1. Water Resources Technical Committee Chesapeake Bay Program Overview & Updates September 17, 2008 Tanya T. Spano

2. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting2 OVERVIEW – w/ NEW/Updates  CBP – General Objectives & Timeline  Bay Models – Updates & Applications 2030 Land Use Model  Impairments & Nutrient/Sediment Loads 303(d) List of Impaired Waters Load Allocations Bay TMDL(s)  2030 Land User Model & Projections

3. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting3 CBP – General Objectives & Timeline Principles: 1.Shared Urgency to Restore the Bay 2.Clear Communication & Common Message 3.Focus & Accelerate Implementation 4.Engage the Public About the Implementation Process 5.Legal Obligations Will Be Met 6.Improving & Applying the Latest Science 7.Flexibility of Sub-allocations within the Major Basins – But w/ new Independent Evaluator 8.Keep Healthy Waters Healthy Finalize Bay TMDL - by May 1, 2011 – Now Dec. 31, 2010 New – a. Bay TMDL – ‘national model’ b. Reorganization Q1. Help implementation? Q2. Better involve local governments?

4. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting4 Existing Structure

5. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting5 Proposed New Structure CBP Management Board CBP Management Board Scientific & Technical Advisory Committee Scientific & Technical Advisory Committee Local Government Advisory Committee Local Government Advisory Committee Citizens’ Advisory Committee Citizens’ Advisory Committee Action Teams Maintaining Healthy Watersheds Maintaining Healthy Watersheds Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Habitat Water Quality Water Quality Fostering Stewardship Fostering Stewardship Chesapeake Executive Council Principals’ Staff Committee Chesapeake Executive Council Principals’ Staff Committee Proposed Independent Evaluator Proposed Independent Evaluator Chesapeake Action Plan Goal Implementation Teams Partnership Leadership & Management Partnership Leadership & Management

6. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting6 Bay TMDL – Help Implementation?  Strengthens legal defense of NPDES limits  Provides stability for allocations  Provides opportunity for needed adjustments in 2003 allocations  Direct public dialogue to promote implementation  NEW Speed up/expand activities Increase involvement & accountability at all levels of government  Increased emphasis on state non-CWA programs to address NPS & some SW issues

7. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting7 Nutrient/Sediment Allocation Processes  2003 Process N&P caps to meet tributary & CB4 segment Decision Rules  Equitable distributions to tributaries & states  Left sub-allocation decisions & Tributary Strategy implementation up to states  Bay TMDL Process Reflect model updates/new data Need to reflect/integrate sediment loads/impacts Regulatory requirements limit discretion Desire to preserve flexibility/trading & promote implementation Is a UAA required? Update – Participation in Reevaluation Technical WG (access via Nutrient Subcommittee, as Wastewater WG – Chair)

8. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting8 Bay TMDL Schedule  Define Required Load Caps - 2008 For Bay For Tidal Tributaries For Nitrogen, Phosphorus & Sediment To achieve attainment based on latest 303(d) lists Evaluate various management scenarios - Expanded  Climate Change & 2030 impacts – ‘Will Consider’ Determine ‘if’ need to adjust cap and/or allocations Assess if a Bay UAA is required  Agree on State/Tributary Allocations – 2009  Sub-Allocations to Sources – 2009-2010  Public Participation – Now through 2011 – Start early 2009  Issue Final Bay TMDL – May 1, 2011 – Dec. 31, 2010

9. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting9 Bay Models – Updates & Applications  Models Airshed Sediment Sheds Watershed Model Water Quality Model  Hydrodynamic  Living Resources  Updates/New Data: Model elements/functions Input data BMP efficiencies Land use / land cover New – 1 st view of output/scenarios: Oct. 2008 & March 2009  2030 Land Use Model Derived from WSM & other ‘growth/projection’ models  TMDL & Allocation Applications WSM - STAC comments versus MD’s intentions WQM – All Forested Baseline, Factor of Safety, & Averaging Period Concerns

10. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting10 Bay Models – Status Bay Water Quality Sediment Transport Model (WQSTM) & Phase 5.0 (.1 &.2) Watershed Model (WSM) DONE Review and approval of the initial dissolved oxygen and water clarity/SAV scoping scenario plans by the Water Quality Steering Committee – Completed July 21, 2008 Phase 5.0 WSM and WQSTM calibrations approved by Modeling Subcommittee – September 8 & 9, 2008. PENDING  Get the Phase 5.1 Model calibration approved and link the Phase 5.1 Model to the WQSTM. Touchup WQSTM calibration as needed. To be completed no later than October 1, 2008.  Initiate first management scenarios – October 2008. Completion of key initial scoping scenarios for review by the Modeling Subcommittee in late October (CBPO Modeling Team anticipates the completion of about 4 key scenarios by this timeframe.)  Presentation of finding and implication of the key initial scoping scenarios to the Water Quality Steering Committee at their November 6-7 TH meeting. Complete Phase 5.2 Model inputs/calibration – Dec. 2008/Jan. 2009 Get the Phase 5.2 Model calibration approved and link the Phase 5.2 Model to the WQSTM - To be completed NLT March 1, 2009.  Apply refined 5.2 Model to key CBP scenarios – March 2009.  Complete allocation scenario development and modeling support for Chesapeake TMDL public review and comment - December 2010.

11. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting11 Bay Model – Scenarios New & Expanded  Initial Draft Tributary Strategy Scoping Scenario – For evaluating achievement of the States’ Bay dissolved oxygen water quality standards in all designated uses and the States’ water clarity/SAV standards in the tidal fresh CBP segments. Existing TSs?  Everyone, Everything, Everywhere (E3) Scoping Scenario – A key dissolved oxygen standard attainment assessment scenario examining water quality conditions under the estimated maximum extent of implementation.  Achieving the DO Water Quality Standards Scoping Scenario – key scenario estimating what the nutrient and sediment loads are needed to be to achieve the States’ Bay dissolved oxygen water quality standards. NEW  Ten-Fold Oyster Increase Scoping Scenario – For evaluating the influence of filter feeders on achievement of the States’ water clarity/SAV and dissolved oxygen water quality standards.  No Oyster Harvest Mortality Scoping Scenario – For evaluating the maximum extent oyster filter feeders influence on achievement of the states’ water clarity/SAV and dissolved oxygen water quality standards.  No Fall Line Sediment Loads Scoping Scenario – To complete the initial assessment of the influence of sediment loads from the upstream jurisdictions have on achieving the States’ water clarity/SAV standards.  Begin development of a scenario that incorporates all of the feasible actions in watershed combined with stream restoration, tidal shoreline BMPs and living resource management (filter feeders) to achieve the states’ water clarity/SAV standards. The object here is to set the outside bounds of achievability and to see if the states’ water clarity/SAV standard can be achieved everywhere with this level of effort. This work will be initiated by the CBP Nutrient Subcommittee’s Sediment Workgroup and the Modeling Subcommittee in January 2009.

12. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting12 Impairments & Nutrient/Sediment Loads  303(d) List of Impaired Waters All derived from agreed upon Bay- specific water quality criteria and Designated Uses For all tidal states (including DE)  DC – EPA approval expected July 2008  MD – EPA approval expected August 2008 CB4 –How to Address less than 100% attainment under a TMDL?  VA – EPA approval expected September 2008

13. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting13 Impairments & Nutrient/Sediment Loads  Load Allocations Changes Required from 2003? UAA Needed? Decision Rules State Allocations vs. sub-allocations to sources  Bay TMDL(s) Margins of Safety – explicit vs. implicit Baseline ‘All Forested’ Scenario Regulatory Requirements for NPDES Permits – WWTP vs. MS4  NEW - EPA letter re: Reasonable Assurance & SW issues Decisions will set precedence for EPA for a major TMDL Links to Tributary Strategies?  NEW – Explicit links to Bay TMDL document/implementation plans  Q1 – Existing TS’s?  Q2 – State plans to update to TS? Accelerate implementation?

14. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting14 2030 Land User Model & Projections  CBP issued preliminary county-level landuse/population projections COG staff provided COG region population data Population projections from states Developed current/future septic & sewered data  Ad Hoc Technical Steering Committee – Delayed Paul DesJardin, Tanya Spano, Norm Goulet COG staff working with members to compare/verify against existing data & future projections Concerns raised with WWTP projections & BMP/land use concerns  District flow issues – Believe we ID’d the problem

15. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting15 2030 Land User Model & Projections  Next Steps Continue to review current data with COG members/agencies - Ongoing Evaluate against other existing projections Work through Ad Hoc SC to address critical regional issues/resolve major discrepancies Implement Hybrid approach for WTTP projections  Suggest hybrid approach to CBP Use most accurate information available from COG and its members Use CBP calculations/logic where accurate information does not exist  NEW - Hybrid Approach – Drafted, undergoing review  Provide formal comments – Summer/Fall 2008 - Winter 2009

16. 9/17/08WRTC Business Meeting16 Wrap-Up  WWTP Flows – Hybrid Approach WW Work Session  Questions?