CBP/TRS 174/97
EPA 903-R-97-014
THE SECOND BIENNIAL
PROGRESS REPORT
OF THE
Agreement of Federal Agencies
on Ecosystem Management
in the Chesapeake Bay
U.S. Environments! P- •'• '"i
.
fhiladelpnia, FA 19 iu/
Chesapeake Bay Program
EPA Report Collection
Information Resource Center
US EPA Region 3
Philadelphia, PA 19107
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Federal Agencies Committee
APRIL 1997
-------
This is the second biennial report of the progress made by Federal agencies on the
commitments made in the Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem
Management in the Chesapeake Bay, which was signed on July 14, 1994. It was
prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Bay Program
Office in cooperation with the Federal signatory agencies to the Agreement.
Internet Address (URL) •http://www.epa.gov/chesapeake
Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (20% Postconsumer)
-------
THE SECOND BIENNIAL
PROGRESS REPORT
of the
Agreement of Federal Agencies
on Ecosystem Management
in the Chesapeake Bay
The Chesapeake Bay Program's Federal Agencies Committee
APRIL 1997
-------
CONTENTS
PROLOGUE: The Role of the Federal Government in the
Chesapeake Bay Program
The Chesapeake Bay Program 1
The Federal Agencies Committee 2
The "Agreement" 2
Federal Agencies Involvement 3
This Report 5
COMMITMENT PROGRESS REPORT
PARTNERSHIPS
Commitment 1— Ecosystem Management Partnerships 7
RESEARCH
Commitment 2 — Coordinated Federal Research 10
DATA COORDINATION
Commitment 3 — Data Coordination 11
ANACOSTIA RIVER
Commitment 4 — Anacostia Restoration 12
HABITAT RESTORATION
Commitment 5 — Projects on Federal Lands 13
Commitment 6 — Beneficial Use 15
Commitment 7 — Forest Buffers 19
Commitment 8 — Fish Passage 19
NUTRIENT REDUCTION
Commitment 9 — Tributary Strategies 21
Commitment 10 — Federal Lands in the District of Columbia 22
Commitment 11 — Integrated Resources Planning 23
Commitment 12 — Wastewater Facilities 24
Commitment 13 — Site Assessments 26
Commitment 14 — Assessment Protocol 29
TOXIC REDUCTIONS
Commitment 15 — Integrated Pest Management 30
Commitment 16 — BayScapes 30
Commitment 17 — Toxic Releases 32
FEDERAL FACILITIES
Commitment 18 — Base Closures 32
NATIONAL SERVICE
Commitment 19 — Environmental Projects 34
REPORTING
Commitment 20—Biennal Report 36
APPENDIX A: Agreement of Federal Agencies on
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay 37
APPENDIX B: Federal Landholdings in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 42
-------
PROLOGUE
THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP), established in 1983 by the signing of the
Chesapeake Bay Agreement, is a unique voluntary partnership between Pennsylvania,
Maryland; Virginia, the District of Columbia, the tri-state legislative Chesapeake Bay
Commission, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) representing the
Federal government. One of the nation's premier ecosystem restoration and management
efforts, the Chesapeake Bay Program focuses on North America's largest estuary and its
watershed and airshed.
The Chesapeake Bay is approximately 200 miles long and varies in width between five
and twenty-five miles. Its watershed comprises 64,000 square miles and stretches from
Cooperstown, NY, in the north, to Norfolk, VA, in the south, where the Bay meets the
Atlantic Ocean. It includes some of America's most scenic and historic rivers, including the
Susquehanna, Potomac, James, York, and Rappahannock. The estuary, whose name derives
from a Native American word meaning "great shellfish waters," is well known for its his-
torically abundant and socio-economically significant production of fish and shellfish and
for its beauty and recreational pleasures.
The Chesapeake Bay Program relies on wide public support of its goals in carrying out
its multi-faceted missions; it employs methods that go beyond environmental laws and reg-
ulations by stressing voluntary compliance, strong commitments, and measurable goals.
The Program addresses:
• the prevention and abatement of pollution;
• the conservation and restoration of habitat, fish and wildlife;
• the enhancement of public access to the Bay and its tributaries;
• public education; and
• the overall health of the Bay and its watershed.
Federal agencies play a major role as partners in the Bay Program. As the lead Federal
representative to the Program and a signatory to the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the EPA
-------
Administrator represents all Federal agencies and serves on the Chesapeake Executive
Council along with the other five signatories—the governors of Maryland, Pennsylvania,
and Virginia; the mayor of the District of Columbia; and the chair of the Chesapeake Bay
Commission. The Executive Council meets annually to assess programs, set new goals,
and reaffirm existing goals and commitments of the Bay Program. In the past, implemen-
tation of most of the goals and commitments of the Program has been carried out by the
states and the District of Columbia on non-Federal lands in the Bay's watershed.
THE FEDERAL AGENCIES COMMITTEE
The Bay Program's Federal Agencies Committee was formed in 1984 and meets regu-
larly to share information among the participating agencies, provide advice and assist with
the implementation of goals and commitments of the Chesapeake Bay Program. In 1993,
the Committee created two work groups—the Nutrient Reduction Work Group and the
Habitat Restoration Work Group—for the primary purpose of implementing the Bay
Program's commitments on the nearly 1.6 million acres of Federally-owned lands within
the watershed. In 1995, the Committee created the Research Coordination Work Group
and, in 1996, the Federal Land Stewardship Work Group. Further, in 1995, the Committee
established the Data/GIS Workgroup, which has subsequently been reorganized as the GIS
Task Group.
THE AGREEMENT
On July 14, 1994, culminating months of interagency cooperation, the Federal Agencies
Committee convened the Chesapeake Bay Federal Summit Meeting at the Department of
the Interior in Washington, D.C. Thirty high-level Federal officials representing twenty-
four agencies and departments assembled to discuss the Federal role in the Chesapeake Bay
Program and to sign the Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the
Chesapeake Bay.
The Agreement was endorsed and signed by all of the Federal participants and, as "ob-
servers/' by representatives of the states of Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania; the
District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission; the Smithsonian Institution; and
U.S. Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD). (See Appendix A)
The Agreement formalized the increasing role of Federal agencies in the Bay Program.
There have always been many and varied Federal programs that support Bay Program goals,
but they are not all necessarily part of the Agreement. Consequently, the commitments
enunciated in the Agreement do not summarize the total Federal involvement in the Bay
Program.
Motivated in part by the Administration's call for "reinventing government" and in part
by a desire to improve interagency ecosystem management and planning, the Agreement
crystallizes the commitments of each agency to those tasks in the Chesapeake Bay region.
It provides a coordinated and cooperative framework for action with specific commitments
for nutrient and toxic-pollution reduction, habitat restoration, coordination of research and
-------
ecological management tools, and the use of national service opportunities for work on
Federal lands.
The Agreement sets precedents by establishing certain Federal policies for the
Chesapeake Bay watershed that have not been applied elsewhere in the nation. In addition,
some of the policies and goals set in the Agreement led to similar commitments by the
Chesapeake Executive Council. For example, in the Agreement the Federal government
adopted a policy to favor "the creation of forested buffers along streams, in order to help
achieve both nutrient reduction and habitat restoration goals of the Chesapeake Bay
Program." This commitment was strengthened a few months later when the states,
through the Chesapeake Executive Council, adopted a similar policy, and again in 1996
when the Executive Council adopted a new Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative. The Initiative
includes a goal "to increase the use of all riparian buffers and restore riparian forests on
2,010 miles of stream and shoreline in the watershed by the year 2010." The Initiative
and its goal are unprecedented in the nation (see Commitment 7).
