Steve Stewart CCW

761 views
679 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
761
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Thank you for inviting me to be on this panel. I want to start by giving you some brief statistics on Baltimore County, followed by the County’s Phase II WIP strategy, which is currently being modified for the July 2 nd Maryland State deadline. Time permitting, I will follow-up with other considerations.
  • Baltimore County is located approximately in the middle of the Chesapeake Bay watershed and borders directly on the bay. Overall, it comprises ~1% of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
  • Baltimore County has been practicing “Smart Growth” since the 1960’s before the term became part of every day language. The Urban Rural Demarcation Line was created in 1967. This line differentiates between urban development and rural development. One third of the land area of Baltimore County supports 90% of the population.
  • The aquatic resources include – list We coordinate with the surrounding 6 local jurisdictions, including York County PA, on water resource issues.
  • As a result of our growth policies, our resources in our rural areas are relatively unimpaired as indicated by Tier II waters and trout populations.
  • Read slide
  • The approach that Baltimore County has taken includes take credit for past actions Conduct a Capacity Analysis to see how far our current pace of restoration will take us Conduct a Gap Analysis to determine how much more we need to do to meet the reduction allocations Find additional actions that will result in water quality improvement, even if there is currently no credit given. Propose a strategy that will fill the gap Work with the State and CBP to determine BMP efficiencies.
  • The current 2-year implementation milestones are based for the most on restoration projects already in the pipeline and current pace of operational programs.
  • In order to fill the gap, an increase in the pace is needed.
  • Besides restoration implementation milestones, programmatic milestones are included. Programmatic milestones, will enable an increase in future restoration actions.
  • Going forward there are a number of other considerations that need to be included to reduce cost and to address all water quality issues in the county
  • Restoration projects implemented closer to the bay or below reservoirs will receive more reduction credit. A project implemented in Prettyboy Reservoir will only receive 5.5 pounds of nitrogen credit for 100 pound removed compared to the same project implemented in Baltimore Harbor. A project implemented in Liberty Reservoir watershed will receive no Chesapeake Bay credit, since little or no water goes over the dam.
  • However, we also need to meet local TMDLs for nutrients, sediment, bacteria, and various toxics. It does not make planning or fiscal sense to address only the Bay TMDL without consideration of the local TMDLs. This means that we will be implementing restoration projects above our drinking reservoirs to meet the local TMDLs and receiving the delivered credit for the Bay TMDL.
  • The local sediment TMDLs are based on increase drinking reservoir life or stream aquatic life.
  • Slide 26 That concludes our presentation. We would be happy to answer any questions.
  • Steve Stewart CCW

