing waters as the area south of Lake Okeechobee, the
Caloosahatchee River watershed (including Estero Bay) to the west of
Lake Okeechobee, and the St. Lucie watershed to the east of Lake
Okeechobee.
    \2\ FL Statute Section 373.4592 (1994) subsection (2)
Definitions: (e) ``Everglades Agricultural Area'' or ``EAA'' means
the Everglades Agricultural Area, which are those lands described in
FL Statute Section 373.4592 (1994) subsection (15). FL Statute
Section 373.4592 (1994) subsection (2) Definitions: (h) ``Everglades
Protection Area'' means Water Conservation Areas 1 (which includes
the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge), 2A,
2B, 3A, and 3B, and the Everglades National Park.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The criteria support implementation of pollution control programs
authorized under the Clean Water Act (CWA). As part of a comprehensive
program to restore and protect the Nation's waters, Section 303(c) of
the CWA directs states to adopt water quality standards for their
navigable waters. CWA Section 303(c)(2)(A) and EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR 131 require that state water quality standards
include the designated use (e.g. public water supply, propagation of
fish and wildlife, recreational purposes) and criteria that protect
those uses. Criteria may be numeric or narrative in form, but
consistent with EPA regulations at 40 CFR 131.11(a)(1), such criteria
``must be based on sound scientific rationale and must contain
sufficient parameters or constituents to protect the designated use.''
EPA regulations at 40 CFR 131.10(b) also provide that ``[i]n
designating uses of a water body and the appropriate criteria for those
uses, the state shall take into consideration the water quality
standards of downstream waters and ensure that its water quality
standards provide for the attainment and maintenance of the water
quality standards of downstream waters.'' The CWA requires that any new
or revised water quality standards developed by states be submitted to
EPA for review and approval or disapproval, and authorizes the EPA
Administrator to determine, even in the absence of a state submission,
that a new or revised standard is needed to meet CWA requirements.
    Florida is known for its abundant and aesthetically beautiful
natural resources, particularly its aquatic resources, which are very
important to Florida's economy. Florida's coastal and estuarine waters
play an especially important part in sustaining the environment and the
economy in the State. For example, Florida's saltwater sport fishing
industry contributes over $5 billion to the State's economy and more
than 54,000 jobs annually; the State's commercial saltwater fishing
industry contributes over $1 billion and more than 10,000 jobs
annually.\3\ In 2007, nearly 11.3 million residents and 46.3 million
visitors participated in recreational saltwater beach activities in
Florida. Nearly 3.5 million residents and approximately 1.4 million
visitors used saltwater boat ramps, over 4.2 million residents and
about 3 million visitors participated in saltwater non-boat fishing,
and over 2.6 million residents and almost 1 million visitors
participated in canoeing and kayaking.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ FFWCC. 2011. The economic impact of saltwater fishing in
Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. http://myfwc.com/conservation/value/saltwater-fishing. Accessed December
2011.
    \4\ FDEP. 2008. Chapter 5--Outdoor Recreation Demand and Need.
In Outdoor Recreation in Florida, 2008: Florida's Comprehensive
Outdoor Recreation Plan, Final Draft. Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Recreation and Parks,
Tallahassee, FL. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/parks/planning/forms/SCORP5.pdf. Accessed December 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution has contributed to
serious water quality degradation affecting these coastal and estuarine
resources in the State of Florida, as well as other Florida waters. In
the most recent Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP)
water quality assessment report, the Integrated Water Quality
Assessment for Florida: 2012 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update, FDEP
describes widespread water quality impairment in Florida due to
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. FDEP's 2012 report identifies
approximately 754 square miles (482,560 acres) of estuaries (about 14
percent of assessed estuarine area) and 102 square miles (65,280 acres)
of coastal waters (about 1.6 percent of assessed coastal waters) as
impaired by nutrients. In addition, the same report indicates that
1,108 miles of rivers and streams (about 8 percent of assessed river
and stream miles) and 107 square miles (68,480 acres) of lakes (about 5
percent of assessed lake square miles) are impaired due to nutrient
pollution.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ FDEP. 2012. Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida:
2012 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update. (May 2012). Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Environmental
Assessment and Restoration, Tallahassee, FL. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2012_integrated_report.pdf.
Accessed August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 14, 2009, EPA determined under CWA section 303(c)(4)(B)
that new or revised water quality standards (WQS) in the form of
numeric nutrient water quality criteria are necessary to protect the
designated uses that Florida has set for its Class I, Class II, and
Class III waters. Subsequently, EPA entered into a Consent Decree with
Florida Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, Conservancy of Southwest
Florida, Environmental Confederation of Southwest Florida, and St.
Johns Riverkeeper, effective on December 30, 2009, which established a
schedule for EPA to propose and promulgate numeric nutrient criteria
for Florida's lakes, flowing waters, estuaries, and coastal waters. The
Consent Decree also provided that if Florida submitted and EPA approved
numeric nutrient criteria for any relevant waterbodies before the dates
outlined in the schedule, EPA would no longer be obligated to propose
or promulgate criteria for those waterbodies.
    On June 13, 2012, FDEP submitted new and revised WQS for review by
the EPA pursuant to section 303(c) of the CWA. These new and revised
WQS are set out primarily in Rule 62-302 of the F.A.C. [Surface Water
Quality Standards]. FDEP also submitted amendments to Rule 62-303,
F.A.C. [Identification of Impaired Surface Waters], which sets out
Florida's methodology for assessing whether waters are attaining State
WQS. On November 30, 2012, EPA approved the provisions of these rules
submitted for review that constitute new or revised WQS (hereafter
referred to as the ``newly-approved State WQS'').
    Among the newly-approved State WQS are numeric criteria for
nutrients that apply to a set of estuaries and coastal marine waters in
Florida. Specifically, these newly-approved State WQS apply to
Clearwater Harbor/St. Joseph Sound, Tampa Bay, Sarasota Bay, Charlotte
Harbor/Estero Bay, Clam Bay, Tidal Cocohatchee River/Ten Thousand
Islands, Florida Bay, Florida

Keys, and Biscayne Bay.\6\ Under the Consent Decree, EPA is relieved of
its obligation to propose numeric criteria for these waters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Clam Bay, Tidal Cocohatchee River/Ten Thousand Islands,
Florida Bay, Florida Keys, and Biscayne Bay are collectively
referred to in this proposed rule as ``south Florida marine
waters,'' as these are the predominantly marine waters downstream of
the South Florida Nutrient Watershed Region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, as described in EPA's November 30, 2012 approval of
Florida's new or revised WQS, while EPA believes that the provisions
addressing downstream protection will provide for quantitative
approaches to ensure the attainment and maintenance of downstream
waters consistent with 40 CFR 131.10(b), the provisions themselves do
not consist of numeric values. Because EPA is currently subject to a
Consent Decree deadline to sign a rule proposing numeric downstream
protection values (DPVs) for Florida by November 30, 2012, EPA is
proposing numeric DPVs to comply with the Consent Decree. However, EPA
has amended its January 2009 determination to specify that numeric
criteria for downstream protection are not necessary and that
quantitative approaches designed to ensure the attainment and
maintenance of downstream water quality standards, such as those
established by Florida, are sufficient to meet CWA requirements. As
such, EPA will ask the court to modify the Consent Decree consistent
with the Agency's amended determination, i.e., to not require EPA to
promulgate numeric DPVs for Florida. Accordingly, EPA approved the
State's downstream protection provisions subject to the district court
modifying the Consent Decree to not require EPA to promulgate numeric
DPVs for Florida. If the district court agrees to so modify the Consent
Decree, EPA will not promulgate numeric DPVs for Florida. However, if
the district court declines to so modify the Consent Decree, EPA would
intend to promulgate numeric DPVs for Florida and would also expect to
revisit its November 30, 2012 approval of the State Rule's downstream
protection provisions to modify or withdraw its approval. Therefore,
EPA has also reserved its authority to do so in its approval document.
    A full description of all of EPA's recent actions on Florida
numeric nutrient criteria and related implications for EPA's own rules
can be found at http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/florida_index.cfm.
    EPA is proposing these numeric criteria in accordance with the
terms of the January 14, 2009 determination, December 2009 Consent
Decree, and subsequent revisions to that Consent Decree that require
the EPA Administrator to sign this proposal by November 30, 2012
(discussed in more detail in Section II.D). EPA believes that the
proposed criteria in this rule will assure protection of Florida's
existing designated uses and are based on sound and substantial
scientific data and analyses.
2. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action
    To develop these proposed numeric nutrient criteria for Florida's
estuaries, coastal waters, and south Florida inland flowing waters, the
Agency conducted a detailed scientific analysis of the substantial
amount of water quality data available from Florida's extensive
monitoring data set.
    EPA concluded that an approach using relevant biological endpoints
and multiple lines of evidence including stressor-response analyses and
mechanistic modeling was a strong and scientifically sound approach for
deriving numeric nutrient criteria for estuaries, in the form of total
nitrogen (TN), total phosphorus (TP) and chlorophyll a concentrations.
EPA's methodology and the resulting proposed estuarine numeric nutrient
criteria are presented in more detail in Section III.B of this notice
of proposed rulemaking.
    For coastal waters on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts of Florida, EPA
is proposing to use a reference condition-based approach. EPA chose to
use satellite remote sensing in all coastal areas of Florida except the
Big Bend Coastal region. Using this approach, EPA developed chlorophyll
a criteria from satellite remote sensing imagery and field data to
calibrate the satellite remote sensing imagery. In the Big Bend Coastal
region of Florida,\7\ where satellite remote sensing predictions of
chlorophyll a were not possible due to reflectance that interferes with
the remote sensing imagery in that area, EPA used mechanistic and
statistical models to determine TN, TP, and chlorophyll a criteria for
these coastal waters.\8\ EPA's methodology and results for its proposed
coastal criteria are presented in more detail in Sections III.B and
III.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This area includes waters offshore of Apalachicola Bay,
Alligator Harbor, Ochlockonee Bay, Big Bend/Apalachee Bay, Suwannee
River, and Springs Coast.
    \8\ EPA derived TN and TP criteria for coastal waters in the Big
Bend Coastal region because mechanistic models were used in these
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is proposing numeric nutrient criteria to ensure the attainment
and maintenance of the water quality standards in downstream estuaries
and south Florida marine waters pursuant to the provisions of 40 CFR
131.10(b). EPA examined a variety of modeling techniques and data to
assess whether waters entering an estuary protect the water quality
standards within the estuary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing an approach
to derive TN and TP criteria expressed as downstream protection values
(DPVs) at the points where inland flowing waters flow into estuaries,
or marine waters in south Florida (referred to as `pour points'). These
proposed DPVs apply to all flowing waters, including south Florida
inland flowing waters (with the exception of waters within the lands of
the Miccosukee and Seminole Tribes, EAA, and EvPA), that flow directly
into estuaries or south Florida marine waters. EPA's proposed approach
for deriving DPVs at the pour points involves an evaluation of water
quality in the downstream estuary, water quality conditions at the pour
point, and selecting a method to derive the DPV values based on
available data. The proposed approaches for deriving DPVs in flowing
waters are presented in more detail in Sections III.B and III.D.
    Finally, EPA is proposing to extend the approach finalized in 40
CFR 131.43(e) \9\ to allow development of Site-Specific Alternative
Criteria (SSAC) for estuaries, coastal waters, and south Florida inland
flowing waters. EPA's rationale for extending these SSAC provisions is
discussed in more detail in Section V.C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 40 CFR 131.43(e) authorizes the derivation of Federal Site-
Specific Alternative Criteria (SSAC) after EPA review and approval
of applicant submissions of scientifically defensible criteria that
meet the requirements of CWA section 303(c) and EPA's implementing
regulations at 40 CFR 131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has incorporated sound science, local expertise, and
substantial Florida-specific data throughout the development of these
proposed numeric TN, TP, and chlorophyll a criteria. EPA relied upon
peer-reviewed criteria development methodologies,\10\ relevant
biological endpoints, and a substantial

