Chesapeake Bay Program A Watershed Partnership The Chapman Perelman Foundation Water Body Remediation Invitational Summit East Hamptons, NY March 9-10, 2017 Nick DiPasquale Director, Chesapeake Bay Program

The Chesapeake Bay and Watershed Largest estuary in North America and the third largest in the world. Home to almost 18 million people. About 150,000 new people move into the watershed each year. Tens of thousands of streams, creeks, and rivers are resources for communities throughout the watershed. 84,000 farms - principally family owned Supports more than 3,600 species of plants, fish and animals Largest estuary in North America and the third largest in the world. Land-to-water ratio is 14:1; largest of any coastal water body in the world. Average depth of 21 feet – productivity. Supports more than 3,600 species of plants, fish and animals Home to 18 million people. About 150,000 new people move into the watershed each year. Tens of thousands of streams, creeks, and rivers are resources for communities throughout the watershed. 84,000 principally family farms. largest of any coastal water body in the world.

Bay Health Issues –We have a degraded ecosystem -Decline in the population and health of fish and wildlife. Examples include decline in crab populations and poor health of fish. Examples of poor health include mycobacteriosis in striped bass and intersex conditions in fish. -Poor water—Bay listed as an impaired water body and a TMDL is being developed. Excess nutrients, sediment, and contaminants in the watershed and delivered to the Bay. Over 90 percent of the Bay is considered impaired and unable to support key fish species -Loss of habitat—forest and wetland loss. We are losing almost 100 acres of forests per day. These are important habitats that sequester pollutants and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Caused by… -population in watershed doubled since 1950. So increasing sources of pollution -Over harvesting of living resources -Greatest rate of sea-level rise on the east coast contributing to loss of wetlands.

Bay Health Issues –We have a degraded ecosystem -Decline in the population and health of fish and wildlife. Examples include decline in crab populations and poor health of fish. Examples of poor health include mycobacteriosis in striped bass and intersex conditions in fish. -Poor water—Bay listed as an impaired water body and a TMDL is being developed. Excess nutrients, sediment, and contaminants in the watershed and delivered to the Bay. Over 90 percent of the Bay is considered impaired and unable to support key fish species -Loss of habitat—forest and wetland loss. We are losing almost 100 acres of forests per day. These are important habitats that sequester pollutants and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Caused by… -population in watershed doubled since 1950. So increasing sources of pollution -Over harvesting of living resources -Greatest rate of sea-level rise on the east coast contributing to loss of wetlands.

Bay Health Issues –We have a degraded ecosystem -Decline in the population and health of fish and wildlife. Examples include decline in crab populations and poor health of fish. Examples of poor health include mycobacteriosis in striped bass and intersex conditions in fish. -Poor water—Bay listed as an impaired water body and a TMDL is being developed. Excess nutrients, sediment, and contaminants in the watershed and delivered to the Bay. Over 90 percent of the Bay is considered impaired and unable to support key fish species -Loss of habitat—forest and wetland loss. We are losing almost 100 acres of forests per day. These are important habitats that sequester pollutants and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Caused by… -population in watershed doubled since 1950. So increasing sources of pollution -Over harvesting of living resources -Greatest rate of sea-level rise on the east coast contributing to loss of wetlands.

Issues –We have a degraded ecosystem -Decline in the population and health of fish and wildlife. Examples include decline in crab populations and poor health of fish. Examples of poor health include mycobacteriosis in striped bass and intersex conditions in fish. -Poor water—Bay listed as an impaired water body and a TMDL is being developed. Excess nutrients, sediment, and contaminants in the watershed and delivered to the Bay. Over 90 percent of the Bay is considered impaired and unable to support key fish species -Loss of habitat—forest and wetland loss. We are losing almost 100 acres of forests per day. These are important habitats that sequester pollutants and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Caused by… -population in watershed doubled since 1950. So increasing sources of pollution -Over harvesting of living resources -Greatest rate of sea-level rise on the east coast contributing to loss of wetlands.

The Bay ‘s Summertime Dead Zone is Decreasing in Size! Source: Testa, 2017 unpublished

History Chesapeake Bay Program Formed (1983) 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement (1987) Chesapeake 2000 Agreement (2000) MD, VA, PA, DC, the CB Commission and the Federal Government MOU with DE, NY, WV (2000-2002) 2009 Executive Order 2010 Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load June 16, 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement Issues –We have a degraded ecosystem -Decline in the population and health of fish and wildlife. Examples include decline in crab populations and poor health of fish. Examples of poor health include mycobacteriosis in striped bass and intersex conditions in fish. -Poor water—Bay listed as an impaired water body and a TMDL is being developed. Excess nutrients, sediment, and contaminants in the watershed and delivered to the Bay. Over 90 percent of the Bay is considered impaired and unable to support key fish species -Loss of habitat—forest and wetland loss. We are losing almost 100 acres of forests per day. These are important habitats that sequester pollutants and provide habitat for fish and wildlife. Caused by… -population in watershed doubled since 1950. So increasing sources of pollution -Over harvesting of living resources -Greatest rate of sea-level rise on the east coast contributing to loss of wetlands.

Chesapeake Bay Program Management Structure Management Board Scientific & Technical Advisory Committee Local Government Citizens’ Advisory Committee Action Teams Social Sciences Laboratory Recommendation Action Team Chesapeake Executive Council Principals’ Staff Committee Independent Evaluator Communications Workgroup Scientific, Technical Assessment, and Reporting Partnering, Leadership & Management Maintain Healthy Watersheds Protect & Restore Water Quality Sustainable Fisheries Protect & Restore Vital Habitats Foster Chesapeake Stewardship Goal Implementation Teams Implementation Workgroups

Funding Executive Order led to an annual cross-cut budget for all Federal Agencies working on the Bay Approximately $2.2 billion over 5 years Federal Funding ~ $500 million per year EPA portion through Clean Water Act, Section 117 From $50M (FY10) to $73M (FY16) per year 2/3 goes to states for support of implementation Environmental Finance Center National Fish and Wildlife Foundation 2 grant programs through funding primarily from EPA Small Watershed Grants - $6M Innovative Nutrient and Sediment Reduction grants - $6M $65 million since 2010

Chesapeake Bay TMDL Bay TMDL, established December 29, 2010, is a Pollution Diet or Budget Average of 25% reduction in nutrient and sediment load from 2009 base year; total reduction of 40+% from 1985 Memorializes the Allocations on an interstate basis, per state and major river basin, and to individual sources (WLA for point sources) Permits must align with the TMDL Largely informed by State-defined Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) – Strategies and source accountability Oversight provided through 2-Year Milestones and EPA annual evaluations of progress By 2017, jurisdictions should have practices in place that would achieve 60 percent of necessary pollutant reductions compared to 2009. When fully implemented, the WIPs will ensure all practices necessary to meet water quality standards in the Chesapeake Bay will be in place by 2025. 2025 is the finish line for implementation under this TMDL, but not for achieving Water Quality Standards. Lag times will mean a delay in achieving the needed reductions, and there will continue to be a need to offset for additional loads.

On June 16, 2014, the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement was signed

Our Goals Sustainable Fisheries Goal Vital Habitat Goal Blue Crab Abundance Outcome Blue Crab Management Outcome Oyster Outcome Forage Fish Outcome Fish Habitat Outcome Vital Habitat Goal Wetlands Outcome Black Duck Stream Health Outcome Brook Trout Fish Passage Outcome SAV Outcome Forest Buffer Outcome Tree Canopy Outcome Water Quality Goal 2017 WIP Outcome 2025 WIP Outcome Water Quality Standards Attainment and Monitoring Outcome Toxic Contaminants Goal Toxic Contaminant Research Outcome Toxic Contaminant Policy and Prevention Outcome   Healthy Watersheds Goal Healthy Watersheds Outcome Stewardship Goal Citizen Stewardship Outcome Local Leadership Outcome Diversity Outcome Product – What does it say and how does it hold the signers accountable while setting it up for adaptive management? Ecosystem based – not just water quality High level, telling public what they can hold signatories accountable for

