[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
AN ASSESSMENT OF THE PATUXENT RIVER RESTORATION EFFORT/ (04 4-Aol- Ui C-4 TC Prepared By 425 Tri-County Council for Southern Maryland T38 P.O. Box 1634 .M35 Charlotte Hall, Maryland 20622 1987 884-2144/870-2520 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared by Gregory Mallon, Tri-County Coun- cil for Southern Maryland working in cooperation with the various State Departments and Agencies active in the Patuxent River Res- toration Effort. Particular thanks must be given to Mr. Earl Bradley, Department of Natural Resources; Ms. Terri Garraty and Mr. David Plott, Department of State Planning who provided in- valuable assistance providing information needed to complete this report. The funding for this report was provided by the Coastal Resources Division, Tidewater Administration, Department of Natural Resources through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal Zone Management Program. Table of Contents Page Patuxent Basin ................................................. I Land Use Changes ............................................... 6 Problem ........................................................ 8 Solutions to the Problem ....................................... 11 Point Source Pollution Reductions ..................... * ........ 13 Non-Point Source Pollution Reductions .......................... 18 Water Quality .................................................. 26 Conclusion ............................. 0... 0 ................... 31 Appendices ..................................................... 32 Appendix A ................. *..0 .......................... 32 Appendix B ....... o........................ 4 ............ 34 Appendix C ......................... 0..0 ........... 0 ....... 38 List of Figures Figure Page 1. Patuxent River Basin .... 4 .............................. * .......... 2 2. Location of Sewage Treatment Plant Discharges ..................... 3 3. Population Growth by County ...................... 00 ......0 ....0 ... 5 4. Diagramatic Representation of Problems Associated with Nutrient Enrichment in the Patuxent River .................................. 10 5. Location of Sewage Treatment Plants in the Patuxent Basin under Compliance ........................................................ 15 6. Comparison of Point and Non-Point Sources of Nitrogen and Phosphorus Bay Wide ............................................... 19 7. Number of Best Management Practices Installed per County in the Patuxent Basin ....................... 0 ........................ 21 8. Total Acres of Best Management Practices Installed per County in the Patuxent Basin so* ... 0..*.* ..... 22 9. Location of Water Quality Monitoring Stations ..................... 27 10. Median Range of Water Temperature and River Flow .................. 28 11. Changes in Water Quality Parameters for the Period January 1983 - December 1985 ..................................................... 30 List of Tables Table Page 1. Ecological Zones of the Patuxent River ... 00 ............ ...... 4 2. Patuxent River Basin Land Use Cover Changes ............. o ....... 7 3. Nutrient Loads Discharged by Major Patuxent Sewage Treatment Plants ............................................ o ............. 14 4. Average Daily Discharges for Plants Meeting the Limits Set Forth by the Nutrient Control Strategy .... 0..0 .... 0 .......... 0 ..... 0... 16 5. Completed Best Management Practices Through Maryland Agricultural Cost Share Program in the Patuxent Watershed ..................... 20 6. Structural Shore Erosion Control Projects Completed in the Patuxent Watershed .. ............................................. 7. Stormwater Management Plans Approved in the Seven Patuxent River Basin Counties for the Period from 1980-1985 ................ o.o.. 25 PATUXENT BASIN The Patuxent River Basin is composed of parts of seven counties encompassing ten percent of the total land area within the State. The watershed is 930 square miles and averages ten miles in width. The river meanders 110 miles on its journey through the seven counties, from its origin at Parris Ridge (the junction of Howard, Montgomery, Frederick amd Carroll counties) to its terminus at the Chesapeake Bay. A map is provided (Figure 1) which indicates the location of the river and the portions of the counties which make up its drainage basin. The river contains three distinct physiographic regions. The headwater region is in the Piedmont Plateau and extends from the river's point of origin to the fall line, near Laurel. The stream valley is steep with little or no flood plain. Steam flow is swift in this portion of the river. Two reservoirs, Triadelphia and Howard T. Duckett, are located on the mainstem, of the river in this segment. The middle portion of the river extends from the fall line into the upper reaches of the fresh tidal zone. This segment is characterized by broad, flat, low-lying swampy flood plains on both sides of the river. The river's mainstem is narrow and flow is sluggish. The Little and Middle Patuxent and Western Branch are important tributaries which enter the Patuxent in this portion of the river. It is this portion of the river into which most of the wastewater effluents are discharged. The location of sewage treatment plants (STPs) in the basin is shown in Figure 2. The third physiographic region of the river is composed entirely of the tidal estuary. The first few miles of this segment of the river are narrow with high land close to the edges of the stream. Near Waysons Corner the river's path again becomes dominated by marsh lands. Below Deep Landing the estuary widens to form a saline reach of the Bay. The marsh covered shores give way to tall bluffs sometime 20 feet or more in height. Along with these physiographic distinctions between portions of the river there are other parameters which divide the basin. Zones of salinity are present along the path of the river. The transition zone from saline to fresh water is bounded by Benedict and Nottingham. Ecological zones and boundaries can also be used to identify specific portions of the watershed. These zones are summarized in Table 1 which was prepared by D'Elia and Boynton (1982). The Patuxent River lies between the cities of Washington and Baltimore. Both of these cities-have expanded over the past decade which have caused populations in the seven basin counties to expand rapidly. As Figure 3 indicates, this growth pattern is anticipated to continue well into the 1990s. Those counties which comprise the upper basin are becoming increasingly urbanized at accelerating rates. The watershed remains predominantly rural with 85 percent of its land cover in agriculture and forest. The agricultural dominance of the watershed is slowly eroding away. The suburban sprawl is consuming.greater and greater tracts of agricultural land as housing demand in the watershed increases. -I- C30AL [IMORE IV. _Jdll0WAfth "..0 o".11F RISE. a -5-GE FMT 610 MEADE r ASHINGTON _"O.o VAi Vt'ftt NIP LA.D.9 IN- CEO-... A CILAR!AN C-M.. It RV3 N A 'P' w @ARII I A.. fl@ PATUXENT BASIN Figure 1. Patuxent River Basin X-11 .-two.* -2- NORTH SAVAGE 13.4 CFS) MD. HOUSE OF CORRECTION PARKWAY- 11.0 CFS) (7.8 CFS) FORT MEADE I Ek 2 MD. CITY (4.0 CFS) JO.96 CFS) I PATUXENT 15.6 CFS) HORSEPEN (0.32 CFS) BOwIE-BELAIR (4.0 CFS) RT. 50 BRIDGE WESTERN BRANCH 17.7 CFS) LOWER MARLBORO BENEDICT CHESAPEAKE SCA L f--* BAY 0 6 8 10 MILES A-SEWAGE THEATMENTPLANT FIGURE 2. LOCATION OF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT DISCHARGES -3- Table 1. Ecological Zones of the Patuxent River@ Kiloncter Kile SLate Natural Kwr-"e Wological Emlogical Sta ti an LarK1tUFkO LwArrarks Boundaries Zones 0.