Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

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.

Published byDonald Perkins Modified over 8 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "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."— Presentation transcript:

1 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

2 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County2 The Bay Program & the COG Region Substantial regional implications Environmental Cost Growth policy Today’s agenda How localities, including Loudoun County, are affected The role and priorities of COG and COG’s Bay Policy Committee

3 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County3 WATER QUALITY in the BAY DEFINING the PROBLEM

4 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County4 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.

5 To protect uses we must … 6

6 … protect underwater grasses, fish and the entire food chain. 7

7 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County7 Water Quality Problems Fish need oxygen Nutrients cause low oxygen levels Underwater grasses need light Sediment blocks the light

8 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County8 Baywide SAV acreage, 1978-2004 Historic levels of underwater grasses exceeded 200,000 acres

9 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

10 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County10 Sources of Pollution Sewage treatment (nutrients) Farm runoff (nutrients & sediment) Urban runoff (nutrients & sediment) Air pollution (nutrients)

11 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County11 HOW DOES the BAY PROGRAM WORK?

12 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County12 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

13 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County13 16

14 Implementation Goal: Reduce Nutrients As we reduce loads... …we increase achievement of water quality conditions. 18

15 As we reduce sediment loads... …we increase underwater bay grasses. Implementation Goal: Reduce Sediment 19

16 2002 Nitrogen Loads to the Tidal Chesapeake Bay by Source Agriculture 42% Forest 15% Urban 11% Mixed Open 6% Point Source 21% Septic 4% Non-Tidal Water Deposition 1% Air deposition accounts for about 1/3 of the total nitrogen load, but virtually no phosphorus 12

17 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County17 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. Needed: 103 million pounds in 8 years Achieved: 60 Million pounds in 17 years

18 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.

19 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County19 LOCAL IMPACTS

20 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County20 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

21 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County21

22 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County22

23 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 CACMWAQC TAC AQPAC Special Independent Sub-regional Environmental Committees Anacostia Watershed Restoration Blue Plains Regional Committee I-95 Technical Committee National Capital Region Emergency Preparedness Council Water Supply Task Force Solid Waste Task Force Policy Committees Child Care Substance Abuse Treatment Foster Care Health officers Housing Human Services Policy Committee 3

24 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County24 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

25 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County25 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 plants Virtually no federal or state money for stormwater

26 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County26 HOW THE COSTS HAVE BEEN SHARED Source: EPA CBP ECONMIC ANALYSIS, 2003

27 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County27 OTHER ISSUES

28 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County28 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

29 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County29 Take Home Points 1. 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

30 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County30

31 Feb. 16, 2006Briefing for Loudoun County31 Contact information COG Director of Environmental Programs, Stuart Freudberg, 202-962-3340 COG Water Resources Director, Ted Graham, 202- 962-3352 CBPC staff, Karl Berger, kberger@mwcog.org, 202- 962-3350kberger@mwcog.org CBPC web page: http://www.mwcog.org/environment/water/chesapeak e/ http://www.mwcog.org/environment/water/chesapeak e/ Chesapeake Bay Program web page: http://chesapeakebay.net/

Download ppt "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."

Similar presentations

Planning for Our Future:

Planning for Our Future:
The Effect of the Changing Dynamics of the Conowingo Dam on the Chesapeake Bay Mukhtar Ibrahim and Karl Berger, COG staff Water Resources Technical Committee.

The Effect of the Changing Dynamics of the Conowingo Dam on the Chesapeake Bay Mukhtar Ibrahim and Karl Berger, COG staff Water Resources Technical Committee.
Title Text for Slide “ The region’s environmental and economic health will improve when we fully implement the Blueprint. The cleanup plan was designed.

Title Text for Slide “ The region’s environmental and economic health will improve when we fully implement the Blueprint. The cleanup plan was designed.
A Collaborative Approach to Meeting Water Quality Goals : Tampa Bay, Florida Holly Greening, Tampa Bay Estuary Program Michael Connors, City of St. Petersburg.