Our Goals Land Conservation Goal Public Access Goal Protected Lands Outcome Land Use Methods and Metrics Development Outcome Land Use Options Evaluation Outcome Public Access Goal Public Access Site Development Outcome Environmental Literacy Student Outcome Sustainable Schools Outcome Environmental Literacy Planning Outcome Climate Resiliency Monitoring and Assessment Outcome Adaptation Outcome  

Evaluating Bay Health Monitoring important habitats, fish and shellfish, and water quality measures in the Bay and its watershed.  Tracking pollution, population and other measures that affect the Bay’s health.

Use Habitats to Define Designated Uses A. Cross Section of Chesapeake Bay or Tidal Tributary Shallow-Water Bay Grass Use Open-Water Fish and Shellfish Use Deep-Water Seasonal Fish and Shellfish Use Deep-Channel Seasonal Refuge Use B. Oblique View of the “Chesapeake Bay” and its Tidal Tributaries Migratory Fish Spawning and Nursery Use The Bay Program is moving toward a fish-eye view of the Chesapeake. What a fish sees, though, is a highly diverse Chesapeake Bay. There are shallow areas that are important for spawning, and grass beds that serve as nursery areas for their young. There are also large areas of open water where they feed on algae or other fish. Deep areas, where they may rarely venture during the summer, are important refuges from winter cold. The new criteria and designated uses seek to take that diversity into account by essentially zoning the Bay. They divide the Bay and its tidal tributaries into five “designated uses” based on the types of habitat provided for specific species. Those uses include: shallow-water bay grass use, open-water fish and shellfish use, migratory fish spawning and nursery areas, deep-water seasonal fish and shellfish use, and deep-channel seasonal refuge use. Different criteria would be applied to each use based on the species found there: grasses in shallow water, adult fish in open water, oysters in deep water, crab food in the deep channel, and so on. Open-Water Habitat Shallow-Water Bay Grass Use Deep-Water Seasonal Fish and Shellfish Use Deep-Channel Seasonal Refuge Use Source: U.S. EPA 2003

Use Aquatic Life Needs by Habitat to Derive Criteria Minimum Amount of Oxygen (mg/L) Needed to Survive by Species Migratory Fish Spawning & Nursery Areas 6 Striped Bass: 5-6 5 American Shad: 5 Shallow and Open Water Areas White Perch: 5 4 Yellow Perch: 5 Hard Clams: 5 Deep Water 3 Alewife: 3.6 Migratory Spawning & Nursery Areas 6 mg/l averaged over 7 days and a 5mg/l 1-day minimum – Feb 15th – June 10th. This is intended to protect larval and early juvenile stages of freshwater species in upper tributaries and the Upper Chesapeake Bay. The early life stages are often more sensitive to low oxygen levels than adult fish. Shallow and Open Water Areas 5mg/l as a 30-day average, with a 7-day average of 4mg/l and a 1-day minimum of 3.5 mg/l – all year round. This provides enough oxygen for the survival of larval and juvenile fish found in these areas. The minimum level is enough to prevent lethal effects for the Atlantic and shortnose sturgeon, the latter of which is listed as an endangered species. Deep Water Uses 3mg/l as a 30-day average, with a 1-day minimum of 1.7 mg/l. - April through Sept. During October through April, the shallow open water use criteria applies. During the summer, these oxygen levels would protect eggs and larvae of bay anchovy, one of the most abundant fish in the Chesapeake and a critical link in the food chain. Deep Channel Uses 1mg/l minimum from May through September. From October through April, the shallow/open water use criteria would apply. These levels are intended to protect worms and other bottom dwellers that can tolerate low oxygen levels during the summer. In winter, these areas are important foraging areas for blue crabs and finfish that seek refuge in these deeper, warmer waters. 2 Crabs: 3 Bay Anchovy: 3 Deep Channel 1 Spot: 2 Worms: 1

Scientific Basis for Criteria and Uses Water Quality Criteria Dissolved Oxygen Water Clarity Chlorophyll-a The Bay is divided into 92 river segments, each with up to 5 designated uses for a total of 291 designated uses.