- rum Point T-.Rlver Mouth stratified Estuarine -Sandy Point 5 --Sx)wn Point -jo,'mon Brid ge -Point Pat ence -1jelen's Creek 10 -XDE 2599 -St. beonard's Creek 15 10 -Broom's Island 20 15 -Battle Creek 25 --tiarsh Point -Sheridan Point -Pill Zone LhsFa U f i ed (Approxinate) 30 20 salinity _Long Point Transit on 35 -)U)E 9401 -senedict Bridge TurbJdlty -Buena Vista Maxim= -swansm Creek --chalk Point -Power Plant 40 25 -Pott's Point -Eagle Harbor -Devp Landing 45 -XED 4892 -11olland Cliff -power Cable 30 50 -Lower railboto _Z hod Salinity fresh Aro 55 -XED 9490 erate Flow) 35 -Jones Point 60 -PXT 0402 -Nott-ingham 65 40 -Lyons Creel 70 Zero Sal' ity 45 -PXT 0455 ---JL)g Bay 1-04- FlIx -Western Brarch SIP Weslern Brarr-h 75 Conflumce -PXT 0494 -Itte. 4 Bridge 80 50 -Spyglass island -Head of Tide Ri Veff in e (Approxirrate) 85 55 0045 90 95 -Rte. 214 Bridge 60 -FXT 0603 Bridge 100 -Rte. 50 Source D'Elia and Boynton (1982) PATUXENT RIVER BASIN FIGURE 3 - POPULATION GROWTH BY COUNTY 220000 Population 070 200000 est. 248,.2 10 180000 MOM 140000 est.352,860 20000 i00000 80000 1990 pro 477,340 60000 40000 2000a 0 nfll nP1 11 off 6DUN HOWAFO PMEM'S AM ARKE DfaS CALYM ST.MWIS County SOURCE: MARYLANID DEPIARTMENT OF STATE PLANNING Land Use Cbanges The Maryland Department of State Planning has conducted land use change analyses for the Patuxent River Watershed in 1973, 1981, and 1985. These analyses showed the increasing urbanization of the watershed, although (to date) it is still predominantly rural. Perhaps even more ominous is the potential future change indicated by the figures in the most recent analysis. Increases have been shown in both the barren and brush land categories over the period from 1981 to 1985. Much of the land which has been converted from other land use types such as agricultural and forested to these land use categories is awaiting development. This would indicate that even greater pressure will be placed on the fragile Patuxent River ecosystem. Forested land categories have all declined while developed land categories have all increased. Thus only those land use changes which do not provide water quality benefits have increased, while those which improve the quality of run- off prior to its deposition in tributaries within the watershed have declined. A chart of the land use changes which have occurred in the Patuxent River basin is shown in Table 2. The percent of change for each land use category which have occurred over the 1981 to 1985 time period is also included. Table 2. - PATUXENT RIVER BASIN 1981 1985 LAND USEICOVER CHANGE 1981 1985 PERCENT CHANGE TYPE OF LAND USE ACRES ACRES 1981-1985 DEVELOPED 75,400 81,300 + 7.B LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 25,600 2@@'ioo + 13.7 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 22,600 23,100 + 2.2 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 49500 51000 + 11.0 COMMERCIAL 59900 6,800 + 15.2 INDUSTRIAL 17200 1,50D + 25.0 INSTITUTIONAL 81400 8,500 + 1.1 EXTRACTIVE 2,100 2,200 + 4.7 OPEN URBAN LAND 51100 5,100 0-.;0 AGRICULTURAL 1957300 1899700 - 2.9 CROPLAND 1689300 165,100 - 1.9 PASTURE 251200 23,000 - 9.5 ORCHARDS7VINEYARDS/HORTICULTURE 800 500 - 40.0 FEEDING OPERATIONS 100 100 0.0 ROW AND GARDEN CROPS 900 1 000 + 11.0 FOREST 303@300 301,800 - 0.5 DECIDUOUS FOREST 179,400 177,500 - 1.1 EVERGREEN FOREST 6@300 5,900 - 6.7 MIXED FOREST 1121000 111,000 - 1.0 BRUSH 5)600 7@400 + 32.0 WETLANDS 7,800 7,800 0.0 BARREN LAND 700 11900 + 170.0 SOURCE: MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF STATE PLANNING - MAGI, 1981, 1985 PROBLEN The Patuxent River has experienced a decline in water quality which became apparent during the 1970s. The evidence of reduced water quality was increased mortalities of both oyster and fish populations in the river. Reduced water quality also was evident through visual observation. The cause for the decline in water quality is multifaceted. Forested lands have been cleared for development and the exposed soils washed into the river and its tributaries. Without the absorptive capacity of the trees, the quantity and velocity of the stormwater runoff has increased. These factors increase erosion from runoff with the eventual deposition of sediment in the river. The overall result is sedimentation occurring at an unnaturally accelerated rate. Under forested conditions, the sediment delivered to the river from all lands in the basin approximated 160,000 tons during an average year; however, under current land uses, that figure has increased to 710,000 tons (DSP, 1986). Increased sediment loading reduces the depth to which light can penetrate the water column. The photic zone (the depth to which sufficient light is present to support plant growth) of the river becomes much smaller and many aquatic plants no longer receive sufficient levels of sunlight to survive. Beds of submerged aquatic vegetation are reduced in the river. These plants are important not only for shoreline stabilization but also release oxygen into the 'water which enables fish and other animal life to prosper. The Patuxent River basin has experienced rapid growth during the period of declining water quality. Many of the problems which confront the river are a direct result of the urbanization of the watershed. A principle factor associated with population growth is increased sewage. Sources of the nutrients which enter the river can be placed into two categories, point and non-point. Point sources are those derived from specific (point) sources, such as sewage treatment plants and industrial discharges. Non-point sources of nutrients are those that enter waterways in the form of stormwater runoff from agricultural, urban, and forested lands and base flow to streams along with atmospheric deposition on land and water. The nutrients of primary importance in the reduction of water quality in the river are Nitrogen (N) and Phosphorus (P) because both are essential for the growth of plants, such as algae. In 1963 only three million gallons of effluent per day flowed from sewage treatment plants. Today, almost 38 million gallons enter the river each day. This figure is expected to increase to 74 million gallons per day by the year 2005. This effluent contains large quantities of both Nitrogen and Phosporus. Non-point sources are much more difficult to detect and monitor but they cannot be ignored, as they contribute substantially to the elevated levels of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in the river. Fifty percent of the Nitrogen and fifty percent of the Phosphorus deposited in the Patuxent River is derived from non-point source inputs. However control of these non-point inputs is both complex and difficult. -8- The result of incresed nutrient loading is a rapid acceleration of algal growth commonly referred to as "blooms." These are principally due to an excess of an otherwise limiting nutrient. Blooms choke off the surface water, preventing light from penetrating into the water column and inhibit submerged and rooted vegetation from receiving essential sunlight. As the "bloom" dies off the algal cells sink to the bottom and begin to decompose. The process of decomposition consumes oxygen from the water resulting in oxygen deprivation in the deeper waters of the Patuxent River. Fish, oysters and other aquatic animal life is unable to survive in waters with dissolved oxygen levels below 4 mg/l. This phenomenon is occurring in portions of the river and is diagramed in Figure 4. The low dissolved oxygen conditions are found during the summer months when the river is poorly