Because of the increasing number of military base closures and disposals of other Federal
lands, the Agreement seeks to "assure that the ecological value of any Federal facilities pro-
posed for closure within the Chesapeake Bay watershed is addressed in the decision-
making process for future land uses." In addition, the Agreement formalized the work of
the two existing Federal Agency Committee work groups by directing Federal agencies to
cooperate with interagency teams doing pollution-prevention and habitat restoration site
assessments on Federally-owned lands. The Nutrient Reduction Work Group, in fact, is
charged with doing a minimum of five Nutrient Site Assessments annually on Federal fa-
cilities throughout the watershed.
FEDERAL AGENCIES INVOLVEMENT
Federal agencies are involved in the Bay Program because they own land in the water-
shed, carry out natural resource management or environmental protection programs in the
watershed, or provide technical assistance for research, monitoring, and other pertinent ac-
tivities. Each Federal agency has a different role and mission, but they all provide varying
degrees of financial and technical assistance to the states, private individuals, and organi-
zations throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Both within and outside their roles in the Bay Program, Federal agencies conduct many
activities that have long-term benefits for the Bay. As landholders, they are stewards with
a significant role in preserving, restoring, and managing habitat and natural areas, as well
as in managing developed areas. Federal property includes many miles of the shoreline of
the Bay and its tributaries as well as extensive park lands, forest lands, wildlife refuges, and
other facilities throughout the entire watershed. (See Appendix B). Although the majority
of those nearly 1.6 million acres are inland and managed by the U.S. Forest Service, they
have significant impact on the Bay and contain major economic, recreational, historic and
wildlife resources that are of immense public benefit.
Federal agencies provide financial and technical assistance in many diverse areas. For ex-
ample, within the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) and the Consolidated Farm Agency (for-
merly the Agricultural Conservation and Stabilization Service) provide grants, loans, and
-------
technical assistance to farmers to help conserve soil and control polluting runoff. The
Farm Service Agency has also provided assistance in resources and manpower to the Bay
Program. Through these partnerships, the Bay Program has been able to disseminate in-
formation on non-point source pollution from agricultural businesses.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages important and sensitive habitat, carries out
restoration work, provides public access to wildlife areas, and organizes educational oppor-
tunities. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provides grants and tech-
nical assistance for researching and monitoring air and water pollutants, for monitoring
and managing coastal development, and for monitoring, researching, restoring and man-
aging Bay fisheries and their habitats.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency helps to provide overall funding, coordina-
tion, and assistance as well as the technical, computer, staffing, and data-management
functions for the Bay Program, and coordinates many other Bay Program activities. It pro-
vides assistance to state and local governments in their efforts to improve sewage treatment
plants and enforces the Clean Water Act and other Federal laws and regulations.
As a branch of the Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Forest Service is, by far, the
largest Federal land owner in the Bay watershed and provides assistance for urban and state
forestry activities. The National Park Service manages natural and historic properties for
conservation, education, and interpretation and provides assistance in those areas to pub-
lic and private groups. The U.S. Geological Survey collects and interprets data from the
Bay's tributaries about nutrients, sediment, and toxics that impact water quality. This in-
formation is used by the Bay Program to set goals and measure progress. The National
Biological Service, recently merged with the U.S. Geological Survey, conducts research on
President Clinton and Vice President Gore celebrate Earth Day 1995 on the shores of
the Chesapeake Bay in Havre de Grace, MD. The President and Vice President renewed
their commitment to a strong Federal role in preserving and restoring the Bay.
-------
living resources and provides technical assistance to other Federal and state agencies in-
volved in the Bay Program.
Branches of the Department of Defense, as managers of large tracts of Federal lands
throughout the Bay region, have participated in the Bay Program to bring principles of re-
sponsible stewardship to military bases. As the newest partner to the Chesapeake Bay
Program, the U.S. Postal Service anticipates making a major contribution to the Program's
public outreach efforts.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers continues to provide valuable technical expertise and
resources to many of the habitat restoration activities promoted by the Bay Program.
Though a relatively small presence among Federal landholders in the Bay region, the U.S.
Coast Guard has made a significant contribution to the Program through BayScape initia-
tives and by independently undertaking sound land stewardship policies that inure to the
benefit of the Bay.
The Federal Highway Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of
Transportation, has played a growing role in the Bay Program's increased understanding
and approach to the management of transportation related pollution impacts on the Bay.
The AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps has provided essential manpower
to habitat restoration projects throughout the Bay region. In so doing, the Corps also taught
the responsibilities of individual environmental stewardship to Corps members.
Through these actions and, perhaps most important, through the coordination of these
actions within the Chesapeake Bay Program, Federal agencies are helping to restore and
protect the Chesapeake Bay and make the Bay Program a national model for ecosystem
management.
THIS REPORT
This is the second biennial report—as prescribed by the Agreement—on the progress
made in implementing the Agreement. It is presented on an item-by-item basis according
to the twenty specific "commitments" to which the signatories have subscribed.
-------
COMMITMENT PROGRESS REPORT
PARTNERSHIPS
Commitment 1
+ Work to bring all our programs into the partnership for Chesapeake Bay ecosys-
tem management, and to urge other Federal agencies to become participants
with us, where appropriate.
Since the April 1995 publication of the First Biennial Progress Report of the Agreement
of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay, the Chesapeake
Bay Program has been joined as partners by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pennsylvania
Field Office in State College in June 1996 and by the United States Postal Service in
November 1996.
The Fish and Wildlife Service Pennsylvania Field Office's participation in the Bay
Program provides an opportunity for the expansion of Bay Program principles into the habi-
tat restoration considerations affecting the Pennsylvania portion of the Bay watershed. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Chesapeake Bay Field Office in Annapolis, Maryland, has
been a formal partner in the Bay Program since 1984. The Pennsylvania Field Office agreed
to designate a coordinator of Chesapeake Bay Program activities and to become a perma-
nent member of the Federal Agencies Committee and its Habitat Restoration Work Group.
Further, the Memorandum of Agreement provides that the Pennsylvania Field Office will
work to implement the four commitments related to habitat restoration contained in the
1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
and will work closely with numerous private organizations on habitat restoration projects.
The Memorandum of Agreement also establishes a commitment by the Habitat
Restoration Work Group to include at least one project in Pennsylvania on its annual list
of priority projects on Federal lands.
The partnership of the U.S. Postal Service with the Bay Program offers a particularly
unique opportunity for both public outreach and land stewardship at the Postal Service's
eighty-seven regional distribution facilities and nearly 1,500 local post offices throughout
the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Further, the relationship between local Postmasters and
local governments offers a particularly expedient channel for communication with local de-
cision makers.
The Postal Service's entry into the Bay Program is manifest in its commitment to host
a Nutrient Site Assessment at its Brentwood maintenance facility in the District of
Columbia during the Spring of 1997 (see Commitment 14). This site assessment is
-------
particularly notable because the Postal Service has encouraged the adjacent Washington
Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (METRO) Brentwood Maintenance Yard to participate
in the site assessment. METRO'S involvement is auspicious as it is a multi-jurisdictional
public transportation system supported in part by Federal funding with extensive property
holdings throughout Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia.
