Chesapeake Executive Council
903R88111
Chesapeake Bay
Basinwide Toxics
Reduction Strategy
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region III Information Resource
Center (3PM52)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
TD
225
.C54
T693
copy 2
Chesapeake
Bay
Program
Agreement Commitment Report
December 1988
-------
Chesapeake Bay Basinwide
Toxics Reduction Strategy
An Agreement Commitment Report from the
Chesapeake Executive Council
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 111 Inionnation Resource
Center (3PM52)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Annapolis, Maryland
December 1988
-------
ADOPTION STATEMENT
We, the undersigned, adopt the Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy, in fulfillment
of Water Quality Commitment Number 3 of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement:
"...by December 1988, to develop, adopt and begin implementation of
a basinwide strategy to achieve a reduction of toxics consistent with
the Water Quality Act of 1987 which will ensure protection of human
health and living resources. The strategy will cover both point and
nonpoint sources, monitoring protocols, enforcement of pretreatment
regulations and methods for dealing with in-pldce toxic sediments
where necessary."
The Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy uses the requirements of the 1987 Clean
Water Act as a foundation for the actions that will be needed to reduce toxics in the Bay.
In addition, the Strategy contains a number of commitments in the areas of research,
monitoring, and toxics management that we agree are necessary to achieve a comprehen-
sive approach to reduce toxics input to the Chesapeake Bay.
The Strategy underscores the importance of including all the various pathways by
which toxic substances can pollute the Bay's waters, habitats, and resources. Management
programs must address all of the point and nonpoint source inputs of toxics - industrial and
municipal wastewater discharges, runoff from agricultural land or urban areas, solid or haz-
ardous waste facilities, and atmospheric deposition.
In recognition that research and monitoring programs will provide new information
about the toxics problems within the Bay, a Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy progress
report will be produced every other year to report on progress and incorporate any neces-
sary refinements to the Strategy.
Date
For the Commonwealth of Virginia
For the State of Maryland
For the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
For the United States of America
For the District of Columbia
For the Chesapeake Bay Commission
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive
Summary; The Toxics Commitment
Chapter
Title
Toxics and the Bay
Assessing the Toxics Problem
Water Quality Standards and Living Resource
Requirements
Towards a Comprehensive Approach to Toxics
Reduction
Implementing the Strategy and Measuring Progress
Appendices
App. A:
Toxic Requirements Under the 1987 Amendments to
the Clean Water Act
App. B: Signatory Appendices:
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Commonwealth of Virginia
District of Columbia
State of Maryland
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
App. C: STAC Toxics Research Plan
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: THE TOXICS COMMITMENT
On December 14, 1987, Governor Casey of Pennsylvania, Governor
Schaefer of Maryland, Governor Baliles of Virginia, Mayor Barry of
the District of Columbia, EPA Administrator Lee Thomas, and
Pennsylvania Representative Kenneth Cole (for the Chesapeake Bay
Commission) signed the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement. The Agreement
contains statements of goals, objectives, and specific commitments in
six major areas, one of which is water quality.
The goal stated for the Bay's water quality is to "Reduce and
control point and nonpoint sources of pollution to attain the water
quality condition necessary to support the living resources of the
Bay". The Agreement adds, "The improvement and maintenance of water
quality are the single most critical elements in the overall
restoration and protection of the Chesapeake Bay." Consequently,
specific commitments are made in the pact to prepare baywide
"strategies" for the control and reduction of inputs of nutrients,
conventional pollutants, and toxics to the Bay.
Specific to toxics, the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement contains
the following commitment:
o By December 1988, to develop, adopt and begin
implementation of a basinwide strategy to achieve a
reduction of toxics consistent with the Water
Quality Act of 1987 which will ensure protection of
human health and living resources. The strategy
will cover both point and nonpoint sources,
monitoring protocols, enforcement of pretreatment
regulations and methods for dealing with in-place
toxic sediments where necessary.
This document was prepared by representatives of the signatories
to the Bay Agreement, working through a Water Quality Task Group, to
fulfill this commitment.
Toxics Definition
For the purposes of this Strategy the definition of toxics or
toxic substances is as follows:
Toxic substance means a substance which can cause death,
disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer, genetic
mutations, physiological or reproductive malfunctions or
physical deformities in any organism or its offspring, or
which can become poisonous after concentration in the food
chain or in combination with other substances.
-1-
-------
This definition refers only to man-made substances and not
naturally occurring substances.
Toxics Goal
The long term goal of this Strategy is to work towards a toxics
free Bay by eliminating the discharge of toxic substances from
all controllable sources. By the year 2000 the input of toxic
substances from all controllable sources to the Chesapeake Bay
will be reduced to levels that result in no toxic or
bioaccumulative impacts on the living resources that inhabit the
Bay or on human health.
Manor Commitments
In order to meet this target, the Strategy uses the requirements
of the 1987 Clean Water Act as a foundation for action. However, the
Strategy also establishes a number of major new commitments on the
part of the signatories. These commitments include:
* Developing a Toxics Loading Inventory to better
establish loadings of toxic substances to the Bay
* Creation of a Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern list that
will provide a basis for assessing and then controlling
substances that are toxic to the Bay or human health.
* Agreement to have point source Toxics Management
Programs include both chemical and biological
monitoring, compatible definitions of toxicity, and
compatible requirements for initiating toxicity
reductions.
* Conducting a Baywide pesticide use survey and developing
appropriate pesticide programs.
* Creating permanent air monitoring stations to measure
long term trends in atmospheric deposition of toxics
* Promoting hazardous waste minimization programs
* Taking a multi-media perspective in developing and
implementing this Strategy
The remainder of this document describes in greater detail the
specific steps that the signatories believe are necessary to achieve
a comprehensive approach to the reduction of toxics.
-2-
-------
Organization of the Strategy
The Strategy has five chapters. They are:
1. Toxics and the Bay
2. Assessing the Toxics Problem
3. Water Quality Standards and Living Resource
Requirements
4. Towards a Comprehensive Approach to Toxics Reduction
5. Implementing the Strategy and Measuring Progress
Each of these chapters contains some general discussion of the
subject issues followed by a listing of milestones and schedules for
specific actions which the signatories to the 1987 Chesapeake Bay
Agreement are committing to do under this Strategy.
The Strategy also contains three Appendices. Appendix A
describes the requirements under the Clean Water Act for toxics.
Appendix B describes, in detail, the individual programs in each
state and EPA. As was the case with previous strategy documents for
conventional pollutants and nutrients, Pennsylvania, Virginia,
Maryland, and the District of Columbia (herein known as the "states")
have each developed pollution control programs under varying sets of
regulations, laws, and budgetary constraints, to address
environmental problems particular to their state waters. As a
result, the programs have evolved at different rates and in varying
forms. Appendix B provides the opportunity for each state to
highlight the unique elements of their toxics control programs.