body of scientific analysis provided to EPA by FDEP, as well as other
federal, State, and local partners such as the National Park Service;
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA); U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS); Tampa Bay, Indian River Lagoon, Sarasota Bay and
Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Programs; St. Johns River and South
Florida Water Management Districts; and Florida International
University.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ USEPA. 2000a. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual:
Lakes and Reservoirs. EPA-822-B-00-001. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
     USEPA. 2000b. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual:
Rivers and Streams. EPA-822-B-00-002. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
    USEPA. 2001. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual:
Estuarine and Coastal Marine Waters. EPA-822-B-01-003. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
    USEPA. 2010. Using Stressor-Response Relationships to Derive
Numeric Nutrient Criteria. EPA-820-S-10-001. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA sought feedback on the scientific defensibility of the
approaches outlined in this proposed rule through a Science Advisory
Board (SAB) review.\11\ The SAB assembled a group of eighteen expert
panelists to review EPA's Methods and Approaches for Deriving Numeric
Criteria for Nitrogen/Phosphorus Pollution in Florida's Estuaries,
Coastal Waters, and Southern Inland Flowing Waters.\12\ The SAB
recommendations \13\ strengthened the scientific basis of these
proposed numeric nutrient criteria. A number of key interest groups
presented their comments and views on the underlying science as part of
the SAB review process. In addition, EPA met with several groups of
stakeholders with local technical expertise to discuss potential
approaches for deriving scientifically defensible numeric nutrient
criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ USEPA-SAB. 2011. Review of EPA's draft Approaches for
Deriving Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Florida's Estuaries, Coastal
Waters, and Southern Inland Flowing Waters. EPA-SAB-11-010. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington,
DC.
    \12\ USEPA. 2010. Methods and Approaches for Deriving Numeric
Criteria for Nitrogen/Phosphorus Pollution in Florida's Estuaries,
Coastal Waters, and Southern Inland Flowing Waters. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
    \13\ USEPA-SAB. 2011. Review of EPA's draft Approaches for
Deriving Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Florida's Estuaries, Coastal
Waters, and Southern Inland Flowing Waters. EPA-SAB-11-010. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Science Advisory Board, Washington,
DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Costs and Benefits
    For the reasons presented in this notice, this is not an
economically significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
Under the CWA, EPA's promulgation of WQS establishes standards that the
State of Florida implements through the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit process for point source dischargers
and may also result in new or revised requirements for nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution treatment controls on other sources (e.g.,
agriculture, urban runoff, and septic systems) through the development
of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) and Basin Management Action Plans
(BMAPs). As a result of this action, the State of Florida will need to
ensure that permits it issues and Waste Load Allocations (WLAs) issued
under TMDLs and BMAPs include any limitations on discharges and other
sources necessary to comply with the standards established in the final
rule. In doing so, the State will have considerable discretion and a
number of choices associated with permit writing (e.g., relating to
compliance schedules, variances, etc.) and flexibilities built into the
TMDL and BMAP process for WLA assignment. While Florida's
implementation of the rule may ultimately result in new or revised
permit conditions for some dischargers and WLA requirements for control
on other sources, EPA's action, by itself, does not establish any
requirements directly applicable to regulated entities or other sources
of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution. Additionally, Florida already has
an existing narrative water quality criterion \14\ which requires that
nutrients not be present in estuaries and coastal waters in Florida or
in south Florida inland flowing waters in concentrations that cause an
imbalance in natural populations of flora and fauna. The proposed
criteria in this rule are consistent with and serve to implement the
State's existing narrative nutrient provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Subsection 62-302.530(47)(b), Florida Administrative Code
(F.A.C.), provides that ``[i]n 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.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the proposed rule does not establish any requirements
directly applicable to regulated entities or other sources of nutrient
pollution, EPA developed an economic analysis to provide information on
potential costs and benefits that may be associated with the State
implementation requirements that may be necessary to ensure attainment
of WQS. EPA conducted an analysis to estimate both the increase in the
number of impaired waters that may be identified as a result of the
proposed rule and the annual cost of CWA pollution control actions
likely to be implemented by the State of Florida to assure attainment
of applicable State water quality designated uses for these waters. It
is important to note that the costs and benefits of pollution controls
needed to attain water quality standards for nutrients for waters
already identified as impaired by the State (including waters with
TMDLs in place and without TMDLs in place) are not included in EPA
estimates of the cost of the rule. EPA believes that these costs and
benefits would be incurred in the absence of the current proposed rule
and are therefore part of the baseline against which the costs and
benefits of this rule are measured. EPA's analysis is fully described
in the document entitled Economic Analysis of Proposed Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida's Estuaries, Coastal Waters, and
South Florida Inland Flowing Waters (hereinafter referred to as the
Economic Analysis), which can be found in the docket and record for
this proposed rule. The final conclusion of this assessment is that the
incremental costs associated with the proposed rule range between
$239.0 million and $632.4 million per year (2010 dollars) and total
monetized benefits may be in the range from $39.0 to $53.4 million
annually. EPA's analysis describes additional benefits that could not
be monetized. EPA has provided estimates of the annual costs and
benefits; these exceed the $100 million threshold that defines an
economically significant rule under section 3(f) of Executive Order
12866. However, EPA cautions that these estimates cannot be used to
determine that this rule is economically significant. The direct effect
of this rule is to provide Florida with a numeric articulation of its
current narrative articulation of nutrients criteria, without affecting
the resulting level of protection offered by the criteria. The
estimates of costs and benefits here are indirect estimates (costs and
benefits associated with controls for waters that would immediately be
judged to be impaired due to numeric criteria) of the direct effects of
this proposed rule (decreasing the time to implement TMDLs on impaired
waters), and the relationship these indirect estimates bear to the true
costs and benefits cannot be determined.

B. Which water bodies are affected by this rule?

    EPA's proposed rule applies to estuaries and coastal marine waters
that have been classified by Florida as Class II (Shellfish Propagation
or Harvesting) or Class III (Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of
a Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife), including
tidal creeks and marine lakes, but excluding the estuarine and marine
waters contained in Florida's newly-approved State WQS. This proposed
rule also applies to south Florida inland flowing waters that have been
classified by Florida as Class I (Potable Water Supplies) or Class III
water bodies pursuant to Section 62-302.400, F.A.C., excluding wetlands
(e.g. sloughs in south Florida) and flowing waters within the lands of
the Miccosukee and Seminole Tribes, EvPA,

or EAA.\15\ Pursuant to Subsection 62-302.400(4), F.A.C., ``Class I,
II, and III surface waters share water quality criteria established to
protect fish consumption, recreation and the propagation and
maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and
wildlife.'' \16\ Florida currently has a narrative nutrient criterion
at Subsection 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C.\17\ established to protect
these three uses and EPA is numerically interpreting Florida's
narrative criterion for the purpose of protecting the Class I, II, and
III surface waters for the purposes of the CWA in this proposed
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ In this rule, EPA is interpreting the existing State
narrative criterion under Subsection 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C. That
criterion applies to Florida waters classified as Class I (Potable
Water Supplies), Class II (Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting), and
Class III Marine and Fresh (Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance
of a Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife). EPA is
not aware of any marine waters that Florida has classified as Class
I potable water supply. Therefore, for purposes of this rule, EPA is
interpreting Subsection 62-302.530(47)(b), F.A.C. to protect fish
consumption, recreation, and the propagation and maintenance of a
healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife in Florida's
Class II and III estuarine and coastal waters.
    \16\ Class I waters also include an applicable nitrate limit of
10 mg/L and nitrite limit of 1 mg/L for the protection of human
health in drinking water supplies. The nitrate limit applies at the
entry point to the distribution system (i.e., after any treatment);
see Section 62-550, F.A.C., for additional details.
    \17\ ``[i]n 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''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is not proposing to change any of Florida's water body
classifications with this regulation. The proposed criteria in this
regulation would only apply to water bodies that are currently
classified by Florida as Class I, II, or III and not to water bodies
with other classifications such as Class III limited waters \18\ for
which use attainability analyses (UAAs) and SSACs for nutrients have
been established, or Class IV canals in Florida's agricultural areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Class III limited waters include waters that support fish
consumption; recreation or limited recreation; and/or propagation
and maintenance of a limited population of fish and wildlife; see
Chapter 62-302.400(1) F.A.C. for more details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is defining estuary to be consistent with Florida's definition
of estuary in Section 62-303.200, F.A.C., where ``estuary'' shall mean
``predominantly marine regions of interaction between rivers and
nearshore ocean waters, where tidal action and river flow mix fresh and
salt water.'' Such areas include bays, mouths of rivers, and lagoons
that have been classified as Class II (Shellfish Propagation or
Harvesting) or Class III (Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a
Healthy, Well-Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife) water bodies
pursuant to Section 62-302.400, F.A.C., excluding wetlands.
    EPA is defining coastal waters based on Florida's definitions of
open coastal waters and open ocean waters, taking into account that CWA
jurisdiction extends to three nautical miles from shore.\19\ EPA's
definition of ``coastal waters'' is all marine waters that have been
classified as Class II (Shellfish Propagation or Harvesting) or Class
III (Recreation, Propagation and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well-
Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife) water bodies pursuant to
Section 62-302.400, F.A.C., extending to three nautical miles from
shore that are not classified as estuaries. EPA's proposed rule defines
``marine waters'' to mean surface waters in which the chloride
concentration at the surface is greater than or equal to 1,500
milligrams per liter (mg/L).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ While CWA jurisdiction, and therefore EPA's proposed
criteria, extend only to three nautical miles from shore (CWA
section 502(8)), Florida State jurisdiction extends beyond three
nautical miles. Florida's seaward boundary in Gulf of Mexico waters
is 3 marine leagues (9 nautical miles) and in Atlantic waters is 3
nautical miles (Submerged Lands Act of 1953. http://www.boem.gov/uploadedFiles/submergedLA.pdf; United States v. Florida, 363 U.S.
121 (1960)). Florida defines open coastal waters as ``all gulf or
ocean waters that are not classified as estuaries or open ocean
waters.'' Open ocean waters consist of ``all surface waters
extending seaward from the most seaward natural 90-foot (15-fathom)
isobath'' (Subsection 62-303.200, F.A.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is defining tidal creeks as relatively small coastal
tributaries with variable salinity that lie at the transition zone
between terrestrial uplands and the open estuary. For another subset of
marine waters, marine lakes, EPA is proposing to use the definition of
``marine waters'' and the definition of lakes included previously in
Water Quality Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing
Waters (40 CFR 131.43) to define a marine lake as a slow-moving or
standing body of marine water that occupies an inland basin that is not
a stream, spring, or wetland.
    EPA previously defined ``flowing waters'' in Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters (40 CFR
131.43). A flowing water is defined as ``a free-flowing, predominantly
fresh surface water in a defined channel, and includes rivers, creeks,
branches, canals, freshwater sloughs, and other similar water bodies.''
Consistent with EPA's definition in 40 CFR 131.43, EPA defines
``canal'' for this proposed rule to mean a trench, the bottom of which
is normally covered by water with the upper edges of its two sides
normally above water. Also as defined in 40 CFR 131.43, ``predominantly
fresh waters'' means surface waters in which the chloride concentration
at the surface is less than 1,500 mg/L. EPA is not proposing criteria
for areas currently managed by the State as wetlands (such as sloughs
in south Florida), which are outside the scope of this rulemaking.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ FDEP. 2001. Chapter 2: Ecological Description. In:
Everglades Phosphorus Criterion Technical Support Document. Part
III: WCA-3/ENP. Florida Department of Environmental Protection,
Everglades Technical Support Section. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wqssp/.everglades/docs/pctsd/IIIChapter.2.pdf. Accessed
January, 10, 2011.
    Doherty, S.J., C.R. Lane, and M.T. Brown. 2000. Proposed
Classification for Biological Assessment of Florida Inland
Freshwater Wetlands. Report to the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection. Contract No. WM68 (Development of a
Biological Approach for Assessing Wetland Function and Integrity).
Center for Wetlands, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
    Ogden, J.C. 2005. Everglades ridge and slough conceptual
ecological model. Wetlands 25(4):810-820.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What entities may be affected by this rule?

