target load method cbp principals staff committee meeting july 22, 2009 gary shenk u.s. epa cbpo...
TRANSCRIPT
Target Load Method
CBP Principals’ Staff Committee Meeting
July 22, 2009
Gary Shenk
U.S. EPA CBPO
Presentation No. 2
Update on Methods
Plan for Resolution
Sample TN Allocation at 90% Level of Effort
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Relative Effectiveness
Frac
tion
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
TN load 183.3
Jm
sA
, W
V
Jm
sA
, V
A
Yrk
A,
VA
Ra
pA
, V
A
Jm
sB
, V
A
Px
tA,
MD
Po
tA,
PA
Ws
h,
PA
Po
tA,
WV
Po
tA,
VA
Yrk
B,
VA
Po
tA,
MD
Su
sq
, N
Y
Mid
ES
, D
E
Ra
pB
, V
A
Po
tB,
VA
Po
tB,
MD
Po
tA,
DC
Px
tB,
MD
Up
ES
, P
A
Es
hV
A,
VA
Po
tB,
DC
Su
sq
, P
A
Mid
ES
, M
D
Ws
h,
MD
Up
ES
, D
E
Lo
wE
S,
DE
Up
ES
, M
D
Lo
wE
S,
MD
Su
sq
, M
D
Review of Target Load Method from April
Sample TN Allocation at 90% Level of Effort
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Relative Effectiveness
Frac
tion
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
TN load 188.1
Jm
sA
, W
V
Jm
sA
, V
A
Yrk
A,
VA
Ra
pA
, V
A
Jm
sB
, V
A
Px
tA,
MD
Po
tA,
PA
Ws
h,
PA
Po
tA,
WV
Po
tA,
VA
Yrk
B,
VA
Po
tA,
MD
Su
sq
, N
Y
Mid
ES
, D
E
Ra
pB
, V
A
Po
tB,
VA
Po
tB,
MD
Po
tA,
DC
Px
tB,
MD
Up
ES
, P
A
Es
hV
A,
VA
Po
tB,
DC
Su
sq
, P
A
Mid
ES
, M
D
Ws
h,
MD
Up
ES
, D
E
Lo
wE
S,
DE
Up
ES
, M
D
Lo
wE
S,
MD
Su
sq
, M
D
Review of Target Load Method from April
Suggested Refinements
• WQSC– Split the graph into multiple lines– Allow curved lines
• PSC– Bring costs into consideration
Cost Basis for Allocations
• Difficult to Implement– Data on costs not readily available for all
practices– Cost are not linear with reductions– Optimization algorithms are highly complex
• What Scale?– Funding is not likely to follow the optimal path– Ignores local benefits– Optimization within state-basins
Phase 4.3 TN reductions from No Action
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Progress 2008 Trib Strategy
Per
cent
of E
3 fr
om N
o A
ctio
nWastewater
All other sources
In past analysis, jurisdictions have chosen to reduce wastewater by a greater percentage, both in plans and in practice
Sample TN Allocation, PS at 4 mg/L and NPS not above 90% Level of Effort
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Relative Effectiveness
Per
cent
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
% NPS reduction
Pivot Point
% PS reduction
179.0 TN
Sample TN reduction, PS at 4 mg/L and NPS S-curve with max 90% and min 80%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Relative Effectiveness
Per
cent
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
% PS reduction
% NPS reduction
180.7 TN
Sample TN reduction, PS at 4 mg/L and NPS hockey stick with flat part at 90%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Relative Effectiveness
Per
cent
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
% PS reduction
% NPS reduction
180.5 TN
Sample TN reduction, PS and NPS both hockey stick. PS flat at 4 mg/L then goes to 6 mg/L and NPS has the same shape
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Relative Effectiveness
Per
cent
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
% PS reduction
% NPS reduction
186.4 TN
Fraction Change in Target LoadBetween Min and Max Option
• Basins near the middle-right of the effectiveness scale do not change much through the options
• Basins near the extremes have more at stake.
Nitrogen
Fraction Change in Target LoadBetween Min and Max Option
• Basins near the middle-right of the effectiveness scale do not change much through the options
• Basins near the extremes have more at stake.
Phosphorus
How do we decide?
• Credible Phase 5.2 Scenarios (Sept 1)– No action– Everyone, Everything, Everywhere (E3)– Tributary Strategies– Enhanced Program Implementation Level– 2002, 2008
Sample TN reduction, PS and NPS both hockey stick. PS flat at 4 mg/L then goes to 6 mg/L and NPS has the same shape
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Relative Effectiveness
Per
cent
red
ucti
on f
rom
201
0 no
BM
Ps
to E
3
% PS reduction
% NPS reduction
186.4 TN
Status:
Still under consideration more information is needed
October PSC:
Bring back 1 or 2 options
If no agreement is reached, EPA will decide