Ways to Achieve and Account for Pollution Reductions - Best Management Practices

Best Management Practice (BMP) solutions consist of two (2) general types: structural BMPs and non-structural BMPs. Both types will need to be an integral component of York County’s Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) strategy. Moreover, the sustainability of York County’s water resources will depend upon incorporating BMPs into all aspects of our communities and lives. The Pennsylvania Stormwater BMP Manual identifies and describes both structural and non-structural BMPs and, in addition, provides design/construction criteria for structural BMPs. Nevertheless, a brief overview of each type is provided below.

Non-structural BMPs: Non-structural BMPs are practices that incorporate techniques and behaviors that do not involve physical construction. Education, outreach, planning, ordinance provisions, and land preservation are types of non-structural BMPs.

This WIP, however, focuses on provisions that could be adopted by a municipality, either through a standalone ordinance or incorporated into an existing zoning or subdivision/land development ordinance, and, when put into practice, would ultimately help to reduce stream pollution.

These provisions include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Urban Nutrient Management
• Conservation by Design/Low Impact Development (LID)
• Green Infrastructure
• IWRP Flowchart Tool
• On-lot Septic System Management
• Protection of Sensitive Environmental Areas

Structural BMPs: Structural BMPs are those practices that use physical structures features to improve water quality.

Although PA DEP provided the County with a scenario of pollution reduction actions (BMPs) to meet the Draft Planning Targets, a primary purpose of this Plan, as previously stated, is to modify that scenario in an effort to make it better suited to York County, yet still meet the targets.

The Recommended Pollutant Reduction Actions Scenario Table (see Appendix D) includes an array of urban and agricultural BMPs to improve streams throughout the County, regardless of whether they are on the Impaired Waters List (see Appendix B), in an effort to be of benefit to both MS4 and non-MS4 municipalities.

Furthermore, BMPs that yield the most efficiency for the least amount of cost or “biggest bang for the buck” are highlighted on the Table.

With regard to recommended urban BMPs, four (4) of the BMPs are highlighted for having high efficiency and low cost in achieving reductions in two (2) out of the three (3) pollutants.

The Actions Opportunity Table (see Appendix E) notes the impaired streams by municipality and the amount of land available in the watershed to implement the Recommended Pollutant Reduction Actions or BMPs.

Both the Recommended Pollutant Reduction Actions and Actions Opportunity Tables were developed by local stakeholders, with specialized knowledge. They represent an attempt to produce a more efficient, less expensive, and more “implementable” means for York County and its municipalities to meet the Draft Planning Targets. However, the average efficiency, median lifecycle costs, and impaired waterway BMP lineal feet/acreage calculations should be used for general information and planning purposes only. Their accuracy cannot be guaranteed as there are many variables and costs are constantly changing.

The Tables can be used separately or in conjunction with one another. While all of the BMPs listed in the Recommended Actions Table are beneficial, their applicability on a watershed or municipal basis may vary.

Ways to Achieve and Account for Pollution Reductions - Existing Program Administration

Administration of existing programs, which includes regulatory compliance and subsequent enforcement, will help York County move closer toward meeting its pollutant reduction targets. The need for assistance with compliance from State and Federal partners is an important component of this solution. Three (3) aspects of program administration are considered in this Plan.

The first is compliance required under the NPDES Permit Program; conditions associated with permits must be met. The Nutrient Credit Trading Program is an option by which permit compliance may be possible. The PA DEP created a Nutrient Credit Trading Program, enabling an eligible permit holder to buy pollution reduction credits from another entity, who has either (a) generated credits by reducing pollutants more than is required by law; (b) has not discharged its allocation of pollution into the watershed; or (c) has installed an improvement that results in quantifiable pollution reductions. So, buyers and sellers should be aware of what credits are actually available for sale (must be credits ‘certified’ by PA DEP). Like any other regulatory program, the Pennsylvania Trading Program is revised periodically.

The regulatory acceptance of nutrient credit trading, coupled with the possible financial benefits, makes nutrient credit trading an approach to consider and analyze as a component of York County’s pollutant reduction strategy. It is important to remember that the financial benefits of this Program could be a savings realized for the purchaser of credits, as well as an income producer for the seller of credits. Furthermore, these financial benefits could result in more funds being available to implement additional BMPs.

A second aspect deals with Conservation Plans, Nutrient Management Plans, and Manure Management Programs. Although municipalities are not responsible for compliance under these Programs, benefits of complying with the associated regulations may well have positive impacts for municipalities. There are various reasons why countywide compliance with Conservation Plan requirements has not been achieved, but limited resources are most likely a primary cause. The YCCD works with farmers to develop and implement Conservation Plans that address not only the conservation plan requirements, but also nutrient and manure management regulations. The limited resources of the YCCD have resulted in a backlog of Conservation Plans in need of development, review and/or approval. A potential consideration worth analysis for this Plan could be obtaining municipal assistance in hiring independent technicians to work with YCCD to administer the Program and attain compliance. Should the analysis prove the benefits (pollution reductions) would keep stricter MS4 requirements away from municipalities, they could achieve some cost savings.