    Citizens concerned with water quality in Florida may be interested
in this rulemaking. Entities discharging nitrogen or phosphorus to
estuaries, coastal waters, and flowing waters in Florida could be
indirectly affected by this rulemaking because water quality standards
are used in determining National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit limits. Examples of categories and entities that may
ultimately be affected are listed in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Examples of potentially
                Category                        affected entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...............................  Industries discharging
                                          pollutants to estuaries,
                                          coastal waters and flowing
                                          waters in the State of
                                          Florida.
Municipalities.........................  Publicly-owned treatment works
                                          discharging pollutants to
                                          estuaries, coastal waters and
                                          flowing waters in the State of
                                          Florida.
Stormwater Management Districts........  Entities responsible for
                                          managing stormwater runoff in
                                          the State of Florida.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for entities that may be indirectly affected by this action.
Other types of entities not listed in the table, such as non-point
source contributors to nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in Florida's
waters, may be affected through implementation of Florida's water
quality standards program (e.g., through Basin Management Action Plans
(BMAPs)). Any parties or entities

conducting activities within Florida watersheds covered by this
proposed rule, or who depend upon or contribute to the water quality of
the estuaries, coastal waters, and flowing waters of Florida, may be
affected by this rule. To determine whether your facility or activities
may be affected by this action, you should examine this proposed rule.
If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

D. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit confidential business information
(CBI) to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside
of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    Commenters who submitted public comments or scientific information
on the portions of EPA's January 26, 2010 proposed Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida's Lakes and Flowing Waters (75 FR
4173) that are addressed in this proposal should reconsider their
previous comments in light of the new information presented in this
proposal and must re-submit their comments during the public comment
period for this rulemaking to receive EPA response.

E. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this
action under Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OW-2010-0222. The official public
docket consists of the document specifically referenced in this action,
any public comments received, and other information related to this
action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does
not include CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by
statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that
is available for public viewing at the OW Docket, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. This Docket Facility
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The Docket telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. A
reasonable fee will be charged for copies.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and
comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at http://www.regulations.gov to view public comments, access the index listing
of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are available electronically. For
additional information about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket
Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. Although not
all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still
access any of the publicly available docket materials through the
Docket Facility identified in Section I.E(1).

II. Background

A. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution

1. What is nitrogen and phosphorus pollution?
a. Overview of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution
    Excess loading of nitrogen and phosphorus to surface water bodies
and groundwater is one of the leading causes of water quality
impairments in the United States.\21\ The problem extends to both fresh
and marine waters,\22\ leading to over 15,000 nutrient pollution-
related impairments in 49 states across the country--a figure that may
substantially understate the problem as many waters have yet to be
assessed.\23\ Estuaries and coastal waters are especially vulnerable to
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution because they are the ultimate
receiving waters for most major watersheds transporting nitrogen and
phosphorus loadings from multiple upstream sources.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Dubrovsky, N.M., K.R. Burow, G.M. Clark, J.M. Gronberg,
P.A. Hamilton, K.J. Hitt, D.K. Mueller, M.D. Munn, B.T. Nolan, L.J.
Puckett, M.G. Rupert, T.M. Short, NE. Spahr, L.A. Sprague, and W.G.
Wilber. 2010. The Quality of our Nation's waters--Nutrients in the
Nation's Streams and Groundwater, 1992-2004. Circular 1350. U.S.
Geological Survey, National Water Quality Assessment Program,
Reston, VA. http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/pubs/circ1350.
Accessed December 2011.
    \22\ Smith, V.H., S.B. Joye, and R.W. Howarth. 2006.
Eutrophication of freshwater and coastal marine ecosystems.
Limnology and Oceanography 51(1, part 2):351-355.
    Schindler, D.W. 2006. Recent advances in the understanding and
management of eutrophication. Limnology and Oceanography 51(1,
part2):356-363.
    \23\ Nationally, only 27% of rivers and streams and less than
50% of lakes, reservoirs, and ponds have been assessed for
impairment (USEPA. 2011. National Summary of State Information. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Watershed Assessment, Tracking &
Environmental Results. http://iaspub.epa.gov/waters10/attains_nation_cy.control. Accessed January 2012).
    \24\ Bricker, S., B. Longstaff, W. Dennison, A. Jones, K.
Boicourt, C. Wicks, and J. Woerner. 2007. Effects of Nutrient
Enrichment in the Nation's Estuaries: A Decade of Change. NOAA
Coastal Ocean Program Decision Analysis Series No. 26. National
Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Silver Spring, MD. http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/publications/eutroupdate/Accessed January 2012.
    National Research Council. 2000. Clean Coastal Waters:
Understanding and Reducing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution. Report
prepared by the Ocean Study Board and Water Science and Technology
Board, Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources,
National Resource Council, Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The problem of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution is not new. Over
forty years ago, a 1969 report by the National Academy of Sciences \25\
noted that ``[m]an's activities, which introduce excess nutrients,
along with other

pollutants, into lakes, streams, and estuaries, are causing significant
changes in aquatic environments. The excess nutrients greatly
accelerate the process of eutrophication. The pollution problem is
critical because of increased population, industrial growth,
intensification of agricultural production, river-basin development,
recreational use of waters, and domestic and industrial exploitation of
shore properties. Accelerated eutrophication causes changes in plant
and animal life--changes that often interfere with use of water,
detract from natural beauty, and reduce property values.'' A 2000
report by the National Research Council \26\ concluded that ``* * *
scientists, coastal managers, and public decision-makers have come to
recognize that coastal ecosystems suffer a number of environmental
problems that can, at times, be attributed to the introduction of
excess nutrients from upstream watersheds. The problems are caused by a
complex chain of events and vary from site to site, but the fundamental
driving force is the accumulation of nitrogen and phosphorus in fresh
water on its way to the sea.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ National Academy of Sciences. 1969. Eutrophication: Causes,
Consequences, Correctives. National Academy of Sciences, Washington,
DC.
    \26\ National Research Council. 2000. Clean Coastal Waters:
Understanding and Reducing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution. Report
prepared by the Ocean Study Board and Water Science and Technology
Board, Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources,
National Resource Council, Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Florida has long struggled with nutrient pollution impacts to its
surface and ground waters. Florida's flat topography makes Florida
particularly susceptible to nitrogen and phosphorus pollution because
water moves more slowly over the landscape, allowing time for nitrogen
and phosphorus pollution to accumulate in water bodies and cause
eutrophication. Florida's high rainfall levels contribute to increased
run-off, and higher temperatures and sunlight contribute to
eutrophication when excess nutrients are available.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Perry, W.B. 2008. Everglades restoration and water quality
challenges in south Florida. Ecotoxicology 17:569-578.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In FDEP's 2012 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for Florida:
2012 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update, nutrient pollution is ranked
as the fifth major cause of estuary impairments by impaired square
miles \28\ and the fifth major cause of impairments in coastal
waters.\29\ FDEP documents nutrient pollution impairments in 754 square
miles (482,560 acres) of estuaries (about 14 percent of the estuarine
area assessed by Florida) and 102 square miles (65,280 acres) of
coastal waters (about 1.6 percent of the assessed coastal waters).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ First, second, third, and fourth major causes of estuary
impairments by impaired square miles are mercury in fish, DO,
bacteria in shellfish, and fecal coliform, respectively.
    \29\ FDEP. 2012. Integrated Water Quality Assessment for
Florida: 2012 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update. (May 2012).
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of
Environmental Assessment and Restoration, Tallahassee, FL. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2012_integrated_report.pdf.
Accessed August 2012.
    \30\ FDEP. 2012. Integrated Water Quality Assessment for
Florida: 2012 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update. (May 2012).
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of
Environmental Assessment and Restoration, Tallahassee, FL. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2012_integrated_report.pdf.
Accessed August 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    FDEP noted in its 2008 Integrated Water Quality Assessment for
Florida: 2008 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update that nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution poses several challenges in Florida. FDEP stated,
``The close connection between surface and groundwater, in combination
with the pressures of continued population growth, accompanying
development, and extensive agricultural operations, present Florida
with a unique set of challenges for managing both water quality and
quantity in the future. After trending downward for 20 years, beginning
in 2000 phosphorus levels again began moving upward, likely due to the
cumulative impacts of non-point source pollution associated with
increased population and development. Increasing pollution from urban
stormwater and agricultural activities is having other significant
effects.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ FDEP. 2008. Integrated Water Quality Assessment for
Florida: 2008 305(b) Report and 303(d) List Update. Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Environmental
Assessment and Restoration, Tallahassee, FL. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/docs/2008_Integrated_Report.pdf.
Accessed July 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To better understand the nitrogen and phosphorus pollution problem
in Florida, EPA looked at trends in the data Florida uses to create its
Integrated Water Quality Reports,\32\ and found increasing
concentrations of nitrogen and phosphorus compounds in Florida waters
over the 12 year period from 1996-2008. Florida's Impaired Waters Rule
(IWR) data indicate that levels of total nitrogen have increased
approximately 20 percent from a state-wide average of 1.06 mg/L in 1996
to 1.27 mg/L in 2008 and average state-wide total phosphorus levels
have increased approximately 40 percent from an average of 0.108 mg/L
in 1996 to 0.151 mg/L in 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ IWR Run 40. Updated through February 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On a national scale, the primary sources of nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution can be grouped into five major categories: (1) Urban and
suburban stormwater runoff--sources associated with residential and
commercial land use and development; (2) municipal and industrial
wastewater discharges; (3) row crop agriculture and fertilizer use; (4)
livestock production and manure management practices; and (5)
atmospheric deposition resulting from nitrogen oxide emissions from
fossil fuel combustion and ammonia emissions from row crop agriculture
and livestock production. These sources contribute loadings of
anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus to surface and groundwaters, and
may cause harmful impacts to aquatic ecosystems and imbalances in the
natural populations of aquatic flora and fauna.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ State-EPA Nutrient Innovations Task Group. 2009. An Urgent
Call to Action: Report of the State-EPA Nutrient Innovations Task
Group. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/swguidance/standards/criteria/nutrients/upload/2009_08_27_criteria_nutrient_nitgreport.pdf
Accessed May 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In general, the major sources of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution
in Florida estuarine and coastal waters are the same as those found at
the national scale: urban and suburban stormwater runoff, wastewater
discharges, row crop agriculture, livestock production, and atmospheric
deposition. As is the case with much of the southern United States,
Florida's population continues to grow, with Florida among the top ten
fastest growing states.\34\ Florida's population growth is concentrated
in major cities and along the coast. As of 2005, Florida's highest
population density was along its eastern coast; there has also been
significant population expansion along the western coast from Tampa to
the south. As populations grow, the increased nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution resulting from increased urban stormwater runoff, municipal
wastewater discharges, air deposition, and agricultural livestock
activities and row-crop runoff can place increased stress on all
ecosystems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ U.S. Census Bureau. 2011. Population Distribution and
Change: 2000 to 2010. http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-01.pdf. Accessed July 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In nearly half of the estuaries examined for this rulemaking, urban
or stormwater runoff is a major contributor of nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution. For example, a report issued in 2010 by the Sarasota Bay
Estuary Program indicates that in Sarasota Bay, nutrients are primarily
transported to the estuary by stormwater runoff, which is the
predominant source in all segments of the estuary (42-60 percent of the
total nitrogen load).\35\ Similarly, according to