mixed. The overall result of nutrient enrichment has been a significant decline in the productivity of the river. Figure 4. - Diagramatic Representation of the Problem� Associated with Nutrient Enrichment in the Patuxent River. NUTRIENT ENRICHMENT Nutrients(poiw@ Ar4d mop- ft;pt) "Al 9@ e.ove@@rqwth in nutrient-enriched w Dead algae settle and .,decompose, consurnin f 10- SOLUTIONS TO THE PROBIMf The concerted effort to restore the river to prior levels of water quality, as indicated by measurements of dissolved oxygen, secchi. depth, and chlorophyll "A", began with the "Charrette" held in December 1981. The Charrette was selected as a unique method to resolve the differences between upstream and downstream counties regarding use and restoration of not only the river but its entire drainage basin. The goal of the meeting was accomplished as the Charrette produced a united strategy for addressing the river's water quality problems in the future. The goals established by the Charrette are outlined in Appendix A. A second document which is devoted to the implementation of a strategy aimed at restoring water quality in the Patuxent is the 208 Water Quality Management Plan. This plan contains an assessment of water quality conditions in the basin. The plan outlines a nutrient control strategy which includes both point and non-point sources of pollution. Governor Hughes certified the plan by making it a legal State document in 1983. A summary of the plan is provided in Appendix B. The third and most recent plan devised to improve water quality in the river is the Patuxent River Policy Plan developed by the Department of State Planning. The Policy Plan was conceived to improve upon the many local, state and federal policies and programs which relate to the protection of the rivet's fragile ecosystem. Some of these policies and programs are intended for the specific protection of our aquatic resources while others only improve the quality of the river as a side benefit. The plan is an integrated approach with a clear goal of water quality protection and restoration using a whole watershed management approach. The plan was required as part of the State's Patuxent River Watershed Act and has been approved by the General Assembly. In addition the plan has been approved and endorsed by the elected officials in each of the basin's seven counties. The plan is summarized in Appendix C. With these three documents serving as a guide for the improvement of water quality in the river, many of the participating agencies have set forth on their application. A significant level of commitment has been shown not only through the number of projects conducted but also in the fiscal support provided by the State. Assessment Goals This assessment will attempt to gather information concerning projects implemented by the many participating agencies in a condensed format. Projects which have been conducted will be divided among point and non-point source controls. This report will summarize those projects which have been completed through fiscal year 1986 with the specific intention of following those strategies set forth by the plans. Water quality data from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DIIIIII) Office of Environmental Program's Patuxent River Monitoring Program (1983-1985) will be reviewed to determine if these projects are improving the condition of the river as indicated by measurements of dissolved oxygen, turbidity and chlorophyll "A". Water quality will be determined from the trend analysis plots provided by OEP. Values will not be quantitative but rather qualitative in nature. This is due to the limited "snapshot" of water quality data produced to date by the monitoring programs which limits its use in precise water quality determination. The assessment will also evaluate the collection of information concerning improvements in the watershed to facilitate future program reviews to determine effectiveness of the restoration strategy. -12- Point Source Pollution Reductions The Nutrient Control Strategy embarked upon by the Maryland Office of Environmental Programs outlined a five year program for the Patuxent Basin to reduce source inputs of both phosphorus and nitrogen. Based on a discussion taking into account scientific as well as economic criteria, the agreed upon limits for these two nutrients were 1.0 mg/1 phosphorus and 3.0 mg/1 nitrogen. Total basin discharge of phosphorus should be limited to 320 lb./day and limited to 2,000 lb./day for nitrogen from point sources. Federal support for nutrient removal is currently directed only at phosphorus. The State of Maryland, backed with scientific evidence showing nitrogen limitation in the Patuxent River has recognized the unique aquatic habitat represented by estuaries and supported the need for nitrogen removal to restore the Patuxent River. The implementation of this nutrient strategy has through 1986 produced some progress, but the five year time frame developed in 1981 has been increased to seven years. Thus all of the STPs (sewage treatment plants) in the basin with a flow greater than 0.5 MGD will not be under compliance until 1988. The initial five year period has seen reduced effluent discharge of both phosphorus and nitrogen. By the end of 1986 OEP estimates that 42% (14.4 MGD) of effluent discharged into the Patuxent from the major STPs will comply with the standards for phosphorus set forth by the strategy. By the end of 1987 the percentage will increase to approximately 56%. Construction is underway at specific facilities in the basin to meet the nitrogen removal standards although none are currently on line. Through 1985 cumulative phosphorus loading into the river from major STPs has been reduced from 1981 levels by approximately 24% while cumulative nitrogen loadings have been reduced by 10%. Phosphorus reduction has accrued principally due to upgrading of two STPs and through improved use of existing equipment at throughout the basin. Nitrogen reduction has been achieved to date solely by a tightening of existing procedures and equipment utilization at STPs in the basin. The reductions in phosphorus and nitrogen plant by plant from 1981 to 1984-85 is shown in Table 3. Water quality data summaries are only available from the Patuxent River Monitoring Program for the years 1983, 1984, 1985; thus only point source reduction of phosphorus and nitrogen which were in effect during this time frame can be used to assess improvements in water quality. Those plants which would be included under this provision are identified in Figure 5. They are all in the upper portion of the Patuxent River, Little Patuxent (savage), Horsepen and Fort Meade. The reduction in phosphorus and nitrogen inputs at these facilities has been extracted from OEP's basin with nitrogen and phosphorus reduction summary (Table 1) and summarized in Table 4. The figures shown in Table 3 represent the actual reduction in point source loading at STPs which have been upgraded prior to 1986. It must be noted that nitrogen removal was not included at any of these facilities and thus reduced nitrogen levels is due to improved techniques at the facilities. The direct impact of the improvements at these facilities on water quality in the river is thought to be small and directed to the upper reaches. The impact on water quality in the lower portions of the river would be indirect. -13- Table 3. - NUTRIENT LOADS DISCHARGED BY MAJOR PATUXENT SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS TOTAL PHOSPHORUS Flow Concentration Pound Loading 1981 Base Year Averages STP Name Average MGO Average mg/I Average/Day MGO lbs./Day Little Patuxent 9.1 0.4 30 370 Parkway 4.5 3.4 130 5.6 150 Western Branch 10.