Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin Alabama Water Resources Conference September 6, 2012 A Feasibility Study of Nutrient Trading in Support of.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 10 – Seattle Region 10 – Seattle
Advertisements

RTI International RTI International is a trade name of Research Triangle Institute. Economic Study of Nutrient Credit Trading for the Chesapeake.
What are TMDLs? and What Might They Mean to MS4 Permittees?
Truckee River Water Quality: Current Conditions and Trends Relevant to TMDLs and WLAs Prepared for: Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility. City of.
Lower Boise Watershed Council TAC Meeting April 25, 2013 Scott Koberg, Ada SWCD.
Approach for Including Nutrient Limitations within NDPDES Permits Dallas Grossman Division of Water Quality
Pollutant Trading Discussion 22 July Why Allow Trading? §To make point sources pay §To lure nonpoint sources into doing pollution control so we.
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA Region 10, Seattle,
The Lake Allegan/Kalamazoo River Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Plan Implementation by Jeff Spoelstra, Coordinator, Kalamazoo River Watershed Council.
Prioritization Workgroup Summary. Workgroup Topics Nutrient results What is a watershed? What is a TMDL? Prioritization methods Basin framework and management.
David K. Paylor Director, Department of Environmental Quality May 27, 2014 VEDP Lunch & Learn Environmental Permitting 101.
Complexities of the Carters Lake TMDL Presented by: Jeremy Wyss, H.I.T. Tetra Tech Presented by: Jeremy Wyss, H.I.T. Tetra Tech 26th Annual Alabama Water.
Clean Water Act Integrated Planning Framework Sewer Smart Summit October 23, 2012.
A Collaborative Approach to Meeting Water Quality Goals : Tampa Bay, Florida Holly Greening, Tampa Bay Estuary Program Michael Connors, City of St. Petersburg.
Overview of TMDL Plans TMDL Plan Workshop April 24, 2015 Karl Berger, COG staff Outline: Details Schedule Plan Elements Issues 1.
Lee County Government Division of Natural Resources TMDL/BMAP Update TMDL/BMAP Update November 30, 2010 Roland Ottolini, Director Lee County Division of.
Introduction to TMDLs for Nutrients Presented by: Dr. Scott Emery January 15, 2009.
Incorporating Climate Change Adaptation in EPA Region 10 Programs: An example based on a newly initiated pilot in the Office of Water and Watershed’s Total.
Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin April 22, 2015.
Watersheds on Wall Street? Water Pollutant Trading Becky Shannon, Missouri Department of Natural Resources Craig Smith, University of Missouri Extension.
1 Market Structures for U.S. Water Quality Trading Richard T. Woodward & Ronald A. Kaiser Texas A&M University.
Water Quality Trading In The Bear River Basin. EPA National Watershed Initiative Bear River Basin WIS WQT Market WQ ModelingOutreach EPA GuidebookFinancial.
Anthony Whiley Environmental Engineer WA Department of Ecology ( ) Spokane River Phosphorus Ratios Preliminary.
Buyer Seller Nutrient Credits Compensation ($) Maryland’s Water Quality Trading Program Phase II – Agricultural Nutrient Trading in Maryland John Rhoderick.
Allen Berthold Texas Water Resources Institute. Review: Clean Water Act Goal of CWA is to restore and maintain water quality suitable for the “protection.
Approaches to Addressing Bacteria Impairments Kevin Wagner Texas Water Resources Institute.
Tom Singleton Associate VP, Director, Integrated Water Resources an Atkins company Linking TMDLs & Environmental Restoration.
Northwest hydraulic consultants 2NDNATURE Geosyntec Consultants September 11, 2007 Urban Upland / Groundwater Source Category Group (UGSCG) Overview Presentation.
Impaired and TMDL Waterbody Listings Impacts on DoD Facilities Bill Melville, Regional TMDL Coordinator
Virginia Nutrient Credit Trading: Nonpoint Source Offset Options Kurt Stephenson Dept of Ag & Applied Economics Virginia Tech
Total Maximum Daily Loads in MS4 Storm Water Programs.
Water Quality Reduction Trading Program Draft Rule Language Policy Forum January 29,