Appendix C contains the Toxics Research Plan that was prepared
by a workgroup of the Chesapeake Bay Program's Scientific and
Technical Advisory Committee. The findings of the recommended
research activities will support the toxicological hazard and
environmental exposure components of a risk assessment framework for
defining the impacts of toxics on the Chesapeake Bay system. The
resultant risk assessment framework will eventually lead to
structured risk reduction decision making through this Reduction
Strategy.
-3-
-------
CHAPTER 1 - TOXICS AND THE BAY
Water quality programs have focused for several decades on the
control of conventional pollutants, primarily oxygen demanding
materials and suspended solids. For example, this effort has been
very successful with point sources, since the majority of dischargers
achieved final effluent limits (secondary treatment at the minimum,
and in some cases more stringent levels) by the July 1988 deadline
set in the National Municipal Policy.
Having addressed many of the problems associated with
conventional pollutants, attention has shifted to other causes of
water quality impairment, including nutrients and toxics. Nutrient
enrichment has been identified as a major cause of deteriorating
water quality in the Bay. The Baywide Nutrient Reduction Strategy
will guide the states toward achieving a 40% reduction in nitrogen
and phosphorus loads to the Bay by the year 2000.
A series of reports published by EPA in 1983 detailed the
findings of the seven year study of the Bay, jointly conducted by the
Bay area states and the federal government, including an assessment
of the problems caused by toxics. Researchers found high
concentrations of metals and organic compounds in some portions of
the Bay, most notably in highly industrialized areas such as the
Elizabeth River and the Patapsco River. High levels of metal
contamination were discovered in sediments in the upper Potomac,
upper James, small sections of the Rappahannock and York Rivers, and
the upper mid-Bay area.
Toxic compounds are affecting the Bay's resources in these
areas. Research and monitoring have shown a relationship between the
levels of toxic compounds found in the sediment and the survival of
individual organisms and the resulting health of the system. A
better definition of toxics and their impacts is important with
initial priorities focusing on protection of the Bay's living
resources.
With the exception of these "hot spots", sufficient baseline
information is lacking to confirm whether other areas of the Bay are
impacted by the concentrations of toxic substances found. As stated
in the Appendix C Research Plan, "no critical compendium of
scientific information relating to distribution and effects of toxics
in the Chesapeake Bay has been formulated. Without such information,
developing hypotheses concerning effects of toxic substances on biota
in the Chesapeake Bay is difficult if not impossible." The
relationship between the concentrations of toxics in the sediment and
water column and their impact on living resources outside of these
hot spot areas is not clear enough to direct appropriate management
actions in many cases. The need for information and further research
to acquire the necessary understanding are discussed in Appendix C.
1-1
-------
A comprehensive water quality monitoring program has been
ongoing since 1984 in the Bay and its major tributaries, with a focus
on the dynamics and water quality problems associated with nutrient
enrichment. Sediment sampling has been conducted on a much more
limited scale for the purpose of assessing toxic contamination in the
Bay, but additional work is needed to expand our understanding of the
distribution and concentration of toxic substances in the Bay.
Limited data exists prior to the 1970s on the levels of toxics in the
Bay system. Therefore, the concentrations of toxic substances
present in the Bay before that time cannot be documented.
A growing awareness of the potential hazards to Bay organisms
and human health from exposure to toxics has prompted the development
of this Strategy. We recognize, however, that detecting,
understanding, and controlling toxics is an extraordinarily difficult
task. For example:
o There are potentially thousands of toxic
substances entering the Bay from point sources
and nonpoint sources. Over four million organic
compounds are known to exist, with about
sixty-five thousand in commercial use today and
1,000 new compounds being developed every year.
Federal emphasis on controlling toxics from point
sources has been directed towards 126 "priority
pollutants", with criteria development focused on
only this short list of substances. Recent EPA
estimates indicate that of the 65,000 chemicals
in commercial use, less than 2% of these have
been adequately tested for their effects on human
health and the environment.
o Some toxic pollutants cause toxic effects at
extremely low concentrations, even below the
level of detection achieved by experienced
laboratories. The analytical procedures involved
are very complex, making burdensome quality
assurance and quality control programs extremely
important in ensuring that reliable and accurate
data are gathered.
o Similarly, even low concentrations of toxic
chemicals can create unacceptable risks to humans
and the Bay's living resources. Assessing such
risks is extremely difficult.
o Chemical analyses for toxics can be very
expensive, with costs approaching $1,500 per
sample, depending on the complexity of the sample
(number of parameters analyzed), and the
detection level required.
1-2
-------
o Although a substance and mixture of substances
may exhibit toxic effects in a laboratory test,
detecting those effects in the environment may be
extremely difficult. Cause and effect
relationships are difficult to demonstrate or
prove. Extrapolating laboratory results to the
"real world" involves many scientific
assumptions, and it is impossible to exactly
simulate the natural setting in the lab.
o The most familiar form of water quality
monitoring involves testing of ambient water
column samples. Because many toxic substances
accumulate in sediments, specialized sampling
could be required. Sediment work involves more
complex sampling gear, and more complicated
preparation before analysis. Recent studies also
point to high concentrations of toxics in the
microlayer at the water surface of the Bay.
o Toxics problems cross over into a number of media
such as surface water, groundwater, air, land,
and bottom sediments.
It is clear that dealing with toxics is highly complex and there
is a need for a great deal of additional monitoring and research (see
Appendix C). However, it is also recognized that aggressive toxics
control programs can be pursued for known toxics problems while data
is being gathered on those toxics issues which may not be well
understood at this time. Implementation of this Strategy recognizes
that efforts to control nutrients and sediment transport in the Bay
watershed will contribute to the control of toxics in the Bay. The
input of some toxics will be reduced due to Best Management Practices
aimed at erosion control even though they are installed primarily to
reduce nutrients. The long term effects on the Bay's waters,
sediments, and resources from toxic pollution makes it imperative
that the signatories pursue toxic reduction programs in an
expeditious manner, with initial emphasis given to protecting the
Bay's living resources and early correction of the known toxics
problems.
Environmental legislation of the 1970s and 1980s has resulted in
laws, regulations ,and programs that have tended to focus on
addressing pollution problems in the water, air or on the land
separately. The 1987 Amendments to the Clean Water Act, for example,
are a basic cornerstone of this Strategy. The Act requires states to
do the following:
* Develop lists of impaired surface waters due to toxics,
identify point sources and amounts of pollutants they
1-3
-------
discharge that cause toxic impacts, and develop individual
control strategies for each of these point sources.
* Adopt standards for certain pollutants listed as toxic. At
this time there are 126 priority pollutants listed in the
Act.
