Minnesota’s Proposed
Nutrient Reduction Strategy
Wayne Anderson Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
November, 2013
FPetersTypewritten Textwq-ppt2-14
Clean water for Minnesota
Nutrient pollution is a widespread, costly and challenging environmental problem
Strategies will require significant and sustained efforts over several decades
There have been phosphorus reductions, however additional reductions are needed
Nitrogen reduction efforts have been limited within the state
2
Clean water downstream
3
Nutrient impacts
Too much nitrogen and phosphorus causes algae in our lakes and streams, which decreases the oxygen that fish and other aquatic life need to survive
Nutrient pollution in ground water - which is a primary source of drinking water for many Minnesotans - can be harmful especially to children and vulnerable adults
4
What is Hypoxia?
Definition: Not enough oxygen to support aquatic life
Nutrient-rich water causes excessive algae growth
As dying algae, use up oxygen, aquatic life is unsupported. It becomes a “dead zone”
Reduce hypoxia by reducing nutrients
Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan - 2008
Working together to build a Strategy?
7
Minnesota State and federal agencies and the University of Minnesota worked together to create an effective draft strategy.
A stakeholder conversation begins now.
Strategy: The foundation
Builds on a foundation of good science Sets goals based on water needs Sets milestones to define progress that is
accountable 2025 – the milestone 2045 – the goal
Action plans directly relate to desired outcomes
Stakeholders are involved in shaping strategy
8
Strategy details include:
Goals and milestones Nutrient monitoring/trends Estimates of recent progress Priority nutrient sources and watersheds Scenarios to meet 1st milestones Agricultural strategies Wastewater strategies Tracking progress into future
9
10
27% reduction
Recent progress is the percent of baseline load remaining after accounting for reduction
Phosphorus
Nitrogen
Reductions since baseline
Reductions during future milestone periods
Reductions during first milestone period
Final goal achieved
0% for N
27% for P
20% for N
8% for P
25% for N
10% for P
[Total 45% for N]
[Total 45% for P]
Milestone Approach – Mississippi River
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Phos
phor
us
(met
ric to
ns/y
ear)
Industrial
Domestic
How to Meet Goals and Milestones
Focus Strategy on high priority sources Develop possible scenarios Identify program-related activities needed to
implement strategy Use adaptive management
12
Reductions: Mississippi River
13
Nutrient Milestone Goal Reduction strategies
Phosphorus 35% by 2025 45% by 2045 • Increase fertilizer use efficiencies
• Field erosion control • CRP and cover crops
Nitrogen 20% by 2025 45% by 2045 • Nitrogen monitoring at wastewater treatment facilities
• Integrate basin reduction goals with watershed planning efforts
Sources and Priority Sectors Agriculture + Wastewater
14
Basin Priority phosphorus sources Priority nitrogen sources
Mississippi River
Cropland runoff, permitted point sources, and stream bank erosion
Agricultural tile drainage and cropland groundwater
Lake Superior Nonagricultural rural runoff, permitted point sources, and stream bank erosion
Permitted point sources
Lake Winnipeg Cropland runoff and nonagricultural rural runoff
Cropland groundwater
Mississippi Scenario to meet Phase 1 Milestones
15
Sector Reductions
Mississippi Phosphorus (tons)
Mississippi Nitrogen (tons)
Progress since Baseline
1,600 0
Agriculture 330 19,600
Wastewater 60 3,100
Miscellaneous 30 0
TOTAL 2,020 22,700
35% Reduction in P 20% Reduction in N
Wastewater Strategies
Continue Existing Phosphorus Strategy Expect additional 50 MTs P reduced (1% of total)
