Assessing Progress. Progress toward building the knowledge and capacity of local officials will be assessed every two years. At the December 2014 workshop, many officials agreed to participate in this initial effort to determine success factors and develop progress criteria. Throughout the initial assessment period, local officials will be a part of the process to determine how progress is determined, which will include criteria, scope, scale and the utilization of adaptive management techniques. It is anticipated that this strategy may require one or more two-year cycles to fully determine whether the initial effort has been successful.
Assessing Progress. Assessing programmatic progress (making sure planned activities are completed) will be at least annual so that adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of programmatic progress will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. Assessment of environmental conditions and change will be done less frequently (every 2 to 5 years) depending on availability of contaminant monitoring results. We will utilize the biannual reporting for impaired waters (305b) done by each state and DC to assess conditions for selected contaminants that monitored for these efforts. Monitoring for additional contaminants will be done less frequently due to efforts needed to collect, compile, and analyze information. The planning, completion and publishing of research is usually a multi-year process which affects the advancement in gaining more knowledge to reduce uncertainty. The following lessons were learned during review of the Toxic Contaminant Research Strategy: • Lesson: Multiple contaminants and additional factors are causing the degradation (and mortality) of fish so trying to identify specific causes is extremely difficult. o Actions: Evolving towards a more geographic approach to focus in areas where fish health issues are most prevalent. Greater emphasis on linkage between factors affecting fish habitat and health, including toxic contaminants. • Lesson: There is a lack of data on the occurrence and trends of toxic contaminants. o Actions: Better utilize jurisdictions monitoring that is used for biannual integrated reports; design an integrated monitoring network to improve long-term information. • Lesson: Limited information of the practices to mitigate contaminants, and their potential co- benefits with nutrients and sediment reductions.
Assessing Progress. For type 1) progress monitoring as described above, the frequency of assessing progress will be at least annual so that adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of type 1) progress data will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan.
Assessing Progress. Assessing programmatic progress (making sure planned activities are completed) will be at least annual so that adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of programmatic progress will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. Assessment of environmental conditions and change will be done less frequently (every 2 to 5 years) depending on contaminant monitoring. We will utilize the biannual reporting for impaired waters (305b) done by each state and DC to assess conditions for selected contaminants that monitored for these efforts. Monitoring for additional contaminants will be done less frequently due to efforts needed to collect, compile, and analyze information. The planning, completion and publishing of research is usually a multi-year process which affects the advancement in gaining more knowledge to reduce uncertainty.
Assessing Progress. The CBP accountability framework provides the foundation to assess performance toward the TMDL and associated water-quality standards. To ensure that tidal water quality goals are realized, stability of the accountability framework is a priority and follow-ups to CBP partnership commitments must be assured. The partnership would be consulted on any potential, proposed changes to the Phase II WIP Planning Targets, which would provide for the watershed-wide distribution of load reductions (separate from any nitrogen-phosphorus and/or cross-basin exchanges within a state which are the responsibility of that jurisdiction) that would achieve the same Chesapeake Bay water quality response. Enhanced knowledge of management practices and their effects will be used primarily to refine individual jurisdiction strategies to achieve the targets. EPA will measure the jurisdictions’ progress toward reaching the Bay TMDL’s ultimate nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment reduction goals against 2-year milestones by which the jurisdictions are expected to identify and commit to implement specific pollutant-reduction controls and actions in each of their successive 2-year milestone periods. The federal government also will be providing 2-year milestones. When assessing 2-year milestone commitments, EPA will evaluate whether proposed actions, controls, and practices would result in estimated loads at the jurisdiction scale that meet the jurisdiction’s 2-year milestone targets. At the end of a milestone period, EPA expects that model-estimated nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment loads resulting from reported implementation would be at or below target loads at the jurisdiction scale. To determine whether sufficient progress is being made toward meeting the TMDL allocations and interim milestones, EPA will rely on the jurisdictions to monitor, verify, and report their progress. EPA will use the reported tracking data and the Phase 5.3 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Model along with Chesapeake Bay tidal and watershed water quality monitoring data (including contributions from other federal agencies including NOAA, USGS, USACE, and USDA) to assess the jurisdictions’ progress.