    1. 1. Choose Clean Water ConferenceBest Ideas in Local Clean Water Implementation Plans (WIPs) Steve Stewart June 5, 2012 Baltimore County Department of Environmental Protection and Sustainability
    2. 2. ScaleMid – Atlantic Region232,330 Sq. MilesChesapeake BayWatershed64,000 Sq. MilesState9,805 Sq. Miles15% of the Chesapeake BaywatershedCounty606 Sq. Miles6% of Maryland~1% Chesapeake Bay
    3. 3. Baltimore County StatsLand Area – 387,939 acres Rural – 257,256 acres (66.3%) Urban – 130,683 acres (33.7%)Population – 789,432 (2005) Rural – 78,458 (9.9%) Urban – 710,974 (90.1%)Impervious Cover – 40,928acres Rural – 8,849 acres (3.4%) Urban – 32,079 acres (24.5%)
    4. 4. Baltimore County14 Major Watersheds(Maryland 8-digit scale)7 Tidal Water Bodies3 Drinking Water Reservoirs>2,100 miles of streams>200 miles of tidal shoreline6 Surrounding Jurisdictions
    5. 5. Tier II Status20 Stream Segments HaveBeen Identified as HavingTier II StatusA total of 55 miles of streamin Baltimore County haveTier II statusThe Tier II streams aredistributed in 6 of theBaltimore County 148-digit watersheds
    6. 6. Urban Stormwater Strategy
    7. 7. Urban Stormwater - Highlights Current pace of restoration will not achieve target reductions 2-year restoration milestone set by what is currently in the pipeline County strategy will account for: – Phase I NPDES – MS4 Loads – Non-regulated stormwater Loads – Construction
    8. 8. Urban Stormwater StrategyApproach Account for progress made between 2009 and June 30, 2011. Account for past actions not apparently credited – Stream Restoration – Shoreline Erosion Control Determine how far current pace will take us (Capacity Analysis) and propose additional implementation actions to fill the gap (Gap Analysis). Account for previously unaccounted for activities – Urban Nutrient Management law 1998 – Fertilizer Use Act of 2011 – Illicit Connection Elimination Program – Reduction in SSO due to Consent Decree progress – Redevelopment Work with State and the CBP to determine BMP efficiencies
    9. 9. July 2011 – June 20132 – Year Restoration Milestones 63,174 linear feet of stream restoration 972 linear feet of shoreline enhancement 669 acres of SWM retrofits/conversions Street Sweeping at current pace Storm drain cleaning at current pace 6,125 acres – urban nutrient management (1998) Watershed Association projects SSO elimination (20% of current average overflow rate) Redevelopment (estimated 200 acres over 2 years) Possible (10 acres urban riparian buffer and 100 acres of upland reforestation
    10. 10. Enhancements for future years Credit for Fertilizer Use Act of 2011 3X SWM Retrofit/Conversion Rate 5X Shoreline Enhancement Rate 2X Street Sweeping (based on better targeting) 2X Storm Drain Cleaning (based on better targeting) 3X Riparian Buffer Planting 3X Upland Reforestation Credit for Illicit Conx Program (need to assess how) Higher Credit for stream restoration and Shoreline Enhancement
    11. 11. January 2012 – December 2013Programmatic 2 - year milestones Fiscal: – Develop a Stormwater Utility Fee as required by Maryland State law.  Assure that such funding that is developed addresses both the capital and operational needs Better Data – Continue to work with the expert panel on stream restoration credits – Continue to work with the expert panel on retrofit credits – Work with expert panel to develop a methodology for receive credits for Illicit Connection removal
    12. 12. July 2011 – June 2013Programmatic 2 - year milestones Tracking, Verification, and Reporting: – Develop a tracking mechanism to account for redevelopment pollutant load reductions – Develop a tracking mechanism to account for green field development and increase in pollutant loads – Develop a better tracking system to tie SSO reduction with sanitary sewer system remediation New or revised programs – Develop a reforestation program that is not dependant on mitigation funds (Use Rural Residential Stewardship and Urban Tree Canopy Models) – Work with the State to develop and assess the options for an off-set program to address increased loads due to new development
    13. 13. July 2011 – June 2013Programmatic 2 - year milestones Coordination – Develop a mechanism for targeting street sweeping based on Neighborhood Source Assessments conducted for SWAPs – Work to surrounding jurisdictions to develop a “Trading in Time” Program with WWTPs to temporarily off-set urban stormwater load reductions.
    14. 14. Other Considerations Targeting of restoration projects based on delivery ratios to the bay Integration of restoration implementation to meet both the Chesapeake Bay TMDL and local TMDLs
    15. 15. Local Nutrient TMDLs (2 EPA approved, 1 in development)Prettyboy Reservoir – 54%Phosphorus Reduction (15%Urban Reduction)Loch Raven Reservoir – 50%Phosphorus Reduction (15%Urban Reduction)Chesapeake Bay TMDLNitrogen – 28.8% Urban SWPhosphorus – 43.4% Urban SWReduction
    16. 16. Local Sediment TMDLs (4 EPA approved)Loch Raven – 25%(based on reducing reservoirsedimentation)Patapsco – 0 – 15.1%(stream aquatic life)Gwynns Falls – 23.5 – 44.6%(stream aquatic life)Jones Falls – 21.9%(stream aquatic life)Chesapeake Bay – no reductionallocation(water clarity)
    17. 17. Bacteria TMDLs (7 EPA approved)Patapsco River 12.9 – 56.1%Liberty Reservoir 64.9%Gwynns Falls 67.2 – 99.9%Jones Falls 92.1 – 95.3%Back River 91.3 – 95.5%Prettyboy Reservoir 9.5 – 85.3%Loch Raven Reservoir 0 – 89.8%
    18. 18. Contact Information Steve Stewart 410-887-4488 x240 sstewart@baltimorecountymd. gov

    ×