PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 16, 2012
State Waters Partnership Act of 2012 - Expresses the sense of Congress that the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): (1) should take into account the effect of numeric nutrient criteria for nitrogen or phosphorus developed to meet the water quality requirements of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (commonly known as the Clean Water Act) on the economy, job creation, consumers, municipalities, agriculture, small business, and other affected sectors; and (2) should not promulgate or enforce nutrient criteria that would result in a negative economic impact of at least 15% on any such sector.
Prohibits the Administrator from proposing, promulgating, or enforcing numeric nutrient criteria for any stream, lake, spring, canal, estuary, or marine water of Florida until the Administrator makes a final determination in accordance with such Act regarding the Florida amended rule approved for adoption by the Environmental Regulation Commission on December 8, 2011. Provides that if the Administrator determines that such rule meets the requirements of such Act: (1) the Adminstrator shall withdraw specified regulations concerning site-specific alternative criteria, and (2) the Administrator shall be prohibited from proposing or promulgating numeric nutrient criteria for streams, lakes, springs, canals, estuaries, or marine waters of Florida based on EPA's January 14, 2009, determination regarding numeric nutrient criteria.
People & committees
Sen. Rubio, Marco [R-FL] · R–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2115 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2115 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2115 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2115 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.