MACo Winter Conference

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

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

Advertisements

Pennsylvania Nonpoint Source BMP Effectiveness, Cost-Effectiveness and Potential for Reducing Loads Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland PA Chesapeake Bay.

RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.

Howard County, MD Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan October 6, 2011 Howard Saltzman Howard County Department of Public Works.

To response to litigation, thirty Minnesota Cities were directed to perform antidegradation reviews or Loading Assessments for two time periods: (1) (1)

Management of New York City’s Watershed Michael A. Principe, Ph.D. Deputy Commissioner New York City Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water.

Legislative Changes Affecting Water Quality at a Local Level October 2011 Robert Kollinger, P.E. Water Resources Manager Polk County Parks and Natural.

Santa Ana Region Stormwater Permit TMDL Requirements and Costs

Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY November, 2013.

SLIDE 1 Sustainable Stormwater Management May 6, 2015 Blue Highways: Transportation and Stormwater Management in Virginia Ginny Snead, PE Richmond Office.

Introduction to TMDLs for Nutrients Presented by: Dr. Scott Emery January 15, 2009.

Update on the District of Columbia’s Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) for the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) November 18, 2010.

© 2010 Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. All Rights Reserved National Implications of the Federal Pollution Limits for the Chesapeake Bay Clean-Up Clifton Bell, P.E.,

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES) Permit.

YOUR SCHOOL AND YOUR WATERSHED LORNA ROSENBERG- US EPA MID-ATLANTIC OCT 1-2, 2014 CHESAPEAKE BAY SCHOOLS WORKSHOP – SHEPHERDSTOWN, WVA.

1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.

Update on the Development of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay TMDL and Virginia’s Watershed Implementation Plan Russ Perkinson Potomac Roundtable October 8, 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,

Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,

Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.

2004 Tributary Strategies: Assessment of Implementation Options Steve Bieber Water Resources Program Presented at: COG Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee.

Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.

Presented to: Severn River Association 2008 State of the Severn Anne Arundel County Government Department of Public Works Ron Bowen, P.E. October 21, 2008.

KWWOA Annual Conference April 2014 Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Paulette Akers Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY.

Non-agricultural regional fertilizer application Tampa Bay Region Model Ordinance Non-agricultural regional fertilizer application Tampa Bay Region Model.

An Overview of our Community’s Stormwater Management Program

Preserving York County 2010 Municipal Educational Series January 28, 2010 Rick Keister, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Jake Romig, York County Circuit.

URBAN STORMWATER: A PERFECT STORM FOR CHANGE Jon M. Capacasa Director, Water Protection Division EPA Region III.

Need for Advanced Stormwater Treatment at Lake Tahoe John E. Reuter & Dave Roberts Tahoe TMDL Research Program.

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

Williamsburg’s Local Strategies to meet the ChesBay TMDL March 2012 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Virginia Maryland Pennsylvania New York Delaware West Virginia.

Improving Local Water Quality in Pennsylvania and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay.

Mary Apostolico Potomac Watershed Manager. Current Authorities for TMDL Process Federal Clean Water Act, § 303(d) - TMDL List & TMDL Development §303(e)

TMDL Implementation: Now What?

New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP

Mulberry River Watershed

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit

Stormwater Management and MS4 Compliance

It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:

Local Government Engagement and Communication Strategy

Land Use Challenges In Maryland Today

Regulatory Requirements Background

The EPA and Susquehanna River

WIP Regional Meetings Jason Keppler

Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Citizens Advisory Committee

Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems

Watershed Implementation Plan

Nutrients and the Chesapeake Bay

GIS Data Management for SHA’s Bay Restoration Program

Maryland’s Own Fiscal Cliff

Mulberry Watershed Management Plan

Understanding the State’s Accounting for Growth Policy

Jeff Sweeney Environmental Protection Agency

Local Partners Engagement and Communication Strategy

Anne Arundel County Maryland

Key Program Benchmarks

Nutrient Trading for NPDES Permittees

Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters

Maryland’s Phase III WIP Planning for 2025 and beyond

Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters

Nutrient Trading for NPDES Permittees

Jon Capacasa, Director Water Protection Division U.S. EPA Region III

Expectations for Federal Agencies in Support if Chesapeake WIPs/TMDL

Estimated Available Nutrient Credits

Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs

Maryland’s Draft Phase III WIP for the Chesapeake Bay

2018 BMP Verification Assessment

Maryland’s Draft Phase III WIP for the Chesapeake Bay

Presentation transcript:

MACo Winter Conference Anne Arundel County MACo Winter Conference January 7, 2011

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Pollutants of Concern Nitrogen Phosphorus Sediment

TMDL Allocation and Gap Determination Existing Conditions Without BMP’s Credit for existing BMPs + Retrofits Current Conditions 2009 Progress Gap Required Reduction Pollutant Load Reducible Load Bay TMDL Allocation E3 (Limit of Technology) 2009 2025 3

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Allocation Anne Arundel County Chesapeake Bay TMDL Allocation Total Nitrogen = 2.460 million lbs/yr Total Phosphorus = 0.151 million lbs/yr Sediment = TBD

Pollutant Source Sectors Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) Septic Systems Stormwater Runoff Agriculture

Pollutant Source Sector Actors Actors Where County Assumes Responsibility County WWTPs Privately Owned Septic Systems County Stormwater Runoff Actors Where County Does Not Assume Responsibility Minor Municipal WWTPs Minor Industrial WWTPs Major Industrial WWTPs Fort Meade WWTP Federal Lands – Stormwater Runoff State Lands – Stormwater Runoff City of Annapolis – Stormwater Runoff Agricultural Lands – Stormwater Runoff

Anne Arundel County Core Implementation Strategy (1) WWTPs Upgrading WWTPs to Enhanced Nitrogen Removal Capacity (2) Septic Systems Sanitary Sewer Extensions and Satellite Cluster Systems (3) Stormwater Retrofits Stormwater Outfall Restoration Stormwater Pond Restoration (4) Headwater Stream Erosion Prevention Stream Channel Restoration Ephemeral Channel Restoration

Point Source WWTP Participants County Government WWTPs (≈ $270,000,000) Federal Government WWTPs Private Sector WWTPs

Septic System Participants County Sanitary Sewer Extensions and Satellite Cluster Systems (≈ $800,000,000) Private Sector Septic Systems

Stormwater Retrofit Participants County Government (≈ $400,000,000) State Government Federal Government City Government Agriculture Privately Owned Land

Headwater Stream Erosion Prevention Participants County Government (≈ $400,000,000) State Government Federal Government City Government Agriculture Private Sector

Degraded Stream Conditions 12

Ultimate Goals Restored Stream Stability Restored Hydrology within Floodplains and Streams Restored Biological Health of Streams Compliance with Water Quality Standards

Step Pool Stormwater Conveyance (SPSC) Restoration Strategy 14

What is the Potential Cost to Anne Arundel County? County WWTPs (≈ $270,000,000) Sanitary Sewer Extensions and Satellite Cluster Systems (≈ $800,000,000) Stormwater Retrofits (≈ $400,000,000) Headwater Stream Erosion Prevention (≈ $400,000,000) TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $1.87 Billion