WATERSHED PERMITTING IN NORTH CAROLINA NPDES PERMIT NCC BECAME EFFECTIVE JAN 1, 2003 NEUSE RIVER COMPLIANCE ASSOCIATION MORRIS V. BROOKHART, P.E.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Regional scale point source nutrient load estimation in support of SPARROW* modeling Gerard McMahon,
Laila Racevskis 1, Tatiana Borisova 1, and Jennison Kipp 2 1 Assistant Professor, Food and Resource Economics Department, University of Florida 2 Resource.
Source Control Planning for Municipal Wastewater System Permit Compliance Environmental Trade Fair & Conference Austin, TX. May 6, 2015 David James Santiago.
Orange Creek Basin Management Action Plan Alachua County Commission December 11, 2007 Fred Calder, FL DEP (850)
Wherever there’s water, there’s Clean Water.. Water Quality Trading in Oregon’s Tualatin River Watershed Charles Logue, PE Director, Regulatory Affairs.
The Use of Environmental Management Systems in Permitting Decisions National Environmental Partnership Summit 2006 May 10, 2006 Christine Steagall SC Department.
Virginia’s Chesapeake Bay Nutrient Credit Trading Program
Chesapeake Bay Policy in Virginia - TMDL, Milestones and the Watershed Agreement Russ Baxter Deputy Secretary of Natural Resources for the Chesapeake Bay.
Deliberative, Pre-decisional – Do Not Quote, Cite or Distribute 1 Chesapeake Bay Water Quality Trading.
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
Prepared for: Prepared by: Nutrient TMDLs and Their Effect on Dredging Operations in the Chesapeake Bay 24 October 2012 William J Rue- EA Engineering,
John Kennedy VA DEQ - Ches. Bay Program Mgr Tributary Strategies: Point Source Nutrient Controls Potomac Watershed.
Wisconsin’s Nutrient Reduction Strategy for Water Quality Wisconsin Crop Management Conference January 16, 2014 Ken Genskow, PhD Associate Professor, Department.
Oregon Department of Transportation Stormwater Management Initiative: Meeting New Challenges Presented by: William Fletcher, ODOT February 5, 2008.
KWWOA Annual Conference April 2014 Development of a Kentucky Nutrient Strategy Paulette Akers Kentucky Division of Water Frankfort, KY.
Adem.alabama.gov ADEM’s Monitoring Summary Reports Alabama – Tombigbee CWP Stakeholders Meeting Montgomery, Alabama 3 February 2010 Lisa Huff – ADEM Field.
Lake Independence Phosphorus TMDL Critique Stephanie Koerner & Zach Tauer BBE 4535 Fall 2011.
The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update, 2007 The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update February 8, 2007.
Introduction to Water Quality Trading National Forum On Water Quality Trading July 22-23, 2003 Chicago, Illinois.
1 State Parks  Soil and Water Conservation  Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning  Land Conservation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Chesapeake.
Edge of Field Monitoring in the Lake Champlain Basin of Vermont
Caroline County Pilot Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Katheleen Freeman, AICP, Director Caroline County Department of Planning & Codes Leslie Grunden,
A Traditional vs. Ecosystem Services Approach to Surface Water Management September 16, 2010 PRESENTED BY Carol Murdock, Clackamas County WES Mark Anderson,
Katherine Antos, Water Quality Team Leader Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Coordinator U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Chesapeake Bay Program.
Maryland’s Nutrient Trading Program How Trading Works John Rhoderick Maryland Department of Agriculture.
Request approval to proceed to EMC with 2014 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Plan.
Northern Virginia Regional Commission MS4 Workgroup March 17, 2011.
Nutrients and the Next Generation of Conservation Presented by: Tom Porta, P.E. Deputy Administrator Nevada Division of Environmental Protection President,
Improving Local Water Quality in Pennsylvania and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay.
Nutrient Permitting – Year 1 Pilot Monitoring Results and Alternative Permitting Strategy May 3, 2017.
Illinois Nutrient Loss Reduction Strategy - NLRS
Nutrient Management Permit Alternatives
Water Quality Credit Trading
Developing a Water Quality Trading Framework
So I have a TMDL Wasteload Allocation
High Rock Lake TMDL Development
Upper Clark Fork Watershed Restoration and TMDLs
Presentation transcript:

