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

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


WATER QUALITY in the BAYDEFINING the PROBLEM


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

http://www.chesapeakebay.net/blue_crab.htm

http://www.travelguides.org/TResources/accessfishing.html

… protect underwater grasses, fish and the entire food chain.

7




Water Quality Problems

Fish need oxygenNutrients cause low oxygen levels

Underwater grasses need lightSediment blocks the light


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


Sources of Pollution

Sewage treatment (nutrients)

Farm runoff (nutrients & sediment)

Urban runoff (nutrients & sediment)

Air pollution (nutrients)


HOW DOES the BAY PROGRAM WORK?


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


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.


LOCAL IMPACTS


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


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)


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


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


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


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


OTHER ISSUES


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


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



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/

Documents

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