The Memorandum of Understanding formalizing the partnership of the U.S. Postal
Service and the Chesapeake Bay Program provides for the Postal Service to:
• assist in areas of ecosystem protection at Postal facilities by actions such as pollution
prevention, utilizing best management practices in lawn care and BayScapes land-
scaping, and developing appropriate contingency plans at applicable facilities;
• work with municipalities to implement the Chesapeake Bay Program's Local
Government Partnership Initiative,
• assist with efforts to increase public awareness of the Chesapeake Bay Program and
the Bay restoration at local Postal facilities; and
• develop an action plan for setting goals and implementing these commitments. The
first biennial action plan will be developed by September 12, 1997.
The U.S. Coast Guard's partnership in the Bay Program has resulted in a number of ac-
tivities that demonstrate the benefits of partnership that extend beyond the formal
Agreement:
• The Coast Guard has contributed positive steps to eliminate the introduction of non-
indigenous species from Coast Guard cutters' ballast water into the waters of the U.S.,
and more specifically the Chesapeake Bay. A second Coast Guard initiative targets
commercial vessels exchanging ballast water in the Bay, providing a means to deter-
mine compliance with this International Maritime Organization program.
• Coast Guard units in the Chesapeake Bay continue to conduct exercises under the
National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program to satisfy all mandated federal
oil pollution response exercise requirements established in the Oil Pollution Act of
1990.
• The Coast Guard worked with the Federal Agencies Committee to identify habitat
restoration opportunities at its 11 facilities in the Bay watershed (see Commitment 5).
The Special Tributary Strategy for Federal Lands in the District of Columbia, signed on
March 25, 1996, served to welcome the U.S. General Services Administration as a signa-
tory to the pantheon of Federal agencies participating in Chesapeake Bay Program initia-
tives. The Special Strategy, described in greater detail in Commitment 10, prescribes seven
specific commitments to be undertaken by signatory Federal landholders in the District of
Columbia. In addition to the signatories, Federal participants were encouraged that the
signing ceremony included the presence of a representative of the Architect of the Capitol,
although the representative declined to sign the Special Strategy.
The U.S. Forest Service has provided support to the Bay Program's mission in a variety
of ways. In 1995, the Forest Service coordinated the development of a scientific consensus
on the water quality functions of riparian forest buffers (published by EPA in 1995). This
technology transfer publication is now in use not only in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
8
-------
but is considered one of the premier references on this subject in the world. In 1996, the
Forest Service completed and presented to the Bay Program an assessment of forest status
and trends in the watershed. This document evaluates how forest resources have changed
in the Bay watershed and the implications of those changes for the ecological and economic
health of the Bay region. In 1997, in cooperation with the Forest Service, Pennsylvania
State University completed a GIS Inventory of riparian forests in the Bay watershed.
Additional outreach and education products have also been completed by the Forest Service
in 1995-96, such as an Educational Video, Case Study Guide, Demonstration Site Guide,
Field Handbook, and training for over 300 state and Federal landowner assistance, local
government, and citizen organization personnel. In addition to direct support of Bay
Program goals, the Forest Service continues to work with the states to plant and protect for-
est lands through its cooperative forestry programs.
The partnership of the Bay Program has been greatly enhanced by the decision of the
National Park Service to staff a full-time Coordinator position at the Chesapeake Bay
Program Office and by the decision of the U.S. Forest Service to add a second full-time staff
liaison to its complement at the Bay Program Office. In addition, although not a formal
partner in the Chesapeake Bay Program, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development has participated in Chesapeake Bay Program meetings.
The National Park Service's participation in the Bay Program has demonstrated the ben-
efits of partnership that extend beyond the formal Agreement. These activities include: the
establishment of a field office for its Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Program to
provide technical assistance in the Potomac River Watershed; the initiation of work on a
heritage framework for the Bay; and the hosting of a Potomac Heritage Festival through
Prince William Forest Park, VA. Through the leadership at George Washington Birthplace
National Monument and Thomas Stone National Historic Site, the Park Service worked
with the Chesapeake Bay Program to create Bay educational wayside signs, which were
erected at George Washington Birthplace and Ft. McHenry National Military Historic Site
in 1995; the Park Service created and distributed The Noblest Bay: 11,000 Years of
Chesapeake History brochure in 1996; and George Washington Birthplace nominated a ri-
parian forest buffer restoration project that was placed on the Federal Agencies Committee
1996 Habitat Restoration Priority List.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has enhanced its role in
the Bay Program by assigning staff to regularly participate in Bay Program meetings.
Further, NASA has expressed an interest in negotiating a Memorandum of Agreement to
formalize its participation in the Bay Program.
In 1996, the U.S. Geological Survey established a Chesapeake Bay Initiative, which is a
component of its Ecosystem Program, and represents yet again the benefits to be derived
from the collaborative sharing of ideas and resources that has characterized the Federal
Agencies Committee and the Chesapeake Bay Program. The Chesapeake Bay Initiative was
established to enable the Geological Survey to enhance its multi-disciplinary scientific as-
sistance to resource managers. Through a three- to five-year effort in the Chesapeake Bay
region, the Geological Survey will intensify its provision of scientific information tailored
to the specific management needs of the ecosystem. Disciplines of investigation include
land characterization, surface modeling, geo spatial database management, ground and sur-
face water hydrology, geophysics, ecology, geochemistry, paleontology, hydrologic modeling,
and contaminant, sediment and nutrient dynamics.
-------
Finally, the National Biological Service, a Federal Agencies Committee member, had its
functions merged in October 1996 with the U.S. Geological Survey as the new Biological
Resources Division.
RESEARCH
Commitment 2
+ Coordinate our research agendas in consultation with the Bay Program's
Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, to address priority management
needs for restoration of the Chesapeake Bay; initially including the role of at-
mospheric deposition in nutrient and toxic pollution of the Bay and the impact
on the natural system. (NOAA lead)
To fulfill this commitment, the Federal Agencies Committee established the Research
Coordination Work Group in 1995, chaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). In 1997, the Work Group will be co-chaired by the U.S.
Geological Survey. Members of the Work Group include NOAA, U.S. Geological Survey,
National Biological Service (now part of the U.S. Geological Survey), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, EPA, Department of Agriculture, NASA, and the Chesapeake Research
Consortium (a non-Federal entity representing the Scientific and Technical Advisory
Committee of the Bay Program).
The Work Group has adopted a mission statement, a preliminary inventory of Federal
research expenditures in the Bay region, and planning efforts for a basinwide Federal re-
search coordination symposium in the fall of 1997.
The Work Group conducted a preliminary inventory of Fiscal Year 1995 Federal agency
research programs that directly support Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration. Even
though EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program Office spent only $430,885 on research, other
Federal agencies spent a total of approximately $22 million in FY 1995. A narrow defini-
tion of "research" was used for this initial analysis, focusing on issues such as nutrient dy-
namics, contaminant transport, fate and effects, nonpoint source pollution, etc. Some no-
table activities left out of this estimate include water quality monitoring and modeling
work funded by EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program,- Federal projects conducted by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and other Department of Defense agencies throughout the wa-
tershed; and basic research funded by the National Science Foundation at major research
institutions in the Bay region. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park
Service have funded research in the past, but their research units were moved into the
National Biological Service, which subsequently moved into the U.S. Geological Survey.
The Work Group is organizing the first Federal interagency Bay research symposium,
planned for September 1997. The objective will be to provide a forum for exchanging in-
formation on the full range of research interests, capabilities, and ongoing investigations,
as well as to identify opportunities for interagency collaboration, in the context of ecosys-
tem management. Federal programs conducting or funding research in the Bay watershed
will be invited to exhibit and present information on their efforts.
