Agriculture Initial Inspections Update

Slides:



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

Public Workshop Implementation and Enforcement of Nutrient TMDLs for Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake CA Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water.
General Ag. Compliance & Chesapeake Bay Update. PA Clean Streams Law & General AG Compliance Prevent discharge of pollutants & water quality impairment.
Imperial River: Water Quality Status and Basin Management Action Plan.
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 Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework Briefing CBP Partnership’s Communications Workgroup July 10, 2014.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
Virginia Assessment Scenario Tool VAST Developed by: Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
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,
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,
Restoring VA Waters the TMDL Way Jeff Corbin Senior Advisor to the Regional Administrator U.S. EPA Region 3.
VIRGINIA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS ANNUAL MEETING DECEMBER 9, 2013 Richard Street Tri-county & City SWCD Fredericksburg VA.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Neuse River Basin Provided by Dr. D. Monreau to Dr. G
KWWOA Annual Conference April 2014 Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Paulette Akers Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL and What It Means for You Katherine Antos, Coordinator Water Quality Team U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Virginia Municipal.
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.
Caroline County Pilot Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Katheleen Freeman, AICP, Director Caroline County Department of Planning & Codes Leslie Grunden,
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPRING MEETING MARCH 1—2, 2012 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA EPA’s Evaluation of Bay Jurisdictions’ Draft Phase II WIPs & Final
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.
Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.
Chapter 92a Fee Amendments Proposed Rulemaking Water Resources Advisory Committee Harrisburg, PA March 24, 2016 Tom Wolf, GovernorJohn Quigley, Secretary.
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
Pennsylvania’s Chesapeake Bay Program Progress and Challenges
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
Local Government Engagement and Communication Strategy
DEP Update 2015 Pennsylvania Inter-Agency Nutrient Management Annual Conference Clarion and Lancaster, PA November 2015.
Department of Environmental Quality
Proposed Bay TMDL Schedule
Illinois Nutrient Loss Reduction Strategy - NLRS
The EPA and Susquehanna River
Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans
WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Citizens Advisory Committee
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Funding from the Local Perspective
Local Planning Process…
Chesapeake Bay Program
“Working with Grape Growers in the Lake Erie Watershed”
Funding from the Local Perspective
Funding from the Local Perspective
Current VA Ag Initiatives
Local Government Engagement Initiative January 16, 2018
Commonwealth of Virginia
Funding at Record Levels
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Tar-Pamlico / Neuse / Falls Lake
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins
Funding from the Local Perspective
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Annual Agriculture Progress Reports Neuse & Tar-Pamlico River Basins
What is a Watershed Implementation Plan?
MDE’s Phase III WIP Inventory 2018 Fall Regional WIP Meetings
Maryland’s Phase III WIP Planning for 2025 and beyond
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.
James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager
Expectations for Federal Agencies in Support if Chesapeake WIPs/TMDL
Maryland’s Draft Phase III WIP for the Chesapeake Bay
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
VIRGINIA’S Phase iii watershed implementation plan
Presentation transcript:

Agriculture Initial Inspections Update Ag Advisory Board April 27, 2017 Tom Wolf, Governor Patrick McDonnell, Acting Secretary

Agenda Past – Quick Overview Present – Restoration Strategy and Initial Ag Inspection Update Future – Data Management

Agriculture Initial Inspections Chapter 91 and Chapter 102 requirements Small Agricultural Operations Specific focus in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Agriculture Initial Inspections Chapter 91 - Manure Management Plan Requirements Chapter 102 - Ag E&S Requirements Education and Outreach Education and Outreach Visits Manure Management and Ag E&S Workshops Planning Assistance Technical Assistance Funding

113 79 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Pennsylvania Nitrogen Loads: 2015-2025 From Rich Batiuk, EPA Pennsylvania Nitrogen Loads: 2015-2025 113 79 Responsible for 69 percent of remaining basinwide nitrogen load reductions by 2025 Agriculture will likely be responsible for much more than 80 percent of these nitrogen reductions by 2025 2025 2015 78% Agriculture 20% Urban 2% Septic Systems Where will the remaining nitrogen reductions* come from? *Based on the jurisdictions’ Phase II WIPs.

4.3 3.6 Chesapeake Bay Watershed From Rich Batiuk, EPA Chesapeake Bay Watershed Pennsylvania Phosphorus Loads: 2015-2025 4.3 3.6 2025 2015 Where will the remaining phosphorus reductions* come from? 76% Agriculture 24% Urban *Based on the jurisdictions’ Phase II WIPs.