* Develop State Nonpoint Source Management Plans that
identify statewide management programs designed to
quantify, control and limit the effects of nonpoint source
pollution on the attainment of water quality goals.
However, the signatories believe that in order to fully protect
the Bay, we must go beyond the legal requirements of the Clean Water
Act in order to deal more effectively with the full spectrum of toxic
compounds, as well as cross-media problems caused by toxics. To do
that, we need better information on sources and loads of toxics,
effects on biota and human health, and the efficacy of control
actions. The remainder of this document lays out specific steps to
achieve such a comprehensive approach to the reduction of toxics with
recognition of the need to address the most important concerns first.
1-4
-------
CHAPTER 2: ASSESSING THE TOXICS PROBLEM
Toxics monitoring currently conducted by federal and state
agencies, localities, and private industry throughout the Chesapeake
Bay region provides only a partial picture of the types and amount of
toxic inputs to the Bay and the toxics present in the Bay. A major
problem facing Bay managers, regulators, and scientists in reducing
toxics is the lack of adequate information on sources, loads and
effects of toxic chemicals in the Bay. This Strategy seeks to
redress these shortcomings by developing a coordinated approach to
research and data gathering. It then initiates a process for
determining which chemicals, because of the special threats they pose
to the Bay, ought to receive priority regulatory attention.
The following sections describe the specific tasks and
commitments which the signatories agree to undertake to assess the
toxics problems in the Bay.
A. Research
As stated previously, there remains a great deal that is not
understood about the effects of toxics on living resources and their
habitat, the fate of toxics in the environment, and the introduction
of new, unknown toxic compounds. As these new toxic chemicals
present more complex challenges it will be necessary to improve the
technical expertise of both the public and private sectors in order
to meet these challenges. Development of control strategies for
these problems depends on the results of continued monitoring and
research initiatives. Although specific control actions are not
defined for these areas needing further monitoring and research, our
ability to address those problems will grow over time as more
information becomes available.
Therefore, concurrent with the development of this Basinwide
Strategy a toxics research plan was developed by the Chesapeake Bay
Programs's Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC). The
STAC research plan is contained in Appendix C as a complement to the
Basinwide Reduction Strategy.
The Research Plan is designed around a risk assessment
approach. It is structured to provide for the development and
validation of source measurement protocols and designs, modeling of
transport and fate processes, and increased understanding of the
origin and magnitude of effects. The findings of the recommended
research activities will support the toxicological hazard and
environmental exposure components of a risk assessment framework for
defining the impact of toxics on the Chesapeake Bay system. The
resultant risk assessment framework will eventually lead to
2-1
-------
structured risk reduction decision making to help prioritize
implementation of this Strategy.
In addition to the specific research areas recommended in
Appendix C, the following study areas have been identified as needing
further study:
* A Baywide monitoring project to assess the extent, the
levels, and the significance of bioaccumulative
compounds that are being discharged in the Bay system.
* Additional studies of the microlayer to determine the
extent and level of contamination, potential impact on
the Bay's resources, and whether special toxics
reduction programs are needed to deal with any
problems found.
* Studies of the effects of toxics on living resources,
using indicators more sensitive than standard acute
and chronic bioassays, and determination of the
potential for use of these indicators in toxic
management programs.
* Evaluation of methods for determining the effects of
toxic discharges on human health (carcinogenicity,
mutagenicity, and teratogenicity).
* Studies of the processes effecting the release of
toxics from sediments into the water column and
bioaccumulating in the food chain.
* Critical habitat that need to be monitored for toxics.
B. Evaluation of Analytical Capabilities for Toxics
In order to properly assess the ambient levels of toxics and to
measure the progress towards achieving reductions in toxics loadings
and toxicity, the appropriate analytical tools and capabilities must
be available. As the Toxics Research Plan points out, "The type and
extent of chemical analyses performed on environmental samples to
determine the presence and amount of toxic substances is often
determined by regulatory statutes or laws rather than by
environmental significance. As a result, much of the scientific
instrumentation and personnel involved in toxics work in the Bay have
been assembled for these "set" or "routine" analyses. The necessary
equipment and expertise to perform state-of-the-art chemical analyses
in the Bay region are at present only minimally available and are not
distributed equally throughout the region."
2-2
-------
The signatories agree that a survey of the existing capabilities
of state, federal, private and university laboratories within the Bay
region is needed to ensure the effective and efficient implementation
of the Strategy. The survey will be designed to gauge the strengths
and weaknesses of the current analytical capabilities both in the
private and public sectors for meeting the needs of the toxics
reduction, monitoring, and research programs within the Bay basin.
Based on the results of this survey, a report will be developed
describing an appropriate plan of action at both the state and
federal levels to address the identified needs and issues.
C. Chesapeake Bay Toxics Data Collection. Management and Synthesis
A critical element in an effective Toxics Strategy is an
informational data base which is available to support management
decisions and actions. Data synthesized into a useful form are
essential when attempting to make management and policy decisions in
an area where the unknowns often overwhelm the known.
The signatories commit to developing a toxics data base for the
Chesapeake Bay Program to provide the support necessary for the
toxics reduction, monitoring, and research programs included in this
Basinwide Strategy.
D. Toxics Loading Inventory
Existing toxic control programs utilize two primary procedures
to identify toxicity problems: (1) bioassay of effluents and
environmental samples to detect toxic effects, if any; and (2)
chemical analysis to identify agents causing toxicity, or chemicals
present in amounts that exceed water quality criteria. These
procedures are used to select sites exhibiting impacts from toxics,
which are usually confined to an area in close proximity to the
source. Thus, toxic control programs have relied upon these
procedures and have not placed much attention on the overall loadings
of toxics.
A comprehensive baseline for the loadings of toxics to the Bay
system from point and nonpoint sources cannot be established at this
time due to a lack of monitoring data. The states recognize there
will be merit in accounting for the loadings of toxics, especially
for the purpose of providing the public a simple way of measuring
progress in toxics control programs. The priority need is to obtain
loading data on discharges which could have toxic impacts on the
living resources of the Bay. In addition, tracking the loading of
certain toxic compounds should also provide government officials and
the public with an additional tool for program evaluation and setting
priorities for toxics control program efforts needed beyond
correction of currently known problems.
2-3
-------
Therefore, the signatories are committed to initiate the process
of developing a Toxics Loading Inventory (TLI) of the Bay for the
following major source areas:
o Point Sources: municipal, industrial, and federal
facilities.
o Nonpoint Sources; agricultural, urban, shipping,
groundwater, and atmospheric deposition.
