| |
| PRIOR PRINTER'S NO. 1542 | PRINTER'S NO. 1725 |
|
| |
| THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA |
| |
| SENATE RESOLUTION |
|
| |
| |
| INTRODUCED BY BRUBAKER, BOSCOLA, ARGALL, RAFFERTY, O'PAKE, WASHINGTON, MUSTO, COSTA, M. WHITE, TARTAGLIONE, YAW, LEACH, FERLO, ALLOWAY, D. WHITE, EARLL, WAUGH, VANCE AND PICCOLA, DECEMBER 14, 2009 |
| |
| |
| AS AMENDED, MARCH 8, 2010 |
| |
| |
| |
| A RESOLUTION |
| |
1 | Directing the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee to study |
2 | the costs to achieve the Chesapeake Bay Program nutrient load |
3 | reductions required from this Commonwealth's agricultural |
4 | sources and to evaluate programs and funding strategies that |
5 | enhance cost-effective nutrient reductions while protecting |
6 | the economic viability of this Commonwealth's agricultural |
7 | sector. |
8 | WHEREAS, The Chesapeake Bay is the nation's largest estuary, |
9 | with its watershed spanning 64,000 square miles, including parts |
10 | of six states and the District of Columbia; and |
11 | WHEREAS, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found, |
12 | through numerous studies of the Chesapeake Bay, that excess |
13 | nutrients from agricultural development, population growth and |
14 | discharges from wastewater treatment plants, along with |
15 | overharvesting, habitat loss and disease, have contributed to an |
16 | overall decline in the aquatic health and environmental quality |
17 | of the bay; and |
18 | WHEREAS, Portions of the Chesapeake Bay and its tidal rivers |
19 | are listed as impaired waters under the Federal Water Pollution |
|
1 | Control Act (62 Stat. 1155, 33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.), and the |
2 | EPA is developing a basin-wide total maximum daily load which |
3 | will take effect December 2010 and which will mandate that the |
4 | Commonwealth develop a State Implementation Plan to achieve its |
5 | allocation; and |
6 | WHEREAS, The Commonwealth's Chesapeake Bay Tributary Strategy |
7 | developed by the Department of Environmental Protection |
8 | describes current nutrient reduction goals, including 25,000,000 |
9 | pounds per year of nutrient reductions from agricultural lands, |
10 | nearly five times the reductions required of sewage treatment |
11 | plants; and |
12 | WHEREAS, Last year, Senate Resolution No. 224, Printer's No. |
13 | 1703 (2008), directed the Legislative Budget and Finance |
14 | Committee to conduct a Phase One study to estimate the cost of |
15 | compliance for wastewater treatment plants and assess the |
16 | methods by which wastewater treatment plants may achieve |
17 | compliance, including nutrient trading; and |
18 | WHEREAS, The study revealed that the capital cost of |
19 | compliance for wastewater treatment plants was $1,400,000,000, |
20 | well in excess of available funding; and |
21 | WHEREAS, The study revealed that the nutrient trading program |
22 | as currently constituted has had, and is likely to have, little |
23 | impact for a number of regulatory, structural and market |
24 | reasons; and |
25 | WHEREAS, The study found that the cost to the agricultural |
26 | community for meeting "baseline requirements," as variously |
27 | defined by erosion and sedimentation regulations, nutrient |
28 | management regulations and concentrated animal feeding operation |
29 | regulations, is largely unknown; and |
30 | WHEREAS, The relative cost effectiveness of nutrient |
|
1 | reductions from agricultural lands and other nonpoint sources is |
2 | not well quantified, and the Commonwealth would benefit from a |
3 | determination of these relative costs to guide the wise |
4 | allocation of limited funding; and |
5 | WHEREAS, The Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority |
6 | is currently studying the merits and forms that a Nutrient |
7 | Credit Exchange may take to encourage participation in nutrient |
8 | trading by wastewater treatment plants; therefore be it |
9 | RESOLVED, That the Senate direct the Legislative Budget and |
10 | Finance Committee to conduct a Phase Two continuation of its |
11 | study under Senate Resolution No. 224, Printer's No. 1703 |
12 | (2008), to estimate the cost to meet the agricultural source |
13 | nutrient reduction goals of the Chesapeake Bay Tributary |
14 | Strategy and agricultural allocations to be defined in the State |
15 | Implementation Plan; and be it further |
16 | RESOLVED, That the committee identify methods employed in |
17 | other states to reduce loads from agricultural sources and make |
18 | findings as to their applicability and impact to the |
19 | agricultural community of this Commonwealth; and be it further |
20 | RESOLVED, That the committee evaluate the potential of new |
21 | technology and innovative best management practices generally to | <-- |
22 | address nutrient loads from agricultural sources at a reduced |
23 | cost; and be it further |
24 | RESOLVED, That the committee make recommendations for |
25 | preferred programs for the agricultural community that overcome |
26 | structural obstacles, encourage participation, accelerate |
27 | bringing agricultural lands to baseline, facilitate the |
28 | application of cost-effective technology and innovative best | <-- |
29 | management practices and stimulate the generation of nutrient |
30 | credits that are valued by point sources; and be it further |
|
1 | RESOLVED, That the committee recommend a schedule for |
2 | implementation of the preferred programs to be included in a |
3 | series of two-year milestones for action under the State |
4 | Implementation Plan as agreed to by the Chesapeake Executive |
5 | Council and required under EPA administration of the basin-wide |
6 | total maximum daily load; and be it further |
7 | RESOLVED, That the committee-preferred programs be shaped to |
8 | the extent practicable to integrate with a Nutrient Credit |
9 | Exchange or other selected water quality trading program |
10 | structure, create income incentives for the agricultural |
11 | community to generate credits, utilize those credits to reduce |
12 | the high capital cost of compliance for wastewater treatment |
13 | plants and make more effective use of public funds; and be it |
14 | further |
15 | RESOLVED, That the committee survey the findings and programs |
16 | of academic institutions and other states with respect to the |
17 | cost of nutrient reductions from nonagricultural, urban, | <-- |
18 | suburban and other runoff, legacy sediments and air deposition; |
19 | and be it further |
20 | RESOLVED, That the committee compare these programs and costs |
21 | to point source and agricultural source reduction cost estimates |
22 | developed in Phases One and Two and to the State Implementation | <-- |
23 | Plan; and be it further |
24 | RESOLVED, That the committee determine whether additional |
25 | evaluation is appropriate to enhance the Commonwealth's programs |
26 | in these areas in order to promote overall nutrient-reduction |
27 | effectiveness and more efficient allocation of public funds; and |
28 | be it further |
29 | RESOLVED, That the committee report its findings, conclusions |
30 | and recommendations to the Senate by November June 30, 2010. | <-- |
|