Restoration Strategy: Six Elements Address Pollutant Reduction Quantify & Multiply BMPs Improve Record-keeping Identify Needed Changes Establish a DEP Chesapeake Bay Office Seek New Resources Address pollutant reduction by: a) meeting the EPA goal of inspecting 10 percent of farms and MS4s in the watershed annually, b) ensuring development and use of manure management and agricultural erosion and sediment control plans, and c) enforcement for non-compliance

50 50 38 50 25 50 50 50 38 50 38 50 63 50 50 50 88 50 25 50 50 This is the total amount of inspections that will be accomplished by each county conservation district annually. 50 300 100 75 75 50

Agricultural Inspection Initiative DEP began inspections August 29, 2016 Districts began inspections October 3, 2016 Preliminary Results (as of December 31, 2016): Over 500 Inspections Completed (29,400 + acres) Over 326 by Conservation Districts Over 177 by DEP Administratively Complete Manure Management Plan = 64% 95% of those with plans reported to be keeping records Administratively Complete Agriculture E&S Plan = 60% 97% of those with plans reported to be implementing the plan Number referred to DEP for follow-up enforcement action due to lack of plan(s) = 5

Agricultural Inspection Initiative Pre-inspection notice Inspection performed by Conservation District or DEP staff Time frame to achieve compliance, if non-compliant Follow-up activities and measures Referral to DEP Referral is made when the inspection is completed by CD and the operation remains in non-compliance

Agricultural Inspection Initiative Manure Management – 273 out of 326 inspected by Districts were required to have MMP 195 farms reported having animals; 78 farms importing manure 175 farms have administratively complete Manure Management Plan (64% initial compliance) 71 farms (26% of those with planning requirement) reported using assistance to develop plans; the rest were developed by the farmer 167 farms (95% of farms with planning requirement) self-reported as implementing the plan 179 farms (66% of farms with planning requirement) self-reported following required application setbacks 144 farms (82% of farms with planning requirement) self-reported the completion of required application records

Agricultural Inspection Initiative Agricultural Erosion and Sediment Control (Ag E&S) Plan – 256 out of 326 inspected by Districts were required to have Ag E&S Plan 155 farms (60% initial compliance) have administratively complete Ag E&S Plan 148 farms (95% of those with planning requirement) reported using assistance to develop plans 150 farms (97% of farms with planning requirement) self- reported as implementing the plan

Agricultural Inspection Initiative Referrals (December 31, 2016 to April 1, 2017) 11 operations were referred to DEP for follow-up enforcement action due to lack of required MMP, Ag E&S Plan, or both NOVs have been sent to 6 operations DEP has 30 days to send NOV NOV allows an additional 90 days to achieve compliance. As of April 6, compliance has been achieved for one operation during 90 day NOV time frame.

Agricultural Inspection Initiative – Future Updating SOP and Inspection Form Workgroup comprised of: 4 county conservation districts (Clinton, Union, Cumberland, Lancaster); 4 DEP Regional Offices (NCRO, NERO, SCRO, SERO) DEP Central Office (Operations Division, Bureau of Clean Water) Continue on course for inspecting 10% of agricultural operations per year Updating SOP and Inspection form due to EPA grant conditions and lessons learned thus far.

Agricultural Inspection Initiative -- Future Worldview Development Used the existing database design that was created for five Pennsylvania county conservation districts and Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Submitted 2016 Progress Data Using the new Database Software PracticeKeeper Software Launch to ALL Districts in July, 2017 6 Modules – Nutrient Management, E & S Planning, Watershed Projects, Complaints and BMPs DEP staff and 9 Districts pilot testing starting now Inspection Module forthcoming Hardware for PracticeKeeper Funding Distributed for tablets for in-the-field data collection Tablets will also be used for completion of inspections Districts doing the pilot testing include Clinton, Susquehanna, Cumberland, Adams, who do not have PracticeKeeper now and Lancaster, Allegheny, Chester, Berks and Juniata Counties who do have it.

Environmental Group Manager Contact Information: Jill Whitcomb Environmental Group Manager NPS Compliance jiwhitcomb@pa.gov 783-5205 Douglas Goodlander Program Manager Operations Division dgoodlande@pa.gov 772-0141 Thank Districts and Regional Offices for their dedication and efforts.