10
-------
DATA COORDINATION
Commitment 3
+ Establish a Work Group under the Federal Agencies Committee to assess and
evaluate existing ecological resource inventories used by Federal agencies, and to
make recommendations to improve coordination, compatibility, standardization,
GIS-based data layers and interagency transfer of information by December 31,
1995. (EPA Lead)
The Federal Agencies Committee Data/GIS Work Group was established in 1995 to eval-
uate existing ecological resource inventories used by Federal agencies in the Chesapeake
Bay basin. A final report was delivered to the Federal Agencies Committee and reported to
the Chesapeake Bay Program's Implementation Committee in December 1995. The report
was also published on the Chesapeake Bay webpage (www.epa.gov/chesapeake) for public
access.
The report inventoried a full range of data, including computerized data files and geo-
graphic information system (GIS) files maintained by the Chesapeake Bay Program, EPA,
U.S. Geological Survey, NOAA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Park Service, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Forest Service, and the Natural Resources Conservation
Service. The report also specified those data needed by the respective agencies for their
near-term work. This list of data needs was used by the Bay Program's Data Center Work
Group to help develop its FY 1997 priorities.
One of the recommendations of the report was that the Work Group should be expanded
to include non-Federal agencies, since a large amount of Chesapeake Bay basin data is not
managed by Federal agencies. The Federal Agencies Committee and Implementation
Committee agreed to this proposal, and the Data/GIS Work Group was reconvened as the
GIS Task Group under the Bay Program's Data Center Work Group in March 1996. The
GIS Task Group has been chaired by U.S.Geological Survey. As of October 1996, the Data
Center Work Group was renamed the Information Management Subcommittee and the
GIS Task Group was renamed the GIS Work Group.
The Data/GIS Work Group report of December 1995 is being updated by the GIS Task
Group and the Information Management Subcommittee for re-publication in June 1997.
That report will take on a slightly different form, probably as a searchable database, since
the inventory of Federal, state, and local information sources is so large. That report will
be available through the Chesapeake Bay Program webpage.
In addition, the National Park Service's Inventory and Monitoring Program is working
on baseline ecological inventories for all parks, including those in the Chesapeake Bay
watershed.
11
-------
ANACOSTIA RIVER
Commitment 4
+ Provide full support to the Anacostia River Demonstration Project as an opportu-
nity to provide ecosystem management concepts in an urban environment,
through a coordinated biennial Federal workplan beginning in FY 1995, in con-
cert with the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee. (Corps of Engineers
lead)
The First Biennial Federal Workplan for the Anacostia River Watershed will be published
in April 1997. This Workplan is a key initiative of Federal agencies to promote both ecosys-
tem management concepts in this inter-state watershed and the establishment of the
Anacostia as a National Urban Watershed Restoration Model.
This Workplan outlines the continuing Federal support for the Anacostia watershed
restoration effort. Applying the six restoration goals identified in the Anacostia Watershed
Restoration Committee's A Six Point Action Plan to Restore the Anacostia River, Federal
programs were examined to determine what goals are being fulfilled and what gaps could
be remedied by additional Federal support. The Workplan then identifies recommendations
for further restoration efforts collectively supported by the Federal agencies.
A third Federal workshop was held on October 31, 1996, at NASA's Goddard Space Flight
Center to gather input and comments on the draft Workplan. Forty-four Federal representa-
tives attended the workshop, representing 10 Federal facilities and 12 Federal agencies. The
group recommended that the Workplan include specific action items for and commitments
by Federal agencies. In addition to the extensive review by Federal agencies, the Workplan was
reviewed by municipalities, citizen groups, and technical organizations. Overall, comments
were highly supportive of the Federal efforts in the Anacostia watershed.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, with the help of citizen volunteers, removes floatables and
other debris from the Anacostia River.
12
-------
The Workplan is a living document that will be updated every two years to highlight suc-
cesses in the Federal restoration effort and, more important, to facilitate strategic planning
of projects and programs to meet local restoration needs. Increased communication and co-
ordinated action have been and will continue to be facilitated through this Workplan and
many other ongoing Anacostia initiatives.
EPA has provided additional support to the Anacostia restoration efforts over the past
two years. In May 1995, EPA Region III, through its Chesapeake Bay Program Office, hired
a community liaison for the Anacostia River restoration project. In May 1996, EPA for-
malized its support of the restoration efforts by signing a Memorandum of Understanding
with the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee. EPA has also set up an Anacostia
Ecosystem Initiative website at: http://www.epa.gov/chesapeake/anacostia/
HABITAT RESTORATION
+ Support full implementation of the Bay Program's Habitat Restoration Strategy
and related plans by:
Commitment 5
(1) Including innovative use of public and private funding sources, restoration of
habitat at Federal facilities, and development annually of a list of priority proj-
ects for habitat restoration on Federal lands in the watershed. (FWS lead)
The Federal Agencies Committee's Habitat Restoration Work Group, created in 1993,
and chaired by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was given the lead to implement this
Commitment. In 1997, the chair of the Work Group will rotate to the U.S. Forest Service.
In 1996 the Federal Agencies Habitat Restoration Work Group assisted the U.S. Coast
Guard, the U.S. Navy, and the National Park Service with prioritized habitat restoration
planning and projects.
The Work Group assisted the U.S. Coast Guard in identifying habitat restoration op-
portunities on all of its Chesapeake Bay facilities. Site reviews were conducted on 11 Coast
Guard Stations located in the tidal portion of the watershed, and recommendations were
incorporated into reports generated for each facility. The reports highlighted habitat
restoration opportunities, nonpoint source pollution abatement strategies, and existing
natural resource values. Several of the Stations are using the reports to target on-the-
ground projects. Future projects include wetland restoration (Station Stillpond, MD),
phragmites control (Coast Guard Yard Curtis Bay, MD, and Integrated Support Command,
Portsmouth, VA).
During 1996, Coast Guard facilities began implementing the recommendations made in
the initial survey. Activities included:
• Bird box building and wildflower meadow planting at Station Annapolis, MD;
• Bat box construction in partnership with a local school at St. Inigoes, MD;
• Development of a BayScaping plan at Station Crisfield, MD (in cooperation with the
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay);
13
-------
• Bird and bat box construction, plus planting of native plants, at Station Little Creek,
VA;
• Wood duck box construction at Station Milford Haven, VA;
• Completion of a small erosion control project at Station Stillpond, MD;
• Eco-friendly maintenance changes at Station Little Creek and Station Crisfield, MD;
and
• 18 acres of mowing reduction at Station Taylor's Island, MD, property.
The Habitat Restoration Work Group assisted the U.S. Navy in incorporating a variety
of habitat restoration initiatives in the Greenbury Point, MD, Natural Resource
Management Plan. Technical assistance was provided to erect osprey nesting platforms,
and 20 acres of warm-season grasses have been restored. Future plans at the facility include
shoreline erosion control in conjunction with tidal wetlands restoration.
During 1996, the Work Group assisted the Army Environmental Center at Aberdeen
Proving Ground, MD, by providing technical assistance for monitoring of submerged
aquatic vegetation (SAV) near the base. Information will be used in planning SAV moni-
toring and restoration projects in 1997, with ongoing technical assistance from the Work
Group.