@ 3.3 290 9.9 190 Horsepen _ Q.36 4.8 14 773-77 10 Maryland City 0.65 5.5 30 0.6 50 Patuxent (A.A.) 4.0 6.2 210 3.6 100- Bowie 2.43 5.1 100 2.5 200 Fort Meade- 1.86 0.4 6 2,4 80 Md. House of 1.11 5.02 50 0.7 Correction So omons sland TOTALS 34.5 NA 860 33.5 J'70 TOTAL NITROGEN Flow Concentration Pound Loading 1981 Base Year Averages STP Name Average MGD Average mg1I Average/Day MGD lbs./Day Little,Patuxent 9.1 1590 _L9 ... .... _147n Parkway 4.5 19 710 5.6 870 Western Branch 10.5 15 1310 9.9 1650 Horsepen 0.36 18 50 0.3 50 Maryland City 0.65 24 130 0.6 130 Patuxent (A.A.) 4.0 22 730 3.6 750 Bowie 2.43 24 490 2.5 580 Fort Meade 1.86 12 190 2A 490 Md. House of 1.11 202 190 0.7 50 Correction Solomons island TOTALS 34.5 NA 5390 33.5 6040 ]Tables are summaries of 1984-1985 self-monitoring data and OEP compliance monitoring data. Though Solomons Island is considered a major Patuxent STP in this plan update, its use of land treatment prevents its-inclusion in these tables. 211aryland House of Correction nutrient concentrations are estimates extrapolated from very limited monitoring. Source : Patuxent River Basin Update, 1986 - Maryland Office of Environmental Programs. _14- NORTH SAVAGE k9.1 MGD) MD. HOUSE OF CORRECTION (1987 (1988 PARKWAY AE 1.11 I1GD) 4 5 MGD) 11). C IT Y A FORT MEA (1 .86 HGD) 1986 0. 65 MGD) PATUXENT(19117 4.0 MGD) (0-36 MGD SEPEN (1986 BOWIE-DELAIR RT. 50 BRIDGE 2. 43 MGD) (1988 10.5 MGD) WESTERN BRANCIf LOWER MARLBORO BENEDICT CHESAPEAKE SC/It C, BAY 4 6 10 MILES A-3E*AGE TREATMENT PLANT __j Figure 5: Map indicates the location of STPs in the Patuxent River Basin. Numbers in parentheses are the average daily flow in millions lion of gallons per day (MGD) and date the plant will comply with the Nutrient Control Strategy. Those STPs circled were under compliance prior to 1986. -15- TOTAL PHOSPHORUS STP NAME 1981 DISCHARGE AVERAGESl1984-85 DISCHARGE AVERAGES CHA14GE MGD lbs./day MGD lbs./day 1981-1985 Little Patuxent 7.9 370 9.1 30 Change MGD Horsepen 0.3 10 0.36 14 +0-72 Fort Change lbs./day Meade 2.4 80 1.86 6 -.41 o TOTAL NITROGEN STP NAME 981 DISCHARGE AVERAGES 1984-85 DISCHARGE AVERAGES CHANGE MGD lbs./day MGD lbs./day 1981-1985 Little Patuxent 7.9 1470 9.1 1590 Change MGD Horsepen 0.3 50 0.36 50 +0-72 Fort Change lbs./da@ Meade 2.4 490 1.86 190 -18o SOURCE - Patuxent River Basin Update, Maryland Off ice of Environmental Programs January, 1986. Table 4. : Average daily discharge changes between 1981 and 1985 for those plants meeting the effluent limits set forth by the Nutrient Control Strategy. -16- Decreases in algal biomass, as a result of reduced nutrient levels, would reduce the amount of detrital material being received by the lower estuary. This detrital material, derived from the decomposition of algae, is transported by currents to the sediments of the lower river where it may act as a nutrient "sink." Nutrients from this "sink" would be released during periods of low dissolved oxygen and moderate stratification. This pool of nutrients could promote blooms in the lower estuary reducing water quality. Reduced nutrients entering the upper portions of the river can be linked to change in water quality throughout the river. Non-Point Source Pollution Reductions Specific reductions in non-point source nutrients are difficult to set and quantify due to the diffuse nature of the inputs. In addition, the extent of non-point source pollution is dependent on the amount of rainfall in a given year. Dry years will reduce nutrient loading while wet years will increase loadings. This dependency on rainfall produces pulses of nutrients entering the system following each storm event. These pulses can result in dramatic localized water quality changes. Even in an average rainfall year non-point sources are significant contributors of nutrients bay wide. Figure 6 is a comparison of point and non-point sources for both nitrogen and phosphorus throughout the bay system. Phosphorus loading is dominated by point sources while non-point sources contribute more nitrogen to the Bay system. This underscores the need to control both of these sources of pollution entering the Patuxent River. The State of Maryland has recognized the need for the control of non-point source pollution and has incorporated such a program into the Chesapeake Bay Initiatives. Many State agencies are actively involved in controlling non- point source inputs into the Bay as a whole and specifically the Patuxent River. Programs include installation of best management practices, retrofitting existing development, structural and non-structural shoreline erosion control, and stormwater management. Agricultural Best Management Practices The cost share program implemented by the Maryland Department of Agriculture is aimed at assisting farmers in the installation of best management practices. This is one of the most important components in the State's overall non-point source control program. Cropland generates the largest share of the non-point source nutrient loadings to the Bay (US EPA 1983). The program has been in effect since 1983 and to date 129 practices have been installed which serves 1,132 acres in the Patuxent River Basin. The number of projects and acreage served is listed by county on Table 5. In addition this table includes the cost share earned by each county along with the total cost of the practices installed. The level of participation by each county is presented graphically in Figures 7 and 8. (Note: the amount of acreage which lies in the watershed varies greatly among the seven counties.) Retrofitting Existing_Development Several projects are planned for the Patuxent River watershed: A. Lewis Creek, St. Mary's County B. Fox Hill Park, Prince George's County C. Towsers Branch, Anne Arundel County While these projects will have a definite impact on water quality, they have not been completed. This would preclude them from having any impact on water quality in the Patuxent River to date. -18- Figure 6. Or POINT AND NFIN-POINT HIII-OGEN AND PHOSPHORUSS P L-i U IF - TV;l !.BET :-E 4 s- n En v Y, o n i e na roe Un; lej@ S*@-@@4-es Ac-fenc, Table 5. PATUXENT RIVER WATERSHED COMPLETED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES THROUGH MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL COST-SHARE PROGRAM June 30, 1986 NO. TOTAL COST SHARE COST COUNTY OF BMPIS ACREAGE SERVED EARNED OF PRACTICES Anne Arundel 18 231 $ 25,192 $ 44,567 Calvert 57 367 87,074 205,601 Charles 6 37 12,726 18,068 Howard 22 189 33,699 69,282 Montgomery 2 0 3,685 4,094 Prince George 18 233 44,573 107,801 .St. Mary's 6 75 23,399 43,626 TOTALS 129 1,132 $230,548 $493,339 -20- Figure 7. M A m- G E N T PR 6 C T C- E'S. A T -'P- E lm@4 EM ..L tl TE E LZ Z;@ AO REM MOM L-Z j2-Z J- A. DEE-AF-TWENT CLONSERVATFIGN rr-'MMTTTEE @ . -@-% ==.