Develop Nitrogen Strategy based on successful Phosphorus Strategy Monitoring, management plans, effluent limits
(from standards), trading Expect 3,100 MTs N reduced (2% of total basin
reduction)
Ag Best Management Practices
17
Phosphorous
Increasing Fertilizer Use Efficiencies Achieve target soil test
phosphorus (P Index) Subsurface banding
Field Erosion Control • Conservation tillage
Increase and Target Living Cover Riparian buffers Cover crops Conservation reserve
Nitrogen
Increasing Fertilizer Use Efficiencies Use recommended fertilizer
application rates Drainage Water Retention and
Treatment Wetlands Controlled drainage
Increase and Target Living Cover Riparian buffers Cover crops Conservation reserve
Miscellaneous Source Strategies
Sewage Treatment Systems – existing program
Stormwater – existing permits and MIDS Feedlots – existing program Sediment – statewide sediment reduction
strategy currently under development
Protection Strategies
Red River Tiling and Lake Superior Loads Watershed Approach
requires protection strategies as part of WRAP development
Vulnerable Groundwater Drinking Water Supplies MDA’s draft Nitrogen
Fertilizer Management Plan
Groundwater Nitrate Concentrations
Integrating the Strategy into ongoing efforts
Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategies Integrate downstream needs into WRAPS
Inform One Watershed, One Plan Increase and target Ag BMPs Coordinate with Fertilizer Management Plan Continue with P/N reductions from wastewater Improve accountability – measurement and
tracking progress
20
Ag BMP scenario: Phosphorus
21
BMP category Example BMP
Mississippi River Red River
Future adoption
rate
Total new acres
(million acres)
Future adoption
rate
Total new acres
(million acres)
Increasing Fertilizer Use Efficiencies
Achieve target soil test phosphorus and use subsurface banding 90% 1.9 0% 0
Increase and Target Living Cover
Riparian buffers 25% 0.3 60% 0.3
Cover crops 10% 0.3 20% 0.2
Conservation reserve 3% 0.2 0.6% 0
Field Erosion Control
Conservation tillage 91% 7.2 64% 1.4
Ag BMP scenario: Nitrogen
22
BMP category Example BMP
Mississippi River Red River
Future adoption
rate
Total new acres
(million acres)
Future adoption
rate
Total new acres
(million acres)
Increasing Fertilizer Use Efficiencies
Use recommended fertilizer application rates 80% 13.2 95% 6.0
Increase and Target Living Cover
Cover crops 10% 0.3 20% 0.2
Riparian buffers 25% 0.3 60% 0.3
Conservation reserve 3% 0.2 0.10% 0
Drainage Water Retention and Treatment
Wetlands and controlled drainage 18% 1.1 25% 0.001
Example strategy
23
BMP category Example BMP
Mississippi River
Future adoption rate
Total new acres
Increasing Fertilizer Use Efficiencies
Use recommended fertilizer application rates 80% 13.2 million
Increase and Target Living Cover
Cover crops 10% 300,000 Riparian buffers 25% 300,000 Conservation reserve 3% 200,000
Drainage Water Retention and Treatment
Wetlands and controlled drainage
18% 1.1 million
Research recommendations Cover crop establishment and genetics Markets and technologies for perennials Fertilizer use efficiency Precision and split applications Remote sensing tools
Further research on tile drainage treatment BMPs with multiple benefits Watershed NBMP tool for N/P/sed
Ag Strategies: Increased adoption BMPs
Optimization – State and federal program Step Up Plans, track industry-led BMPs
Economic – Crop yield insurance program, markets and technologies for use of perennials, trading
Education and Involvement – Targeted campaign, focus on co-op agronomists and certified crop advisors, producers help develop solutions, AWQCP
Research – Cover crop establishment, soluble phosphorus, removing nutrients from tile drainage waters
Demonstration – On-farm trials
Overarching Strategies
Watershed planning
Tracking & account-ability
State/Fed level program support
Ackn
owle
dgin