1996 HABITAT RESTORATION PRIORITY LIST
The Federal Agencies Committee Habitat Restoration Work Group compiled the second
annual list of priority habitat restoration projects on Federal lands for 1996. The list is not
static, and additional projects may be added. A new list will be issued annually. The pro-
jects are all supported by the Federal agencies, and all will receive various types of assis-
tance. The 1996 Priority List includes:
• Bloodsworth Island, MD—Replacement of heron nesting platforms. (U.S. Navy)
• Prince William Forest Park, VA—Stream restoration and riparian forest buffer work
on Quantico Creek as part of a mine tailings site restoration. The Park Service has
nearly completed the re-vegetation of a 5-7 acre mine tailings site within the riparian
zone of Quantico Creek. Stream restoration will require further effort and funding.
(National Park Service)
• Presquile National Wildlife Refuge, VA—Erosion control and wetland restoration
using clean dredged material. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
• Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD—Incorporating habitat restoration projects as part of
ongoing Resource Management Plan. (U.S. Army)
• Stillpond Station, MD—Technical assistance to conduct maintenance dredging and
wetland restoration. (U.S. Coast Guard)
• U.S. Naval Academy, MD—Design work for BayScaping at the Naval Academy Golf
Course and at the Academy "Yard." Continue forest buffer and grass restoration work
at Greenbury Point. Additionally, the Academy would like to monitor water quality
around Greenbury Point. (U.S. Navy)
• George Washington Birthplace National Monument, VA—The Work Group, in con-
junction with Park Service and the Virginia Department of Forestry assisted in the de-
14
-------
velopment of a riparian forest buffer reforestation and riparian restoration plan.
(National Park Service)
• Boiling Air Force Base, DC—Habitat restoration and water monitoring project at the
Base marina on the Potomac River. (U.S. Air Force)
• Crisfield Station, MD—BayScaping, including uplands and dune habitats, to enhance
diversity and provide habitat for neotropical birds. (U.S. Coast Guard)
• Letterkenny Army Depot, PA—Creation of two five-acre impoundments and associ-
ated wetlands in a previously agricultural area. (U.S. Army)
• Raystown Lake, PA—Creation of fish nursery habitat and placement of osprey nest-
ing platforms. (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers)
• Langley Air Force Base, VA—Restore a fill area to saltmarsh. Technical assistance in
fine tuning the plans and obtaining permits. (U.S. Air Force)
• Andrews Air Force Base, MD—Assist the Base in developing and selecting Best
Management Practices to implement as part of its stormwater management plan.
(U.S. Air Force)
• Eastern Neck Island National Wildlife Refuge, MD—Vegetating the expanded
intertidal zone at the Eastern Neck restoration site. (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service)
• Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center, MD—Assistance in establishing a mon-
itoring program in the waters adjacent to the Base for the five water quality parame-
ters—suspended solids, chlorophyll-a, dissolved nitrogen, dissolved phosphorous,
light attenuation—necessary for SAY Support will include site selection, equipment
acquisition, and Quality Assurance/Quality Control advice. The monitoring program
will target potential SAV restoration sites (including Mattawoman Creek) and track
SAV distribution. (U.S. Navy)
• Coast Guard Yard, Curtis Bay, MD—Phragmites eradication and erosion control
project incorporating tidal wetland restoration. (U.S. Coast Guard)
In 1996, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Pennsylvania Field Office, through the
Pennsylvania Partners for Wildlife Program, continued to improve water quality and fish
and wildlife habitat in the Pennsylvania portion of the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
Through the combined efforts of the Partners in the Susquehanna and Potomac drainages,
80 acres of wetlands were restored, 16 miles of streambanks were fenced to improve ripar-
ian habitat, and 300 acres of native, warm-season grasses were planted.
Commitment 6
(2) Fully implementing all habitat restoration authorities to improve the condition
of aquatic, riparian and upland fish and wildlife habitat and assuring beneficial
use of clean dredged material to support fish, migratory waterfowl, and other
wildlife habitat in the Bay. (Corps of Engineers lead)
The Baltimore, Norfolk, and Philadelphia Districts of the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers
have the lead for habitat restoration projects described below. The success of these projects
to date reflects the cooperation among Federal agencies. In addition, initiatives are under-
15
-------
Scores of volunteers, local school children, and community activists joined Interior
Secretary Bruce Babbitt, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Carol
Browner, National Park Service Regional Director Robert Stanton (now retired), and
District of Columbia City Councilman Kevin Chavous for Earth Week conservation
activities on the shores of the Anacostia River at the National Park Service's
Kenilworth Park and Aquatic Gardens on April 23, 1996. The Park contains a
restored 32-acre tidal wetland, which was constructed using dredged material.
way to establish a process for continued cooperative efforts among the Federal agencies and
the Chesapeake Bay Program. The process would encourage agency involvement in the Bay
Program in all project stages from initiation through development to implementation.
INVESTIGATIONS*
• Little Falls Dam, Potomac River, VA and MD—Design and construction of a fish lad-
der to restore spawning area for anadromous fish.
• Anacostia River and Tributaries, D.C. and MD (AHC)—The second feasibility study
will address additional fish and wildlife restoration, concentrating in the Northwest
Branch sub-basin of the Anacostia watershed.
• Baltimore Metropolitan Water Resources, MD (ER)—Evaluation of stream channel
and bank restoration; creation of in-stream habitat; creation of new stormwater man-
agement ponds; retrofitting of existing stormwater management ponds; wetland cre-
ation; restoration of riparian vegetation; and removal of fish passage blockages in the
Gwynns Falls, Tiber/Hudson and Deep Run basins.
1 Key: FDP = Flood Damage Prevention,- SP = Shoreline Protection; FC = Flood Control
ER = Ecosystem Restoration; N = Navigation; AHC = Wetland and other Aquatic Habitat Creation.
16
-------
Patuxent River Water Resources, MD (ER)—Development of a comprehensive wa-
tershed management study identifying needs and problem solutions regarding envi-
ronmental restoration, wetland protection, navigation, flood damage reduction, envi-
ronmental infrastructure, and recreation.
Susquehanna River Basin Water Management, NY, PA &. MD (FDP, AHC)—
Development of a comprehensive plan to manage existing reservoir storage in an ef-
fort to maintain and restore aquatic resources, as well as to minimize flood-related
damage in the basin.
North Branch Potomac River Environmental Restoration, WV & MD (FDP, ER)—
Ecosystem enhancement to restore fish and wildlife habitat and other environmental
restoration opportunities in the upper North Branch.
Anacostia River Federal Facilities Impact Assessment, MD & DC (ER)—
Identification of adverse impacts on the watershed from Federal facilities, review cur-
rent plans to mitigate such impacts, and production of a blueprint of environmental
management measures to assist in the mitigation of such impacts.
Smith Island Environmental Restoration and Protection, MD (SP,N, AHC)—
Restoration of fish and wildlife habitat lost from previous construction activities and
erosion control.
Chemung River Basin Environmental Restoration, NY (ER);Upper Susquehanna
River Basin Environmental Restoration, NY and PA (SP ,ER); Lower West Branch
Susquehanna River Basin Environmental Restoration, PA (SP, ER)—Identification of
needs and problem solutions regarding environmental restoration, erosion protection,
stormwater management, flood damage reduction and water quality improvements.
Tioga River Watershed, PA (ER)—Restoration of fish and wildlife habitat and other
opportunities including environmental restoration, flood damage reduction, and
preparation of a comprehensive ecosystem management plan.
