Maryland Phase II WIP Strategies. MONTGOMERY Agriculture - Annual Practices

Similar documents
Statewide Results (Final Target)

Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Modeling. Gary Shenk, Lewis Linker, Rich Batiuk Presentation to STAC 3/22/2011

Chesapeake Bay s Problems

BMP Verification: What is it and How Will it Impact Pennsylvania?

Pennsylvania / NRCS Potomac Pilot Remote Sensing Project Chesapeake Bay Ag Workgroup

Pennsylvania s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan

Sector Load Growth Demonstration Technical Memorandum

Compliance and Scoping Scenarios by Sector. Matthew Johnston University of Maryland CBPO And PA Phase III WIP Workgroup Co-Chairs 3/16/2018

Use of Market and Voluntary Approaches for Reducing Nonpoint Source Pollution in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Evolution of Water Quality BMP Accountability & Effectiveness

PA Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) TMDL Plan

Nutrient Management in. A presentation to the West Metro Water Alliance

PROTECTING OUR WATERWAYS: STORMWATER POLLUTION REDUCTION EFFORTS

Montgomery County s MS4 Permit Implementation Strategy: Using the Watershed Treatment to meet local and Bay restoration goals

DORCHESTER COUNTY CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL PHASE II WATERSHED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT)

Cost-Effectiveness Study of Urban Stormwater BMPs in the James River Basin

Project Name: Add a unique name that appropriately identifies the submission

Ecosystem Service Tradeoffs in the Implementation of the Bay TMDL

What Does It All Mean? CWA? Sara Esposito, P.E. DNREC Division of Watershed Stewardship

Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4) Implementation. Craig Carson Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection

Wisconsin Wastewater Operators Association. Protecting Our Water Resources: The Future Bill Hafs - NEW Water 10/2014

FieldDoc.org User Guide For 2017 NFWF Chesapeake Bay Stewardship Fund Applicants. Background 2. Step 1: Register for a FieldDoc account 3

Riparian Buffers and Stream Restoration

Site Condition Evaluation & Environmental Benefits Report

Appendix 12. Pollutant Load Estimates and Reductions

The Next Generation of Stormwater Management and Site Design. Melanie R. Grigsby, P.E. Stormwater Resource Manager, City of Fort Myers

Stormwater Retrofitting for Nutrient Reduction

LPES Small Farms Fact Sheets* Got Barnyard Runoff? By Chris Henry, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Joe Harner, Kansas State University

%XLOGLQJ D &RPPXQLW\ &OHDQ :DWHU 7RROER[ 3$ :DWHUVKHG,PSOHPHQWDWLRQ 3ODQ :,3 /RFDO 3ODQQLQJ 3URFHVV 6WDNHKROGHU 0HHWLQJ

Manure Management Manual Revisions

Pinellas County Stormwater Management Manual Training Workshop SMALL COMMERCIAL AREA CASE STUDY

CBP Implementation Plan

Optimization Applied to Strategies for Achieving the Chesapeake Bay TMDL

GUIDELINES FOR STORMWATER BACTERIA REDUCTIONS THROUGH BMP IMPLEMENTATION NY/NJ HARBOR TMDL DEVELOPMENT

WHATCOM COUNTY STANDARD FARM CONSERVATION PLAN PLANNING WORKBOOK: Checklist and Action Plan

Council of Governments

Upper Choptank River Watershed Based Plan Developed to be Consistent with EPA s 319(h) Nonpoint Source Program Grant A through I Criteria

Andrea Ludwig, PhD, EIT Assistant Professor Biosystems Engineering and Soil Science University of Tennessee

GLASI GLASI. Priority Subwatershed Project. Great Lakes Agricultural Stewardship Initiative

Water Resources Element Appendix

Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Policy. PA Statewide Conference for Watershed Organizations March 6, 2017

Rhode Island Stormwater Design and Installation Standards Manual-- Final Draft: Public Informational Session May 26, 2010 at CCRI

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: URBAN STREAM RESTORATION BMP. David Wood Chesapeake Stormwater Network. Lisa Fraley-McNeal Center for Watershed Protection

Pollution Reduction Plan For Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE / COVER TYPES (SEE GENERAL DESCRIPTIONS ON PAGE 7) A 2. ADJACENT LANDS & EASEMENTS 3. FAMILY AGRICULTURAL LEGACY

Spray Irrigation of Treated Wastewater. A Sensible Approach to Wastewater Management. Promoting Beneficial Reuse of Reclaimed Water

