Status Report: Blue Plains Biosolids Master Plan and COG Staff Support Report to the Blue Plains Regional Committee by Chris Peot and Karl Berger March 25, 2009

Presentation Outline Virginia legislation/regulatory status Maryland legislation/regulatory status Storage issues National biosolids issues Biosolids research Status of digester project Blue Plains’ carbon footprinting

Digester implementation schedule Annual production, in thousands of tons/year

Virginia status Two bills with troubling precedents were killed HB restrictions based on “health-sensitive individuals” HB 1340 – giving counties the right to ban in karst soils Two adverse budget amendments defeated Draft regulation revisions expected for public comment* in next couple months Current public hearing testimony will put pressure on Water Control Board to make changes * Potential BPRC comment

Maryland status H.B. 813 proposes to tie biosolids to same winter application rules that apply to manure Would effectively prohibit winter land application in MD Supported by MDA, environmental groups MDE encouraged on-site storage in July 09 letter Revision of state regs (begun in 2006) remains in limbo

Storage Issues Increasing winter restrictions driven by nutrient management requirements Potential for MD precedent Difficulty in permitting new storage sites Cumberland County (Va.) facility is the only new large-scale site that has been permitted in last 10 years Severe weather conditions this winter Contractors were at 95 – 100 % of their storage capacity from February through mid-March Landfill tonnages for December – February totaled 24,916 tons

National Issues Continued focus on micro-constituents Perfluorates in Alabama NIEHS study in NC, Va. Continued legal challenges PA case Funding support for litigation Center for Food Safety opposed compost giveaway program in San Francisco In response – national network of biosolids agencies; WERF pilot project on risk communication

Ongoing Research Projects Under BPRC Biostimulant/greenhouse gas study Wye surface application Task Order projects on greenhouse gas balance, land base analysis DC-WASA funded Triclosan, triclorocarbon Perfluorates PBDEs Odor modeling and prevention Ag fuel crop study WSSC funded ERCO-University of MD

BPRC Sponsored Projects Previous projects include: forest nutrient dynamics*, phosphorus fate and transport* and heavy metals* * Final project reports available from COG staff

DCWASA Digester Project

Dewatering DCWASA Digester Project Lime Store & Load out Class B DAFTs Mix Site Preparation RR Pre- Dewatering Final Dewatering Recycle Processing R Load out Cambi Steam Biogas Biogas Treatment and CHP Emissions Enclosed Flares Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion Class A Power RR Gravity Thickeners Blend Tank BMP Projects

Carbon Footprint Estimates at DCWASA Develop a dynamic model that can change as new info/higher-tier assumptions become available Auditable estimate using The Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol (GRP): establish a baseline evaluate best options for treatment document improvements possibly sell greenhouse gas credits

Local Government Ops Protocol and General Reporting Protocol Scope I, direct, required Liquid stream emissions Effluent emissions WASA vehicle use Combustion of natural gas Refrigerants Scope II, indirect, required Purchased electricity Scope III, indirect, optional  Contract vehicle and activities  Chemical production  Land Ap. N 2 O evolution Scope III Offsets, indirect, optional  Fertilizer offsets  Carbon sequestration  Avoided N 2 O evolution

Biosolids and Climate Change Digestion creates clean green energy (net 10 MW) Land application of biosolids: sequesters carbon in the soil Spargo (Va Tech), Soil and Tillage Research, 2008 Lindsey, JEQ, 1998 G. Tian, JEQ, 2009 avoids the use (and energy associated w/production) of industrial fertilizer

DCWASA GHG Inventories 186,261 MT CO 2 e in ,436 MT CO 2 e in 2008

Future Projects Effects on Carbon Footprint Digesters (net reduction) Fine Bubble Diffusers (net reduction) LTCP (increase - greater pumping energy) ENR (increase – power needs and methanol use)

Certification of the Footprint Model Future reduction tracking Public relations asset Sell credits (carbon credits or REC’s) as an offset provider Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) Commercial entities (Walmart, Amtrak, etc.) Green the Capitol

Rules That Will Affect DCWASA EPA Reporting Rule Gathering info for accounting purposes POTW’s exempted Biogenic CO 2 excluded EPA Tailoring Rule Designed for PSD, limit 25,000 tons/yr for GH gasses only Biogenic sources not excluded We believe this is an oversight and have submitted comments

Our Comments to EPA Biogenic sources should be excluded because: It’s short-cycle carbon, bounces from atmosphere to plants relatively quickly All reporting and inventory protocols are designed to track and reduce release of long-cycle carbon (fossil fuels) This may have an unintended consequence of increasing carbon release Other documents exempt biogenic sources: EPA’s Endangerment Finding EPA’s Reporting Rule Green Energy National Standard IPCC GHG Reporting Protocol The Climate Registry, General Reporting Protocol Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories