Integrated Approach for Assessing and Communicating Progress toward the Chesapeake Bay Water-Quality Standards Scott Phillips USGS, STAR May 14, 2012 PSC.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Planning for Our Future:
Advertisements

Delaware River Basin SPARROW Model Mary Chepiga Susan Colarullo Jeff Fischer
The Effect of the Changing Dynamics of the Conowingo Dam on the Chesapeake Bay Mukhtar Ibrahim and Karl Berger, COG staff Water Resources Technical Committee.
Scott Phillips, USGS for Severn River Association September 16, 2014.
Incorporating Lag-Times Into the Chesapeake Bay Program Report for STAC Workshop October 16-17, 2012 Annapolis, MD.
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Nutrient Loads to the Gulf of Mexico Mike Woodside U.S. Geological Survey TN.
Overview of TMDL Plans TMDL Plan Workshop April 24, 2015 Karl Berger, COG staff Outline: Details Schedule Plan Elements Issues 1.
Carin Bisland, EPA Management Board Presentation 5/9/12.
Current Planning for 2017 Mid-Point Assessment Gary Shenk COG 10/4/2012 presentation credit to Katherine Antos and the WQGIT ad hoc planning team.
Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Chesapeake Bay Program Monitoring Activities and Monitoring Network Design Stephen.
Nutrient Criteria Development for New Hampshire’s Estuaries P. Trowbridge, P.E. December 7, 2007.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation.
Long Island Sound Prospects for the Urban Sea- John Mullaney  Chapter 5: Metals, Organic Compounds, and Nutrients in Long Island Sound: Sources, Magnitudes,
Chesapeake Bay Program Incorporation of Lag Times into the Decision Process Gary Shenk 10/16/12 1.
Wetland Monitoring and Assessment National Water Quality Monitoring Council Meeting August 20, 2003.
Best Management Practices and the Chesapeake Bay Program Watershed Model Jeff Sweeney University of Maryland Chesapeake Bay Program Office
The Non-tidal Water Quality Monitoring Network: past, present and future opportunities Katie Foreman Water Quality Analyst, UMCES-CBPO MASC Non-tidal Water.
Milestone Evaluations and Long Term Water Quality Monitoring Trends: What are They Telling Us About Where We are and Where We are Heading Chesapeake Bay.
1 Chesapeake Bay Program Management Board Meeting March 6, 2012 Discussion for the Final Evaluation of Milestones.
Phase II WIP Background & Development Process Tri-County Council – Eastern Shore June 2,
Understanding the Effectiveness of BMPs: Synthesizing Lessons Learned from Water Quality Monitoring Studies Katie Foreman & Liza Hernandez August 15, 2012.
Understanding the Effectiveness of BMPs: Synthesizing Lessons Learned from Water Quality Monitoring Studies Katie Foreman & Liza Hernandez April 9, 2012.
 Nutrient Limitation What’s happening in the Chesapeake Bay and how does it compare to our results?
Status Report on Chesapeake Bay Clean Up Plan Wastewater Sector June 2, 2010.
NWQMC July 26, 2005 Developing A National Water Quality Monitoring Network Design.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Support System Management Actions Watershed Model Bay Model Criteria Assessment Procedures Effects Allocations Airshed.
Robert M. Summers, Ph.D. September 16, 2015 How can we make sure the Chesapeake Bay Restoration really works?
U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey CBP Partnership Team- Enhance Monitoring in the Bay and its Watershed Scott Phillips, USGS Jonathan.
Chesapeake Bay Program Partnership’s Basinwide BMP Verification Framework: Building Confidence in Delivering on Pollution Reductions to Local Waters Maryland.
Chesapeake Bay Program’s Baywide and Basinwide Monitoring Networks: Options for Adapting Monitoring Networks and Realigning Resources to Address Partner.
Tidal Monitoring and Analysis Workgroup (TMAW) Meeting February 7, 2013 Annapolis, MD Katie Foreman and Liza Hernandez University of Maryland Center for.
Need for Advanced Stormwater Treatment at Lake Tahoe John E. Reuter & Dave Roberts Tahoe TMDL Research Program.
Chesapeake Bay TMDL 2017 Midpoint Assessment: A Critical Path Forward Lucinda Power EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting.
Answering the Question: Why? Factors Affecting Change in Water Quality Exceptional challenge to explain “why” Poor quality of pollution source information.
Moving towards a restored Chesapeake Bay watershed
The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update, 2007 The Lake Okeechobee Protection Plan Evaluation Update February 8, 2007.
Integrating the NAWQA approach to assessments in rivers and streams By Donna Myers, Bill Wilber, Anne Hoos, and Charlie Crawford U.S. Geological Survey,
Point Sources Progress Reporting Management Board Conference Call February 9, 2012.
OVERVIEW: CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM DEVELOPMENTS AND WATER & CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVITIES Water Resources Technical Committee Oct. 29, 2015 Presented by Tanya.
Water Quality Indicators and Monitoring Design to Support the Albemarle-Pamlico National Estuary Program: A Progress Report Dean E. Carpenter and William.
Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plans: Why, What, and When Katherine Antos U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office MACo Winter Conference January.
Potential Activities, Costs, and Priorities for Watershed Monitoring Scott Phillips Joel Blomquist Katie Foreman Eff/Opt Conf Call July 24, 2009.
Stream Health Outcome Biennial Workplan Neely L. Law, PhD Center for Watershed Protection Chesapeake Bay Program Sediment & Stream Coordinator Habitat.
Jeff Horan, Habitat GIT Chair February 16, 2012 CBP Decision Framework in Action.
Existing Non-tidal Monitoring Network. Existing Non-tidal Monitoring Network classified according to size of watershed and predominant land use upstream.
Carin Bisland, EPA Principals’ Staff Committee 5/14/12.
Katherine Antos, Water Quality Team Leader Water Quality Goal Implementation Team Coordinator U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office Chesapeake Bay Program.
State of the Chesapeake Bay Program Nick DiPasquale, CBP Director, EPA Executive Council Annual Meeting June 16,
Criteria Attainment and Assessing Management Effectiveness Peter Tango CBPO Co-chair Bob Hirsch USGS Staff Expert Katie Foreman May 20,
Request approval to proceed to EMC with 2014 Tar-Pamlico River Basin Plan.
Chesapeake Bay Program Decision Framework Implementation.
For EBTJV meeting October 26, 2010 Executive Order Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
1 Chesapeake Bay TMDL Watershed Implementation Plan – Phase II James Davis-Martin, Chesapeake Bay TMDL Coordinator Citizens Advisory Committee to the Chesapeake.
Goal Lines for Monitoring Gary Shenk TMAW/NTWG 8/15/
Citizens Advisory Council
CBP Update: Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
DEP Citizen Advisory Committee October 17, 2017
2025 Chesapeake Bay Climate Change Load Projections
Conowingo Dam Update Presented to the Citizens Advisory Committee
Local Government Advisory Committee
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
What is a Watershed Implementation Plan?
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
James Davis-Martin Chesapeake Bay Program Manager
Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2
Chesapeake Bay Program Climate Change Modeling 2.0
Jon Capacasa, Director Water Protection Division U.S. EPA Region III
Expectations for Federal Agencies in Support if Chesapeake WIPs/TMDL
2018 BMP Verification Assessment
Presentation transcript:

