CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPRING MEETING MARCH 1—2, 2012 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA EPA’s Evaluation of Bay Jurisdictions’ Draft Phase II WIPs & Final 2012-2013.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Howard County, MD Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan October 6, 2011 Howard Saltzman Howard County Department of Public Works.
Commonwealth of Virginia Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Russ Baxter, Chesapeake Bay Coordinator.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Chesapeake Bay Restoration An EPA Perspective Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Administrator U.S. EPA.
Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.
Update on the District of Columbia’s Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) for the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) November 18, 2010.
Jim Edward, Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program (EPA) 1 CBP Program Update Citizens Advisory Committee February 27, 2014.
Update on Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.
Update on Forest Goals and Progress in the Chesapeake Bay Partnership Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting, 8/23/13 Sally Claggett & Julie Mawhorter, US.
Developing Final Phase II WIPs and Milestones Katherine Antos Chesapeake Bay Program Office Jenny Molloy Water Protection Division DC Draft Phase II WIP.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework Briefing CBP Partnership’s Communications Workgroup July 10, 2014.
Progress Update: Evaluation of Federal Facilities in WIPs and Milestones CBPO Management Board March 6, Jim Edward, EPA Greg Allen, EPA.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
DC Draft Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan Stakeholder Meeting March 1, 2012 Metropolitan Washington Council Of Governments Hamid Karimi Deputy Director.
Update on the Development of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Virginia’s Watershed Implementation Plan Russ Perkinson Potomac Roundtable October 8, 2010.
Virginia Assessment Scenario Tool VAST Developed by: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
C hesapeake Bay EPA TMDLs & State WIPs: Implications for Local Governments Presentation to Water Resources Technical Committee November 12, WRTC.
Progress on Coordinating CBP and Federal Leadership Goals, Outcomes, and Actions Principals’ Staff Committee Meeting 2/16/12 Carin Bisland, Associate Director.
1 Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board Meeting March 6, 2012 Discussion for the Final Evaluation of Milestones.
Phase II WIP Background & Development Process Tri-County Council – Eastern Shore June 2,
Developing Final Phase II WIPs and Milestones Jim Edward EPA Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office DDOE Meeting with Federal Partners February.
Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 30, 2010.
What is the Chesapeake Bay TMDL? Total Maximum Daily Load –Amount of pollutants that a water body can receive and still support designated uses Drinking,
Chesapeake Bay TMDL & Watershed Implementation Plans The Role of Local Governments Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Administrator U.S. EPA Presentation.
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
Jim Edward, Deputy Director Chesapeake Bay Program, EPA 1 CBP Program Update on Bay Agreement Comments, Final Draft, and 2-Year Milestone Status Citizens.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.
Chesapeake Bay Policy in Virginia - TMDL, Milestones and the Watershed Agreement Russ Baxter Deputy Secretary of Natural Resources for the Chesapeake Bay.
EPA Chesapeake Bay Trading and Offsets Workplan June 1, 2012.
10/03/021 Stormwater Video-conference Department of Environmental Protection Stormwater Videoconference October 3, 2002.
2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.
Wisconsin’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy for Water Quality Wisconsin Crop Management Conference January 16, 2014 Ken Genskow, PhD Associate Professor, Department.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.
VACo Environment and Agriculture Steering Committee VML Environmental Policy Committee June 2, 2010 Charlottesville, VA Chesapeake Bay Watershed Roanoke.
Preserving York County 2010 Municipal Educational Series January 28, 2010 Rick Keister, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Jake Romig, York County Circuit.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Moving towards a restored Chesapeake Bay watershed
Maryland Association of Counties Conference August 12, 2009 Bob Koroncai USEPA Region III The Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
1 State Parks  Soil and Water Conservation  Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning  Land Conservation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Chesapeake.
Carin Bisland, EPA Principals’ Staff Committee 5/14/12.
JULIE MAWHORTER MID-ATLANTIC URBAN & COMMUNITY FORESTRY COORDINATOR CHESAPEAKE TREE CANOPY STRATEGY & WORKPLAN UPDATE CITIZEN’S ADVISORY.
Potomac Round Table Bay TMDL Update 4/1/2011. Schedule Dec 29,2010 EPA established Bay TMDL Dec 29,2010 EPA established Bay TMDL March/April/May/June.
Northern Virginia Regional Commission MS4 Meeting March 17, 2011 Virginia Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Approach.
Northern Virginia Regional Commission MS4 Workgroup March 17, 2011.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
Milestones, Progress and the Mid-point Assessment APPROACHING 2017 James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager Department of Environmental Quality.
Improving Local Water Quality in Pennsylvania and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP
Update for the Citizens Advisory Committee February 22, 2017
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
Jim Edward, Deputy Director – EPA/CBPO
Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans
WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Watershed Implementation Plan
U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office June 1, 2012
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
What is a Watershed Implementation Plan?
MDE’s Phase III WIP Inventory 2018 Fall Regional WIP Meetings
Approach to Setting Local Planning Goals
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Milestones, Progress, Mid-point Assessment
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
Jon Capacasa, Director Water Protection Division U.S. EPA Region III
Citizen Advisory Committee November 30, 2018
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
VIRGINIA’S Phase iii watershed implementation plan
Presentation transcript:

CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPRING MEETING MARCH 1—2, 2012 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA EPA’s Evaluation of Bay Jurisdictions’ Draft Phase II WIPs & Final Milestones

Bay TMDL Based on State Plans 2

Across the Watershed We are – and have been – making progress throughout the watershed in reducing pollution to the Bay and its local rivers and streams.