Simple Method for Estimating Phosphorus Export

VILLAGE OF BELLAIRE WATER QUALITY ACTION PLAN

How Nutrient Trading Can Help Restore the Chesapeake Bay

MS4 Programs: Quality, the Other Stormwater Q. Dan Bounds, PE, D.WRE IAFSM March 9, 2017

VERSION 7.1 USERS GUIDE. for the. Barry M. Evans, David W. Lehning, and Kenneth J. Corradini

Agricultural NPS Measures. Kevin Wagner Aaron Wendt

FINAL. Appendix D: Newport Bay

STREAM AND BUFFER AREA PROTECTION/RESTORATION

Monitoring Project. Status of the UNRBA Monitoring and Credits Projects 3/28/2016. WRRI Annual Conference March 17 & 18, 2016

Maitland Valley WATERSHED

Big Chetac and the Red Cedar River Watershed. Dan Zerr University of Wisconsin-Extension Natural Resource Educator

Agricultural/Rural Riparian Buffer Analysis

Offsite BMP Program for Sediment Reduction. February 2017

Example Waste Utilization / Nutrient Management Plan. Revised 7/05

WORKING PAPER How Baywide Nutrient Trading Could Benefit Pennsylvania Farms

Riparian Buffer Requirements. Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Watershed Management

Hickory Creek 319 grant project City of Denton

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL ACTION PLAN ( MS4 General Permit)

Bacteria Reduction in Stormwater- the MS4 Approach

A Case for the Design and Modeling of BMP Infiltration and LID Techniques. By: Bob Murdock

J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College. Chesapeake Bay TMDL Action Plan

Stormwater Treatment Practice (STP) Calculator Instructions

C O M P R E H E N S I V E P R O T E C T I O N & R E S T O R AT I O N P L A N. f or th e

Hydrology 101. Impacts of the Urban Environment. Nokomis Knolls Pond Summer June 2008

Final Report: Executive Summary

Nutrient Reduction Strategy and Best Management Practices

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION VERIFICATION PROGRAM

MDA BMP Functional Equivalents. Update WQGIT 11/12/13

Monitoring Stormwater Best Management Practices: Why Is It Important and What To Monitor

CASE STUDIES: BMPTRAINS MODEL

Small-Scale Farmers and the Environment: How to be a Good Steward

ALMY POND TMDL MANAGEMENT PLAN

BMPTRAINS MODEL: A TRAINING WORKSHOP B Y : M AR T Y W AN I E L I S T A, H AR V E Y H AR P E R AN D M I K E H AR D I N.

Understanding Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) (SWPPPS)

Kentucky Agriculture Water Quality Plan Producer Workbook

Subchapter D. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

A Summary of Efforts to Reduce Phosphorus in the Red Cedar River Basin

Bioswales, Wetlands, and Trees: How going green can be a part of a Wet Weather Management Plan. Presented by Brian Tornes, PE

LPES Small Farms Fact Sheets* Small-Scale Farmers and the Environment: How to be a Good Steward. By Mark Rice, North Carolina State University

Nutrient Management Issues in Tennessee

Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed District Six Lakes Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan

Montgomery County MD MS4 Phase I/ II WIP Contributions November 18, 2011 CONTACTS:

CHESAPEAKE BAY TMDL ACTION PLAN ( MS4 General Permit)

STREAM RESTORATION PURPOSE, PRACTICE, AND METHODS. By Marcus Rubenstein, CPESC

Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Center Webcast Series June 20, From: G. Albrecht P. Ristow

Maryland Nutrient Management Program

Polluted Runoff and Land Conservation: What s the Connection?

WATERSHED AUDITS Auditing Stormwater Best Management Practices (BMPs) This Presentation Posted At ceds.org/audit

Environmental Management at DoD Facilities in the Chesapeake Bay Region. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

Rainfall, runoff and sediment transport in the Napa River watershed: now and a possible future

Bronx River Pollutant Loading Model Summary

for the Chesapeake Bay

VIRGINIA RUNOFF REDUCTION METHOD Compliance Spreadsheet User s Guide & Documentation (April, 2012 Version 2.5)

Mud Lake Lakeshed Assessment

Transcription:

Maryland Phase II Strategies MONTGOMERY Agriculture - Annual Practices BMP Name Conservation Tillage Acres/Year 28,436 27,984 27,677 Cover Crop Acres/Year 4,275 10,816 11,000 Cropland Irrigation Management Acres/Year 0 1,280 1,280 Dairy Manure Incorporation Acres/Year 0 300 500 Nutrient Management (All forms) Acres/Year 29,914 45,658 46,438 Soil Conservation and Water Quality Plans Acres/Year 22,101 34,651 38,664 Unit MONTGOMERY Agriculture - Additional BMPs BMP Name Barnyard Runoff Control Acres 41 55 55 Forest Buffers Acres 578 590 598 Grass Buffers / Vegetated Open Channel Acres 196 230 253 Horse Pasture Management Acres 0 161 268 Irrigation Water Capture Reuse Acres 0 120 200 Land Retirement Acres 2,288 2,870 3,393 Loafing Lot Management Acres 0 0 0 Off Stream Watering Without Fencing Acres 1,344 1,524 1,645 Prescribed Grazing Acres 31 299 498 Stream Access Control with Fencing Acres 28 28 28 Tree Planting / Vegetative Environmental Buffers Acres 995 995 995 Water Control Structures Acres 4 3 3 Wetland Restoration Acres 49 50 51 Unit The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Please note: The Agricultural BMP tables represent Land BMPs that can be shown as acres or feet and do not show those BMPs that are based on percentages such as Animal Waste Storage and Poultry Litter Treatment (Alum). Manure Transport is also not represented in these tables. Page 1 of 13

Forest BMPs BMP Name Zone Unit Forest Harvesting Practices harvested forest Acres 903 903 903 The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Page 2 of 13

Developed Land BMPs BMP Name Bioretention / Raingardens Acres 0 4,394 6,846 Bioswale Acres 0 4,909 7,444 Dry Detention Ponds and Hydrodynamic Structures Acres 4,834 2,918 2,300 Dry Extended Detention Ponds Acres 1,862 1,980 1,947 Impervious Urban Surface Reduction Acres 0 0 1,777 MS4 Permit Stormwater Retrofit Acres 4,329 4,504 4,516 Stormwater Management Generic BMP (1985 to 2002) Acres 25,343 10,623 8,187 Stormwater Management Generic BMP (2002 to ) Acres 3,429 3,671 2,617 Urban Filtering Practices Acres 505 950 24,024 Urban Forest Buffers Acres 22 23 2,102 Urban Infiltration Practices Acres 1,010 1,106 1,516 Urban Tree Planting / Urban Tree Canopy Acres 0 276 590 Vegetated Open Channels Acres 0 814 776 Wet Ponds and Wetlands Acres 5,642 5,889 5,782 Erosion and Sediment Control on Construction Acres/Year 2,718 2,718 5,356 Erosion and Sediment Control on Extractive Acres/Year 0 0 89 Forest Conservation Acres/Year 9,128 8,738 8,872 Urban Nutrient Management Acres/Year 24,553 23,661 44,722 Street Sweeping Pounds Lbs/Year 0 941,633 941,633 Urban Stream Restoration / Shoreline Erosion Control Linear Feet 0 5,920 9,914 Unit The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Page 3 of 13

Septic System BMPs BMP Name Zone Unit Septic Denitrification Critical Area Systems 0 0 0 Outside of the Critical Area, not within 1000 ft of a perennial stream Systems 71 71 71 Within 1000 ft of a perennial stream Systems 57 57 13,495 Septic DenitrificationTotal 129 129 13,566 The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Page 4 of 13

Maryland Phase II Strategies MONTGOMERY Total Nitrogen Loads Source Sector Landuse Target Agriculture AFO 0.008 0.002 0.002 0.005 CAFO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crop 0.722 0.616 0.599 0.596 Nursery 0.185 0.155 0.141 0.177 Pasture 0.077 0.074 0.074 0.068 Subtotal 0.992 0.847 0.816 0.847 Forest Harvested 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.021 Natural 0.329 0.332 0.339 0.331 Subtotal 0.346 0.349 0.356 0.352 Non-Tidal Atm Non-Tidal Atm 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 Subtotal 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 Septic Septic 0.143 0.143 0.105 0.106 Subtotal 0.143 0.143 0.105 0.106 Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Construction 0.130 0.130 0.111 0.129 Extractive 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Regulated Developed 1.243 1.198 1.026 1.047 Subtotal 1.377 1.332 1.141 1.179 Wastewater CSO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Industrial 0.046 0.015 0.009 0.012 Municipal 1.301 0.983 1.329 1.327 Subtotal 1.347 0.998 1.338 1.339 Total 4.241 3.705 3.792 3.860 The agricultural sector strategies were set to meet basin targets rather than county targets. Therefore, agricultural strategies are likely to overshoot or undershoot county targets, which can be reflected in the total countywide target results. Stormwater sector strategies may overshoot the county target for nitrogen (N) to meet the phosphorus (P) target, or vice versa. This is because the N and P reduction targets differ and the same BMP has different effects on the reduction of N and P. Page 5 of 13