Nutrient Trading Framework in the Coosa Basin Alabama Water Resources Conference September 6, 2012 A Feasibility Study of Nutrient Trading in Support of the Weiss Lake TMDL

Since 2000 the Partnership has been: Diverse – Comprised of water with- drawal permit holders, local governments, and other advocacy entities with interest in water issues Collaborative – Formed voluntarily, membership by choice Largely self-funded River Basin Centered - Geographic boundaries nearly coincide with the Coosa Basin Introduction – North Georgia Water Resources Partnership Brown and Caldwell2 Drought Years of the late 1990s Highlighted Need for: Regional Planning Integrated Planning for Water Supply, Wastewater Treatment, and Stormwater Management

The Coosa Basin to Weiss Lake Drainage area over 5,200 square miles Majority of the watershed in Georgia Focus Area - Coosa River Basin to Weiss Lake 3 Source: USEPA 2008 Brown and Caldwell

Lake Weiss TMDL completed in 2008 In order to meet Alabama Chlorophyll a standards, total phosphorus (TP) reduction targets set 30% phosphorus load reduction goal at the Georgia/Alabama state line. GAEPD considering TP permit limits for NPDES discharges of 1.0 mg/L (major) and 8.34 lbs/day (minor) Georgia can meet 30% TP reduction “in any number of ways” (point and/or non-point measures) The TMDL acknowledges that non-point sources are major contributors to the phosphorus loading Background Brown and Caldwell

Non-Point Sources 2,280 kg/day 71% Source: USEPA Weiss Lake TMDL (2008) Growing Season Median TP Loads to Weiss Lake Brown and Caldwell Model Results for Existing Conditions

What is Water Quality Trading? An approach to meet water quality standards in a more efficient method. Based on the fact that sources in a watershed can face very different costs to control the same pollutant. Trading programs allow facilities facing higher pollution control costs to meet their regulatory obligations by purchasing environmentally equivalent pollution reductions from another source at lower cost Thus achieving the same water quality improvement at lower overall cost A credit is a tradable unit of pollutant reduction (i.e. pound of TP) Brown and Caldwell

Water Quality Trading Programs Source: USEPA Brown and Caldwell Programs in the US (as tracked by EPA) 48 with at least one trade Includes a range parameters and trading frameworks

Identify and Evaluate potential Nutrient Trading Frameworks Evaluate Existing Phosphorus Loads within the Coosa River Basin Identify and Evaluate Alternatives/Reduction Strategies Set Up Pilot Point to Non-Point Trade Coosa Basin Tasks Brown and Caldwell

Type of Trading NPDES Approach Administration Trading Factors Key Framework Considerations Brown and Caldwell9

One point source to one point source trading Multiple facility point source trading Point Source Exchange Credits Types of Trading Point Source – Point Source Brown and Caldwell One to one trading Multiple Facilities

One point source to one non-point source trade One point source to multiple non- point source trades Non-point source credit exchange Types of Trading Point Source – Non-point Source Brown and Caldwell One to one trading Credit Exchange

Individual Permit – trades would generally be executed through contracts between trading parties, and then documented in NPDES permits Watershed Permit - A similar alternative is the issuance of a group NPDES permit (or “general watershed permit”) that represents the aggregate wasteload allocation (WLA) for all participating sources. Typically, a point source can attain compliance by staying under its individual WLA or purchasing credits under the general watershed permit. NPDES Approach Brown and Caldwell | Footer | Date12

Agreement between individual parties – trades arranged through direct negotiation between buying and selling sources Credit exchange – administered by: a coalition of dischargers the state private third-party broker Administration Brown and Caldwell | Footer | Date13

The factors modify the rate from something other than a one-to-one ratio between credits needed at point A and reductions achieved at point B. Generally, the magnitudes for different locations within the watersheds estimated from models. Trading Factors Brown and Caldwell | Footer | Date14 Many trading frameworks have included the use of factors to adjust the credit exchange rate. Example of USGS SPARROW Model Phosphorus delivery for the Flint River in Northern Alabama

Proposed Coosa Basin Nutrient Trading Framework Elements Type of Trading Point Source – Non-point source NPDES Approach Individual Permit Administration Individual Negotiations Trading Factor Proposed 1:1 ratio Trades between individual parties EPD review & approve trading framework and modify NPDES permits Public participation Develop basic trading guidance Brown and Caldwell

Definition of the units of trade. Definition of the manner in which credits would be calculated for point and nonpoint source load reduction projects. A procedure for verifying BMPs or nutrient load reductions. Templates for trading agreements between parties Common language for incorporation into NPDES permits. Brown and Caldwell Trading Guidance

This step is currently underway Gathering available models and studies to understand phosphorus loads Identify high phosphorus load subwatersheds Identify potential point source partners Identify potential non-point source partners Evaluate Phosphorus Loads Brown and Caldwell | Footer | Date17

Identify and Evaluate Alternatives and Pilot Trade Identify potential point to non-point source trade Identify BMPs to reduce TP (type, size, number) Identify potential sites for BMP implementation Conduct site visit of potential BMP sites Develop concept plan for BMP Brown and Caldwell Lower Boise Wetland Concept

Nutrient Trading is a cost effective solution for meeting water quality requirements that is supported by the EPA and Georgia EPD. The North Georgia Water Resources Partnership is currently investigating the feasibility of developing a nutrient trading framework and pilot trade for the Coosa Basin. Summary 19Brown and Caldwell

Questions? Brown and Caldwell | Footer | Date20

Questions? Acknowledgements: North Georgia Water Resources Partnership Laurie Hawks and Clifton Bell, Brown and Caldwell