Across the Watershed Phase II is about taking it local Key evaluation points of draft Phase II WIPs and final milestones:  Local stakeholder involvement in WIP/Milestone development and implementation  No backsliding from Phase I WIP commitments (i.e. reasonable assurance just as strong as in the Phase I WIP)  Improved reasonable assurance in sectors that received backstop actions, allocations, or adjustments or enhanced oversight in Bay TMDL  milestones reflect commitments to necessary, near-term actions to achieve long-term cleanup goals

Across the Watershed Generally jurisdictions are on track in meeting pollution reduction targets by 2017 and More specificity was included on clean-up strategies and how they apply to the local level. EPA expects improved reasonable assurance in some sectors. EPA will continue to work with the jurisdictions to address concerns between now and March 30, 2012.

Delaware Overall, the draft Phase II WIP and final milestones meet EPA expectations.  No backsliding from key commitments or reasonable assurance in Phase I WIP.  Local partners and other key stakeholders were engaged.  The 2025 draft input deck meets the Phase II WIP planning targets.  Final milestones align with key WIP commitments.  Increased staff and new stormwater and offset regulations. Maintain “ongoing oversight” for all sectors to ensure commitments are implemented.

District of Columbia Overall, the draft Phase II WIP and final milestones meet EPA expectations.  Commendable progress engaging and assigning target loads to federal agencies.  Final milestones identified important near-term commitments to implement WIP strategies.  The 2017 & 2025 input decks meet the Phase II WIP planning targets.  Strong emphasis on capacity building and upgrades at Blue Plains Wastewater Treatment Plant.  Implementing MS4 permit and new stormwater regulations requiring a retention standard. Maintain “ongoing oversight” for all sectors to ensure commitments are implemented.

Maryland Overall, the draft Phase II WIP and final milestones meet EPA expectations.  Implementation of a significant local engagement initiative with key stakeholders.  Commitments to upgrade significant numbers of on-site systems and connect others to wastewater treatment plants.  Expansion of trading program to include ecosystem services.  Committed to a schedule to reissue Phase I & II MS4 permits.  Final milestones identify important near-term commitments to implement WIP strategies.  Appropriate and important emphasis on local financing of stormwater BMP implementation. Maintain “ongoing oversight” for all sectors to ensure commitments are implemented.

New York New York has not submitted a complete draft Phase II WIP that is publicly available and has yet to submit a final milestone input deck. EPA expects New York to submit a final Phase II WIP by March 30. EPA will review the Phase II WIP and milestones to determine whether to take federal actions or change the level of oversight.

Pennsylvania Progress is being made on several commitments from the Phase I WIP that are reflected in the Phase II WIP.  Provides updated information for activities since the Phase I WIP.  2025 WIP input deck approximately meets the Phase II WIP planning targets.  Development of statewide guidance for addressing stormwater offsets to be complete in early Milestones for agriculture and wastewater generally align with strategies in draft Phase II WIP. Maintain “enhanced oversight” for all sectors and backstop adjustments for stormwater to ensure commitments are implemented.

Pennsylvania Improvements EPA expects Pennsylvania to address in Final Phase II WIP and milestones to avoid federal actions for all sectors:  Further detail on how to assure compliance with existing state regulations.  Additional agricultural milestones to advance manure to energy technologies.  Greater alignment between stormwater milestones and WIP commitments.  Additional clarity on the process for on-going local engagement.

Virginia The draft Phase II WIP provides some updated information on progress since finalizing the Phase I WIP.  Conducted extensive amount of outreach to local stakeholders.  Process for continuing local engagement during implementation is expected in final Phase II WIP. No Phase II WIP input deck submission  Submission of WIP and Milestone input decks in advance of the Final Phase II WIP deadline is expected. Most of Virginia’s programmatic milestones are in alignment with the Phase I and II WIP commitments.  Additional details on process for achieving stormwater commitments given the continued backlog of expired MS4 permits is expected. Maintain “ongoing oversight” for all sectors to ensure that commitments are implemented – with the exception of the stormwater sector, which will remain in “enhanced oversight.”

West Virginia The draft Phase II WIP demonstrates substantial improvements compared to the Phase I WIP.  Significant amount of outreach conducted with local stakeholders.  Plan is directly informed by local agricultural producers and demonstrates stronger reasonable assurance.  Identifies stormwater regulations as a contingency if urban stormwater strategy goals are not achieved.  Developed a basic framework for an offsets and trading program. Final milestones closely align with WIP commitments. Upgrade agriculture sector from a “backstop action” to “enhanced oversight,” and stormwater and wastewater sectors from “enhanced oversight” to “ongoing oversight” to ensure commitments are implemented.

Next Steps EPA will continue to work with the Bay jurisdictions to address any outstanding issues leading up to the Phase II WIP deadline. March 30, 2012: Final Phase II WIPs and amendments to Final Milestones due to EPA. Post-March 30: Potential for federal actions based on evaluation of final Phase II WIPs and… Focus on implementation!