The Appendix C Research Plan addresses some of the difficulties
inherent in determining sources of toxic chemicals: "although
detection of toxics is relatively simple for well known compounds
emanating from point sources, this is not the case for unidentified
or unregulated compounds, or those entering the Bay via atmospheric
deposition, groundwater, or urban runoff. For these compounds,
chemical analyses must be capable of detecting as many compounds as
possible. The problem of sampling is particularly difficult. For
these reasons, most of the inventories of toxic loadings to the Bay
are less than ideal either because they ignored some routes of entry
such as groundwater or atmospheric deposition, or because the
chemical analyses of the source materials were minimal and
incomplete." For certain sources, such as atmospheric deposition,
estimating toxic loads will be extremely difficult and will most
likely never be as accurate as point source loading estimates.
Initial compilation of the TLI will reflect the availability of
information as much as the sources of toxics loadings.
The purpose of the TLI is to provide a meaningful, realistic,
and responsible way to measure progress in reducing the amount of
toxics discharged. The TLI is not intended to be utilized to provide
information for use in developing percent reduction goals, because
the nature of any toxics control program is the detection of toxic
substances, discharged in toxic amounts. The mere presence of a
toxic compound in a source (point or nonpoint) does not establish
that toxicity will result in the receiving stream.
The emphasis on load inventories does not obscure the necessity
to consider concentrations at any point in time. Occasional
discharges of highly toxic substances may contribute little on an
annual loading basis, but may be responsible for significant harm to
living resources. Management programs need to be flexible enough to
respond with different approaches to protect sensitive life stages of
the living resources.
The states believe the TLI will be most useful at the river
basin, subbasin, or river segment level. Loading information for
these smaller geographical areas will be more meaningful to toxics
control programs due to the relative near field impacts of toxics.
2-4
-------
The commitment and milestones at the end of this chapter
describe the workplan and schedule for initiating development of a
Toxics Loading Inventory for the Chesapeake Bay watershed beginning
with those which could impact the Bay's living resources.
E. Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern
In addition to the information that will be gathered for the
Toxics Loading Inventory, the signatories recognize the need to
identify toxics of concern that are causing or potentially may cause
problems for the living resources and their habitats within the Bay.
As a direct outgrowth from the Toxics Loading Inventory and efforts
to develop living resource habitat requirements for toxics, a
proposed Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern List will be developed by
the signatories. The Toxics of Concern will be a listing of toxic
pollutants identified as impacting or having the potential to impact
the Bay system and targeted for regulatory and management action
within the Strategy framework. The accompanying matrix will contain
contaminant sources, toxicity, criteria/standard, geographical
distribution, analysis and sample matrix information.
The principal objective of the Toxics of Concern List and matrix
will be to identify and provide concise, supporting documentation on
key toxicants with the potential to impact the Bay system, thereby
targeting these contaminants for future research, monitoring,
assessment, control and prevention actions. Managers involved in
environmental decision making related to toxics are faced with the
task of synthesizing and assessing a wide diversity of technical
information in order to deal effectively with contaminant issues.
The Toxics of Concern List will provide both a Baywide consensus on
contaminants to be targeted by various research, monitoring, and
management programs and a comprehensive compilation of information to
be used as part of decision making processes.
Within the Strategy framework, the Toxics of Concern List is
directly connected with the development and continued enhancement of
the toxics loading inventory, Baywide toxics monitoring programs, and
priority setting for control, reduction, and prevention actions to
reach the goals stated within this document.
There will be a continual feedback loop between the toxics
loading inventory and the contaminants of concern list. The initial
toxics of concern will be used to expand the list of toxic compounds
and source terms included in the Toxics Loading Inventory. From that
point, as the toxics loading inventory is expanded into other media,
additional specific compounds will be identified for possible
inclusion on the toxics of concern list.
2-5
-------
The individual toxics of concern will be used to reevaluate or
develop new lists of parameters to be analyzed as part of ongoing or
new toxics monitoring programs. As the matrix will contain
information on the medium in which the contaminant may be found, the
sources, analytical methods, and geographical distribution within the
Bay, the matrix will be instrumental in planning monitoring programs.
Priorities for research, monitoring, regulatory or management
actions can be established based on the defined list of toxics of
concern. Agencies will be able to set priorities based on individual
chemicals or classes of chemicals, as well as focusing attention on
specific use patterns or contaminant sources. The states will be
able to use the list to schedule the adoption of water quality
standards, consistent with the commitments contained with this
strategy.
The process will result in: (1) a listing of these toxic
compounds and issues along with a review of existing data; (2)
identification of additional special toxics monitoring for these
compounds for discharges, ambient waters, sediments, or tissue as
appropriate to gain required data; and (3) a description of the
alternative remedial actions necessary to counter these problems.
Commitments and Milestones - Toxics Assessment
1. The signatories commit to support a program of directed research
for toxics in the Chesapeake Bay in order to:
* improve current capabilities for detecting, assessing, and
managing toxics;
* provide a better understanding of the current significance
of toxics in the Bay and the potential risks associated
with their presence; and,
* provide a better understanding of the processes by which
toxics may enter the system, move, and become available to
the Bay's living resources.
2. By July 1991. the signatories commit to completing a basinwide
survey of the existing analytical capabilities for toxics,
report on the findings, and begin implementing an appropriate
plan of action to address the identified analytical needs and
issues.
* By December 1989. the signatories commit to develop a
workplan for undertaking and completing the survey. The
2-6
-------
workplan will describe the overall analytical needs for
implementation of the Strategy, the elements of the survey,
a listing of laboratories targeted by the survey, the
mechanism for undertaking the survey, and the schedule for
production of the survey findings report and action plan.
3. The signatories commit to develop a comprehensive listing of
data needs for assessment and management of toxics not being
addressed through existing monitoring programs and to design and
implement the necessary data collection programs to address the
identified needs.
* By July 1989, develop and update every two years, a
complete set of narrative descriptions of all ongoing
toxics monitoring programs within the Chesapeake Bay basin
to be published in the Monitoring Subcommittee's Chesapeake
Bay Basin Monitoring Program Atlas.
* By December 1989, develop a listing of the identified data
needs, evaluate the utility of existing and planned toxic
monitoring programs to address those data needs, and
outline a schedule for designing and implementing the
monitoring programs emphasizing those needs which are
important to protecting the Bay's living resources.
4. The signatories commit to develop, support and maintain a
basinwide toxics data base accessible through the Chesapeake Bay
Program Computer Center and other network data bases where
necessary.
* By July 1989f develop a workplan describing the intended
structure of the data base, schedule for data submission
from ongoing monitoring programs, the schedule for
acquisition of historical Bay basin toxics data, and plans
for linking the database with the development of the
Chesapeake Bay Basin Toxics Loading Inventory.