Total Phosphorus Loads Source Sector Landuse Target Agriculture AFO 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.001 CAFO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crop 0.034 0.031 0.031 0.028 Nursery 0.038 0.030 0.027 0.035 Pasture 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 Subtotal 0.078 0.067 0.064 0.069 Forest Harvested 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Natural 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Subtotal 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Non-Tidal Atm Non-Tidal Atm 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Subtotal 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Septic Septic 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Subtotal 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Construction 0.019 0.019 0.014 0.019 Extractive 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Regulated Developed 0.060 0.059 0.048 0.045 Subtotal 0.080 0.078 0.063 0.064 Wastewater CSO 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Industrial 0.017 0.002 0.001 0.002 Municipal 0.017 0.049 0.064 0.064 Subtotal 0.034 0.051 0.065 0.066 Total 0.199 0.203 0.198 0.205 The agricultural sector strategies were set to meet basin targets rather than county targets. Therefore, agricultural strategies are likely to overshoot or undershoot county targets, which can be reflected in the total countywide target results. Stormwater sector strategies may overshoot the county target for nitrogen (N) to meet the phosphorus (P) target, or vice versa. This is because the N and P reduction targets differ and the same BMP has different effects on the reduction of N and P. Page 6 of 13

Total Sediment Loads Source Sector Landuse Agriculture AFO 0.073 0.062 0.062 CAFO 0.000 0.000 0.000 Crop 27.632 26.063 25.580 Nursery 1.488 1.260 1.234 Pasture 2.269 2.138 2.186 Subtotal 31.463 29.523 29.061 Forest Harvested 0.282 0.302 0.302 Natural 6.843 6.901 7.117 Subtotal 7.125 7.202 7.419 Non-Tidal Atm Non-Tidal Atm 0.000 0.000 0.000 Subtotal 0.000 0.000 0.000 Septic Septic 0.000 0.000 0.000 Subtotal 0.000 0.000 0.000 Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 Construction 26.838 27.009 20.542 Extractive 0.664 0.664 0.528 Regulated Developed 62.588 60.280 47.908 Subtotal 90.089 87.953 68.977 Wastewater CSO 0.000 0.000 0.000 Industrial 0.142 0.185 0.185 Municipal 0.164 2.750 3.931 Subtotal 0.306 2.935 4.116 Total 128.983 127.613 109.574 The State did not distribute EPA's state and basin targets at the county or sector scale for sediment. Hence a Target column is not shown. Page 7 of 13

Page 8 of 13

The State did not distribute EPA's state and basin targets at the county or sector scale for sediment. Hence a Target bar is not shown. Page 9 of 13