A Collaborative Approach to Meeting Water Quality Goals : Tampa Bay, Florida Holly Greening, Tampa Bay Estuary Program Michael Connors, City of St. Petersburg.
Restoring Estuaries: Chesapeake Bay

Restoring Estuaries: Chesapeake Bay
Citizens Advisory Committee Ann Swanson Executive Director February 27, 2014 Chesapeake Bay Commission.

Citizens Advisory Committee Ann Swanson Executive Director February 27, 2014 Chesapeake Bay Commission.
Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.

Chesapeake Bay and New York State Water Quality and the Potential for Future Regulations Presented by the Upper Susquehanna Coalition.
Chesapeake Bay Program Presented by: Elizabeth Mills, Heather Plumridge, Elizabeth Repko Possibilities, Problems, and Promise.

Chesapeake Bay Program Presented by: Elizabeth Mills, Heather Plumridge, Elizabeth Repko Possibilities, Problems, and Promise.
Helping Shape the Future of the National Capital Region: COG’s Climate Change and Greater Washington 2050 Initiatives Stuart Freudberg Director, Dept.

Helping Shape the Future of the National Capital Region: COG’s Climate Change and Greater Washington 2050 Initiatives Stuart Freudberg Director, Dept.
Point Source POLLUTION: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES

Point Source POLLUTION: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES
Scott’s Proposal for Phosphorous Reduction in Fertilizers Prepared by Heidi Bonnaffon WRTC Meeting May 11, 2006.

Scott’s Proposal for Phosphorous Reduction in Fertilizers Prepared by Heidi Bonnaffon WRTC Meeting May 11, 2006.
04/2007 European Funds in Bulgaria 2007-2013 Supported by the European Commission (DG ENV)

04/2007 European Funds in Bulgaria Supported by the European Commission (DG ENV)
Title Text for Slide “ The region’s environmental and economic health will improve when we fully implement the Blueprint. The cleanup plan was designed.

Title Text for Slide “ The region’s environmental and economic health will improve when we fully implement the Blueprint. The cleanup plan was designed.
Update on Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.

Update on Chesapeake Bay Issues Presentation to the Chesapeake Bay and Water Resources Policy Committee July 17, 2009 Ted Graham & Steve Bieber COG Department.
8th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable Arlington, VA March 30, 2012 PlanMaryland Maryland Department of Planning.

8th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable Arlington, VA March 30, 2012 PlanMaryland Maryland Department of Planning.
First Discussion of Climate Change Steering Committee Recommendations to COG Board of Directors Agenda Item #6 February 27, 2008.

First Discussion of Climate Change Steering Committee Recommendations to COG Board of Directors Agenda Item #6 February 27, 2008.
Puget Sound Initiative 2007 At A Glance Jay Manning, Director Washington Department of Ecology April 26, 2007 1.

Puget Sound Initiative 2007 At A Glance Jay Manning, Director Washington Department of Ecology April 26,
Chesapeake Bay TMDL Background and Litigation Jon A. Mueller, Vice President For Litigation Chesapeake Bay Foundation William and Mary,

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Background and Litigation Jon A. Mueller, Vice President For Litigation Chesapeake Bay Foundation William and Mary,
ANACOSTIA RESTORATION Indicators: How They Are Helping Achieve Water Quality Goals? SWRR April 2006 Meeting Ted Graham, Metropolitan Washington Council.

ANACOSTIA RESTORATION Indicators: How They Are Helping Achieve Water Quality Goals? SWRR April 2006 Meeting Ted Graham, Metropolitan Washington Council.
National Capital Region Climate Change Report OVERVIEW Joan Rohlfs, Chief, Air Quality Planning Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments October.

National Capital Region Climate Change Report OVERVIEW Joan Rohlfs, Chief, Air Quality Planning Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments October.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google