* By December 1989, the Chesapeake Bay Program Data
Management Plans for Water Quality, Biological Data, and
Sediment Data will be updated and revised as appropriate to
include guidelines for the format and submission of all
forms of Bay related toxics data including but not limited
to water, microlayer, atmospheric deposition, air quality,
sediment, and tissue.
* By July 1990, the toxics database will be made available to
all interested users.
2-7
-------
5. The signatories commit to develop and maintain a Chesapeake Bay
Basin Toxics Loading Inventory, accessible through the
Chesapeake Bay Program Computer Center, for all major point
sources (municipal, industrial, and federal facilities) and
nonpoint sources (agricultural, urban, shipping, groundwater,
and atmospheric deposition) of toxics.
* By December 1989, the signatories commit to develop a
workplan which describes: the inventory structure and its
intended focus on the Bay and regional and subbasin scales,
where appropriate; signatory roles and responsibilities for
developing, maintaining and expanding the Toxics Loading
Inventory; plans for identifying additional source data
needs; and a schedule for meeting the commitment.
* By December 1990, the initial Toxics Loading Inventory will
be made accessible to the Program participants and other
interested users. The Toxics Loading Inventory will
include point source toxics loads, building upon the
Chesapeake Bay Point Source Atlas now accessible through
the Chesapeake Bay Program Computer, the point sources
identified in accordance with the requirements of Section
304 (1) of the Clean Water Act and any other available
data. Nonpoint source loading information that is
available will also be included.
Sources of information will be discharge permits and
accompanying discharge monitoring reports, existing file
information on particular point sources, SARA Title III
Inventory data, NURP study data, pesticide use surveys, and
other source monitoring program data as appropriate.
Source data needs and monitoring programs to collect the
necessary loading information will be identified and
described for both point and nonpoint sources of toxics.
* Every two years the Toxics Loading Inventory will be
reviewed, expanded and revised as necessary. This process
will include point and nonpoint sources as investigations
identify additional discharges, monitoring programs and
research studies that refine source estimates, and
additional toxics of concerns are identified. Revised and
updated versions of the Toxics Loading Inventory will be
completed by December of each successive two year period
after the initial inventory is developed.
6. The Signatories commit to develop and update a Chesapeake Bay
Toxics of Concern list, maintain a matrix of supporting
information, and utilize the list and supporting matrix to
establish priorities for future standards adoption, monitoring,
2-8
-------
assessment, research, and toxic reduction actions as described
within this Strategy.
* By September 1989. the signatories commit to hold a joint
public meeting to invite input from the public on a
workplan for developing the Toxics of Concern list. The
Water Quality Task Group will use this information in
developing the workplan and the initial list.
* By December 1989. the signatories commit to complete a
workplan describing the specific selection criteria for
toxics to be incorporated into the list; how toxics of
Baywide concern will be addressed; description of the
supporting matrix elements and corresponding sources of
information; plans for surveying existing source and
monitoring data to develop the inventory of toxics from
which the list will be developed; description of the
applications and timetable for using the list; the schedule
for future updates of the list and supporting matrix
elements and methods for including public involvement in
the process.
* By March 1990. an initial Toxics of Concern List will be
developed for use by the Chesapeake Bay Program.
* Every two years the Toxics of Concern List will be reviewed
and revised as necessary when monitoring programs and
research studies identify other toxic compounds meeting the
selection criteria. A revised and updated Toxics of
Concern List will be completed by March of each successive
two year period after the initial list is developed.
7. The signatories commit to support and promote interdisciplinary
analysis and reporting of recent findings from toxic monitoring
and research programs applicable to management of toxics and
ensure wide distribution of the resultant publications.
8. By July 1989. the signatories agree to convene a scientific
workshop to develop consensus protocols for the use of
biological indicators to monitor the effects of toxic
contaminants in Chesapeake Bay habitats important to living
resources.
9. By December 1989. the signatories commit to develop and begin to
implement a plan for Baywide assessment and monitoring of the
effects of toxic substances, within natural habitats, on
selected commercially, recreationally and ecologically important
species of living resources.
2-9
-------
CHAPTER 3. WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND LIVING RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS
Water quality standards and living resource habitat objectives
are important management tools for measuring progress towards the
Strategy goals. Because these tools are chemical specific in their
approach, they need to be combined with biological assessment
techniques to ensure all potential impacts are being identified and
addressed. The ultimate measures of success will be the restoration
of quality habitat and abundant living resource populations.
Both water quality standards and living resource habitat
objectives are useful guides for determining the quality of the
aquatic habitat. However, their management application differs when
applied within the Strategy framework. Chesapeake Bay water quality
standards will serve as means to secure regulatory actions where
necessary for a selected set of contaminants; living resource habitat
objectives will continue to remain as the goals for restoration of
specific habitats for toxics and other controlling habitat
requirements.
Water Quality Standards
Water quality standards have been the cornerstone of water
quality management programs for many years. Standards establish the
goals for water quality through narrative statements and numeric
criteria. Both EPA and the states have responsibilities in the
standards setting process. EPA issues national criteria
recommendations under section 304(a) of the Clean Water Act which may
form the basis for state standards. The states are charged with the
responsibility of adopting water quality standards to protect the
designated uses of their state waters. Adopting water quality
standards must follow the regulation adoption process within each
state. Therefore, under this Strategy the states, by committing to
consider standards adoption, do agree to begin the regulatory process
for standards adoption, but cannot commit to, nor predict, the final
outcome of the process.
The Bay states are currently on different schedules for
conducting the triennial reviews of their state water quality
standards. However, it may be beneficial for the states to conduct
some regulatory processes for standards adoption simultaneously, such
as for a chemical appearing on the list of Chesapeake Bay Toxics of
Concern. We recognize that for these cases the states have the
flexibility of proceeding towards standards adoption at any time and
not just during their triennial review period.
The demand for national criteria is already being intensified
by the requirements of the 1987 amendments to the Clean Water Act.
(Appendix A to this Strategy contains a summary of the requirements.)
3-1
-------
The focus of the Act is on the 307(a) toxics, the so called 126
priority pollutants. EPA has published national criteria for 25
pollutants for the protection of aquatic life and 109 for the
protection of human health. To enhance the effectiveness of this
system, EPA needs to increase the rate at which national water
quality criteria recommendations are published during each fiscal
year. In addition, the signatories also acknowledge that criteria
need to be developed for those chemicals appearing on the list of
toxics of concern in the Chesapeake Bay, but which may not be
included on Clean Water Act's list of priority pollutants.
EPA has also issued guidance (though not yet final as of early
September 1988) to assist the states in complying with the new
requirements of the Act. The guidance outlines three options (or
combinations thereof) that the states may use. Appendix B contains
descriptions of the status within each state for implementing these
requirements.