Integrated Approach for Assessing and Communicating Progress toward the Chesapeake Bay Water-Quality Standards Scott Phillips USGS, STAR May 14, 2012 PSC Meeting

Telling the water-quality story How are practices being implemented for the TMDL improving water quality? Integrated approach: –Practices implemented (TMDL) –Nutrients/sediment in watershed –Attainment of standards WQ GIT-STAR interactions –Improve communication –Coordinate reporting Current information and planned improvements

TMDL-Reporting of BMPs BMPs implemented Projected load reductions (progress runs) Annual reporting and 2-year milestones Improved BMP reporting and verification

CBP Nontidal Monitoring Nutrients and sediment Network –Long-term sites –Adding stations Trends –Long term and 10 year Loads –To the Bay –Yields in watershed

Trends: Nutrients and Sediment Trends –1980’s-2010 – –Flow adjusted concentrations Nitrogen –LT: 2/3 of sites improving trends –10 year: half with improving trends or no trends Phosphorus –LT: 70 percent improving –10 year: 1/3 improving, most no trends Sediment –LT 30 percent of sites improving, 8 degrading –10 year: 3 sites improving, 9 degrading, most no trend New approach for loads over time

New Technique: Change in Load Flow-Normalized Load

Water-Quality Standards DO, clarity, chl-a in progress toward standards DO: 38%, Clarity: 18%, Chl-a: 22% Enhanced assessments

“Lag times” and water quality Management actions –Implementation –Reaching efficiency Watershed –Point sources –TN Runoff Ground water –TP and sediment Storage Storms and runoff Estuary –Seasonal to annual

Communicating the Story What can be provided now? –Progress toward milestones –Nutrient and sediment trends –Attainment of water-quality standards –Planned improvements for accountability Reporting opportunities in the future: –Annual updates –2-yr milestones –2017 evaluation –2025 attainment of TMDL

Improvements for integrated reporting: –Decision framework (WQGIT) –Expanded watershed monitoring (EPA/States/DC/USGS) and trends in loads (USGS) –Attainment of Standards (EPA/STAR) –“Lag times” workshop (STAC) –Reports to explain water quality changes “Lessons learned” report (STAR) USGS/STAR: Eastern Shore (2013), Potomac (2015) Planned Improvements

Endorse development of integrated approach to assess progress toward water-quality standards and relation to TMDL: –Progress in BMP implementation –Nutrient and sediment trends –Attainment of standards –Enhanced accountability What other pieces of information would you like considered? Watershed trends and standards attainment for EC meeting package PSC Decisions