Moving to phase ii watershed implementation plans
1 / 23

Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans. MACO Cambridge, MD January 7, 2011. Implications. The Chesapeake Bay TMDL was primarily a technical exercise, admittedly on a much larger scale than ever before completed.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans' - brie

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Moving to phase ii watershed implementation plans

Moving to Phase II:Watershed Implementation Plans


Cambridge, MD

January 7, 2011


  • The Chesapeake Bay TMDL was primarily a technical exercise, admittedly on a much larger scale than ever before completed.

  • The implications are in the implementation of the TMDL, and specific plans needed to achieve the wasteload and load allocations.


  • Allocations: Maximum allowable load; WLA and LA.

  • Basins: Five major basis in Maryland: Potomac, Susquehanna, Patuxent, Western Shore, and Eastern Shore.


  • Contingencies: “Plan B” If a strategy does not achieve the projected load reduction a contingency must be in place to make up the deficit.

  • Two Year Milestones: part of the accountability framework. Goals will be assessed and contingencies imposed at two year intervals.

  • Sectors: Point sources, agriculture, stormwater, septics, forest.

  • Strategies: Best management practices, programs or approaches that reduce nutrient loads.

  • WIP: Watershed Implementation Plan.

What is the wip
What is the WIP?

  • Watershed Implementation Plan.

  • Provides “reasonable assurance” for the TMDL, including reductions from non-regulated sectors.

  • Creates the foundation for an implementation schedule and milestones.

  • Provides the basis for accountability.

  • Establishes the strategies and practices that will be used to reach the interim goal of 70% of the total reductions by 2017.

Basic background
Basic Background

  • Court Settlement: Ches. Bay TMDLs by December 2010

  • Agreement by Executive Council in 2000 to clean up Bay or do a TMDL by 2010.

  • EPA Led a Regional/Watershed-wide TMDL Development Process

  • Region is entire Bay drainage up to and including NY, WV, DE, in addition to PA, VA, DC and MD.

Basic background1
Basic Background

  • Watershed Implementation Plans:

    • Allowed States to Allocate Loads to WLA and LA

    • Support “Reasonable Assurance” of Implementation

    • Part of new federal “Accountability Framework” to Ensure Results

  • Clean up now required under federal Clean Water Act

More background
More Background

  • Federal “Accountability Framework”

    • Bay TMDLs

    • Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs)

    • 2-Year Implementation Milestones (due by end of 2011).

    • Tracking & Evaluating Progress

    • Federal “Consequences” or “Backstops.”

  • EPA made it clear from the TMDL backstops for inadequate WIPs that they were serious this time.

Phase i wip accomplishments
Phase I WIP Accomplishments

  • Set equitable allocations by sector and basin.

  • Provided legal basis for stricter permits to accelerate progress.

  • Provided a “default” implementation plan that can be used “as is” or modified during Phase II.

  • Started the discussion.

Offsetting growth
Offsetting Growth

  • All growth adds to the nutrient load, but not equally, e.g., ENR plant vs. septics

  • Areas will be classified as high, medium or low per capita impact

  • Impose highest offset requirements (more than the added load) where loads per capita are high and least where loads are low

  • There will be competition for scarce offsets

  • Once offsets are used up, growth will be curtailed

Goals of phase ii
Goals of Phase II

  • Assign responsibility for load reductions

    • Federal facilities and municipalities

    • Stormwater, e.g., State Highways

  • Increased emphasis on cost and cost effectiveness.

    • Develop more cost effective and lower cost strategies.

    • Develop funding approaches.

    • Trading/offsets

Goals of phase ii1
Goals of Phase II

  • Refinement of Phase I.

    • Finalize local allocations and refine strategies

    • Provide greater geographic resolution for allocations

  • Respond to model changes

    • Changes in land use will have significant implications

    • Changes in how model addresses manure management also key issue.

Key outcomes of phase ii
Key Outcomes of Phase II

Will determine at local level:

  • Who’s responsible for how much implementation

  • Implementation costs to each source sector

  • How much growth/economic development can fit, where, and at what costs

Who gets allocations
Who gets allocations?

  • Any entity that generates significant loads and has authority or is required to control them. Examples:

    • Local governments: wastewater, stormwater, septics.

    • Soil Conservation Districts: agriculture.

    • State Highways: stormwater

    • Federal Facilities: stormwater, wastewater

    • Other major facilities, e.g., airports, parks, etc.

What will change in phase ii
What will change in Phase II?

  • Strategies will be adjusted:

    • Model will be modified with respect to land use and manure management

    • Local governments can redistribute allocations among sectors

  • Increased geographic specificity

  • Increased sector specificity

Process and approach
Process and Approach

  • Work at the county scale. Includes:

    • Municipalities

    • SCDs

    • SHA

    • Federal Facilities

    • Other Major Facilities (e.g., airports)

  • Start with revised allocations based on Model revision, using same equity rules as in TMDL.

  • Revise via negotiation to achieve greater cost effectiveness and feasibility.

Time frame
Time Frame

  • Current schedule calls for submission by June 2011 – an extension has been requested.

  • Regardless of extension, two year (2012-2013) milestones must be ready by December, 2011.

  • Final model (5.3.2) and allocations may not be available until April – we cannot wait for final numbers to begin working!

Critical first steps
Critical First Steps

  • Meetings in January and February for elected officials.

  • Regional training workshop in January for staff.

  • Identify county, municipal, SCD contacts.

  • Identify liaison to each county.

  • Identify lead staff in each local Department and organize a coordination structure.

  • Draft a preliminary workplan and begin work with interim allocations until final allocations are available.

  • State to provide technical assistance.

Critical next steps
Critical Next Steps

  • Workplan for 2011-2013 milestones.

  • “Infrastructure” priorities:

    • Funding

    • Staffing: Admin and Technical

    • Tracking and Reporting

  • Sector priorities: SW, Septics, Ag, WWTPs

  • Geographic priorities

  • Begin development of offset policy working with State agencies.

Pilot experiences
Pilot Experiences

  • It can be done!

  • Substantial effort for everyone.

  • Communication is paramount.

  • State or local can lead, but the Phase II Plan must meet State and EPA requirements.

  • Build on WRE, existing TMDLs, Water and Sewer Plans, comp plans.

  • Control your destiny.

Phase III

  • 2017-2020

  • May be preceded by revised TMDL.

  • Expectation is that there will be new and innovative practices that can be applied at that time.

  • Full implementation of what is needed to achieve water quality standards, by 2020.