Living Resource Habitat Recruirements
In addition to the regulatory process of establishing goals for
water quality programs, the Chesapeake Bay Program has initiated a
process of defining the habitat objectives for the living resources
of the Bay. As stated in the report, Habitat Requirements For
Chesapeake Bay Living Resources, which was adopted in January 1988 by
the principals to the Bay Agreement, "Strategies based primarily upon
water quality....cannot necessarily ensure the restoration and
protection of living resources. The most tangible signs of
widespread environmental problems in the Bay have been shifts in the
relative abundance of living resources. Therefore, living resources
serve as excellent indicators of the Bay's recovery for Bay managers
and the public." The report goes on to state, "...the recovery of
species which have declined in Chesapeake Bay and the reestablishment
of a balanced ecosystem must be seen as the ultimate measures of
success in restoring the quality of Chesapeake Bay. These goals will
be unattainable unless certain minimum habitat requirements are
achieved." The research needs required to develop criteria and
techniques for the measurement and evaluation of the impacts of toxic
components on the living resources of the Bay are stated in the
attached Research Plan (Appendix C).
As an aid to utilizing the habitat requirements information the
Bay Program is developing a use document targeted for management
agencies. This process should help to identify needed water quality
standards and to allow pollution control programs and natural
resource management efforts to take into account the needs of living
resources.
3-2
-------
The states recognize the importance to the Bay cleanup of
working towards consistent goals for water quality and habitat
requirements. While each state sets standards under state laws and
regulations, the milestones contained below will provide an
opportunity for the states to work towards consistent water quality
and living resource goals within the Bay.
Commitments and Milestones - Water Quality Standards and Habitat
Requirements
1. The states commit to adopting during their triennial review the
necessary water quality standards for the 307(a) priority
pollutants in accordance with the Clean Water Act and EPA's
regulations.
2. EPA commits to increase the rate at which national criteria
recommendations are published during each fiscal year by the
agency.
3. By July 1989. the states commit to develop and agree to a
consistent definition for where to apply national "freshwater"
and "marine" criteria and advisories for toxics within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed.
4. EPA commits to place priority on developing national water
quality criteria and advisories for those toxics of concern
specifically identified by the Chesapeake Bay Program.
* By March 1990. and on an annual basis thereafter, the
Chesapeake Bay Program will submit to the EPA Office of
Water, Criteria and Standards Division, a prioritized list
of toxic compounds taken from the Chesapeake Bay Toxics of
Concern List, to be considered as priorities for
development of water quality criteria, applicable to
Chesapeake Bay, for the next federal fiscal year.
Accompanying the prioritized list of criteria will be a
listing of compounds suggested for development of
advisories.
5. The states commit to collectively review the criteria and
advisories issued by EPA for toxics of concern in the
Chesapeake Bay and consider standards adoption for these toxics
during the next triennial review period.
6. By December 1989. EPA commits to issue guidance for the states
on ways to enhance water quality standards to better address
problems created by nonpoint sources of toxics. The states
will pursue incorporation of this guidance into their
management programs as appropriate.
3-3
-------
7. The signatories commit to explore means of using more generic
approaches to regulating classes of toxic substances and
pesticides in lieu of relying upon regulation of individual
chemicals. Any generic approach will be incorporated into
Strategy workplans as appropriate.
8. The signatories commit to use the information contained in the
Chesapeake Bay Program report, Habitat Requirements for
Chesapeake Bay Living Resources as guidance in toxics
management programs for those toxic pollutants not adopted as
water quality standards and to update the toxics related
habitat requirements contained within the document for listed
Toxics of Concern.
3-4
-------
CHAPTER 4. TOWARDS A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO TOXICS REDUCTION
In order to address the increasing threat of toxic pollution in
the Chesapeake Bay, the federal and state partners in the Bay cleanup
recognize that a more unified, basinwide approach is needed in the
future. Unlike the commitment in the Bay Agreement to reduce the
level of nutrients by 40%, the commitment in the Agreement to toxics
reduction does not contain any short, simple to understand target.
Therefore, as stated in the Executive Summary of this Strategy the
signatories agree to the following long-term goal:
The long term goal of this Strategy is to work towards a toxics
free Bay by eliminating the discharge of toxic substances from
all controllable sources. By the year 2000 the input of toxic
substances front all controllable sources to the Chesapeake Bay
will be reduced to levels that result in no toxic or
bioaccumulative impacts on the living resources that inhabit the
Bay or on human health.
The signatories have developed a series of milestones in order
to work towards the goal of the Strategy. Some of these milestones
call for specific tasks to be completed by a specific date. Some are
less specific. Some of the milestones deal with actual reductions in
the amount of toxics being discharged from point or nonpoint
sources. Others only deal with gathering additional data to support
future control efforts. The milestones also reflect the intention to
address the highest priority toxic problems first.
As outlined in Appendix A the Clean Water Act identifies
specific actions the states are to take to control toxics.
Individual control strategies are to be developed and implemented to
deal with listed toxic "hot spots", especially impacted by toxics
appearing on EPA's priority pollutant list. Although much attention
will be placed on these requirements in the near future as a first
priority, the Strategy is broader in scope to address other point and
nonpoint sources of toxics.
Although the costs of implementing the following commitments and
milestones cannot been accurately determined, it is evident they will
be high. An effective Baywide toxics management strategy will
involve monitoring, research, technology development, education, and
enforcement, with costs for assessing and controlling toxics
pollutants being borne by both the public and private industry.
However, the impact of toxic contamination on the Bay's resources is
also considerable, as for example in the closing of the James River
to fishing following Kepone contamination. The costs of toxics
reduction will be high, but the costs to the Bay and its resources of
not acting will also be high.
4-1
-------
Appendix B to this strategy contains summaries of the various
point source and nonpoint source programs currently being implemented
within the Bay states. Many of these programs are similar,
reflecting each state's response to the various federal environmental
laws such as the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, the Superfund, and pesticide use
registration laws. In addition, some programs reflect state laws and
initiatives that may be unique to a particular state and its
particular problems.
A. Commitments and Milestones - Point Sources
NPDES Permit Program
1. By February 1989. each state will develop and submit to EPA
in accordance with Section 304(1) of the Clean Water Act
their lists of waters impacted by toxics. Each state will
develop and submit to EPA Individual Control Strategies for
those discharges appearing on the 304(1) list.
2. By December 1989, each state and EPA commit to have Toxics
Management Programs in place that will include the
following components:
* A schedule for including appropriate toxics monitoring
programs (biological and chemical) in the permits of
all priority discharges. Priority discharges will
include both major and minor discharges.
* Criteria that are compatible with the other Bay states
and consistent with EPA requirements for defining
acute toxicity and chronic toxicity.
* Requirements for initiating aquatic life and human
health toxicity determinations and reduction
evaluations that are compatible with the other Bay
states and consistent with EPA requirements.