A third aspect is the administration of stormwater management (SWM) regulations under the Pennsylvania Stormwater Management Act (Act 167). This task falls to each County municipality who is required, by the Act, to adopt a SWM Ordinance consistent with the County’s approved and adopted countywide SWM Plan. This requirement, to date, has not been fulfilled by all County municipalities, although most, if not all, are working in that direction. Compliance with Act 167, and subsequent enforcement of the adopted SWM Ordinances, will help prevent urban stormwater runoff pollution from getting worse, thereby allowing the benefits of BMPs installed outside of Act 167 to have a greater impact toward achieving the target reductions.

Ways to Achieve and Account for Pollution Reductions

There are many ways to achieve and account for pollution reductions. In Developing an effective and viable strategy for York County to meet its pollution reduction targets, a variety of solutions were evaluated. Below is a description of potential solutions recommended for the County by the York County Coalition for Clean Waters. York County has identified four areas of activity, and they are:

1. Capture unreported actions;
2. Existing program administration;
3. Best Management Practices; and
4. BMPs not currently in Bay Model.

 The Chesapeake Bay Model can only give credit for BMPs entered into it, and only what is known can be entered into it. The amount of pollution reduction Pennsylvania has achieved since January 1, 2006, is determined by BMPs that have been entered into the Bay Model by US EPA. To date, Pennsylvania has primarily included only BMPs cost shared by Federal/State programs. Thus, unreported actions relate to BMPs that were (1) funded completely by private dollars, (2) cost shared through government programs not presently accounted for in the Bay Model, or (3) undertaken without pollution reduction being a goal, but in reality, achieved pollution reductions.

York County’s municipalities need to identify, report, and get credit for these unreported BMPs to help achieve their draft target reductions. These unreported BMPs, or “credits,” may be the least costly and most efficient means of reducing the distance the County must travel toward reaching its pollutant reduction targets. Examples of such projects include, but are not limited to:

Capture Unreported Actions  

• Ag BMPs not associated with conservation plans and/or cost shared by Appendix C programs,   
• Municipal BMPs not required by NPDES permits or cost shared by Appendix C programs, 
• Projects cost shared with agencies not included in Appendix C, such as PEMA and PennDOT; project examples include Wrightsville Susquehanna riverbank restoration and PennDOT Mt. Rose Avenue stream bank stabilization, 
•  Projects requiring PA DEP permits, BUT not cost shared by Appendix C programs, 
•  Erosion and sedimentation projects not reported to PA DEP, and 
•  BMPs completed by any stakeholder on private lands.

Where Does York County Need to Reduce Nutrients and Sediment?

PA DEP’s Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report lists the polluted streams and the reasons for the pollution. Additionally, the Report identifies waters that have a developed total maximum daily load (TMDL) and waters that require a TMDL, including a target date for the development of the required TMDL. For this section of the York County WIP, the Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report is used to identify York County impaired waters, the pollutants that caused the impairments, and the source of the impairments. Likewise, the Report can be used to identify York County waters that need reductions in nutrients (nitrogen/phosphorus) and/or sediment to improve water quality.

The 2011 York County Integrated Water Resources Plan (IWRP) included information on all York County impaired waters from the PA DEP’s Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report. This Plan, however, focuses on the waters impaired by nutrients and/or sediment (see Map 1 and Appendix B). Map 1 also shows the York County large watersheds and municipal boundaries, in order to put the impaired waters in perspective. Map 2 shows the impaired sub-watersheds within each of the larger watersheds, which further demonstrates the extent of nutrient/sediment impairment in the County.

According to the 2012 Report, the impairment of 28% of the waters shown is due solely to an agricultural source and the cause in each case is siltation. Approximately 50% of the waters are impaired due to another source or sources in combination with agriculture, with urban runoff/storm sewers being the most prevalent. It is also interesting to note that siltation is a contributing cause of the impairment in 93% of the waters and it is the sole cause in 53% of the waters.

A listing of York County waters that are impaired to some extent due to nutrients and/or sediment can be found in Appendix B. Also included are the impaired use, source and specific cause for each water body listed.

It is essential to remember that US EPA’s, and therefore PA DEP’s, watershed restoration priorities are developed and implemented as a result of the Integrated Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report. Thus, this Report should be used as a tool to identify priority locations for watershed restoration projects in York County.

York County's Pollution Diet

How much pollution needs to be cleaned up by York County? The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP) has distributed pollutant reduction targets to each county in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, including York County. Along with pollutant reduction numbers, a scenario by which York County could achieve these reductions through the establishment/construction of identified Best Management Practices (BMPs) was provided. Based on input from several local stakeholders with expertise in implementing agricultural, urban and other BMPs, the scenario provided with the Draft Targets would be difficult for the County to achieve. Thus, this Watershed Implementation Plan will establish another scenario that the York County Coalition for Clean Waters believes is the most efficient/practicable for York County to implement.

York County’s 2025 total maximum daily load pollution reduction targets are 3,860,342 pounds of Total Nitrogen, 56,408 pounds of Total Phosphorous, and 83,717,179 pounds of Total Sediment. Pollution load and reduction targets are displayed graphically in the WIP. For Nitrogen and Sediment, this number is about a 39% reduction from 2009; while, for Phosphorus, it’s about a 30% reduction. For the full York County draft planning targets as generated by PA DEP, see Appendix A.