the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, the largest source of nitrogen to Tampa
Bay is also runoff (63 percent of total nitrogen loadings to Tampa Bay
from 1999-2003).\36\ Impervious land cover is a large driver of
stormwater volume. In 2005, one study estimated that 7 percent of
Florida's area had total impervious area greater than 20 percent, and
of that, a quarter of that land had total impervious area greater than
40 percent. As Florida's population grows, it is likely that the
resulting expansion of impervious cover will cause increased harmful
impacts on water quality in coastal areas, wetlands, and other aquatic
ecosystems.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ SBEP. 2010. Numeric Nutrient Criteria for Sarasota Bay.
Prepared for the Sarasota Bay Estuary Program by Janicki
Environmental, Inc. http://www.sarasotabay.org/documents/SBEP-NNC-Final-Report.pdf. Accessed August 2011.
    \36\ TBEP. No date. About the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, State
of the Bay: Water and Sediment Quality. Tampa Bay Estuary Program.
http://www.tbep.org/tbep/stateofthebay/waterquality.html. Accessed
January 2012.
    \37\ Exum, L.R., S.L. Bird, J. Harrison, and C.A. Perkins. 2005.
Estimating and Projecting Impervious Cover in the Southeastern
United States. EPA/600/R-05/061. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wastewater is also a significant contributor of nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution. In Florida, there are 443 domestic (not including
septic systems) and industrial wastewater dischargers with individual
NPDES permits.\38\ Of those facilities, 198 are classified as domestic
(municipal) wastewater facilities, which treat sanitary wastewater or
sewage from homes, businesses, and institutions. The other 245
facilities are classified as industrial wastewater facilities. About
one third of Florida's population uses on-site sewage treatment and
disposal (septic tanks) to treat wastewater.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Facilities with NPDES permits either discharge to surface
waters or ground waters, using methods that include land
application, beneficial reuse of reclaimed water, and deep well
injection. USEPA. 2011. Permit Compliance System Database. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/enviro/facts/pcs/customized.html. Accessed June 2011.
    There are also 34,508 dischargers covered under generic or
general permits, which FDEP regulates based on categories of
wastewater facilities or activities that involve the same or similar
types of operations or wastes.
    \39\ FDEP. 2011. General Facts and Statistics about Wastewater
in Florida. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wastewater/facts.htm. Accessed January
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Florida, fewer than a quarter of individually permitted domestic
and industrial facilities are authorized to discharge to surface
waters. The remaining permittees are authorized to discharge solely to
groundwater through land-application, beneficial reuse of reclaimed
water, or deep well injection. Domestic wastewater treatment facilities
permitted by FDEP produce over 1.5 billion gallons of treated effluent
and reclaimed water per day, with a total treatment capacity of over
2.5 billion gallons per day. Eighteen percent of domestic wastewater
treatment facilities have treatment capacities greater than 500,000
gallons per day, whereas 73 percent of domestic wastewater treatment
facilities have capacities less than 100,000 gallons per day.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ FDEP. 2011. Wastewater Program. Florida Department of
Environmental Protection. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/wastewater/index.htm Accessed January 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Wastewater has been cited as contributing to negative impacts on
water quality in some areas. On the east coast of Florida, septic
systems contribute an estimated 1.5 million pounds of nitrogen per year
to Florida's Indian River Lagoon.\41\ There have been some successes in
reducing the impact of wastewater on marine waters. In Tampa Bay,
wastewater treatment plants were one of the major sources of nitrogen
prior to the institution of tertiary nitrogen removal. This treatment
has contributed to an improvement in Tampa Bay's water quality.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ USEPA. 2003. EPA Voluntary National Guidelines for
Management of Onsite and Clustered (Decentralized) Wastewater
Treatment Systems. EPA-832-B-03-001. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owm/septic/pubs/septic_guidelines.pdf. Accessed August 2011.
    \42\ Johansson, J.O.R., and H.S. Greening. 2000. Seagrass
Restoration in Tampa Bay: A Resource-based Approach to Estuarine
Management. Chapter 20 In: Seagrasses: Monitoring, Ecology,
Physiology, and Management, ed. S.A. Bortone, pp. 279-293. CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There have been a number of studies examining the sources of
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in waters across Florida. One area of
study is Biscayne Bay, located on the southeast coast of Florida,
adjacent to Miami. Nutrient pollution in the Bay comes from a number of
key sources that vary geographically: stormwater runoff from urban
areas, discharges from the Black Point Landfill and Sewage Treatment
Plant, agricultural runoff from canals in the South Dade agricultural
basin, and contaminated ground water.\43\ In the northern section of
the Bay, there are inputs from five canals, a landfill, and urban
runoff. The southern section of the Bay has a greater contribution from
agricultural sources.\44\ In one study, researchers found that canals
conveying waters from agricultural and urban areas contributed 88
percent and 66 percent of the Bay's total dissolved inorganic nitrogen
and total phosphorus loads, respectively.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Caccia, V.G., and J.N. Boyer. 2007. A nutrient loading
budget for Biscayne Bay, Florida. Marine Pollution Bulletin
54(7):994-1008.
    Caccia, V.G., and J.N. Boyer. 2005. Spatial patterning of water
quality in Biscayne Bay, Florida as a function of land use and water
management. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50(11):1416-1429.
    \44\ Caccia, V.G., and J.N. Boyer. 2005. Spatial patterning of
water quality in Biscayne Bay, Florida as a function of land use and
water management. Marine Pollution Bulletin 50(11):1416-1429.
    \45\ Caccia, V.G., and J.N. Boyer. 2007. A nutrient loading
budget for Biscayne Bay, Florida. Marine Pollution Bulletin
54(7):994-1008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Adverse Impacts of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution on Aquatic Life
    Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution in surface and ground waters
degrade water quality and negatively impact aquatic life through
processes associated with eutrophication.\46\ Eutrophication is a
predictable, well-understood, and widely-documented biological process
by which anthropogenic nitrogen and phosphorus pollution results in
increased growth of algae (plankton and periphyton).\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Eutrophication is the process by which a water body becomes
enriched with organic material, which is formed by primary
productivity (i.e., photosynthetic activity) and can be stimulated
to harmful levels by the anthropogenic introduction of high
concentrations of nutrients--particularly nitrogen and phosphorus
(National Research Council. 2000. Clean Coastal Waters:
Understanding and Reducing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution. Report
prepared by the Ocean Study Board and Water Science and Technology
Board, Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources,
National Resource Council, Washington, DC. See also Nixon. SW. 1995.
Coastal marine eutrophication: A definition, social causes, and
future concerns. Ophelia 41:199-219.)
    \47\ Cambridge, M.L., J.R. How, P.S. Lavery, and M.A.
Vanderklift. 2007. Retrospective analysis of epiphyte assemblages in
relation to seagrass loss in a eutrophic coastal embayment. Marine
Ecology Progress Series 346:97-107.
    Frankovich, T.A., and J.W. Fourqurean. 1997. Seagrass epiphyte
loads along a nutrient availability gradient, Florida Bay, USA.
Marine Ecology Progress Series 159:37-50.
    Peterson, B.J., T.A. Frankovich, and J.C. Zieman. 2007. Response
of seagrass epiphyte loading to field manipulations of
fertilization, gastropod grazing and leaf turnover rates. Journal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 349(1):61-72.
    Howarth, R., D. Anderson, J. Cloern, C. Elfring, C. Hopkinson,
B. Lapointe, T. Malone, N. Marcus, K.J. McGlathery, A. Sharpley, and
D. Walker. 2000. Nutrient pollution of coastal rivers, bays, and
seas. Issues in Ecology 7:1-15.
    Cloern, J.E. 2001. Our evolving conceptual model of the coastal
eutrophication problem. Marine Ecology Progress Series 210:223-253.
    Elser, J.J., M.E.S. Bracken, E.E. Cleland, D.S. Gruner, W.S.
Harpole, H. Hillebrand, J.T. Ngai, E.W. Seabloom, J.B. Shurin, and
J.E. Smith. 2007. Global analysis of nitrogen and phosphorus
limitation of primary production in freshwater, marine, and
terrestrial ecosystems. Ecology Letters 10:1135-1142.
    Smith, V.H. 2006. Responses of estuarine and coastal marine
phytoplankton to nitrogen and phosphorus enrichment. Limnology and
Oceanography 51(1, part 2): 377-384.
    Vitousek, P.M., J.D. Aber, R.W. Howarth, G.E. Likens, P.A.
Matson, D.W. Schindler, W.H. Schlesinger, and D.G. Tilman. 1997.
Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: Sources and
consequences. Ecological Applications 7(3):737-750.
    Bricker, S.B., J.G. Ferreira, and T. Simas. 2003. An integrated
methodology for assessment of estuarine trophic status. Ecological
Modelling 169(1):39-60.
    Bricker, S.B., B. Longstaff, W. Dennison, A. Jones, K. Boicourt,
C. Wicks, and J. Woerner. 2008. Effects of nutrient enrichment in
the nation's estuaries: A decade of change. Harmful Algae 8(1):21-
32.
    Boyer, J.N., C.R. Kelble, P.B. Ortner, and D.T. Rudnick. 2009.
Phytoplankton bloom status: Chlorophyll a biomass as an indicator of
water quality condition in the southern estuaries of Florida, USA.
Ecological Indicators 9(6, Supplement 1):S56-S67.
    Hutchinson, G.E. 1961. The paradox of plankton. American
Naturalist 95:137-145.
    Piehler, M.F., L.J. Twomey, N.S. Hall, and H.W. Paerl. 2004.
Impacts of inorganic nutrient enrichment on phytoplankton community
structure and function in Pamlico Sound, NC, USA. Estuarine Coastal
and Shelf Science 61(2):197-209.
    Sanders, J.G., S.J. Cibik, C.F. D'Elia, and W.R. Boynton. 1987.
Nutrient enrichment studies in a coastal plain estuary: changes in
phytoplankton species composition. Canadian Journal of Fisheries &
Aquatic Sciences 44:83-90.
    Parsons, T.R., P.J. Harrison, and R. Waters. 1978. An
experimental simulation of changes in diatom and flagellate blooms.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 32:285-294.
    Paerl, H.W. 1988. Nuisance phytoplankton blooms in coastal,
estuarine, and inland waters. Limnology and Oceanography 33(4):823-
847.
    Harding, Jr., L.W. 1994. Long-term trends in the distribution of
phytoplankton in Chesapeake Bay: roles of light, nutrients, and
streamflow. Marine Ecology Progress Series 104:267-291.
    Richardson, K. 1997. Harmful or Exceptional Phytoplankton Blooms
in the Marine Ecosystem. Advances in Marine Biology. 31:301-385.
    Hagy, J.D., J.C. Kurtz, and R.M. Greene. 2008. An Approach for
Developing Numeric Nutrient Criteria for a Gulf Coast Estuary. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development,
National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory,
Research Triangle Park, NC., EPA 600R-08/004, 44 pp.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution increases algal growth that
negatively impacts many aspects of ecological communities. As algae
growth accelerates in response to nutrient pollution, there may be
negative changes in algal species composition and competition among
species, leading to harmful, adverse effects, such as the increased
growth or dominance of toxic or otherwise harmful algal species.\48\
These harmful algal blooms (HABs) can contain undesirable species of
diatoms, cyanobacteria, and dinoflagellates, which are known to
generate toxins that are a threat to both aquatic life and recreational
activities.\49\ Many nuisance taxa of algae are also less palatable to
aquatic organisms that consume phytoplankton, so prolonged HABs can
impact the food supply of the overall aquatic community. More than 100
HAB species have been identified in the United States.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Paerl, H.W. 1988. Nuisance phytoplankton blooms in coastal,
estuarine, and inland waters. Limnology and Oceanography 33(4):823-
847.
    Anderson, D.M., P.M. Glibert, and J.M. Burkholder. 2002. Harmful
algal blooms and eutrophication: Nutrient sources, composition, and
consequences. Estuaries 25(4):704-726.
    Anderson, D.M., J.M. Burkholder, W.P. Cochlan, P.M. Glibert,
C.J. Gobler, C.A. Heil, R.M. Kudela, M.L. Parsons, J.E.J. Rensel,
D.W. Townsend, V.L. Trainer, and G.A. Vargo. 2008. Harmful algal
blooms and eutrophication: Examining linkages from selected coastal
regions of the United States. Harmful Algae 8(1):39-53.
    \49\ Anderson, D.M., P.M. Glibert, and J.M. Burkholder. 2002.
Harmful algal blooms and eutrophication: Nutrient sources,
composition, and consequences. Estuaries 25(4):704-726.
    Paerl, H.W. 2002. Connecting atmospheric nitrogen deposition to
coastal eutrophication. Environmental Science & Technology
36(15):323A-326A.
    Anderson, D.M., J.M. Burkholder, W.P. Cochlan, P.M. Glibert,
C.J. Gobler, C.A. Heil, R.M. Kudela, M.L. Parsons, J.E.J. Rensel,
D.W. Townsend, V.L. Trainer, and G.A. Vargo. 2008. Harmful algal
blooms and eutrophication: Examining linkages from selected coastal
regions of the United States. Harmful Algae 8(1):39-53.
    \50\ Abbott, G.M., J.H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A. Steidinger,
S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for Public Health
Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI Technical Report
TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and
Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task-force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/Accessed June 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Marine and fresh waters of the United States are increasingly being
negatively impacted by HABs.\51\ HAB toxins have been linked to
illnesses and deaths of marine animals, including sea lions, turtles,
fish, seabirds, dolphins, and manatees.\52\ Diatoms in HABs, such as
Pseudo-nitzschia, produce domoic acid.\53\ Domoic acid has been shown
to accumulate in the tissue of mussels, crabs, and fish, causing their
predators to become ill or die.\54\ Domoic acid poisoning has been
reported as the cause of death of humpback whales in the Gulf of Maine
in 2003 and sea lions in California's Monterey Bay during May and June
of 1998.\55\ Other toxin-producing algal species that have been linked
to harmful, adverse aquatic life impacts include Pfisteria piscicida,
which produces several toxins that impact fish and humans \56\ and the
flagellate Heterosigma akashiwo which produces an ichthyotoxin that
kills fish.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ Dortch, Q., P. Glibert, E. Jewett, and C. Lopez. 2008.
Introduction. Chapter 1 In: HAB RDDTT 2 National Workshop Report, A
plan for Reducing HABs and HAB Impacts. eds. Q. Dortch, D.M.
Anderson, D.L. Ayres, and P.M. Glibert, pp. 5-12. Woods Hole, MA.
    \52\ WHOI. 2008. Marine Mammals. Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution. http://www.whoi.edu/redtide/page.do?pid=14215. Accessed
June 2011.
    WHOI. 2008. HAB Impacts on Wildlife. Woods Hole Oceanographic
Institution. http://www.whoi.edu/redtide/page.do?pid=9682. Accessed
June 2011.
    NOAA. 2011. Overview of Harmful Algal Blooms. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean
Research.
    http://www.cop.noaa.gov/stressors/extremeevents/hab/default.aspx. Accessed June 2011.
    \53\ Thessen, A.E., and D.K. Stoecker. 2008. Distribution,
abundance and domoic acid analysis of the toxic diatom genus Pseudo-
nitzschia from the Chesapeake Bay. Estuaries and Coasts 31:664-672.
    \54\ Bushaw-Newton, K.L., and K.G. Sellner. 1999. Harmful Algal
Blooms. In: NOAA's State of the Coast Report. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/Web sites/retiredsites/sotc--pdf/hab.pdf.
Accessed June 2011.
    \55\ MBARI. 2000, January 5. Molecular Probes Link Sea Lion
Deaths to Toxic Algal Bloom. MBARI News and Information. Monterey
Bay Aquarium Research Institute. http://www.mbari.org/news/news_releases/2000/jan06_scholin.html. Accessed June 2011.
    \56\ Waring G.T., E. Josephson, K. Maze-Foley, and P.E. Rosel,
eds. 2010. Humpback Whale (Megaptera novaeangliae): Gulf of Maine
Stock (December 2009). In: U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico Marine
Mammal Stock Assessments--2010, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-NE-
219. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National
Marine Fisheries Service, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, Woods
Hole, MA. http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/publications/tm/tm219/. Accessed
January 2012.
    \57\ Rensel, J.E.J. 2007. Fish kills from the harmful alga
Heterosigma akashiwo in Puget Sound: Recent blooms and review.
Prepared for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Center
for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research, by Rensel Associates Aquatic
Sciences, Arlington, Washington, in cooperation with American Gold
Seafoods, LLC. http://www.whoi.edu/fileserver.do?id=39383&pt=2&p=29109. Accessed January 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Secondly, excessive algal growth as a result of nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution reduces water clarity, resulting in reduced light
availability for macrophytes and seagrasses.\58\ Seagrasses cover
approximately 2.7 million acres throughout the State and are a central
ecological feature of Florida's dynamic, highly productive marine
ecosystems.\59\ A substantial body of scientific research has linked
nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, and