3. By January 1990 or upon completion of the present studies,
EPA commits to provide guidance to the states for including
the control of bioaccumulative compounds in toxics
management programs. The states will pursue incorporation
of this guidance into their management programs as
appropriate.
4. By July 1990. the states commit to develop a workplan for
conducting a program to "fingerprint" effluent, sediment
and tissue samples at selected point source discharges to
the Bay. Data from this program will be incorporated into
the Toxics Database.
4-2
-------
5. By July 1990. the states commit to develop a workplan for
conducting a program of toxicity studies at selected point
source discharges to the Bay. Data from these toxicity and
chemical tests will be incorporated into the Toxics
Database.
6. By July 1991, all priority discharges will have chemical
and biological toxics monitoring programs included in their
permits. Priority discharges will include both major and
minor discharges.
7. By June 1992. all discharges identified on the 1989 304(1)
list will be in compliance with their Individual Control
Strategies for toxics (as required by their permits).
8. By July 1996. all major discharges not included on the 1989
304(1) list will be in compliance with their Toxicity
Reduction Evaluations (as required by their permits).
9. The states commit to take timely and appropriate
enforcement action, conduct spot checks of self-monitored
permittees, and take follow-up actions against
non-complying dischargers.
10. The states commit to continue development and
implementation of the Permit Compliance System (PCS) for
NPDES permits to include archival of data.
11. By December 1989, EPA, in consultation with the states,
commits to examine the feasibility of requiring that
chemical and biological evaluations be performed, and
appropriate remedial measures implemented, before allowing
a discharge to the Bay or its tributaries of 1) a
significantly changed waste from an existing facility or 2)
any discharge from a new facility. By July 1990. the
states commit to collectively respond to the conclusions
and recommendations of EPA's feasibility study.
Pretreatment
1. Delegated states will inspect, and audit as needed, those
POTWs with pretreatment programs on an annual basis. For
non-delegated states, EPA will conduct these inspections
and audits.
2. Delegated states will inspect selected categorical
discharges on an annual basis and the remaining significant
dischargers at least once during the term of the Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW) permit.
4-3
-------
3. Delegated states will take appropriate enforcement and
follow-up action against non-complying POTWs.
4. New candidate POTWs for pretreatment program development
will be investigated and included as necessary.
5. Delegated states will conduct sampling at priority POTWs at
least annually, and at the significant dischargers when
necessary.
B. Commitments and Milestones - Nonpoint Sources
Urban
1. By December 1989. the states commit to develop consistent
methodologies for estimating loads and/or load delivery
calculations, for developed urban land uses.
2. By December 1990. the states commit to use the developed
methodology to quantify and characterize toxic loads from
urban areas into the Bay basin.
3. Following promulgation of stormwater regulations by EPA,
the states commit to develop programs to regulate urban
stormwater discharges.
Pesticides
1. By December 1989. the signatories commit to summarize and
analyze the baseline demonstration watershed data relative
to pesticides.
2. By December 1989, the signatories commit to completing a
pesticide use survey of the Chesapeake Bay basin through a
comprehensive review of existing use information;
collection of new data where necessary; incorporation of
survey findings in the toxics data base; and utilization of
the findings to target Integrated Pest Management programs.
3. By December 1989. the signatories commit to review existing
Integrated Pest Management and Sustainable Agriculture
Programs and develop alternatives for increasing
utilization of these concepts in agricultural production.
4. By December 1990. the signatories commit to implement
necessary new and/or expanded monitoring programs for
pesticides within the basin.
4-4
-------
5. By December 1991. the states commit to identify additional
pesticide programs as necessary, for example IPMs for urban
areas.
6. EPA commits to review methods for improving coordination
between the Toxic Substances Control Act process and the
information needs on aquatic toxicity for water quality
programs so that more information on the toxicity of
chemicals to aquatic life is developed prior to the use of
approved chemicals. The signatories commit to explore the
development of a Basinwide and national toxics registry of
chemicals that are preferred for use due to their more
limited potential for causing environmental harm.
Air Deposition
1. By December 1989. the signatories commit to ensure that
pertinent monitoring data is supplied to the Chesapeake Bay
Program Toxics Data Base, and utilize that information to
redirect ongoing and future monitoring programs to focus on
those cross media toxic pollutants which are present in the
Chesapeake Bay system and the ambient air.
2. EPA and other federal agencies commit to continue national
research efforts on atmospheric deposition in the
Chesapeake Bay basin. EPA commits to develop a national
atmospheric pollutant deposition monitoring network and
computer model to interpret the data. Results of the work
will be supplied to the Chesapeake Bay Program as part of
the national strategy to reduce the deposition of airborne
toxics.
3. The signatories commit to continue building toxic emissions
inventories. When sufficient emissions information exists,
it will be possible to generate multi-media dispersion
models which predict expected concentrations of pollutants
and their impact on the environment of the Bay.
4. The signatories commit to take full advantage of innovative
technologies which may become available in the long-term.
Such technologies might include satellite measurement of
pollutant concentrations or improvements to the minimum
detectable levels of analytical equipment.
5. The signatories commit to support long-term research into
the mechanisms for pollutant transfer between air and water
as it relates to the Chesapeake Bay.£
4-5
-------
6. The signatories commit to designate and maintain permanent
monitoring stations in the Bay to measure the long term
trends in atmospheric deposition of toxic pollutants
Solid and Hazardous Waste
1. The states commit to promote hazardous waste minimization
by conducting information exchange and other public
education activities and setting reduction targets where
appropriate.
2. The states commit to comply with the Superfund Amendments
and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) 104(k) capacity
assurance certification requirements in accordance with
schedules promulgated by EPA.
3. By October 1989, the states commit to develop and initiate
an inspection program for Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA) facilities within the Bay watershed.
4. The states commit to comply with SARA 104(k) assurance
requirements in accordance with schedules promulgated by
EPA.
5. EPA commits to coordinate SARA Title III reporting
requirements with the Federal facilities in the basin.
6. EPA and the states commit to prioritize site cleanups for
solid and hazardous waste sites where there is evidence or
the likelihood of an impact on living resources.
C. Commitments and Milestones - Contaminated Sediments
1. By December 1989, the signatories commit to design and
implement a long-term sediment monitoring program to
identify the location and extent of contaminated sediments
within the Bay and its tidal tributaries and to track
multiple year trends in sediment concentrations of toxics.
2. EPA commits to promote the technology transfer of
information on sediment toxicity testing to the scientific
and regulatory communities by having the appropriate EPA
research laboratories evaluate and modify existing sediment
toxicity tests within the Chesapeake Bay basin as part of
the process of validating these testing protocols.