Lower Potomac Estuary Watershed Study, VA & MD (ER, N, SP ,FDP)—Identifi-
cation of needs and problem solutions regarding navigation, environmental restora-
tion, erosion protection, and flood damage reduction.
Bodkin Island Investigation, MD (AHC, ER)—Provide island and marsh habitat for
black ducks using dredged material.
Hart-Miller Island South Cell Environmental Restoration Investigation, MD (ER)—
Creation of approximately 335 acres of wetland, upland, island, and aquatic habitat at
the dredged material placement site.
CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
• Anacostia River and Tributaries, MD &. DC (AHC)—Modifications to the Anacostia
River Basin, District of Columbia and Maryland Flood Control, Navigation, and
Channel Improvement Projects which were completed in 1959 and 1974. The modi-
fications would complete a vital ecological link between the existing habitat upstream,
downstream, and adjacent to the study area and restore a part of the natural filtering
capacity of the watershed.
17
-------
• Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, MD (AHC)—Multi-agency efforts to restore oys-
ter populations in the Maryland portion of the Chesapeake Bay. Project elements in-
clude: construction or rehabilitation of oyster reefs to create disease-free oyster habi-
tat, monitoring, and planting of oyster seed.
• Fort Eustis Shoreline, James River, VA—In concert with comprehensive shoreline
protection project and habitat restoration, created tidal wetlands along shoreline to
provide habitat and shoreline protection.
• Fort Story, "Virginia Beach, "VA—Construction of dune system using geotextile con-
tainers filled with sand and planting of dune grasses.
• Norfolk Naval Air Station, VA—Wetlands were created and enhanced for stormwater
retention and treatment.
• Poplar Island, MD (AHC)—Use of approximately 38 million cubic yards of dredged
material from the southern approach channels of the Baltimore Harbor and Channels
Navigation Project to restore 1,110 acres of remote habitat. Approximately 550 acres
will be wetlands habitat and 550 acres will be upland habitat.
• Rooster Island, Dorchester County, MD (AHC)—Beneficial use of material previ-
ously dredged from the Corps' navigation channel at Cambridge Harbor to restore lost
habitat at Rooster Island.
• Tedious Creek, MD—Primary project purpose is construction of breakwaters to pro-
tect fishing harbor. Material dredged to stabilize the breakwater foundation was placed
behind geotextile tubes, and wetlands were created.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE DREDGING
• Smith Island, MD—Geotextile tubes and wetland creation.
• Honga River—Barren Island National Wildlife Refuge—Geotextile tubes and wet-
land creation.
• Pokomoke River, MD—Geotextile tubes and wetland creation.
In addition, the National Parks East resource management staff are working toward the
reestablishment of Kenilworth Marsh. Park Service staff from Fredericksburg &
Spotsylvania National Battlefield Park are working with the Fish and Wildlife Foundation
to restore native grass habitat to enhance quail populations and are working with Mary
Washington College to complete a fish inventory of the Park. Resource management staff
at Colonial National Historical Park are working with state and local agencies to complete
fishery inventories and establish baseline water quality monitoring programs at the Park.
18
-------
Commitment 7
(3) Supporting development in the Bay watershed of a policy favoring the creation
of forested buffers along streams, in order to help achieve both nutrient reduc-
tion and habitat restoration goals of the Chesapeake Bay Program, (U.S. Forest
Service lead)
Following the October 1994 signing of Executive Council Directive 94-1 on Riparian
Forest Buffers, a Panel was convened to develop goals and a comprehensive riparian forest
buffer policy for the Bay Program. This 31-member Panel included a diverse membership
of Federal, state, local, scientific, citizen, industry, and environmental interests. Federal
members of the Panel included the Forest Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service,
and the Fish and Wildlife Service. The Forest Service provided a Riparian Technical Team
which supported the Panel in synthesizing scientific, programmatic, and public comment
information. The Team also facilitated a series of Issue Forums where landowners and
stakeholders were able to present their views.
In addition, in April 1996, a Federal Lands Forum identified the need for Federal lands
to serve as models for the protection of riparian forests. Other recommendations included
a need to review management and development guidelines and practices, provide opportu-
nities for demonstration and research sites on federal lands, and to enhance the delivery of
federal assistance programs to private lands.
In October 1996, the Chesapeake Executive Council kicked off a new initiative by ac-
cepting the Riparian Forest Buffer Panel report and, in addition, adopting a goal "to increase
the use of all riparian buffers and restore riparian forests on 2,010 miles of stream and
shoreline in the watershed by the year 2010, targeting efforts where they will be of greatest
value to water quality and living resources."
The Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative is unprecedented in the nation. As
part of the Initiative, each of the states and the Federal government will develop an imple-
mentation strategy for the Initiative by June 30, 1998. A Federal Team led by the Forest
Service and including other Federal land managers such as the Department of Defense,
National Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service are working together with other mem-
bers of the Federal Agencies Committee to develop a strategy for Federal lands and private
land assistance programs.
At the National Park Service's Prince William Forest Park, with 6,000 hours of volunteer
assistance, over 5,000 trees of five native species have been planted in the riparian zone of
Quantico Creek as part of a pyrite mine restoration project.
Commitment 8
(4) Providing technical assistance in fish passage design, providing stock for restor-
ing newly opened spawning habitat, and determining needs for restoring up-
stream spawning habitat. (NOAA lead)
Federal agencies have been working closely with state and private organizations to re-
open blocked spawning reaches, restock species, and provide upstream habitat protection.
The Fish Passage Work Group of the Chesapeake Bay Program's Living Resources
19
-------
Subcommittee, chaired by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is leading efforts with fund-
ing and management support from EPA, the Corps of Engineers, NOAA/National Marine
Fisheries Service, the states, and electric companies. As a result of these and other cooper-
ative efforts, a total of 271.8 cumulative miles were opened to anadromous and migratory
fish by the end of 1996 (93.4 of those miles were opened in 1995 and 1996). Significant
gains were made in the James River watershed in Virginia and the Susquehanna in
Pennsylvania.
EPA, through an Interagency Agreement with the National Marine Fisheries Service, is-
sued grants to reopen blocked spawning reaches (Urieville/Morgan Run Dam and Cypress
Mill Dam on the Chester River in Maryland and Rock Hill on the Conestoga River in
Pennsylvania), to assist stocking efforts (above Little Falls Dam on the Potomac River), and
to facilitate upstream impediment surveys (on the Susquehanna and Rappahannock rivers).
A planned Memorandum of Agreement between thirteen Federal, state, and local gov-
ernment entities and the National Marine Fisheries Service created a framework for
reestablishing anadromous fish access and restoring an American shad population to the
10-mile stretch of the Potomac River below Great Falls, blocked by the Little Falls Dam.
The Corps of Engineers approved the fish passage project and has provided $128,000 in
Fiscal Year 1997. Construction should begin by September 1997, with fishway completion
by March 1998. An Interagency Agreement was signed between EPA and the Fish and
Wildlife Service to fund stocking and monitoring of juvenile American shad above Little
Falls Dam. Biologists from the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin and the
Fish and Wildlife Service's Harrison Lake National Fish Hatchery worked cooperatively to
release more than 1 million American shad fry in the spring of 1995.
The Susquehanna River Anadromous Fish Restoration Cooperative reported that ap-
proximately 34,000 American shad were successfully transported upstream of the
Conowingo Dam and 2,000 were tagged and stocked above Safe Harbor Dam. A total of
7.466 million American shad fry were reared and stocked into the Susquehanna drainage
during 1996. Maryland stocked approximately 3.545 million fry, including hickory shad,
below the Conowingo Dam in the Susquehanna River and in the Patuxent and Choptank
rivers, while Virginia stocked over 10 million fry into the James, York, Potomac, and
Pamunkey rivers.