subsequent reduced light availability, to seagrass decline. Excessive
nutrient inputs increase phytoplankton biomass and thereby increase
water column light attenuation, which limits the light available for
seagrass photosynthesis. This results in reduced growth and increased
mortality of seagrasses. In addition, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution
can lead to excess growth of epiphytic algae on seagrasses that blocks
the light available to seagrasses and affects seagrass growth.\60\ This
reduction of seagrass communities, in turn, results in harmful, adverse
impacts such as destabilization of sediments, which causes the release
of more nutrients into the water column.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Vitousek, P.M., J.D. Aber, R.W. Howarth, G.E. Likens, P.A.
Matson, D.W. Schindler, W.H. Schlesinger, and D.G. Tilman. 1997.
Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: Sources and
consequences. Ecological Applications 7(3):737-750.
    Bricker, S.B., J.G. Ferreira, and T. Simas. 2003. An integrated
methodology for assessment of estuarine trophic status. Ecological
Modelling 169(1):39-60.
    Bricker, S.B., B. Longstaff, W. Dennison, A. Jones, K. Boicourt,
C. Wicks, and J. Woerner. 2008. Effects of nutrient enrichment in
the nation's estuaries: A decade of change. Harmful Algae 8(1):21-
32.
    Boyer, J.N., C.R. Kelble, P.B. Ortner, and D.T. Rudnick. 2009.
Phytoplankton bloom status: Chlorophyll a biomass as an indicator of
water quality condition in the southern estuaries of Florida, USA.
Ecological Indicators 9(6, Supplement 1):S56-S67.
    \59\ FFWCC. 2003. Conserving Florida's Seagrass Resources:
Developing a Coordinated Statewide Management Program. Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Marine Research
Institute, St. Petersburg, FL.
    \60\ Duarte, C.M. 1991. Seagrass depth limits. Aquatic Botany
40(4):363-377.
    \61\ Boyer, J.N., C.R. Kelble, P.B. Ortner, and D.T. Rudnick.
2009. Phytoplankton bloom status: Chlorophyll a biomass as an
indicator of water quality condition in the southern estuaries of
Florida, USA. Ecological Indicators 9(6, Supplement 1):S56-S67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The role that nitrogen and phosphorus pollution plays in the
decline of seagrass has been studied extensively in Florida.\62\ In a
report published by USGS in 2001, six of nine Florida estuaries located
along the Gulf Coast showed declines in seagrass coverage, the
predominant causes of which were nitrogen and phosphorus pollution,
dredging, propeller scarring, hydrologic alterations, increased
turbidity, and chronic light reduction.\63\ Florida Fish & Wildlife
Conservation Commission has noted several areas of significant seagrass
decline between 1950 and 2000, including 72 percent loss in St. Joseph
Sound, 43 percent loss in the northern section of Biscayne Bay near
Miami, 40 percent loss in Tampa Bay, 30 percent loss in the Indian
River Lagoon, and 29 percent loss in Charlotte Harbor. These losses
coincided with population growth in these watersheds, and resulted from
human activities such as fertilizer use in residential and agricultural
areas and construction projects which contribute high levels of
suspended sediments.\64\ Several studies have attributed declines in
seagrass to excess chlorophyll a and phytoplankton in the water column
which can increase light attenuation. One study conducted from 1989-
1991 found that excess chlorophyll a caused light attenuation of 16 to
28 percent across Charlotte Harbor and Tampa Bay. In the same study,
the authors noted an overall improvement in seagrass recolonization and
areal cover in Hillsborough Bay and other parts of Tampa Bay starting
in the late 1980s coinciding with decreased nutrient loading, which
resulted in decreased concentrations of chlorophyll a and increased
water clarity.\65\ A later study, which conducted sampling monthly
between June 1998 and July 1999, estimated that phytoplankton biomass
contributed approximately 29 percent of total water column light
attenuation in Lemon Bay, Florida. The authors predicted a continuation
in the potential decline of seagrasses with increased urbanization.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Dawes, C.J., R.C. Phillips, and G. Morrison. 2004. Seagrass
Communities of the Gulf Coast of Florida: Status and Ecology, Final
Report. Technical Publication 03-04. Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research
Institute, and the Tampa Bay Estuary Program, St. Petersburg, FL.
    Tomasko, D.A., C.A. Corbett, H.S. Greening, and G.E. Raulerson.
2005. Spatial and temporal variation in seagrass coverage in
Southwest Florida: assessing the relative effects of anthropogenic
nutrient load reductions and rainfall in four contiguous estuaries.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 50:797-805.
    Orth, R.J., T.J.B. Carruthers, W.C. Dennison, C.M. Duarte, J.W.
Fourqurean, K.L. Heck Jr., A.R. Hughes, G.A. Kendrick, W.J.
Kenworthy, S. Olyarnik, F.T. Short, M. Waycott, and S.L. Williams.
2006. A global crisis for seagrass ecosystems. Bioscience 56:987-
996.
    Burkholder, J.M., D.A. Tomasko, and B.W. Touchette. 2007.
Seagrasses and eutrophication. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 350:46-72.
    Collado-Vides, L., V.G. Caccia, J.N. Boyer, and J.W. Fourqurean.
2007. Tropical seagrass-associated macroalgae distributions and
trends relative to water quality. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science 73:680-694.
    \63\ USGS. 2001. Seagrass Habitat In the Northern Gulf of
Mexico: Degradation, Conservation, and Restoration of a Valuable
Resource. 855-R-04-001. U.S. Geological Survey, Gulf of Mexico
Habitat Program Team. http://gulfsci.usgs.gov/gom_ims/pdf/pubs_gom.pdf. Accessed July 2011.
    \64\ FFWCC. 2002. Florida's Seagrass Meadows: Benefitting
Everyone. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St.
Petersburg, FL. http://www.sarasotabay.org/documents/seagrassbrochure.pdf. Accessed July 2011.
    \65\ McPherson, B.F., and R.L. Miller. 1994. Causes of Light
Attenuation in Tampa Bay and Charlotte Harbor, Southwestern Florida.
Water Resources Bulletin 30(1):43-53.
    \66\ Tomasko, D.A., D.L. Bristol, and J.A. Ott. 2001. Assessment
of present and future nitrogen loads, water quality, and seagrass
(Thalassia testudinum) depth distribution in Lemon Bay, Florida.
Estuaries 24(6A):926-938.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lastly, excessive algal growth also leads to low dissolved oxygen
(DO) potentially creating hypoxic and anoxic conditions that cannot
support aquatic life and thereby can change the balance of natural
populations of aquatic fauna expected to occur.\67\ Hypoxia is
typically defined as DO < 2 mg/L, and anoxia as DO < 0.1 mg/L.\68\ The
cause and effect relationship between nitrogen and phosphorus pollution
and marine hypoxia is clear and well documented in the scientific
literature.\69\ Increased nitrogen and phosphorus inputs lead to
excessive algal growth and organic matter loading to bottom waters.
Bacterial decomposition of the organic matter consumes oxygen and
depletes the water column of DO.\70\ In estuaries and coastal waters,
low DO is one of the most widely reported consequences of nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution and one of the best predictors of a range of
biotic impairments.\71\ Low DO causes negative impacts to aquatic life
ranging from mortality to chronic impairment of growth and
reproduction.\72\ When nitrogen and phosphorus pollution creates
adverse conditions that result in large hypoxic zones, substantial
negative changes in fish, benthic, and plankton communities may
occur.\73\ This includes avoidance of these areas by fish, mobile
benthic invertebrates migrating from the hypoxic area, and fish kills
in some systems when fish and other mobile aquatic organisms have
nowhere to migrate away from the areas

