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

nutrientreduction.pca@state.mn.us

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:nutrientreduction.pca@state.mn.us

29

Thank you

Wayne Anderson MPCA

651-757-2195 wayne.p.anderson@state.mn.us

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