Maryland Phase II MAST Submittals MONTGOMERY Developed Land BMPs BMP Name Unit Change in Submittal Change in Submittal Bioretention / Raingardens Acres 0 4,395 4,394 6,942 6,846-0 -96 Bioswale Acres 0 4,909 4,909 7,547 7,444-0 -103 Dry Detention Ponds and Hydrodynamic Structures Acres 4,834 2,918 2,918 2,331 2,300-0 -31 Dry Extended Detention Ponds Acres 1,862 1,981 1,980 1,974 1,947-1 -27 Impervious Urban Surface Reduction Acres 0 0 0 0 1,777 0 1,777 MS4 Permit Stormwater Retrofit Acres 4,329 4,504 4,504 4,578 4,516-0 -62 Stormwater Management Generic BMP (1985 to 2002) Stormwater Management Generic BMP (2002 to ) Acres 25,343 10,624 10,623 8,316 8,187-0 -129 Acres 3,429 3,670 3,671 2,652 2,617 1-35 Urban Filtering Practices Acres 505 950 950 966 24,024-0 23,057 Urban Forest Buffers Acres 22 26 23 26 2,102-3 2,076 Urban Infiltration Practices Acres 1,010 1,107 1,106 1,536 1,516-1 -20 Urban Tree Planting / Urban Tree Canopy Acres 0 276 276 590 590 0 0 Vegetated Open Channels Acres 0 814 814 776 776 0-0 Wet Ponds and Wetlands Acres 5,642 5,889 5,889 5,862 5,782-0 -80 Erosion and Sediment Control on Construction Erosion and Sediment Control on Extractive Acres/Year 2,718 5,356 2,718 5,356 5,356-2,638 0 Acres/Year 0 0 0 0 89 0 89 Forest Conservation Acres/Year 9,128 8,733 8,738 8,733 8,872 5 139 Urban Nutrient Management Acres/Year 24,553 23,662 23,661 23,662 44,722-1 21,060 Street Sweeping Pounds Lbs/Year 0 941,633 941,633 941,633 941,633 0 0 Urban Stream Restoration / Shoreline Erosion Control Linear Feet 0 5,920 5,920 9,914 9,914 0 0 The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Acres of BMPs might be observed to decrease in subsequent scenarios for several reasons: - To meet the countywide sector target, the State supplemented the scenarios with a generic set of BMPs. - Some aspects of the State strategies were automated, such that BMP levels were computed as a percentage of available acres. The application of some BMPs convert the acres of developed land to forest land, or impervious to pervious. This reduces/increases the available acres so that, if the same percentage level of other BMPs is applied to these lands, then a decrease/increase in BMP acreage might be observed even though the implementation level was intedend to remain equal. - Because the Bay watershed model is not able to account for BMPs that treat overlapping areas (nested BMPs), the acreage available for BMPs can be used up before the Target is achieved. In such cases the State gave precedance to the more effective BMPs. The columns labeled include the State Highway Administration (SHA) strategies as well as levels for other entities. The columns for and strategies include numbers for SHA, federal facilities, State lands, industrial facilities, Phase I and II MS4 and non-regulated stormwater where applicable. They also reflect changes made by the State. Page 10 of 13

Septic System BMPs BMP Name Zone Unit Septic Denitrification Change in Submittal Change in Submittal Critical Area Systems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Outside of the Critical Area, not within 1000 ft of a perennial stream Within 1000 ft of a perennial stream Systems 71 71 71 71 71 0 0 Systems 57 57 57 57 13,495 0 13,438 Septic DenitrificationTotal 129 129 129 129 13,566 0 13,438 The BMP values represent the total amount of implementation in place. Page 11 of 13

Maryland Phase II MAST Submittals MONTGOMERY Total Nitrogen Loads Source Sector Landuse Target Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Construction 0.130 0.112 0.130 0.112 0.111 0.129 Extractive 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Regulated Developed 1.243 1.201 1.198 1.163 1.026 1.047 Subtotal 1.377 1.316 1.332 1.278 1.141 1.179 Septic Septic 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.105 0.106 Subtotal 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.105 0.106 The columns labeled include the State Highway Administration (SHA) strategies as well as levels for other entities. The columns for and strategies include numbers for SHA, federal facilities, State lands, industrial facilities, Phase I and II MS4 and non-regulated stormwater where applicable. They also reflect changes made by the State. MONTGOMERY Total Phosphorus Loads Source Sector Landuse Target Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 Construction 0.019 0.014 0.019 0.014 0.014 0.019 Extractive 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Regulated Developed 0.060 0.058 0.059 0.056 0.048 0.045 Subtotal 0.080 0.073 0.078 0.071 0.063 0.064 Septic Septic 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0.000 Subtotal 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 0.000 The columns labeled include the State Highway Administration (SHA) strategies as well as levels for other entities. The columns for and strategies include numbers for SHA, federal facilities, State lands, industrial facilities, Phase I and II MS4 and non-regulated stormwater where applicable. They also reflect changes made by the State. Page 12 of 13

Total Sediment Loads Source Sector Landuse Stormwater CSS 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Construction 26.838 20.203 27.009 20.203 20.542 Extractive 0.664 0.664 0.664 0.664 0.528 Regulated Developed 62.588 59.821 60.280 57.641 47.908 Subtotal 90.089 80.688 87.953 78.508 68.977 Septic Septic 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 Subtotal 0.000 0 0.000 0 0.000 The columns labeled include the State Highway Administration (SHA) strategies as well as levels for other entities. The columns for and strategies include numbers for SHA, federal facilities, State lands, industrial facilities, Phase I and II MS4 and non-regulated stormwater where applicable. They also reflect changes made by the State. Page 13 of 13