with low DO.\74\ This can result in negative changes to the benthic
invertebrate community structure of estuaries and coastal areas, with
increases of organisms more tolerant of low DO.\75\ Even intermittent
hypoxia can cause shifts in the benthic assemblage to favor resistant
or tolerant organisms, which are less desirable food sources, creating
unbalanced benthic communities in the hypoxic zone because fish avoid
the area.\76\ When hypoxia extends into shallow waters, it affects
spawning and nursery areas for many important fish species by reducing
the habitat available that protects smaller fish and aquatic organisms,
especially juveniles, from predation.\77\ Hypoxia has been implicated
in a recent increase and late-summer dominance of hypoxia-tolerant
gelatinous zooplankton (jellyfish and ctenophores) in the Chesapeake
Bay and other eastern estuaries.\78\ Reduced fishery production in
hypoxic zones has been documented in the United States and
worldwide.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ Vitousek, P.M., J.D. Aber, R.W. Howarth, G.E. Likens, P.A.
Matson, D.W. Schindler, W.H. Schlesinger, and D.G. Tilman. 1997.
Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: Sources and
consequences. Ecological Applications 7(3):737-750.
    \68\ USEPA. 1999. The Ecological Condition of Estuaries in the
Gulf of Mexico. EPA 620-R-98-004. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Health and
Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, Gulf Ecology Division,
Gulf Breeze, FL.
    \69\ Conley, D., J. Carstensen, R. Vaquer-Sunyer, and C. Duarte.
2009. Ecosystem thresholds with hypoxia. Hydrobiologia 629(1):21-29.
    Conley, D.J., H.W. Paerl, R.W. Howarth, D.F. Boesch, S.P.
Seitzinger, K.E. Havens, C. Lancelot, and G.E. Likens. 2009.
Controlling Eutrophication: Nitrogen and Phosphorus. Science
323(5917):1014-1015.
    Diaz, R.J. 2001. Overview of hypoxia around the world. Journal
of Environmental Quality 30(2):275-281. Diaz, R.J., and R.
Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine
ecosystems. Science 321(5891):926-929.
    \70\ Clement, C., S.B. Bricker and D.E. Pirhalla. 2001.
Eutrophic Conditions in Estuarine Waters. In: NOAA's State of the
Coast Report. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Silver Spring, MD. http://state-of-coast.noaa.gov/bulletins/html/eut_18/eut.html. Accessed December 2011.
    \71\ Bricker, S.B., J.G. Ferreira, and T. Simas. 2003. An
integrated methodology for assessment of estuarine trophic status.
Ecological Modelling 169(1):39-60.
    Bricker, S.B., C.G. Clement, D.E. Pirhalla, S.P. Orlando, and
D.R.G. Farrow. 1999. National Estuarine Eutrophication Assessment,
Effects of Nutrient Enrichment in the Nation's Estuaries. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service,
Special Projects Office and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean
Science. Silver Spring, MD.
    \72\ USEPA. 2001. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual,
Estuarine and Coastal Marine Waters. EPA-822-B-01-003. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, DC.
    \73\ Howell, P., and D. Simpson. 1994. Abundance of marine
resources in relation to dissolved oxygen in Long Island Sound.
Estuaries 17(2):394-402.
    Kidwell, D.M., A.J. Lewitus, S. Brandt, E.B. Jewett, and D.M.
Mason. 2009. Ecological impacts of hypoxia on living resources.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381(Supplement
1):S1-S3.
    \74\ Howell, P., and D. Simpson. 1994. Abundance of marine
resources in relation to dissolved oxygen in Long Island Sound.
Estuaries 17(2):394-402.
    Kidwell, D.M., A.J. Lewitus, S. Brandt, E.B. Jewett, and D.M.
Mason. 2009. Ecological impacts of hypoxia on living resources.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381(Supplement
1):S1-S3.
    \75\ Baker, S., and R. Mann. 1992. Effects of hypoxia and anoxia
on larval settlement, juvenile growth, and juvenile survival of the
oyster Crassostrea virginica. Biological Bulletin 182(2):265-269.
    Baker, S., and R. Mann. 1994. Feeding ability during settlement
and metamorphosis in the oyster Crassostrea virginica (Gmelin, 1791)
and the effects of hypoxia on post-settlement ingestion rates.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 181(2):239-253.
    Baker, S.M., and R. Mann. 1994. Description of metamorphic
phases in the oyster Crassostrea virginica and effects of hypoxia on
metamorphosis. Marine Ecology Progress Series 104:91-99.
    Baustian, M., and N. Rabalais. 2009. Seasonal composition of
benthic macroinfauna exposed to hypoxia in the northern Gulf of
Mexico. Estuaries and Coasts 32(5):975-983.
    Breitburg, D. 2002. Effects of hypoxia, and the balance between
hypoxia and enrichment, on coastal fishes and fisheries. Estuaries
25(4):767-781.
    \76\ Kidwell, D.M., A.J. Lewitus, S. Brandt, E.B. Jewett, and
D.M. Mason. 2009. Ecological impacts of hypoxia on living resources.
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 381(Supplement
1):S1-S3.
    \77\ Breitburg, D. 2002. Effects of hypoxia, and the balance
between hypoxia and enrichment, on coastal fishes and fisheries.
Estuaries 25(4):767-781.
    \78\ Grove, M., and D.L. Breitburg. 2005. Growth and
reproduction of gelatinous zooplankton exposed to low dissolved
oxygen. Marine Ecology Progress Series 301:185-198.
    \79\ Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones
and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321(5891):926-929.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hypoxia and anoxia in bottom waters result in anoxia in the surface
sediments, which has geochemical consequences including acidification
and release of toxic hydrogen sulfide, soluble reactive phosphorus, and
ammonia.\80\ The sediment of hypoxic zones then becomes a potential
source of nutrients that can increase the degree of eutrophication.
Systems that have had persistent and chronic hypoxia often fail to
recover quickly even after pollution loadings have been reduced.\81\
Reduced oxygen also affects a variety of other biogeochemical processes
that can negatively impact water quality, such as the chemical form of
metals in the water column.\82\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones
and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321(5891):926-929.
    Kemp, W.M., W.R. Boynton, J.E. Adolf, D.F. Boesch, W.C.
Boicourt, G. Brush, J.C. Cornwell, T.R. Fisher, P.M. Glibert, J.D.
Hagy, L.W. Harding, E.D. Houde, D.G. Kimmel, W.D. Miller, R.I.E.
Newell, M.R. Roman, E.M. Smith, and J.C. Stevenson. 2005.
Eutrophication of Chesapeake Bay: Historical trends and ecological
interactions. Marine Ecology Progress Series 303:1-29.
    McCarthy, M., K. McNeal, J. Morse, and W. Gardner. 2008. Bottom-
water hypoxia effects on sediment-water interface nitrogen
transformations in a seasonally hypoxic, shallow bay (Corpus Christi
Bay, TX, USA). Estuaries and Coasts 31(3):521-531.
    Cai, W., X. Hu, W. Huang, M.C. Murrell, J.C. Lehrter, SE.
Lohrenz, W. Chou, W. Zhai, J.T. Hollibaugh, Y. Wang, P. Zhao, X.
Guo, K. Gundersen, M. Dai, and G. Gong.. 2011. Acidification of
subsurface coastal waters enhanced by eutrophication. Nature
Geoscience 4:766-770.
    \81\ Conley, D.J., J. Carstensen, G. [AElig]rtebjerg, P.B.
Christensen, T. Dalsgaard, J.L.S. Hansen, and A.B. Josefson. 2007.
Long-term changes and impacts of hypoxia in Danish coastal water.
Ecological Applications 17(sp5):S165-S184.
    Diaz, R.J., and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones and
consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321(5891):926-929.
    \82\ Snoeyink, V.L., and D. Jenkins. 1980. Oxidation-Reduction
Reactions. Chapter 7 In: Water Chemistry, pp. 316-430. John Wiley
and Sons, New York.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The harmful, adverse impacts of nitrogen and phosphorus pollution
on aquatic life have been manifested throughout Florida. The State has
been negatively impacted by algal blooms for many years. Red algae,
Laurencia intricata and Spyridia filamentosa; brown algae, Dictyota sp.
and Sargassum filipendula; and green algae, Enteromorpha sp., Codium
isthmocladum, and Halimeda sp. grow in the Florida Bay area.\83\ At
times their increased growth has threatened the commercially important
fish, lobster, and shrimp nurseries in the area.\84\ Southern Palm
Beach and northern Broward counties have been negatively impacted by
algal mats made up of Caulerpa species since the 1990s. Caulerpa
species can become overgrown or displace coral, other macroalgae, or
sponges. Off Palm Beach County, dive operators and fishermen have
reported large amounts of Caulerpa brachypus driving fish and lobster
away from reefs. Researchers in Florida (e.g., Florida Sea Grant,
University of Florida IFAS Extension, University of Central Florida,
Tampa Bay Estuary Program) and nationally (e.g., National Sea Grant,
NOAA) have noted the spread of a related green alga (Caulerpa
taxifolia) along the California coast, which is illustrative of the
potential for future further spread of C. brachypus in Florida coastal
waters. California is spending millions to eradicate the C.
taxifolia.\85\ Gambierdiscus toxicus (a ciguatoxin producer) is found
from Palm Beach to the Dry Tortugas and Florida Bay and is suspected to
have caused fish kills and disease events.\86\ Blooms of Lyngbya
majuscula were reported in Charlotte Harbor, Cedar Key, Sebastian
Inlet, Sarasota Bay, Tampa Bay, Terra Ceia Bay, Palma Sola, Manatee
River, and northwest Bradenton in 1999, 2000, and 2002. Lyngbya
majuscula can form sizeable, floating mats that emit foul odors.\87\ In
1991, widespread and persistent blooms of cyanobacteria in Florida Bay
coincided with massive sponge die-offs, which negatively impacted the
behavior and abundance of populations of juvenile Caribbean spiny
lobsters.\88\ Two Pseudo-nitzschia species found in Florida are P.
calliantha, which was observed at bloom levels in the northern Indian
River Lagoon, and P.

