HD28 - Report of the Chesapeake Bay Commission

  • Published: 1985
  • Author: Chesapeake Bay Commission
  • Enabling Authority: House Joint Resolution 137 (Regular Session, 1984)

Executive Summary:
Nonpoint sources (NPS) of pollution have been identified by the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program and others as contributing to the deterioration of water quality and habitat suitability within the Chesapeake Bay system. Nonpoint sources may be described as those which cannot be traced to a single, discrete point of origin. These include soil erosion and resultant sedimentation from agricultural lands and areas under development as well as stormwater overflow in urban areas and atmospheric precipitation. Causes include both natural forces such as wind and rain and man-induced activities such as cultivation and construction.

Sediment, a major component of nonpoint source pollution, is significant both as a pollutant itself and as a carrier of pollutants. It decreases water clarity and light penetration and may smother communities of benthic organisms and submerged aquatic vegetation. Sediment also serves as a carrier of nutrients and toxic substances from farmlands and urban surfaces to the waters of the Bay. The relative contribution of nonpoint sources to total nutrient loading to the Bay watershed is largely dependent on rainfall conditions. Under average rainfall conditions, however, nonpoint sources contribute 39 percent of the phosphorous load and 67 percent of the nitrogen load on a Bay-wide basis. Agricultural lands are by far the dominant source of NPS-originating nutrients entering the Chesapeake Bay. Nutrient and sediment loads also vary widely among individual river basins and watersheds.

Nonpoint sources of pollution have not traditionally received the same level of recognition, emphasis, or funding as have point sources. Important federal legislation enacted during the late 1960's and early 1970's was aimed primarily at the reduction or eradication of the most visible, or point source, discharges of pollutants to the system. Thus, the sewage treatment plant construction grants program and the NPDES permit requirements have formed the cornerstone of the cooperative effort to reduce the level of contaminants entering the Chesapeake Bay. Efforts to control nonpoint sources of pollution have traditionally been considered a function of agricultural or soil conservation agencies. Until recently, emphasis and programs at both the federal and state levels have not been targeted to water quality but have, rather, been designed merely to prevent erosion in an effort to avoid the loss of productive top soil. Research conducted over the past decade, however, has brought scientists, managers, farmers and other Bay users to the realization that runoff (urban as well as agricultural) and sedimentation eventually find their way into creeks and streams and are therefore intimately related to the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay.

The EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, conducted over a six-year period at a cost of some twenty-seven million dollars, has discovered and compiled a great deal of information concerning the Bay and its resources. This study and its implications have provided the impetus for significant and continuing efforts on the part of all states in the region to halt the continuing degradation of the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay and to restore the quality and productivity of the Bay to former levels. By its very nature and design, the EPA study was somewhat limited in scope. It did not, for instance, specifically address sediment per se; it did, however, describe nutrient enrichment as a major problem in the Bay and identified urban and agricultural runoff as the major contributors to that problem.

Problems associated with sedimentation and other nonpoint sources of pollution were addressed in more specific terms by several of the workshops held in preparation for the 1983 Chesapeake Bay Conference. The Habitat Management Workshop identified sediment control as a top priority, and recommended that best management land use practices, including stormwater retention programs as well as agricultural practices, be required in all major Chesapeake Bay watersheds to reduce the rapidity of runoff and the amount of nutrients and sediment released to the system. The Water Use Activities Workshop addressed sediment primarily as a product of dredging activities. Sediment quality and quantity are extremely important in assessing the impacts of any dredging operations. Finally, the Land Activities Workshop identified sediment as a major pollutant and defined the basic problem as follows:

"Large amounts of sediment reach the waters of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries, having a detrimental effect on the quality of habitat for living organisms, reducing water clarity, and speeding the rate of channel silting (and thus the necessity for dredging)."

Clearly, many organizations and individuals have come to consider nonpoint sources of pollution as important contributors to the overall water quality problems facing the Chesapeake Bay region. Prior to 1984, Virginia had enacted or supported two major programs in an effort to combat nonpoint sources of pollution:

(1) an Erosion and Sediment Control Law, and

(2) the Agricultural Pollution Control Program.

Virginia's Erosion and Sediment Control Law was enacted by the General Assembly in 1973. It grants the Soil and Water Conservation Commission the responsibility for developing guidelines, providing assistance to localities, and approving local plans for controlling erosion. The SWCC was to develop a program for any locality which had not adopted an appropriate ordinance within one year of the effective date of SWCC guidelines. Forty-four Soil and Water Conservation Districts throughout the Commonwealth provide technical assistance to the localities in administering their programs. To date, 95 counties, 41 independent cities and 35 towns have enacted erosion and sediment control ordinances. Agricultural activities are exempt from Virginia's sediment control law.