Establish Basinwide Assimilative Capacity then Assign Major River and Interstate Loading Targets

Drive Towards Loads = Standards Achievement

Relative Effect of a Pound of Pollution on Water Quality Nutrient and sediment pollution from some land areas have a greater direct impact on the Bay than from others

Major Basin-State by Relative Impact on Water Quality

Allocating Nutrient and Sediment Pollutant Load Reduction Responsibilities by States and Sources

Allocate to Sources Through States’ Watershed Implementation Plans

Pollution Diet by River Pollution Diet by State These maps show the breakdown by state and by major river basin. We’ve already discussed how it’s further broken down into 92 river segments and up to 291 designated uses.

Multi-State Monitoring Networks

Sustained Monitoring Networks benefit Measuring Progress

Partnership Approves BMPs Partnership has approved more than 400 Best Management Practices to date Partnership follows an established BMP protocol for convening panels of recognized experts to develop BMP definitions and pollution reduction efficiencies BMP protocol also spells out the entire Partnership review and approval procedures States submit annual reports on the implemented acres, miles, numbers of Partnership approved BMPs These reported BMPs are simulated through the suite of Partnership models and load reductions are estimated   300+ unique practice names available for reporting through NEIEN About 50 unique BMP names available for conservation plans alone These lump into 200+ more-inclusive BMP categories in Scenario Builder across the agricultural, urban, septic, and natural sectors Wastewater controls across significant + non-significant facilities, municipal + industrial

Establish Accountability Framework then Build into Commitments to Reduce Watershed Pollutant Loads

Establish Accountability Framework 1. Watershed Implementation Plans identify nutrient and sediment targets that meet water quality standards. with programmatic and pollutant reduction commitments Milestones 2. 2-Year Assess Progress implementing WIPs and milestones 3.Track and We share progress, decisions and evaluations through a number of outlets, including: Chesapeake STAT Progress Data Decisions TMDL Website, where evaluations are published Executive Order website to track progress by federal agencies CAST BayTAS (for planners with an account) -- BayTAS provides access to nutrient load, BMP, and supporting data specific to implementation of and progress toward the Chesapeake Bay TMDL 4. Federal Actions if insufficient Watershed Implementation Plans or 2-year milestones

Annually Evaluate Milestones Progress

Provide EPA Oversight Enhanced Oversight These are the Oversight levels established during the 2014 Interim Evaluations. Final evaluations for 2014-2015 Milestones will be completed in June.

Trading We feel Water Quality trading is an essential tool allowing states to offset: new development increases in existing loads land use changes in most cost effective manner The Chesapeake Bay TMDL website has each of the jurisdictions programs and a series of TMs

Track, Verify and Report Best Management Practices, Treatments and Technologies Across all Source Sectors

Discharged Total Nitrogen Loads from 472 Significant Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facilities vs. Municipal Flow Wastewater sector has met 2025 Chesapeake Bay pollution reduction targets 10 years ahead of schedule. Reductions in pollution generating public health, environmental and economic benefits. In past 30 years, nearly 900 million pounds of nitrogen and phosphorus abated – even as population, volume increased. Largest and most successful program in the nation to control nutrient pollution from direct sources.

Discharged Total Phosphorus Loads from 472 Significant Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facilities vs. Municipal Flow Goals reached through enforceable permits, major capital improvements, phosphorus detergent bans and manufacturing process changes. Bay Program funded R&D for nutrient removal technology. Many facilities removing more nitrogen from wastewater than believed possible; achieving reductions beyond what permits require. Investments largely triggered by 2004 agreement between EPA and the Bay watershed jurisdictions; since reflected in the Bay TMDL and accompanying implementation plans.

