the chesapeake bay program february 16, 2006 how the bay program affects the cog region briefing for...
TRANSCRIPT
The Chesapeake Bay Program
February 16, 2006
How the Bay Program Affects the COG Region
Briefing for Loudoun County Supervisor Sally Kurtz
Credit for several slides goes to the Chesapeake Bay Program and to the Chesapeake Bay Commission
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 2
The Bay Program & the COG RegionSubstantial regional implicationsEnvironmentalCostGrowth policy
Today’s agendaHow localities, including Loudoun County,
are affectedThe role and priorities of COG and COG’s
Bay Policy Committee
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 3
WATER QUALITY in the BAYDEFINING the PROBLEM
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 4
The Chesapeake Bay
64,000 square mile watershed.
Home to over 200 species of fish.
Largest estuary in North America.
Focus of a multistate partnership.
Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Maryland
Delaware
New York
District of Columbia
Virginia
West Virginia
Pennsylvania
To protect uses we must …
6
… protect underwater grasses, fish and the entire food chain.
7
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 7
Water Quality Problems
Fish need oxygenNutrients cause low oxygen levels
Underwater grasses need lightSediment blocks the light
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 8
Baywide SAV acreage, 1978-2004
Historic levels of
underwater grasses
exceeded 200,000
acres
During the summer, dissolved oxygen (DO) levels become dangerously low in about half of the Bay's deeper water.
Low Oxygen Causes Fish Kills
9
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 10
Sources of Pollution
Sewage treatment (nutrients)
Farm runoff (nutrients & sediment)
Urban runoff (nutrients & sediment)
Air pollution (nutrients)
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 11
HOW DOES the BAY PROGRAM WORK?
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 12
Chesapeake Bay Program
“Voluntary" association
Formal agreements 1983: Focus on science 1987: Established nutrient reduction goals 2000: More stringent goals, including sediment
2010 deadline for results
The path to solutions Tributary strategies Regulatory backstop to tributary strategies
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 13 61
CBP 5/28/03
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
Who’s involved?• Bay Program partners in this effort include the signatories
to the Chesapeake Bay agreement -- EPA (representing the Federal government), the jurisdictions of MD, PA, VA and DC, and the Chesapeake Bay Commission (representing MD, PA and VA state legislatures).
• The partnership for this effort was expanded through a Memorandum of Understanding to include the jurisdictions of DE, NY and WV.
Section 7: Who? When?
Delaware
Maryland Virginia District of ColumbiaPennsylvaniaEPA CBC
New York West Virginia
16
Implementation Goal: Reduce Nutrients
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1985 2000 2010
Nu
trie
nt L
oa
d (
mill
ion
lbs/
yr)
nitrogen
phosphorus
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1985 2000 2010
DO
Crit
eria
Ach
ieve
men
t (%
wat
er v
olum
e)
% w ater volumeachieving dissolvedoxygen criteria
As we reduce loads...…we increase achievement of water quality conditions.
18
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1985 2000 2010
Se
dim
en
t Lo
ad
(m
illio
n to
ns/
yr)
land-basedsediment
020406080
100120140160180
1985 2000 2010
Bay
Gra
sses
(x
1,00
0 ac
res)
acres ofunderw aterbay grass
As we reduce sediment loads...
…we increase underwater bay grasses.
Implementation Goal: Reduce Sediment
19
2002 Nitrogen Loads to the Tidal Chesapeake Bay by Source
Agriculture42%
Forest
15%
Urban
11%
Mixed Open
6%
Point Source
21%
Septic4%
Non-Tidal Water Deposition
1%
Air deposition accounts for
about 1/3 of the total nitrogen
load, but virtually no phosphorus
12
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 17
What’s Needed to Restore the Chesapeake Bay?
Steep reductions in the amount of nutrients and sediment entering the Bay.
A large-scale financial investment in the range of $15 - $28 billion.
The political will to make it a reality.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1985 2002 2010Goal
Nitrogen Loadsto Tidal BayWatershed-wide (millionlbs/yr)
Needed: 103 million pounds in 8 yearsAchieved: 60 Million pounds in 17 years
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County
Flow-adjusted Trends Show Progress Reversing or Slowing
Flow-adjusted Trends Show Progress Reversing or Slowing
Graphs from Michael Langland et. al., USGS. Changes in Streamflow and Water Quality in Selected Nontidal Basins in the Chesapeake Bay Basin, 1985 – 2004.