g Steering Committee and Work Group Rebecca Flood (Chair), Mark Schmitt, Gaylen Reetz, Jeff Stollenwerk, Wendy Turri, Marni Karnowski, Randy Hukreide, Doug Wetzstein, Glenn Skuta, Katrina Kessler, Steve Woods, Tim Koehler, Marcey Westrick, Mike Schmitt, Carl Rosen, John Nieber, Gary Sands, Greg Buzicky, Rob Sip, Dan Stoddard, Mary Hanks, Bruce Montgomery, Ron Struss, Steve Hirsch, Steve Colvin, Dave Wright, Tom Hogan, Randy Ellingboe, Jeff Freeman, Leisa Thompson, Judy Sventek, Mary Gail Scott, Larry Rogacki, Don Baloun, Myron Taylor, Carissa Spencer, Wanda Garry, Jim Stark, Dave Lorenz Wastewater Focus Group -- Marco Graziani, Dennis Wasley, Scott Casey, Aaron Luckstein, Larry Rogacki, Mary Gail Scott, Judy Sventek, Steve Weiss, Nicole Blasing, Bruce Henningsgaard, Bill Priebe, Mike Trojan
Agricultural Focus Group -- John Nieber, Bill Lazarus, Joe Magner, Bruce Wilson, Al Kean, Chris Lenhart, Bobbi Hernandez, John Lamb, Fabian Fernandez, David Mulla, Bruce Montgomery, Gary Sands, Dave Wall, Wayne Anderson, Carissa Spencer, Larry Baker, John Baker, Mike Schmitt, Forrest Izuno, Heidi Peterson, Joshua Stamper, Nick Gervino, Larry Gunderson, Bill Thompson, Greg Johnson
Next steps
Public comment ends on December 18 Send written comments sent to
Statewide open houses in November - stay tuned for announcements
Outreach at stakeholder meetings For updates or more information visit:
www.pca.state.mn.us/nutrientreduction
28
mailto:[email protected]
29
Thank you
Wayne Anderson MPCA
651-757-2195 [email protected]
30
Wastewater Scenarios
Red River Scenario to meet Phase 1 Milestones
32
Sector Reductions Red River Phosphorus (tons)
Red River Nitrogen (tons)
Progress since Baseline
40 0
Agriculture 60 2,400
Wastewater 20 100
Miscellaneous 10 0
TOTAL 130 2,500
10% Reduction in P 13% Reduction in N
Reductions: Lake Superior
33
Nutrient Milestone Goal Strategies
Phosphorus 3% by 2025 Meeting goals, no net increase
Additional treatment of wastewater and stormwater
Nitrogen Maintain protection
Maintain protection
Increases of nitrogen have been observed but not yet at threatening levels
Reductions: Red River
34
Nutrient Milestone Goal Strategies
Phosphorus 10% by 2025 Adapt goals, if necessary, based on joint efforts with Canada
Field erosion, Living cover and point source reductions
Nitrogen 13% by 2025 Adapt goals, if necessary, based on joint efforts with Canada
Fertilizer efficiency, cover crops, buffers and CRP, mitigate new drainage sources.
Ackn
owle
dgin
g Strategy Development Team - MPCA • Wayne P Anderson P.E., Strategy Manager • David Wall • Dennis Wasley
Strategy Development Team - Tetra Tech • Jennifer Olson, Consultant Project Manager • Kellie DuBay • Jon Butcher • Heather Fisher • Kevin Kratt
Funding/ support provided through EPA grants & contracts • EPA Cooperative Agreement CA Number: MX00E0100 • EPA Consultant Contract: EP-C-12-055
�Minnesota’s Proposed�Nutrient Reduction StrategyClean water for MinnesotaClean water downstreamNutrient impactsWhat is Hypoxia?Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan - 2008Working together to build a Strategy?Strategy: The foundationStrategy details include:Slide Number 10Milestone Approach – Mississippi RiverHow to Meet Goals and MilestonesReductions: Mississippi RiverSources and Priority Sectors�Agriculture + WastewaterMississippi Scenario to meet Phase 1 MilestonesWastewater StrategiesAg Best Management PracticesMiscellaneous Source StrategiesProtection StrategiesIntegrating the Strategy into ongoing effortsAg BMP scenario: PhosphorusAg BMP scenario: NitrogenExample strategyResearch recommendations Ag Strategies: Increased adoption BMPsOverarching StrategiesAcknowledgingNext stepsThank youSlide Number 30Wastewater ScenariosRed River Scenario to meet Phase 1 MilestonesReductions: Lake SuperiorReductions: Red River Acknowledging