- I I Figure 8. P. Bx E ST sh"A r- E-K E t- hi p;j -I-- lb.V L 1@ jl- la 6 V;mfi L Lgt@@ Wgi@@ f4 SS A TSCSIL Shoreline Erosion Control 1. Non-Structural - These shoreline stabilization projects involve grading and/or planting of vegetation along the bank to reduce erosion and resultant sedimentation of the river. These projects will have an impact on water quality in the future by reducing turbidity. This is a new program and few of the projects have progressed beyond the planning stage. A few projects are nearing the construction phase. They are: A. Mechanicsville, St. Mary's County - Trent Hall Farm Installation of 500 feet of intertidal marsh grass. B. St. Leonard, Calvert County - Jefferson Patterson Park - Installation of offshore stone breakwater with 700 feet of intertidal marsh grass C. Pieds Property, Prince George's County - (1500 feet) bank grading and stabilization with installation of intertidal grass and a 100 foot wide forested buffer 2. Structural '- These erosion projects involve the use of rip-rap, bulkheading or other permanent structures to reduce shoreline erosion. A summary of the projects which have been conducted in the Patuxent Basin is shown in Table 6. Information provided includes location, shore length, structure length, type construction and date completed. Stormwater Management Many projects are currently being installed throughout the State to reduce the impa ct of stormwater upon receiving water bodies. As indicated by Table 7 the number of approved projects in each of the seven Patuxent River Basin counties has risen steadily. However these figures are for the entire county as the Water Resources Division does not currently maintain their computer files by watershed. -23- Table 6.- Structural Shore Erosion Control Projects Completed in the Patuxent River Watershed Fiscal Year 1984 County General Project Length Construction Completion Length Location of Type Date of Shore Structure Calvert Back Creek 234 Timber Bulk- 6-25-84 228' Timber L.F. head & Rip Rap 401 Stone Fiscal Year 1985 St. Mary's Esperanza 464 Stone 9-18-84 464' Farms L.F. Revetment Calvert Prison 430 Stone Point L.F. Revetment 12-11-84 4301 St. Mary's Greenwell 1134 Stone State Park L.F. Revetment 4-17-85 1134, St. Mary's Greenwell 150 Stone State Park L.F. Revetment 5-27-85 162' Fiscal Year 1986 Calvert Drum Point 930.5 Timber Bulk- L.F. head w/ Drain 11-2.5-85 1032-51 Calvert Ships Point 735 Timber L.F. Bulkhead 12-2o-85 782' Table 7. - Stormwater Management Plans Approved in the Seven Patuxent River Basin Counties During the Period From 1980 - 1985. (Note: figures are for entire county) County 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Cum. Ann Arundel 11 17 12 16 16 42 114 Calvert 2 3 3 3 3 7 21 Charles 1 2 9 7 2 7 28 Howard 8 6 10 6 8 13 51 Montgomery 7 5 8 11 7 19 57 Prince Georges 12 16 3 7 12 39 95 St. Mary's 3 2 8 9 11 9 42 TOTAL 44 51 59 59 59 136 4o8 Source Maryland Department of Natural Resources Water Resources Division -25- Water Quality The information used to assess water quality parameters was taken from the Office of Environmental Programs Patuxent River Water Quality Monitoring Program over the period of January 1983 to December 1985. The location distance from mouth and identification number is provided for each sampling station in Figure 9. The interpretation of changes in water quality over this period is a qualitative assessment of the data and is not intended topoKLra_X a quantitative difference in the parameter over the period. When using such a brief time span to identify trends, variances in environmental conditions will exist over the period. Two significant environmental factors which may produce changes would be fluctuations in temperature and water flow. The temperature pattern has remained stable as shown in Figure 10 . The mean daily flow has changed over the period of January 1983 to December 1985. The flow has declined each year with very low flows recorded during 1985. The overall pattern of changes in flow is presented in Figure to . Reduced flow in the river could lower dissolved oxygen levels as well as reduce turbidity in the river. The change which has occurred in the parameters is presented for each ecological zone of the river. Values are shown to have increased, decreased or remained constant over the three year period. The water quality parameters selected, dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll "as" and turbidity were those identified by the Charrette as indicators to monitor improvement in water quality. Dissolved oxygen can vary greatly depending on the specific environment conditions at the time of sampling. Both water temperature and flow would have,an effect on the amount of oxygen able to be held by the water. Because 1985 was a particularly low flow year, it would be anticipated that dissolved oxygen measurements made during this time frame would be lower than during a normal flow condition. Two data points were selected to be used in this assessment, the change observed in the maximum and minimum dissolved oxygen values for each year based on median plots prepared by CEP. The yearly maximum occurs during the winter, as low temperatures increase the oxygen holding capacity of the water. Biota in the river can become stressed when dissolved oxygen levels fall below 4 mg/l. During the summer months the lower portion of the river becomes stratified and increased water temperatures cause dissolved oxygen levels to decline. These levels can fall below the critical value of 4.0 mg/l from 0 to 30 km above the river's mouth. Chlorophyll "a" is used to determine the amount of algae present in a water sample. Chlorophyll "a" is a component of algae cells and its concentration is directly related to the amount of algae present in the river, High chlorophyll "a" readings would indicate nutrient enrichment of the water body which has promoted increased algal growth. Chlorophyll "a" can be used to determine if excessive amounts of nutrients are entering the river from sources in the watershed. Turbidity is used to determine the photic zone of a river. This is the depth to which enough light is able to penetrate to support plant growth, either for free floating algae or submerged aquatic vegetation along the shoreline. Turbidity is an indicator of the extent of sedimentation occurring within a -26- Figure 9. MD Rt.50 100 Patuxent River Estuary PXT 0603 Water Quality Monitoring Stations 90 so PXT 0494 PXT 0456 Jug Bay 70 PXT 0402 60 Lower Marlboro XED 9490 so X.ED 4892 40 B e n a d I c t XDE 401 30 XDE 5339 0 20 KEY XDE 792 10 XCF 9575 River Kilometer XDF 0407 0 Station location on CG 86137) 0 SCALE XCF 8747 0 1'o Km. -27- W40 - A Source OEP, 1986 T E + R30 + ++ 44 -@ + t T + ;E + 4+ M + 4 ++ -P + -4 4+ 20 + N t 10 + E + ++ 4 G + t C OIJAN83 OIJUL83 01JANG4 01JUL84 01JANGS OIJUL8S OIJANGG (a) M5000 E A 4000 D L3000 y L 02000 W N1000 C f s OIJAN83 01JAN84 01JAN8S 01JANOG (b) Figure IQ Median and range oF water temperature (a) and river Flow (b) -2@- river. Turbidity can also indicate the productive health of a river as turbid waters tend to be unproductive due to a lack of available light. Assessment of water quality in each of the zones of the river over the period from January 1983 - December 1985 Zone 1 - Tidal Fresh Dissolved oxygen levels have remained constant over the period with a slight increase in the minimum dissolved oxygen level during the summer. Peak and median chlorophyll "a" readings have remained stable over the period. Peaks have not exceeded 60 mg/I in this portion of the river. Turbidity has also remained constant. The overall stability of this portion of the river during this three year period may be due to the segment's swift flow and the reduced phosphorus inputs from sewage treatment plants. Zone II - Transition Zone Dissolved oxygen levels have remained constant in this portion of the river, though they tend to be low. The extent of elevated chlorophyll "a" readings increased as well as peak chlorophyll A" readings. The number of readings in excess of 60 mg/l increased over the period. The mixing which occurs in this portion of the river along with reduced flow during 1985 may explain the slight rise in chlorophyll "a" measurements in the transition zone. Turbidity remained constant over the period although it is very high due to the mixing of salt and fresh water which occurs in the transition zone. Zone III - Estuary The summer months tend to have low dissolved oxygen recordings in the estuary portion of the river. This trend is continuing although there has been a slight improvement in the summer minimum over the period. The chlorophyll "a" median concentrates remained stable although peaks increased which may be a result of low flows causing periodic increased residence times for nutrients which stimulated algae growth. Turbidity increased in this segment of the river over the three-year period. -29- CHANGES IN SELECTED WATER QUALITY PARAMETER 'S FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 1983 TO DECEMBER 1985. Key p @itj- CInu,,q.I,i 11 Vo.lue O_r I o riod N-g.ti- ch-njo tj@c Period V.I.. V@j- 11.1.ti-ly C-t-t O-r tj,. Period wate-1-1 D-ndary MONTGOMER T, Tidal FreGI, Zone ,,I .. Ivd oxygen C- Winter Maximum Claorophyll -a- Peak di.n T-'biaity s@ IS.