In October 1996, NOAA's Chesapeake Bay Office funded a facilitator for an innovative
Chesapeake Bay Program "Apollo 13" workshop—using only currently available data—to
develop a method for prioritizing Bay watersheds for upstream habitat protection or
restoration. This workshop was held because fish will be returning to formerly blocked
parts of the Bay basin when fish passage construction at key dams is completed within the
next seven years. Participants working in small teams identified a range of approaches for
ranking sub-watersheds for upstream habitat improvements or simply for protecting high
quality rivers and streams.
The Chesapeake Bay Program is currently revising its Alosid Fishery Management Plan
(FMP) to incorporate the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's anticipated 1997
American Shad Federal Management Plan amendment and stock assessment. The Bay
Program also plans to separate its current Alosid FMP into two separate American shad
and river herring FMPs. The revised shad FMP will focus more on habitat requirements
and restoration needs than does the existing FMP.
20
-------
The NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office is working cooperatively with the Fish and Wildlife
Service to conduct a workshop in 1997 on alosid monitoring needs in the Bay system. There
are currently a variety of ongoing shad and herring monitoring surveys in the mainstream
Bay and tributaries, but there is no Bay-wide consistency nor are there any standard indica-
tors of the status of alosid stocks. The workshop will be directed to standardizing Bay-wide
survey methods, identifying standard indicators of the status of alosid stocks, identifying the
best options for improved monitoring, and identifying remaining research needs.
The National Park Service is working on the Little Falls Dam project on the Potomac
River and has also removed two barriers to fish passage on Rock Creek.
NUTRIENT REDUCTION
+ Commit to do our share to meet the goal to reduce by 40% reduction the load-
ings of nutrients to the Bay by 2000 through:
Commitment 9
(1) Supporting the goals and action items of the tributary strategies as they are affected
by Federal lands and programs.
The Bay Program continues to work to ensure communication and coordination be-
tween the states and Federal landholders as the state tributary strategies move from the
planning to the implementation stages. During the fall of 1996, the Federal Agencies
Committee created the Federal Land Stewardship Work Group as a permanent body
charged with the mission of developing, identifying, and promoting opportunities for nat-
ural resource protection, restoration, and stewardship on Federal lands. The Work Group
has selected as one of its immediate priorities the development of a comprehensive
stormwater management assessment program to assist Federal landholders in the broad
array of issues that arise in stormwater management. These issues pertain directly to the
implementation of state tributary strategies within watersheds affected by such Federal
stormwater runoff.
In addition, by using the Priorities for Action for Land, Growth and Stewardship in the
Chesapeake Bay Region as a guide, the Work Group is identifying opportunities for coor-
dinated Federal environmental and natural resource protection, restoration, and steward-
ship by: 1) utilizing Federal lands to serve as models for technical transfer demonstration
areas; 2) acting as facilitators of positive action in Federal policy assessment and integra-
tion, and 3) finding innovative ways to utilize Federal information to benefit non-Federal
land management.
The National Park Service's Colonial National Historical Park is working with North
Carolina State University to develop an erosion sedimentation management system man-
ual for the Park.
21
-------
Commitment 10
(2) Developing by December 31,1995, a Special Tributary Strategy for Federal lands
in the District of Columbia, where the Federal Government is a major land-
holder. (EPA lead)
Federal agencies completed the Special Tributary Strategy for Federal Lands in the District
of Columbia in December 1995. On March 25, 1996, seventeen partners including Federal
agencies, the District of Columbia, and regional commissions voluntarily signed the
Strategy. The goal of the Strategy is to reduce the amount of nutrients, principally nitrogen
and phosphorous, entering the tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. This Strategy is the first
comprehensive effort to address the activities on all Federal lands in the District of
Columbia—comprising 40% of the land area of the District—and their impacts on water
quality and the Chesapeake Bay. The Strategy is a direct result of the 1994 Agreement of
Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay and will provide a
model for other tributary strategies to reduce the flow of nutrients.
The Strategy provides seven resolutions:
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans and Management: review stormwater pol-
lution prevention plans at Federal facilities, addressing, inter alia, storage capacity for
the initial half-inch of rainfall for the total impervious surface area.
• Nutrient Management: review existing nutrient management plans and create and
implement plans as needed.
• Landscaping: encourage the development and implementation of landscaping prac-
tices and designs that are economically and environmentally beneficial in accordance
with the 1994 Presidential Memorandum on Environmentally and Economically
Beneficial Practices on Federal Landscaped Grounds.
EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner, flanked by Department of Agriculture's Deputy Secretary,
Richard E. Rominger (right), and EPA's Region III Administrator, W. Michael McCabe (left), at the
signing ceremony for the Special Tributary Strategy for Federal Lands in the District of Columbia
at the U.S. National Arboretum on March 25, 1996.
22
-------
Federal Funding: participate fully in convening and attending an annual workshop fo-
cusing on Federal financial assistance vehicles available to the District of Columbia
and Federal agencies that further the goal of the Special Strategy.
Federal Facility Site Assessments: conduct and participate in at least one Federal fa-
cility site assessment per year through the year 2000 on Federal properties in the
District of Columbia, stressing issues of nutrient management, turf management,
nonpoint source pollution control and landscaping. During 1996, the Federal Agencies
Committee conducted a Nutrient Site Assessment at Rock Creek Park in the District
of Columbia (see Commitment 13). During 1997, the Federal Agencies Committee
has scheduled a Nutrient Site Assessment with the U.S. Postal Service Brentwood
Facility in the District of Columbia.
Education and Technical Assistance: participate fully in convening and attending an
annual technology transfer workshop designed to assist Federal agencies with im-
proving urban nutrient management and stormwater controls. During 1996, Federal
Agency Committee members met with representatives from the Department of
Defense to share information on nutrient management and stormwater runoff plans.
In addition, the Federal Agencies Committee developed a nutrient worksheet to serve
as an information resource to Federal facilities in the District of Columbia.
Coordination, Evaluation and Reporting: participate fully in a coordination and
communication group of Federal and District of Columbia agencies to share informa-
tion, provide assistance, and improve interagency coordination. Ensure that the com-
mitments of this Special Strategy are met. Provide an annual progress report to the sig-
natories of the Special Strategy. The Federal Agencies Committee is scheduled to issue
its first report in July 1997.
Commitment 11
(3) Delivery of Federal assistance by integrated resources planning on a watershed
basis to deal with nonpoint sources of pollution, consistent with the 1993 Agree-
ment between the USDA and the Bay Program. (Natural Resources Conserva-
tion Service lead)
Since 1985, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, with conservation partners
that include soil conservation districts, state agencies, the Cooperative Extension Service,
and the Consolidated Farm Services Agency, has aggressively developed conservation plans
that address many of the concerns identified in Ecosystem Based Assistance (EBA).
The Natural Resources Conservation Service and its partners have aligned EBA with the
tributary strategies of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Maryland. This has required a significant
shift in management focus and the development of staffing plans to improve technical as-
sistance from the field offices. Further, in Maryland, a pilot state in the development and
implementation of EBA, all field office employees, including partnership employees, are re-
ceiving intensive training in EBA subjects. Similar efforts are under way in other Bay states.