The principal focus of Virginia's agricultural pollution control program has been guided by the Section 208 area-wide waste treatment management provisions of the Clean Water Act (P.L. 92-500, as amended). Virginia's 208 management plan has resulted in the development of a series of Best Management Practices Handbooks designed to control nonpoint source pollution in five categories, one of which is agriculture. The Soil and Water Conservation Commission is the lead agency for the development and implementation of agricultural best management practices while SWCDs are the lead agencies at the local level. The State Water Control Board, however, retains overall responsibility for the direction and coordination of the program. In its 208 planning process, Virginia, like most states, has relied principally on the voluntary compliance of land owners and users with recommended best management practices.

During 1983, the Chesapeake Bay Commission examined thoroughly the nonpoint source pollution control programs of states in the Chesapeake Bay drainage basin. The Commission found that sound erosion and sediment control standards had been developed at the state level in Virginia and that local governments and SWCDs were generally doing an adequate job of approving effective sediment control plans. Throughout the state, however, enforcement of approved plans appeared to be a serious problem. No absolute documentation exists to verify the extent of the enforcement problem in Virginia, but two state-wide reviews conducted since 1976 have identified inspection and enforcement inadequacies as significant obstacles to the effective administration and implementation of nonpoint source pollution control programs within the state. Manpower limitations were pointed out in both studies as significant causative factors.

As a result of its review and deliberations, the Commission made several recommendations to the General Assembly in its 1984 Annual Report. Among them was the following:

"A task force should be created to review and evaluate the effects of staff levels currently employed and assigned by Conservation Districts and local governments to the implementation and enforcement of the Erosion and Sediment Control Law in Virginia."

The Commission recommended that specific tasks assigned to the group should include:

• an assessment of the adequacy of existing and proposed staff at the local and SWCD levels to effectively address nonpoint source pollution control programs including

* implementation of the state Sediment Control Law,

* implementation of the state 208 Agricultural program,

* provision of technical assistance to farmers within critical or priority watersheds as determined by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Virginia State Water Control Board, and the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Commission.

* an assessment of the role and responsibility of state government in providing adequate, trained staff to implement urban sediment control and agricultural Best Management Practices.

* an assessment of the role and responsibility of local government in providing for adequate, trained staff to implement these programs.

* an examination of potential revenue sources to provide such staff and training.

Largely as a result of new information which was generated and publicized by the EPA Chesapeake Bay Program, and following recommendations made at the 1983 Chesapeake Bay Conference, the 1984 Session of the Virginia General Assembly and the executive agencies acknowledged the significance of nonpoint sources in several important ways. As a major element of its 1984-1986 Chesapeake Bay Initiatives package, the legislature appropriated $2.5 million for an Agricultural Pollution Control Program to be administered by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission. The goal of the program is to reduce the amounts of sediment, nutrients and toxic substances reaching the state's waterways by providing cost share grants and technical assistance to farmers agreeing to implement specific agricultural best management practices. It is hoped that the availability of these grants will provide members of the agricultural community sufficient incentive to adopt sound soil conservation and management practices. In the area of urban nonpoint source pollution control programs, the state has appropriated $750,000 for the 1984-86 biennium. A primary objective of this element of the program is to demonstrate and monitor the effectiveness and practicability of certain innovative urban BMPs. An initial demonstration project will include the construction of a one-acre porous paved parking lot, grassed waterway, and infiltration trench at a Northern Virginia location. It is proposed that stormwater runoff from the pavement project will be monitored for water quality and quantity and that results will be compared to the runoff from an adjacent conventionally-paved parking lot.

These programs, and others, represent bold and innovative steps for Virginia and demonstrate the commitment of the Commonwealth to the Chesapeake Bay clean-up effort. It is too early to assess the effectiveness of these new programs but they do seem to address some long-acknowledged problem areas and, if administered and implemented efficiently, they should significantly reduce nonpoint source pollution in the state. Clearly, these efforts must be continuously evaluated and monitored to ensure that they are assisting the state in achieving its goals of improved water quality and living resources productivity.

In response to the findings and recommendations of the Chesapeake Bay Commission, the 1984 General Assembly also enacted House Joint Resolution 137. This Resolution, attached as Appendix A, recognizes the significant contribution of pollution from nonpoint sources to deteriorating water quality conditions in Virginia and requests the Chesapeake Bay Commission to assess the adequacy of staff resources within existing state and local programs designed to deal with all aspects of nonpoint source pollution control in the state. This document represents the Chesapeake Bay Commission's response to HJR 137.

While the primary focus of the study was the adequacy of staff resources dedicated to NPS pollution control, research indicated many other strengths and weaknesses of existing erosion and sediment control and agricultural conservation programs. Where appropriate, these observations have been included in the report. In order to evaluate Virginia's programs comparatively, relevant information from several neighboring states has been compiled and included. Additional issues raised by the study which are less directly concerned with manpower needs are documented in the Chesapeake Bay Commission's "1984 Annual Report to the General Assemblies of Maryland and Virginia."