-Ini Depth) Ln Winter ...-un. Chl-phyll edian Peak M T S.-M uepth) -111diLy p, R L E S E.L-y Zone mi i.u.x Wj.n r ,ain.,,. cj.,!nophyll "a. M-1 I an To @bidity (Go-hi D141th) Bay Z- Di,s,l,ed Oxygen summer Minimum Winter maximum peak H.di- Turbidity Secclit Depth) + Source: Office of [email protected] Prog-111n Patuxent Water Oniality ljonitoring program Data sunullary )jeports 1984, 1965, 19 86. CONCLUSION Progress has been made in the effort to restore the Patuxent River to prior levels of water quality. This progress has been slow and results are only now beginning to be manifest., The reduction in po t@rce nutrient inputs has not occurred in the int magnitude initiall outlVaed in 1981. The reduction which has occurred has y focused in the element Ph@sphorus with little or no reduction to date in Nitrogen loading from the'fSTPs in the basin. The control of non-point source inputs has also been dela.yed and few projects have reached the implementation phase. The point and non-point source control improvements reflect the inability of current State programs to be effective over a short time span such as five years. The current control program is making progress and conditions are slowly improving in the river. The program for restoring the Patuxent River needs to maintain momentum. Point source controls for both Nitrogen and Phosphorus need to be implemented in a more timely fashion at all STPs in the basin. Those STPs in the basin unable to meet acceptable discharge standards should have stronger actions taken against them to correct the failure of current program in doing this. The control of non-point source nutrients loading must be made as high a priority as point source control. Future progress reports should not refer to 11planned" improvements but to simply state what is in place at that point in time. In conclusion progress has been made although it has been at a significantly slower pace than anticipated and the time frame for the completion of the restoration effort has expanded. APPENDIX A PATUXE,NT RIVEIR ("11A)WHITTEA The 1,11(lixellt River (I'llarrette was held oil December 2-4, 1981 to reneh a consensus flifloll1r, State and local lenders oil a mitrient control strategy for the watershed. The following statement of goals for the watershed, as taken from the Patuxent 208 Planj was agreed upoll. Water (111fility Goflls fillst"@Meflstlrcs GoIll: To restore watel-quality to the 1950's levels its defined by dissolved oxygen J @ (DO) and turbidi@q. liedlive polliltallt loadings EAmire levels to siistain biological life Maintain sources! of potable water in upper river mensilres: DO Millillif.1111 5 ing/l above Sheridan Pt. (river mile 20) 2 ing/l fit Sheridan Pt. in deep water Turbidity: 1.5 to 2 ineters seechi dise visibility at Sheridan Pt. Itecrontiomil and Esthetic Goals and Measures Restore fill(] improve the potential for recreational uses of the PatUXClit River, including boating, sports fishing, swimming, mid esthetic pleasure. 1. E'iihance the scenic (Itiality of the river Measures: refuse clenimp rehabilitation und reclamation of still(] and (travel sites* turbidity reduction maintenance of traditional water uses fill(] way of life ngricultural. ]fill(] preservation park (level opm ent * 2. Preserve and enhance wildlife habitats mellstires: zolling Control of water frontage return of indigenous Species *Added from Charrette Action Plan -32- Productivity Goids Restore the entch of I'desired" species (finfish, shellfisl i, etc.) in the entire river by ninximizing the number or sticcessful yeni, classes. milintaill research capability to identify key environmental life cycle needs. Itiver Sy.-;tvill (Ioals find meastire's F 1. View of the rivqr as a unit including the impacts of the Chesnpelike Ibly oil tile estt;",r PA Y - 2. Prohibit or contr6l (regulate) uses that degrade the river. 3. Niminge water quantity to preserve water quality. Measures: infiltration and inflow reduction 1 4. Protect the economic and social needs of both tile tipper and estuarine jtirisdictions. Aleitsures: preservation of diversity and quality of life 5. lit accommodating growth, develop land-use patterns that protect the water citiality goals. Measures: quantity mid quality of runoff same or better after development as before 6. Set targets for research, prograin for open space, construetion grnilt money, fuld clif orcell) CIA. 7. People who wotild generate a potential cost (environmental or economic) oil the river SIIOLlld pay for the initigation or prevention measures (including governinent regulation). The recommedations that were agreed upon at the Chm-rette were incorpornted into the Office of F"Invironmental Programs' January 14, t982 Nutrient Control Strategy for the Patuxent River Basim. That strategy, in turn, forms the policy of the Patuxent 208 I'lan which is summarized in Appendix 11. -33- -snioildsoild Pill? tIOl'lO.11!tl JO SIDA01 01 dllISlIOIjVID.I ilatil Ptill buillso Dill III salui illmo.09 pim ssuttioul uol >Iuv idol Aild ammialal; I)tjti* 'Itiatlil, pas 111101 pull S11131.111111 tiiuljaz) jo tiolstiodslisai Plill tiollultioullpas jo SZ)IUJ aluttillsa 14.10111sa .10M.01 Dill 1)[111 AUq all] twamlaq sJuDlillill jo Oliviloxa jo salui Dill aluttillso p1nom 113111M spafoid Is.101110 2tioulu lapliplil DSDtl,l, 'POIJ!IlIDI)l Dill I)DI)a3lI St 1.1D.IVUS3.1 JDIII.lllj 3.13tIM S110.111 JUJ,3A,3S pull 'Paptia III tlio;);).l SI llivi&d Dliliolploul sI!IvIlb JDJUM @111111111(loa V -saaillos Illiod -11011 PIIU ItIlOd 111O.Ij JDAIJ all) 01 @puoj pJapinif hii-wipai Aq*'juaIxa atilos ol pa] 13.11111111 aq tIUD jIIaxIlIU(I all) III I)aAJOS(IO suialqo.id Sl!p'llb JOI'Um 111111 s3l)"13110;) "Vill DILL ,siolupaid pup lasuosip lainjujadmal ISIpips su ilons 1suoij!ptIoD IU)IIDUItIOJIAIID JWIJO SU 113M SU 41!111111) Jalum Ul sauvtla aptiptil ac;atl,l, -SJOIZ)Uj JO AJOIJIJA' U A(I I)DS111130 aq Autu las juds tq stioilmilanIj Dallis lsatlfl@ap lions jo sasnua all] 2111P,IU23J SIIOISIIIDIIOD DIJ!D3dS MUJP 01 'JOADMOtl '111)Z)Ijj!p SI 11 'SOI)IIZIDI) 111030.1 JDAO S13S juds III sampap 111.1311,30 OJUDIP1.11 PIIU '@PIMAU(l @IqUII.I@DSIP DSOIII 01 JUI!tIIIS oslu Diu sptlaij @)Satjj lutil sIsDAA's Illaxillud Dill I" AJDtIsIJ JOIsAO Dill I -ItI@xI'IVd W[I tit Aj!SJ@A1P samads Ill ampap -a tmaq still waill, tl@notljlv 'Au[j witiodusail,,) Dill III spiail lallend Ajasop Itiaxtilu,j Dill III SI)IID.Il IS,)A,IUII )till) IlSIjtIIj JO SIDIJUA V JO SOSAII31,111 P1113.1,1, 'fi.lulllsa JaMOI Dill if[ StIolliptioa 1619.11101111 @DIAIII tIDA3 I)i)A.IZ)Sqo osp OJU SUOIJUJI(IDDLIOD 'O'Cl MOI tlj'lilOtlllU 'A.111111sa all] jo SJOJUM UIOIIO(l Dill (11 SIDADI ('0'(1) 1132AXO POAJOSSIP III DSU3JDDj) U PIIU Oil) aDIIIS Aj!pjqjnj,ptm u 114(ldojolip jo sIaAOI Dill tit SOSDO30til DIN11DIll OSDIIJ, -.0tildOlOADI) aq Sum Aillunt) Jolum III SpIlail tilul.103 pill Sal@DIIAIJ JOA; .11 Illaxi'llUd DIII Joj U1111) 3I(lI;I!UAV 111,3tilSSDSSV S-1!1111q) '10piki mo[d Dill jo sluatliala Joruttl @III ayliumitins stimpas i9mmolloj w1j, *S31 ;)Sl aill of lipil I .j!AIjDU ItI3111,3111111tIl SII?I1P!SDJ PtI-G 30JUMP111-10.111 JO StIOISS11. P 1) 1 OS V -XIllunh jalum tio uoilnilod jo saziinos juiod-tiou puu juiod jo spudmi Dill jo stioildinsap p1lu 1111.3tilssassil Sj!IlJIlb JaJUM V 'S@AII33f(l0 [)IIU SIUO.',J JO Itl3tilaJUIS It 01)[110111 II.)ItIM Isialclutp III st t1uld DILL -SU.I@Iqodd asoill @JHIIVIA311U JOJ StI01IUl)IIDtlIIlIOODJ OPjAOJd I)IJU Isttj;)Iqo.id Sj!Iunb ialUM 111111SIX0 JO ODJ.