pseudodelicatissima.\89\ Pseudo-nitzschia spp. has been observed in
Tampa Bay since the 1960s. Pseudo-nitzschia spp. cause amnesic
shellfish poisoning in humans and mortality of marine mammals and
seabirds.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ Anderson, D.M., ed. 1995. ECOHAB: The Ecology and
Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms: A National Research Agenda.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA.
    \84\ Anderson, D.M., ed. 1995. ECOHAB: The Ecology and
Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms: A National Research Agenda.
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA.
    \85\ Jacoby, C., B. Lapointe, and L. Creswell. No date. Are
native and nonindigenous seaweeds overgrowing Florida's east coast
reefs? SGEF-156. Florida Sea Grant College Program. http://nsgl.gso.uri.edu/flsgp/flsgpg01015.pdf. Accessed January 2012.
    Jacoby, C., and L. Walters. 2009. Can We Stop ``Killer Algae''
from Invading Florida? (March 2009 rev.) SGEF-155. Florida Sea Grant
College Program. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/sg/sg07200.pdf.
Accessed April 2012.
    \86\ FFWCC. No date. Gambierdiscus toxicus. Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission. http://myfwc.com/media/202186/g_toxicus_1054.pdf. Accessed January 2012.
    \87\ FFWCC. No date. Blue-Green Algal Blooms in Coastal Florida;
1999, 2000, and 2002. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/archive/historical-events/blue-green-algal-blooms-coastal-fl/. Accessed January 2012.
    \88\ Butler, M.J., J.H. Hunt, W.F. Herrnking, M.J. Childress, R.
Bertelsen, W. Sharp, T. Matthews, J.M. Field, and H.G. Marshall.
1995. Cascading disturbances in Florida Bay, USA: cyanobacteria
blooms, sponge mortality, and implications for juvenile spiny
lobsters Panulirus argus. Marine Ecology Progress Series 129:119-
125.
    \89\ Phlips, E.J., S. Badylak, M. Christman, J. Wolny, J. Brame,
J. Garland, L. Hall, J. Hart, J. Lansberg, M. Lasi, J. Lockwood, R.
Paperno, D. Scheidt, A. Staples, K. Steidinger. 2011. Scales of
temporal and spatial variability in the distribution of harmful
algae species in the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, USA. Harmful
Algae 10:277-290.
    Phlips, E.J., S. Badylak, S. Youn, and K. Kelley. 2004. The
occurrence of potentially toxic dinoflagellates and diatoms in a
subtropical lagoon, the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, USA. Harmful
Algae 3(1):39-49.
    \90\ Badylak, S., E.J. Phlips, P. Baker, J. Fajans, and R.
Boler. 2007. Distributions of phytoplankton in Tampa Bay estuary,
U.S.A. 2002-2003. Bulletin of Marine Science 80(2):295-317.
    Lopez, C.B., Q. Dortch, E.B. Jewett, and D. Garrison. 2008.
Scientific Assessment of Marine Harmful Algal Blooms. Interagency
Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and Human Health of
the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology, Washington,
DC. http://www.cop.noaa.gov/stressors/extremeevents/hab/habhrca/assess_12-08.pdf. Accessed April 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to being negatively indirectly impacted by algal toxins
and decline of seagrass, aquatic life in Florida is directly impacted
by hypoxia. In June 2011, a fish kill in Marco Island, Florida was
attributed to low dissolved oxygen, resulting from a ``mixed'' bloom of
non-toxic algae and diatoms.\91\ In 2010, there were reports of algal
blooms and fish kills in the St. Johns River.\92\ Spring releases of
water from Lake Okeechobee into the St. Lucie Canal resulted in
floating mats of toxic cyanobacteria, Microcystis aeruginosa, prompting
Martin and St. Lucie county health departments to issue public health
warnings.\93\ A large Microcystis bloom was documented in the Lower St.
Johns River in 2005, covering a 100 mi (160 km) stretch from
Jacksonville to Crescent City.\94\ Toxic cyanobacteria Anabaena
circinalis and Cylindrospermopsis raciborskii have been implicated in
fish kills in the Lower St. Johns River basin.\95\ In addition, in June
2009, a large algal bloom stretching more than 14 mi (23 km) was
documented in Tampa Bay. This was linked to surface water runoff of
nutrients and pollutants (e.g., fertilizers, yard waste, animal feces)
that were washed into the bay from recent heavy rains.\96\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ Fish kill in island canals appears over. 2011, June 2.
Marconews.com -Marco Eagle. http://www.marconews.com/news/2011/jun/02/dead-fish-bad-smell-permeate-parts-island/?print=1. Accessed
January 2012.
    \92\ Patterson, S. 2010, July 23. St John's River Looks Sick,
Nelson says. The Florida Times Union. http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-07-23/story/st-johns-looks-sick-nelson-says. Accessed
September 2010.
    Patterson, S. 2010, July 21. Foam on St. John's River Churns Up
Environmental Interest. The Florida Times Union. http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-07-21/story/foam-st-johns-churns-environmental-questions. Accessed October 2010.
    \93\ Killer, E. 2010, June 10. Blue-green Algae Found Floating
Near Palm City as Lake Okeechobee Releases Continue. TCPalm. http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2010/jun/10/blue-green-algae-found-floating-near-palm-city-o/. Accessed October 2010.
    \94\ Aubel, M., P. D'Aiuto, A. Chapman, D. Casamatta, A. Reich,
S. Ketchen, and C. Williams. 2006. Blue-Green Algae in St. Johns
River, FL. Lakeline Summer 2006:40-45.
    \95\ Abbott, G. M., J. H. Landsberg, A. R. Reich, K. A.
Steidinger, S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for
Public Health Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI
Technical Report TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg,
FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task-force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/. Accessed June 2011.
    http://www.lsjr.org/pdf/ResourceGuide_FL_algal_blooms_2009.pdf. Accessed June 2011.
    \96\ Pittman, C. 2009, June 26. Algae bloom one of largest in
Tampa Bay history. St. Petersburg Times. http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/water/article1013322.ece. Accessed July 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Numerous algal blooms, some capable of producing toxins, foul
odors, and fish kills, occurred in Florida coastal areas, estuaries,
and canals in 2011. Green algae, known as June Grass, were found
washing onto local beaches on Okaloosa Island. The algae adhere to
swimmers, cover beaches and hinder fishing.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \97\ Tammen, K. 2011, April 20. It's not even June and the June
Grass is Back. Northwest Florida Daily News. http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/grass-39438-island-okaloosa.html. Accessed
April 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Caloosahatchee River and estuary, high algae and salinity
levels caused the Olga water treatment plant in Lee County to close in
May 2011. Customers complained about unusual tastes and odors in their
drinking water. The blue-green algae bloom significantly affected areas
from the W.P. Franklin Lock and Dam, upstream through Alva and LaBelle,
Florida. The bloom caused fish, bird and shellfish mortalities, and
triggered the Lee County Health Department to issue warnings and
advisories on water and fish consumption as well as swimming. Toxic
blue-green algae species were identified in the bloom, including
Anabaena, Oscillatoria and Aphanizomenon sp.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ Lee Closes a Water Plant; Blame Algae and Saltwater
intrusion in Caloosahatchee. 2011, May 19. CBS Wink News Now. http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-05-19/Lee-Closes-a-Water-Plant-Blame-Algae-and-Salt-water-intrusion-in-Caloosahatchee. Accessed
December 2011.
    Lollar, K. 2011, June 6. Bacterial bloom stains waterway up to
LaBelle. News-Press. http://www.marconews.com/news/2011/jun/02/dead-fish-bad-smell-permeate-parts-island/. Accessed June 2011.
    Crisis in the Caloosahatchee: Algal blooms in local waters.
2011, June 8. Sanibel-Captiva Islander. http://sanibel-captiva-
islander.com/page/content.detail/id/511872/Crisis-in-the-
Caloosahatchee--Algal-blooms-in-local-waters.html?nav=5051. Accessed
June 2011.
    Warning added for Lee County waters. 2011, June 16. CBS Wink
News Now.
    http://www.winknews.com/Local-Florida/2011-06-16/Warning-added-for-Lee-County-waters. Accessed June 2011.
    Cornwell, B. 2011, June 22. Algae Bloom doesn't deter everyone.
Fort Meyers Florida Weekly. http://fortmyers.floridaweekly.com/news/2011-06-22/Top_News/Algae_bloom_doesnt_deter_everyone.html.
Accessed June 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Indian River Lagoon also experienced large and prolonged algae
blooms. High levels of green algae Resultor sp. were found from
Titusville to Melbourne and covering the entire Banana River. The algae
were thought to be responsible for killing hundreds of fish and
inhibiting seagrass growth.\99\ A large rust-colored bloom of
Pyrodinium bahamense formed in Old Tampa Bay in August 2011; the bloom
stretched from Safety Harbor to the Howard Frankland Bridge and was
thought to be caused by a combination of heat, rain, and fertilizer
runoff.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ Florida Today. 2011, July 18. Green algae killing fish,
seagrass in northern Indian River Lagoon. 10 News WTSP--Tampa Bay.
http://www.wtsp.com/rss/article/201465/19/Green-algae-killing-fish-seagrass-in-northern-Indian-River-Lagoon. Accessed December 2011.
    \100\ Reyes, R. 2011, August 31. Algae bloom continues to grow
in Old Tampa Bay. Tampa Bay Online. http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/aug/31/1/algae-bloom-continues-to-grow-in-old-tampa-bay-ar-254281/. Accessed December 2011.
    Harwell, D. 2011, August 27. Tampa Bay algae bloom threatens the
estuary's fish. St. Petersburg Times. http://www.tampabay.com/news/environment/water/tampa-bay-algae-bloom-threatens-the-estuarys-fish/1188284. Accessed August 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Adverse Impacts of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution on Human Health
    As noted previously in section II.A.1.b, nitrogen and phosphorus
pollution have been explicitly linked to changes in natural algal
species composition including increased growth or dominance of toxic or
otherwise harmful algal species.\101\ Toxins produced by HABs have been
linked, through recreational exposure, to adverse human health impacts
through ingestion of contaminated seafood,