Assessing Progress. Assessing progress on the actions is the LAP will be done at least annually under the TCW. The reviews will provide opportunities to make adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of programmatic progress will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. For the previous two year period the qualitative assessment by the TCW was: • Further characterize the occurrence, concentrations, sources and effects of mercury, PCBs, and other contaminants of emerging and widespread concern. Progress: Good, progress has been made on mercury across the watershed and contaminants in local areas, but ability characterize more regional occurrence and concentrations of contaminants has been limited. • Identify which best management practices might provide multiple benefits of reducing nutrient and sediment pollution as well as toxic contaminants in waterways. Progress: Fair. A STAC workshop provided insights of a limited number of BMPs to have co-benefits between nutrient, sediment, and contaminant reductions. However, getting information into CBP decision tools, such as CAST, does not have a clear path forward. Additionally, jurisdictions WIPs don’t have much emphasis on addressing co- benefits for contaminant reduction A similar assessment is expected at the end of 2022.
Assessing Progress. Assessing progress on the actions is the LAP will be done at least annually under the TCW. The reviews will provide opportunities to make adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of programmatic progress will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. For the previous two year period the qualitative assessment by the TCW was: • Further characterize the occurrence, concentrations, sources and effects of mercury, PCBs, and other contaminants of emerging and widespread concern. Progress: Good, progress has continued to be made on mercury across the watershed and other contaminants of interest in local areas due to TMDL inclusion in the MS4 permits. Regional characterizations improved for agricultural chemicals in the Potomac and Susquehanna watersheds, and for PCBs related to restoration efforts in Anacostia watershed, and complex mixtures of contaminants in the Shenandoah watershed.. • Identify which best management practices might provide multiple benefits of reducing nutrient and sediment pollution as well as toxic contaminants in waterways. Progress: Fair. Progress has been made to better understand reduction of specific contaminants in specific management actions (e.g., PCBs in gray infrastructure) and relevant response timelines from BMP implementation, but stormwater BMP removal efficiency studies continue to be limited. Additionally, jurisdictions WIPs don’t have much emphasis on addressing co-benefits for contaminant reduction or have a way to quantify the reduction. A similar assessment is expected at the end of 2022.
Assessing Progress. For type 1) progress monitoring as described above, the frequency of assessing progress will be at least annual so that adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of type 1) progress data will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. Progress assessment based on type 2) and 3) monitoring will be conducted on an as-available basis. These types of monitoring generally will involve measurements of environmental response and environmental condition, which do not necessarily occur at regular intervals and will be contingent on availability of data and/or monitoring funds.
Assessing Progress. For type 1) progress monitoring as described above, the frequency of assessing progress will be at least annual so that adjustments to the biennial workplan can be made to accommodate changing circumstances and availability of resources. Formal review of type 1) progress data will be completed through the update of the biennial workplan. Progress assessment based on type 2) and 3) monitoring will be conducted on an as-available basis. These types of monitoring generally will involve measurements of environmental response and environmental condition, which do not necessarily occur at regular intervals and will be contingent on availability of data and/or monitoring funds. Adaptive management will focus foremost on monitoring information described under type 2) above where there will be assessment of whether management actions are having the expected results in terms of PCB reductions. Over time, it is expected we will learn which loading mechanisms and sources provide the greatest opportunities for continued reductions. Other adaptations to the strategy will result from assessing the long term response of the system (type 3 monitoring above) and, in the short term, whether the TCW and other entities are completing work as planned (type 1 monitoring above). Biennial Workplan summarize the commitments, actions and resources that each jurisdiction, federal agency and partner will take to help achieve each of the outcomes Biennial workplan to be developed Appendix A - Overview of PCB TMDL Activities in the Chesapeake Watershed TMDL Development in Maryland 1. Characterization of NPDES regulated and unregulated stormwater PCB loads.
Assessing Progress. Progress toward building the knowledge and capacity of local officials will be assessed periodically, with the goal of updating the Local Leadership Indicator every two years. It is anticipated that this strategy may require one or more two-year cycles to fully determine whether the initial effort has been successful.