@Df) [NIU 3.11111111 0111 Sj!ltl-3p! Itlisua Illaxillu'l wil III stjoij!ptjo.) Al!1unb jDl@m ssassu ol aju tiuld Dill jo sasodind 0(1,1, -stiold ItiatuaDfutium Itiattiluail alsum ap1mvaiv jo tioijultiamaldtIll INIV ItlDIlldOI3ADI) Dill saipiba.j tl;)itlm 3111 jo 8()Z [101pas jo s1poillnu Dill japtill '(LIZ-96 "I-d) IDV -10111M tlualO PZ)JV(I@J(l SUM IJISUJJ JDAIJJ I(IDXlilutl all] ioj LIUI,j Jll3tllDDUIIUW AI!IUQ) .10111AI 8()Z allj, hUtIIIIIIIS DAiInaax-,j NV'1d I,N'-l11J,If')VNVW A,1,1'1Vnb 11,11VAI BOZ d.N',Ix wx ci U XIUNHddV Point soill-ces In tile Patuxent River Basin, 96 percent of the effluent from sewage trentment plants comes from ptiblicly owned treatment works with discharges of over 50n,000 gallons per ony. Smaller sewage treatineiiI. plaiits and indtistrial discharges linve relatively in.illor effects oil basillwide water (piality. This chapter outlines the State's strategry for controllinjr, point som-ce oischm-gres to tile Ntnent River. The recom ill enon t i oils were largely oprived froi I theyesults of a conflict resolution process (called a charrette) which took I)Ill(!e ill 1!)ecegiber 1981, and incItided representatives from various coliflictilitr gl,ollps. The major points of the StatQ's point source control strategy are as follows: 1. All facilities which have diseharges that exceed 500,000 gallons per day intist meet phosphorus effIticiii. limits of 1.0 rng/1 all(] plan for possible phosphorus limits of 0.3 mg/l. 2. Ali established goal of tile charrette was to redtice nitrogen loadings to tile river by Point sokirces by 2,000 poillids from 1.981 levels. To nceomplish this, certain facilities will meet nitrogen linlits of 3-0 -g/1 cither through conventional nitrogen removal or Imid treatment. All hivilitics will plan for possible 3.0 mg/1 nitrogen limits all(] their 201 facilities plans will analyze the various alternatives for achieving this nitrogren limitation. 3. 'I'll(! '201 facilities plans will be tile process through which Specific oceisions for ench treatment plant affected by this strategy will be made. 4. Lmid treatment is the preferred alternative (where it is shown to be cos t-e f f cc t i ve). Non-poifit Sources In addition to point sotirces of pollution, water qtiality call also be affected to a significant degree by 11011-poilit som-ces of pollutimi. These origrinate oil iii-Imn, suburban, alld flgricult(Irtil Inilds throughout the Patuxent Dasin. The State's strategy for controllb.ii; non-point sources of pollution consists of tile following elements: 1. A Non-point Source Technical Committee will be established to octail mid coordinitte the implementation or this strategy. The comillittee will consist of representatives of key State agencies, tile seven collilties withill the Pattixent 1.311sill, the Soil Conservation Districts (SCDS), the scientific comintmity, mid EPA. 2. Of-T will commit funds to the development and maintemince of n computerized modet for the basin, which will serve to test nitenintive policies till(] developmeM scenarios for their water (Itiality impacts. -35- 3. A lIntuxent Agrictilbiral Tnsk Force will be established, comprised of representatives of the Soil Conservation Service oil(] the S(.'Ds within the basin, and members of key State ngencies. The Task Force will detail fill(] coordinate the implementatim of the ngricultural aspects of the State's strategy. 4. Locid SCI)s Should be strengthened where necessary ill order for them to provide ndc late technical assistance to farmers for plimithig and implementing p4jlutioll controls. 5. OEP wol-ked wit) other agencies to develop a State cost-slinring progrnin which was Appr-o; 'ved by the Maryland Legislature ill 1982. Fluids will be tised to help, fariners install best manngement practices ill "critical areas" defined under the State's 208 prograin for agriculture. 6. OF11 will work with local governments to strengthen their storinwilter mmingement prdgrams and is calling oil these jurisdictions to adequately stnff and implement programs for effective stormwater management. The reillilinder of the chapter incitides brief Sections Oil floil-pollit SoilrCc pollution from construction sites, surface inines, septic systems, and boating ill the Patuxent Basill. Groundmiter Although Maryland's groundwaters have not su f f ered widespread or serious contamination, the potential for contninhiation is present. Mary1mid is an industrial state all(] prodtices significant qtiantities of toxic or ham-dous materials. If these are improperly managed, they may pose a serious threat to the qtiality of groundwater supplies. l-Werull all(] State programs have been implemented to protect groundwater resources throughout the State, and water appropriations control and water supply planning lielp ensure the conservation of this limited resource. The plall colichides that 110 flew management programs are necessary to ensure the protection of ground water quality and quantity ill the Patuxent Basin, n1thotigh carefut mmingement is re(lidred ill a few localized areas to ensure ade(pinte supply. There is also a need to further educate the general public regarding certain netions they may take which might affect groundwater quality, such as improper disposal of toxic household slibstallces. The plan n1so concluded that land treatment call be an effective menns of treating wastewater, btit proper site selection and design must be carefully considered to avoid any adverse impact oil groundwater resouvces. Itesidifills The generation of residt-1111S has increased dramatically ill the past few decades as a result of increased popultition, more stringent requirements for wastewater trentinciitj and increases ill commercial and industrial activities. Landfill Space is limited, and improper 111111111gelliellt of- disposal of these wastes may restilt !if stirface or groundwater containimition. Federal prograins, especially the Resource Conservation lind Recovery -36- Act provide for the development of prograins to regulate hind disposid of waste materials, fuld for Ihe development of resource recovery programs. Mary1mid lilts developed regil In I i oils for the proper mmingement, utilization, mid disposal of residmils, including solid wilste, sewage shidge, hazardous waste, all(] resource recovery. The 1)1:111 conchided Vint no new laws or regulations are needed in Maryland to malinge residli'lls wilste disposill. Therc is- it colltillilillir need, however, to closely illollitor solid waste 1111111, Ige III ent flicilities fill.16 ensure the proper handling of toxic (ind linzardous Wastes. Stich monitoring prograiip5 shotild be coupled with strong enforcement programs. Additiomil cluipters of the plall" hiclude Institutional Arrangements, which describe existillir Io(!jII pI-ojrl-j)jIjs rellited',to various aspects of water (Imility inmingement all(] provide the render with contact persons and their phone numbers for various State all(I JOCIII proIrl-11111q. A cimpter oil ptiblic pirticipation is included, which describes the make-tip all(] functions of Variolls grollps Which have provided input to 011`1) during the development of this plan. The eimpter also describes the process by which the plan will be reviewed by the ptiblic, revised, mid stibmitted to the Governor all(.] E-PA for approval. Several tippendices appear at the end of the p1mi, and serve to provide more detailed inforintition oil vitrious stibJects dealt with in the body of the plan. These appendices Include it disetission of estimated sediment yields in the Patuxent, the State's water (11111lity Stillififirds, it glossilry, a tilble stillullarizing pop illation fill(] land Ilse, a discussion of silviculbire, mid descriptions of Hest Management Practices. -37- APPENDIX C PATUXENT RIVER POLICY PLAN The following recommendations are the strategies of the Patuxent River Policy Plan. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. ESTABLISHING A PRIMARY MANAGEMENT AREA (PMA) A PRIMARY MANAGEMENT AREA, DELINEATING THE AREA ALONG THE RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES, WILL BE ESTABLISHED TO IDENTIFY AND MANAGE LAND FROM WHICH POLLUTION IS MOST LIKELY TO BE TRANSPORTED INTO THE RIVER. The PMA shall be considered to be an area critical to the Chesapeake Bay and its tributories; Local governments will include the PMA in their plans and zoning ordinances; Preferred land uses in the PMA will be agriculture, forest, and recreation; Local governments will prepare plans for the PMA to minimize dense and intensive development and large impervious areas in the PMA; State agencies, in regulatory activities, technical assistance, and grant programs, will target the PMA as a priority area; and -38- State and local governments will ensure that land use practices within the PMA shall be of such a nature so as to have no (or at least minimal) adverse impact on water quality of the Patuxent River. 2. PROVIDING BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP's) AND VEGETATIVE BUFFERS PROGRAMS FOR PROVIDING BMP's AND VEGETATIVE BUFFERS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES WILL BE DEVELOPED. State and local governments will provide BMP's on their publicly owned lands, including buffers where appropriate; The State will require BMP's on State assisted projects, including buffers where appropriate; Local governments will adopt subdivision and zoning provisions that require BMP's, including buffers where appropriate, in all new development; BMP's, including filter strips and filed borders, will be encouraged on agricultural land through education, voluntary action, incentive, compensation, and through implementation of the Maryland Agricultural Water Quality Management Plan; Implementation of soil conservation plans, including filter strips and field borders where appropriate, will be required on lands acquired in easements; The federal government will be requested to provide BMP's including buffers where appropriate, on its lands; and The State Department of Transportation will protect roadside buffers by eliminating its practice of broadcast spraying of herbicides along roadsides. 3. IDENTIFYING MAJOR NON-POINT POLLUTION SITES THE STATE, IN CONJUNCTION WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, WILL SURVEY THE WATERSHED AND IDENTIFY MAJOR NON-POINT POLLUTION SITES. Existing State regulatory and corrective programs will consider these sites as priority areas. -39- 4. RETROFITTING EXISTING DEVELOPMENT THE STATE WILL DEVELOP A COST-SHARING PROGRAM TO AID LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN CORRECTING AND MANAGING STORM WATER POLLUTION FROM EXISTING DEVELOPED AREAS. Local governments will pursue a program of abating pollution in existing developed areas; State and local governments wil curtail non-point pollution coming from their facilities; and The State will establish priorites among developed areas causing non- point pollution and address problems in order of priority. 5. ACCOMMODATING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL BE ACCOMMODATED IN WAYS TO MINIMIZE IMPACT ON WATER QUALITY AND MAXIMIZE EXISTING OPPORTUNITIES. Development will be concentrated where possible, outside the PMA; Development will optimize the use of existing facilities and utilities; Development will be sited to maximize use of soil infiltration capacity; Development will be sited away from sensitive areas, such as reservoirs, wetlands, steep slopes, and aquifer recharge areas; Sites within the watershed that offer unique opportunities for development and redevelopment will be identified and planned; and New public facilities (schools, parks, highways) will incorporate best management practices. 6. INCREASING RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ADDITIONAL RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE LANDS WILL BE ACQUIRED IN THE PATUXENT WATERSHED BY THE STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS. State and local governments will review their recreation and open space plans for the Patuxent Watershed; Acquisition will be concentrated along the river and tributaries and in the lower portion of the watershed; Federal holdings in the watershed must be retained for open space and research; and An acquisition program for the lower portion of the watershed will be prepared. -40- 7. PROTECTING FOREST COVER EXISTING FOREST COVER WILL BE RETAINED AND IMPORTANT SENSITIVE AREAS WILL BE REFORESTED TO PROTECT WATER QUALITY. Existing State programs, like Program Open Space and Agricultural Preservation will be examined and amended for their application to forest protection; Buffering with forested strips will be encouraged; and The State will institute a reforestation program for developed areas. 8. PRESERVING AGRICULTURAL LAND PRIME AND PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURRAL LAND WILL BE PRESESRVED IN THE PATUXENT WATERSHED. Easement purchases will include requirements for implementing soil conservation plans including buffer strips where appropriate; and The Agricultural Cost-Sharing program will target the Patuxent watershed. 9. EXTRACTING SAND AND GRAVEL SAND AND GRAVEL ACTIVITIES WILL BE MANAGED TO ALLOW EXTRACTION OF THE RESOURCE WITHOUT DAMAGE TO THE RIVER. Abandoned sand and gravel sites will be reclaimed; Sensitive control of active and future sites, particularly those in the PMA, will be requuired; Penalties for allowing sediment to enter the Patuxent River resulting from washing operations are to be increased to a minimum of $1,000 per day for every day a violation is found to exist by the appropriate State agency; and The location of the resources will be identified, and county resource management strategies developed. 10. ADOPTING AN ANNUAL ACITON PROGRAM THE PATUXENT RIVER COMMISSION WILL ANNUALLY DEVELOP AND ADOPT AN ACTION PROGRAM TO IMPLEMENT THE STRATEGIES. The action program will contain a schedule and indicate responsibilities in carrying out specific actions to implement the plan; -41- A community education program will be an integral part of the action program; and The Commission will prepare an annual report on progress in implementing the plan. The recommendations and proposed actions in this plan are a starting point. The Policy Plan has been approved by county governments and the General Assembly. Approval of the plan indicates concurrence and committment to improving the Patuxent River. The combined work of local and State governments, citizens, land owners, and private industry is required to transorm the proposals into an improved river. While prepared for the Patuxent, the land management recommendations contained in this plan can serve as a model for managing any watershed and the Chesapeake Bay. -42- II - - --- - ---L @, 41023459