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 19
LOCAL IMPACTS
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 20
1 in 4 of the Bay watershed’s residents lives here now; 1 in 3 in
2020
Impact of the COG Region
COG region’s population: 2000 - 4.2 M 2020 - 5.8 M
Bay Watershed 2000 – 15.7 M 2020 – 17.8 M
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 21
Annual Total Nitrogen Loads from Regional WWTPs
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
1913
1950
1970
1980
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
*
Year*2005 data is January through August
TN
(kg
/day
)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Flo
w (
m3/
s)
TN
flow
~ 9.9 M pounds N per year ('04)
~ 21.3 M pounds N per year ('93)
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 22
Annual Total Phosphorus Loads from Regional WWTPs
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
1913
1950
1970
1980
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
*
Year* 2005 data is January through August
TP
(kg
/day
)
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Flo
w (
m3/
s)
TP
flow
~ 288,715 lbs. P per year ('93)
~256,011 lbs. P per year ('04)
Energy Policy Advisory Committee
Information Technology
Purchasing Officers
Election Officials
Independent Committees
COG Organizational Structure
COG Board of Directors
Chief Administrative Officers
Public-Private
Partnerships
Committee on Noise Abatement and Aviation at National and Dulles Airports
Public Safety Policy Committee
Correction Chiefs
Disaster & Emergency
Preparedness
Fire Chiefs
Police Chiefs
Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee
Water Resources
Community Forestry
Metropolitan Development Policy Committee
Cooperative Forecasting
Planning Directors
Washington Area Housing Partnership
Alternative Fuels Partnership
Clean Air Partners
Administrative Committees
Finance
Strategic Planning
Environment & Public Works Directors
National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board
Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee
TPB Tech. Comm TPB CAC
MWAQC TAC AQPAC
Special Independent Sub-regional Environmental Committees
Anacostia Watershed Restoration
Blue Plains Regional Committee
I-95 Technical Committee
National Capital RegionEmergency Preparedness
Council
Water Supply Task Force
SolidWaste Task Force
Policy Committees
Child Care
Substance Abuse
Treatment
Foster Care
Health officers
Housing
Human Services Policy Committee
3
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 24
Major Priority for COG -- Funding
Most progress in region (e.g. wastewater treatment plant upgrades) has come through funding partnerships among local, state and federal levels
COG rep (Penelope Gross of Fairfax County) participated on Chesapeake Bay Watershed Blue Ribbon Funding Panel (2003-2004)
Panel identified major “funding gap” of $15 – 28 billion
Panel proposed creation of regional financing authority to be capitalized by six-year $15 billion investment by federal and state governments (80 – 20 split.
COG comments supported creation of authority
Little to no progress has been made; federal contribution seems unlikely at this point in time
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 25
Costs at the Local Level
Stormwater management retrofits $2.5 billion Excludes new development costs
Wastewater treatment upgrades Advanced technology: $3.0 - $8 billion.
Maryland has “Flush Tax” program in place to pay for its wastewater upgrades; Viriginia General Assembly currently debating funding policies for its plantsVirtually no federal or state money for stormwater
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 26
HOW THE COSTS HAVE BEEN SHARED
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
POTW AG URBAN
Fed/State
Local
Source: EPA CBP ECONMIC ANALYSIS, 2003
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 27
OTHER ISSUES
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 28
Load Cap for all sources
Load Cap for Each Sewage Plant
Growth Cap as each plant reaches capacity
From the Bay Program
From tributary strategies & permits
Options to prevent a moratorium: new technology, offsets or regulatory relief
Three Steps to a Cap on Growth
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 29
Take Home Points1. The Bay Program is about living resources
2. Nutrients & sediment are the main problems
3. Wastewater, urban stormwater, agriculture and air deposition are the main sources
4. Localities face new requirements for stormwater and wastewater
5. These have substantial cost implications
6. They may have growth policy implications
7. COG is the focus for regional coordination
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 30
Feb. 16, 2006 Briefing for Loudoun County 31
Contact information
COG Director of Environmental Programs, Stuart Freudberg, 202-962-3340COG Water Resources Director, Ted Graham, 202-962-3352CBPC staff, Karl Berger, [email protected], 202-962-3350CBPC web page: http://www.mwcog.org/environment/water/chesapeake/Chesapeake Bay Program web page: http://chesapeakebay.net/