3. After reviewing the EPA testing protocols, the states
4-6
-------
commit to work with EPA to implement toxicity testing of
sediments within the Bay watershed.
4. Following recommendations by the EPA Science Advisory Board
on the scientific validity of methodologies to estimate
sediment toxicity and biological impacts of in-place
contaminated sediments, EPA will work with the states and
other federal agencies in using the above methodologies to
develop a Chesapeake Bay specific sediment quality
evaluation protocol by December 1991.
5. The states commit to pursue incorporating appropriate
sediment protocols into their toxics management programs.
6. By December 1990, EPA commits to complete a study of the
feasibility of developing a Superfund type program for
contaminated sediments.
4-7
-------
CHAPTER 5: IMPLEMENTING THE STRATEGY AND MEASURING PROGRESS
The milestones listed in Chapters 2, 3, and 4 address key areas
in toxics control and toxics monitoring that directly support control
programs. However, a great deal lies ahead in implementing and
refining the Strategy. This chapter describes several ways of
helping to ensure that these all important steps will not be
overlooked.
Implementing the Strategy
The signatories believe that this Strategy would benefit from a
structured process to guide how it will be implemented. Therefore, a
special panel of managers, researchers, and other individuals will be
established. The purpose of this panel will be to consider and
recommend proposals for implementing the Strategy. It is expected
that this panel will complete its work in about six months.
Professional facilitators outside of the Bay Program will be used to
assist the panel in arriving at a consensus on the approaches that
should be used.
The commitments and milestones contained in this Strategy will
require a great deal of financial resources to implement on the part
of the federal and state regulatory and management agencies as well
as local governments and industry. At this time the total costs are
not known, nor who will pay these costs. One of the tasks of the ad
hoc panel mentioned above will be to explore alternative funding
sources from state, federal, and private sectors. It is the intent
of the signatories to address budgetary and funding needs and
priorities in any report or workplan developed pursuant to this
Strategy.
Management programs for toxics may also benefit from
improvements in water quality modeling. The 3-D model currently
being developed will aid in the 1991 reevaluation of the Basinwide
Nutrient Reduction Strategy. Nutrient enrichment within the Bay
watershed results in water quality problems far removed from the
sources of nutrients. Therefore, a water quality model should
provide managers with an important tool linking the changes in
nutrient input with changes in water quality in the Bay. The same
Baywide modeling approach may not be as critical in dealing with more
localized toxics problems, but refinements can be made to use models
to assist management decisions in more localized, targeted areas. It
will be important for the signatories to identify how the 3-D model
of the Bay can be used to aid the toxics management programs.
5-1
-------
Public Education and Involvement
Several drafts of this Strategy were circulated for review and
comment by numerous federal and state officials, environmental
groups, industry, and private citizens. The Alliance for the
Chesapeake Bay sponsored a two day conference in October 1988 to
provide several hundred persons the opportunity to discuss the toxics
issues of the Bay and to provide comment on the draft Strategy. The
Water Quality Task Group believes this extensive public review
process greatly strengthened the final Strategy document.
The complexity of toxic pollution in the Bay requires public
educations programs that present in understandable terms the
seriousness of the problems caused by toxics, but in a balanced way
that do not overstate the threat of these chemicals. The signatories
will be working to ensure that the.public education strategy
developed in response to the 1987 Bay Agreement incorporates
appropriate toxics education programs.
It is also important that individuals and groups both in the
public and private sectors are informed of this Strategy and how they
may be impacted by its commitments and programs. Therefore, the
signatories will use all available means to disseminate information
about the Strategy, such as newsletters, public meetings, news media,
and circulation of summaries of the Strategy.
The signatories agree that implementation of this Strategy will
be aided by active involvement from the public. Therefore,
appropriate means will be used to ensure that public input is
provided through public meetings, involvement with strategy
workgroups, and solicitation of public review and comment on
workplans, programs, and other components implementing this Strategy.
Progress Reports and Reevaluation
As more information from research and monitoring becomes
available, the signatories recognize that refinements to the
Basinwide Strategy will be necessary. Therefore, a Basinwide Toxics
Reduction Strategy Progress Report will be produced on a biennial
basis.
During the development of the Basinwide Nutrient Reduction
Strategy the signatories recognized the need, not only for annual
progress reports, but also for a complete reevaluation of that
Strategy in December 1991. A similar approach for the Toxics
Strategy is appropriate.
5-2
-------
Commitments and Milestones - Implementing The Strategy
1. By January 1989. the Principals' Staff Committee will
establish an ad hoc panel of managers, researchers, and
other appropriate individuals that will: 1) help design an
action plan to coordinate implementation of this Strategy;
2) identify the available toxics baseline data; 3)
determine what baseline data is needed; and, 4) how to
implement short-term and long-term monitoring and research
to collect the data to meet managerial needs. The panel
will coordinate their activities with the other Chesapeake
Bay Program committees.
2. By July 1989. the signatories commit to the development of
an action plan, including appropriate means for public
involvement, to implement this Basinwide Toxics Reduction
Strategy.
3. By December 1989. the signatories commit to develop and
begin implementing a plan of action to increase
coordination of programs and agencies so that cross-media
impacts from toxics are properly addressed.
4. EPA commits to coordinate toxics reduction initiatives with
Federal Facilities in the basin and with Federal agencies
participating in the Chesapeake Bay Program.
* Through the Federal Agencies Committee, EPA will
ensure the revisions to the Federal Agency Workplan
reflect the Federal agencies plans for achieving the
goals and commitments outlined in this Strategy.
5. By December 1989. the signatories commit to completing the
design of a system for measuring progress under the
Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy.
For point sources these measurements may include the
following:
* An accounting of the number of point source
dischargers operating under a Toxics Monitoring
Program or Toxicity Reduction Evaluation Program.
* The volume of wastewater flow that is considered
acutely or chronically toxic, as demonstrated though
biological monitoring, and the volume no longer
exhibiting toxic effects due to reduction programs
(including degree of toxicity).
* An accounting of the reduced toxic loads discharged
5-3
-------
due to toxics control programs using the TLI and
discharge monitoring data. The accounting should
include the quantity and the relative toxicity of the
compounds.
For nonpoint sources these measurements may include the
following:
* Conduct "before and after" investigations on the
effectiveness of BMPs (urban and agricultural) in
removing toxic materials
* An accounting of pesticide use reductions, such as
pounds of pesticides used annually, based upon the
efforts of selected Integrated Pest Management
Programs.
* The estimated volume reduction of urban nonpoint toxic
loadings achieved through implemented control
programs.
6. The signatories commit to producing a Basinwide Toxics
Reduction Strategy Progress Report every other year.
7. By December 1992, the signatories commit to a complete
reevaluation of the Basinwide Toxics Reduction Strategy.
5-4
------- |