dermal reactions, and respiratory problems.\102\ Ingestion of seafood
that is contaminated with toxins can cause gastrointestinal,
neurological, cardiovascular, and hepatological illnesses. In some
severe cases, ingestion of even a small amount of contaminated seafood
can result in coma or death.\103\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ Paerl, H.W. 1988. Nuisance phytoplankton blooms in
coastal, estuarine, and inland waters. Limnology and Oceanography
33(4):823-847.
    Anderson, D.M., P.M. Glibert, and J.M. Burkholder. 2002. Harmful
algal blooms and eutrophication: Nutrient sources, composition, and
consequences. Estuaries 25(4):704-726.
    Anderson, D.M., J.M. Burkholder, W.P. Cochlan, P.M. Glibert,
C.J. Gobler, C.A. Heil, R.M. Kudela, M.L. Parsons, J.E.J. Rensel,
D.W. Townsend, V.L. Trainer, and G.A. Vargo. 2008. Harmful algal
blooms and eutrophication: Examining linkages from selected coastal
regions of the United States. Harmful Algae 8(1):39-53.
    \102\ WHOI. 2006. Harmful Algae and Red Tides Primer. Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA.
    Anderson, D.M. 2004. The Growing Problem of Harmful Algae: Tiny
plants pose a potent threat to those who live in and eat from the
sea. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. Oceanus Magazine 43(1):1-
5.
    Graham, J. 2007. Harmful Algal Blooms. Fact Sheet 2006-3147.
U.S. Geological Survey, Lawrence, KS CDC. 2004. About Harmful Algal
Blooms. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
Bronstein, A.C., D.A. Spyker, L.R. Cantilena, Jr., J.L. Green, B.H.
Rumack, S.L. Giffin. 2009. 2008 Annual Report of the American
Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data System
(NPDS): 26th Annual Report. Clinical Toxicology 48:979-1178.
    Landsberg, J., F.Van Dolah, and G. Doucette. 2005. Marine and
estuarine harmful algal blooms: Impacts on human and animal health.
Chapter 8 In: Oceans and Health: Pathogens in the Marine
Environment. eds. S. Belkin and R.R. Colwell, pp.165-215. Springer,
New York.
    NOAA. 2009. Marine Biotoxins. National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, Northwest Fisheries Science Center. http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/hab/habs_toxins/marine_biotoxins/index.html.
Accessed December 2011.
    Anderson, D., P. Glibert, and J. Burkholder. 2002. Harmful Algal
Blooms and Eutrophication: Nutrient Sources, Composition, and
Consequences. Estuaries 25(4b):704-726.
    \103\ Bushaw-Newton, K.L., and K.G. Sellner. 1999. Harmful Algal
Blooms. In: NOAA's State of the Coast Report. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD. http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/websites/retiredsites/sotc_pdf/hab.pdf.
Accessed June 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nitrogen and phosphorus pollution has been linked to human health
impacts in Florida, primarily through illnesses associated with HABs.
Although marine HABs occur naturally, increased nutrient loadings and
pollution have been linked to increased occurrence of some types of
HABs.\104\ Significant HAB-caused toxins that have been found in
Florida's marine waters include saxitoxins, brevetoxins, ciguatoxins,
cyanotoxins, domoic acid, and okadaic acid.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \104\ Lopez, C.B., Q. Dortch, E.B. Jewett, and D. Garrison.
2008. Scientific Assessment of Marine Harmful Algal Blooms.
Interagency Working Group on Harmful Algal Blooms, Hypoxia, and
Human Health of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and
Technology, Washington, DC.
    \105\ Abbott, G.M., J.H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A. Steidinger,
S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for Public Health
Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI Technical Report
TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and
Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task- force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-
for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/.
Accessed June 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ciguatoxins lead to Ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP), one of the most
commonly reported food borne illnesses caused by a marine biotoxin in
the United States,\106\ with 176 cases reported to U.S. poison centers
in 2009 (22 percent of the total reported cases of food poisoning from
seafood toxins).\107\ Ciguatoxins are bioaccumulative, causing
gastrointestinal, neurological, or cardiovascular symptoms that vary in
intensity.\108\ In Florida, CFP poses a significant risk to public
health.\109\ One estimate indicates that approximately 1,300 cases of
CFP (reported and unreported cases) occur annually in Florida.\110\ The
Florida Department of Health (FDOH) reported 8 cases of CFP in 2005, 44
cases in 2006, 34 cases in 2007, and 51 cases in 2008.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ Dickey, R.W., and S.M. Plakas. 2010. Ciguatera: A public
health perspective. Toxicon 56:123-136.
    \107\ Bronstein, A.C., D.A. Spyker, L.R. Cantilena, Jr., J.L.
Green, B.H. Rumack, and S.L. Giffin. 2009. 2008 Annual Report of the
American Association of Poison Control Centers' National Poison Data
System (NPDS): 26th Annual Report. Clinical Toxicology 48:979-1178.
    \108\ McKee D.B., L.E. Fleming, R. Tamer, R. Weisman, and D.
Blythe. 2001. Physician diagnosis and reporting of ciguatera fish
poisoning in an endemic area. In: Harmful Algal Blooms 2000:
Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Harmful Algal
Blooms, Hobart, Australia, 7-11 February 2000, eds. G.M.
Hallegraeff, S.I. Blackburn, C.J. Bolch, and R.J. Lewis, pp. 451-
453. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, Paris,
France.
    \109\ Abbott, G. M., J. H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A.
Steidinger, S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for
Public Health Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI
Technical Report TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg,
FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task-force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/. Accessed June 2011.
    \110\ Abbott, G. M., J. H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A.
Steidinger, S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for
Public Health Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI
Technical Report TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg,
FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task- force/reports-
presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-
algal-blooms-in-florida/. Accessed June 2011.
    \111\ Abbott, G. M., J.H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A.
Steidinger, S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for
Public Health Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI
Technical Report TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg,
FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task-force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/. Accessed June 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Saxitoxins lead to paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP), which
occurs when humans eat shellfish contaminated with saxitoxins. These
toxins affect the nervous system and in severe cases cause respiratory
paralysis.\112\ Between January 2002 and May 2004, 28 cases of
saxitoxin poisoning associated with puffer fish caught in Florida's
Indian River Lagoon (IRL) were reported. In 2002, the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission banned the commercial and recreational
harvest of puffer fish in several water bodies in Florida and made that
ban permanent in 2004.\113\ Domoic acid, also produced by HABs, can
also cause food poisoning, producing symptoms ranging from mild
gastrointestinal discomfort to permanent brain damage and, in rare
cases, death.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ Landsberg, J., F. Van Dolah, and G. Doucette. 2005. Marine
and estuarine harmful algal blooms: Impacts on human and animal
health. Chapter 8 In: Oceans and Health: Pathogens in the Marine
Environment. eds. S. Belkin and R.R. Colwell, pp. 165-215. Springer,
New York.
    \113\ Abbott, G.M., J.H. Landsberg, A.R. Reich, K.A. Steidinger,
S. Ketchen, and C. Blackmore. 2009. Resource Guide for Public Health
Response to Harmful Algal Blooms in Florida. FWRI Technical Report
TR-14. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and
Wildlife Research Institute, St. Petersburg, FL. http://myfwc.com/research/redtide/task-force/reports-presentations/resource-guide-for-public-health-response-to-harmful-algal-blooms-in-florida/.
Accessed June 2011.
    Landsberg, J.H., S. Hall, J.N. Johannessen, K.D. White, S.M.
Conrad, J.P. Abbott, L.J. Flewelling, R.W. Richardson, R.W. Dickey,
E.L.E. Jester, S. M. Etheridge, J.R. Deeds, F.M. Van Dolah, T.A.
Leighfield, Y. Zou, C.G. Beaudry, R.A. Benner, P.L. Rogers, P.S.
Scott, K. Kawabata, J.L. Wolny, and K.A. Steidinger. 2006. Saxitoxin
Puffer Fish Poisoning in the United States, with the First Report of
Pyrodinium bahamense as the Putative Toxin Source. Environmental
Health Perspectives 114(10):1502-1507.
    \114\ NOAA. 2009. Marine Biotoxins. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Northwest Fisheries Science Center.
http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/hab/habs_toxins/marine_biotoxins/index.html. Accessed December 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, elevated levels of nitrate, a byproduct of nitrogen
pollution in surface waters, can cause public health concerns if the
water is a drinking water source, where \115\ nitrate is converted to
harmful nitrite after ingestion.\116\ The primary human health concern
with nitrates and nitrites in drinking water is methemoglobinemia,
although adverse thyroid effects have been associated with elevated
nitrates as well.\117\

Methemoglobinemia, or ``blue baby syndrome,'' as the name implies, most
often affects infants less than six months old (although adults can
also be affected) when the ingested nitrate is converted to nitrite in
the body that prevents hemoglobin in the blood from delivering oxygen
effectively throughout the body. Methemoglobinemia is an acute disease
and symptoms can develop rapidly in infants, usually over a period of
days. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blueness of the skin,
and even death in severe cases.\118\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \115\ FDEP. 1998. Ground-water Quality and Agricultural Land Use
in the Polk County Very Intense Study Area (VISA). AMR 1998-2.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Division of Water
Facilities. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/monitoring/docs/facts/fs9802.pdf. Accessed September 2010.
    \116\ Gulis. G., M. Czompolyova, and J.R. Cerhan. 2002. An
Ecologic Study of Nitrate in Municipal Drinking Water and Cancer
Incidence in Trnava District, Slovakia. Environmental Research
88:182-187.
    \117\ Fan, A.M., and V.E. Steinberg. 1996. Health implications
of nitrate and nitrite in drinking water: An update on
methemoglobinemia occurrence and reproductive and development
toxicity. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 23(1 Pt 1):35-43.
    \118\ Manassaram, D.M., L.C. Backer, and D.M. Moll. 2006. A
Review of Nitrates in Drinking Water: Maternal Exposure and Adverse
Reproductive and Developmental Outcomes. Environmental Health
Perspectives 114(3):320-327. FDEP. 2011. Drinking Water: Inorganic
Contaminants. Florida Department of Environmental Protection. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/inorg_con.htm. Accessed
November 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA developed a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) of 10 mg/L for
nitrate in drinking water and an MCL of 1 mg/L for nitrite.\119\
Nitrates are found in groundwater and wells in Florida, ranging from
the detection limit of 0.02 mg/L to over 20 mg/L. Elevated nitrate
concentrations in groundwater are more common in rural agricultural
areas which are often served by private wells. When nitrate occurs at
concentrations greater than 1 mg/L, it is considered to be the result
of human activities such as application of agricultural fertilizers,
disposal of animal wastes, and use of septic tanks.\120\ Monitoring of
Florida Public Water Supplies from 2004-2011 indicates that exceedances
of the nitrate MCL reported by drinking water plants in Florida ranged
from 19-34 annually.\121\ A study in the late 1980s conducted by
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS) and
FDEP, analyzed 3,949 shallow drinking water wells for nitrate.\122\
Nitrate was detected in 2,483 wells (63%), with 584 wells (15%) above
the MCL of 10 mg/L.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \119\ USEPA. 2007. Nitrates and Nitrites: TEACH Chemical
Summary. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/Nitrates_summary.pdf. Accessed May 2012.
    \120\ DeSimone, L.A., P.A. Hamilton, and R.J. Gilliom. 2009.
Quality of Water from Domestic Wells in Principal Aquifers of the
United States, 1991-2004: Overview of Major Findings. Circular
1332.U.S. Geological Survey, National Water Quality Assessment
Program, Reston, VA. http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/studies/domestic_wells/WaterWellJournalArticle_DeSimoneetal2009.pdf. Accessed
November 2011.
    Spechler, R.M. 2010. Hydrogeology and Groundwater Quality of
Highlands County, Florida. Scientific Investigations Report 2010-
5097. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA
    Dubrovsky, N.M., K.R. Burow, G.M. Clark, J.M. Gronberg, P.A.
Hamilton, K.J. Hitt, D.K. Mueller, M.D. Munn, B.T. Nolan, L.J.
Puckett, M.G. Rupert, T.M. Short, NE. Spahr, L.A. Sprague, and W.G.
Wilber. 2010. The Quality of our Nation's Waters--Nutrients in the
Nation's Streams and Groundwater, 1992-2004. Circular 1350. U.S.
Geological Survey, National Water Quality Assessment Program,
Reston, VA. http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/nutrients/pubs/circ1350.
Accessed May 2012.
    \121\ FDEP. 2012. Chemical Data for 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007,
2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011. Florida Department of Environmental
Protection. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/water/drinkingwater/chemdata.htm. Accessed May 2012.
    \122\ Southern Regional Water Program. 2010. Drinking Water and
Human Health in Florida. http://srwqis.tamu.edu/florida/program-information/florida-target-themes/drinking-water-and-human-health.aspx. Accessed May 2012.
    Obreza, T.A., and K.T. Morgan. 2008. Nutrition of Florida Citrus
Trees. 2nd ed. SL 253. University of Florida, IFAS Extension. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/SS/SS47800.pdf. Accessed May 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Adverse Impacts of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Pollution on the Economy
    Excessive algal blooms result in a range of economic losses,
including lost revenue from impacts to commercial fisheries,
recreational fishing and boating trips, and tourism, as well as
increased drinking water costs and reduced waterfront property
values.\123\ More information concerning the costs and benefits of the
numeric nutrient criteria proposed in this rule can be found in Section
VI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ Dodds, W.K., W.W. Bouska, J.L. Eitzmann, T.J. Pilger, K.L.
Pitts, A.J. Riley, J.T. Schloesser, and D.J. Thornbrugh. 2009.
Eutrophication of U.S. Freshwaters: Analysis of Potential Economic
Damages. Environmental Science and Technology 43(1):12-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The economic value of Florida's marine recreational fisheries is
higher than any other state in the country. Recreational fishing
contributed over $5 billion to Florida's economy in 2006. In the 2008-
2009 fiscal year, over 1 million individuals bought a marine
recreational fishing license, generating over $29 million in
revenue.\124\ Similarly, Florida has one of the nation's top producing
commercial fisheries. In 2009, Florida's harvest of the top five
commercial species of fish and shellfish was worth more than $55
million combined. In total, commercial fishing contributed more than $1
billion to the economy of Florida. Outdoor recreation in Florida
(including wildlife-viewing, fishing, and water sports) generates $10.1
billion annually.\125\ In 2006, over 3 million Florida residents and
746,000 visitors participated in wildlife-viewing activities, for total
retail sales of an estimated $3.1 billion.\126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \124\ FFWCC. No Date. The Economic Impact of Saltwater Fishing
in Florida. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
http://myfwc.com/conservation/value/saltwater-fishing. Accessed
December 2011.
    \125\ FFWCC. No Date. Economic Impact of Outdoor Recreation.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.
    http://myfwc.com/conservation/value/outdoor-recreation. Accessed
July 2011.
    \126\ USFWS. 2008. 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation: Florida. FHW/06-FL. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/fhw06-fl.pdf.
Accessed July 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the county level, Monroe County's commercial tourism and fishing
industries rely on finfish and shellfish from Florida Bay. Measurable
economic losses associated with the changing environmental conditions
of the Bay have occurred, primarily from the substantial decline in
pink shrimp harvests due to loss of submerged aquatic vegetation
(habitat), which was linked to nitrogen and phosphorus pollution as a
contributing factor. From 1986 through the early 1990s, employment in
commercial fishing declined by about 10 percent, while income of
individuals in the industry declined by $16 million. These losses
coincided with massive seagrass die-offs in the Bay and blue-green
algae blooms.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ Gorte, R.W. 1994. The Florida Bay economy and changing
environmental conditions. 94-435 ENR, CRS Report for Congress,
Congressional Research Service, The Library of Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAB toxins can make seafood unsafe for human consumption, leading
to an overall reduction in the amount of fish purchased due to the real
or perceived threats of contamination.\128\ Potential economic impacts