Air Deposition Airshed is 570,000 square miles – 9 times larger than the watershed 1/3 of nitrogen pollution comes from air deposition Between 1985-2015, loads of oxidized nitrogen from atmospheric deposition in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is projected to decrease by about 60%

BMP Verification Life Cycle installed, verified, and reported by Jurisdiction Data quality assurance/ validation BMP lifespan ends – re-verify BMP verified/ upgraded with new technology BMP no longer present/functional removed from database OR BMP gains efficiency BMP fully functional BMP nears end of life span Initial Inspection Follow-up Checks BMP Performance BMP performance metrics collected

TMDL Midpoint Assessment What’s Next for MPA? Local area targets: Task Force recommendations spring 2017, partnership decisions summer 2017, factor into Phase III WIPs 2018 Phase 6 Models: independent scientific peer reviews spring/summer 2016; continue Partnership reviews 2016-early 2017; management application starting late spring 2017 Conowingo Dam: Partnership decisions on path forward fall 2016; solid understanding of level of nutrients/sediment loads to be offset spring 2017; factor into Phase III WIPs 2018 Climate Change: independent scientific peer review summer 2016, partnership decisions on how to factor into WIPs fall 2016-spring 2017, factor into Phase III WIPs 2018 2025 Projections: Partnership discussions about how to address increased load due to growth within the Phase III WIPs fall 2016-spring 2017 Phase III WIP Expectation: share draft with Partners summer 2016; actively seek feedback/input; finalize expectations by summer 2017 Implications from Monitoring Trends: initial explanations of long term monitoring trends winter 2016, factor into development of Phase III target loads in 2017 and into Phase III WIPs in 2018 Analysis of Programmatic Capacity: factor into development of Phase III target loads in 2017 and into Phase III WIPs in 2018 Phase III WIP Target Loads: approve suite of Partnership models for management application spring 2017; develop target loads spring-winter 2017; factor into Phase III WIPs 2018 Issues: Land Use changes Climate Change Geographic (James River & Conowingo) New BMPs Phase 6 Models

Summary – Essential Elements Conducting Baseline Assessment Establishing Water Quality Criteria and Standards Estimating Pollutant Loading by Source Sector (including air deposition) Setting Point Source Waste Load and Non-Point Source Load Allocations Reaching Agreement on Watershed-wide Permitting Strategies for Wastewater and Stormwater Setting Interim Targets Developing Linked Environmental Models to Address Management Questions

Summary – Essential Elements Establishing Watershed-wide Monitoring Networks overseen by multiple partners (including non-traditional monitoring programs) Creating BMP Approval and Verification Programs Establishing a Management  and Accountability System Watershed Implementation Plans Two Year Milestones Annual Progress Reporting Developing Tracking and Reporting Systems Calculating Load Reduction Estimates Accounting for Growth

Summary – Essential Elements Soliciting Federal Facility Engagement Engaging Local Governments (they do most of the implementation) Providing Funding/Financing/Technical Assistance Developing Planning and Decision Support Tools Providing Flexibility and Science-based Adaptive Management Supporting Transparency Promoting Public Involvement and Reporting

Lessons Learned Progress is not immediate Lag times P saturated soils Contaminated groundwater Progress is not linear Varies with weather/precipitation Varies with location in the watershed

Lessons Learned Comprehensive Approach Restoration takes time Ongoing growth and development Changing conditions like climate impacts Emerging contaminants – Personal Care Products, Micro- plastics, Estrogen Disruptors Restoration requires management of expectations General public Elected officials Comprehensive Approach Ecosystem-based approach is more effective

Lessons Learned A Management & Accountability System is Essential for Progress Allocations Watershed Implementation Strategies 2-Year Milestones (Numeric and Programmatic) Annual Progress Reports Mid-Point Assessment Co-Benefits/Avoided Costs

Lessons Learned Local Governments do the heavy lifting Information & resource sharing is critical “One size fits all” doesn’t work Targeted actions are critical, but difficult Maintaining a monitoring network is important Use of an adaptive management decision-making framework is important to success Shared leadership leads to buy-in

Questions? Learn more at www.chesapeakebay.net/ watershedagreement Microplastics Pharmaceutical biproducts Personal hygiene Climate change Learn more at www.chesapeakebay.net/ watershedagreement