Through the cooperative efforts of the conservation partnership that includes the private
sector, farmers in the Bay watershed have accelerated their efforts to reduce nitrogen and
phosphorous nonpoint source pollution through: nearly 1,500 animal waste systems to
23
-------
contain manure; nutrient management plans on 1.6 million acres of farmland to keep nu-
trients from washing into or infiltrating water supplies; dead bird composting facilities on
more than one third of watershed poultry operations; workshops for homeowners on lawn
care and proper fertilization methods; and resource management systems applied to more
than 100,000 acres to reduce water runoff from agricultural lands. A new $7 million pro-
gram created by the Natural Resources Conservation Service in partnership with West
Virginia is designed to reduce the level of bacteria and nutrients arising from agricultural
land use along the upper reaches of the Potomac River and its tributaries.
Blizzards and hurricanes brought record amounts of fresh water into the Chesapeake Bay
in 1996. Since July 1995, the Conservation Service has provided over $25 million in
Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania through the Emergency Watershed
Protection Program to repair and stabilize streams and streambanks damaged by flooding.
Volunteers with the Natural Resources Conservation Service and conservation districts
have donated over 20,000 hours for conservation education, stream clean-ups, water mon-
itoring, and citizen outreach. In addition, the Park Service's Colonial National Historical
Park and the Fredericksburg &. Spotsylvania National Battlefields have developed nutrient
management plans for their agricultural leasing programs. These plans are valuable in ef-
fectively transmitting nutrient management plans to farmers in the private sector.
Commitment 12
(4) Completing upgrades of wastewater treatment facilities to remove nutrients at
federal facilities, with priority on facilities in excess of 0.5m gallons per day being
upgraded by January 31, 2000, to levels consistent with the applicable tributary
strategy. (DoD Lead)
The Federal Agencies Committee continues to track Federally-owned wastewater treat-
ment plants to ensure that all pertinent facilities are identified and that nutrient upgrades
are implemented in accordance with Bay Program commitments. The list of Federally-
owned wastewater plants has expanded recently to include lower flow facilities and selected
industrial facilities. Upgrade efforts, however, have focussed on the eleven major Federal fa-
cilities (those facilities having a flow in excess of 0.5 million gallons per day). Identifying
and tracking discharges from these plants provides an additional information tool for trib-
utary strategy and nutrient reduction planning.
The majority of the 30 identified Federally-owned facilities have design capacities well
below 0.5 million gallons per day. Twenty-two facilities fall under the Department of
Defense. Three of these are industrial facilities and are currently being evaluated to deter-
mine whether nutrients are present at a level sufficient to warrant tracking under this
commitment. Other Federal facility owners are the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2), the
National Park Service (1), Department of Agriculture (2), Department of Transportation (1),
Federal Emergency Management Agency (1), and the National Institutes of Health (1). The
eleven major Federally-owned wastewater plants are all under the jurisdiction of the
Department of Defense.
The Federal Agencies Committee conducted a detailed Biological Nutrient Removal
(BNR) feasibility analysis for six of the eleven major facilities in 1995. Implementation of
24
-------
recommendations from this analysis are underway at selected facilities, six of the eleven
wastewater plants have completed or are conducting upgrades, and one plant is being con-
nected to a publicly-owned treatment plant. This study and other Federal studies indicate
that many of the existing facilities practice advanced treatment for nutrients, reducing the
discharge of nitrogen and phosphorous to the Bay. Upgrades and management changes at
additional facilities will contribute significantly to achieving the nutrient reductions spec-
ified in associated tributary strategies. It is important to note that many of the major
Federally-owned wastewater plants operate at flow volumes below their design capacities
and that actual discharges to the Bay and its tributaries are lower than would be predicted
based purely upon design data.
Examples of nutrient upgrade work at major Federally-owned wastewater plants include:
• Aberdeen Proving Ground Wastewater Treatment Plant, MD (Army)—Coordination
of project design and funding is being conducted in 1997. BNR upgrades of the waste-
water facility will occur over the next few years and will be designed in accordance
with the recommendations of the Federal Agency Committee BNR/nutrient study.
• Fort Eustis, VA (Army)—The Base is in the process of connecting its 1.7 million gal-
lon per day plant to a publicly-owned treatment plant and will no longer be operated
as a Federal facility. Transfer to a publicly-owned facility should ensure that all waste-
water is handled in accordance with applicable tributary strategies.
• Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, "VA (Navy)—Expansion and significant up-
grades are nearing completion for this Navy-owned treatment plant. The upgraded
plant will include ultraviolet disinfection and a constructed wetland for nutrient re-
moval. The new plant is scheduled to come on-line in May 1997. The upgrades will
increase the design capacity of the wastewater treatment plant from 0.4 to 0.72 mil-
lion gallons-per-day to accommodate an increase in personnel, while simultaneously
upgrading the nutrient removal capability of the plant. The new plant permit calls for
ammonia limits and increased toxicity testing to ensure that nutrient removal and
toxicity limits are achieved. Wetlands construction will begin once restoration of the
planned site is completed.
• Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA (Navy)—Progress continues on the $19.1 million
upgrade of this wastewater plant. This large-scale BNR implementation serves as a
demonstration for other military and Federal wastewater facilities. The existing 2 mil-
lion gallons-per-day plant is being upgraded to 2.2 million gallons, designed to ac-
commodate a 20-year base growth planning forecast. To achieve nutrient reduction,
the plant's existing nitrification capacity is being doubled and the denitrification
process is being added. Construction is approximately 50 percent completed as of
March 1997 and is being conducted in phases to allow continual plant operation. It is
anticipated that the upgraded nitrification and denitrification processes will be on-line
by late April 1997.
• Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division, MD (Navy)—The Navy com-
pleted the installation of a new photocatalytic oxidation treatment system in 1996.
This upgrade ties in with other nutrient reduction efforts at the installation.
• Fort A.P. Hill, VA (Army)—The Army completed a major nutrient upgrade in 1992,
including ultraviolet disinfection and advanced treatment for phosphorous and
nitrogen.
25
-------
• Fort Meade, MD (Army)—This Base represents a relatively new plant, and processes
include advance treatment for removal of phosphorous, nitrogen, and chlorine. There
are no additional upgrades planned for Fort Meade or for the Federally-owned treat-
ment works at the Letterkenny Army Depot (PA) at this time.
• Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Edgewood, MD (Army)—This wastewater facility was
not identified as requiring upgrades during initial studies, but the Army will conduct
a more detailed study of this plant in 1997. Similarly, assessment of options for major
facilities located at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, and at Fort Dietrick,
MD, will continue.
BNR studies will be continued during 1997 and 1998 to evaluate feasibility of upgrades
for the remaining Federal facilities. In addition to the major wastewater plants, upgrades
have been implemented at smaller plants, contributing to the reduction of nutrient dis-
charges to the Bay. Examples include:
• Andrews Air Force Base, MD (Air Force)—The Air Force recently completed a con-
struction project upgrading two wastewater treatment plants at their Davidson
Transmitter Station, located within the Chesapeake Bay watershed area, in Davidson,
Maryland. The two batch plants are designed to treat 10 thousand gallons per day and
will ensure that discharges meet the requirements of the NPDES permit and support
the nutrient reduction initiatives of the Chesapeake Bay Program.
• Vint Hill Farms,VA (Army)—This facility is currently undergoing closure as part of
the Base Realignment and Closure process. The wastewater treatment plant was up-
graded to use ultraviolet disinfection and will likely be transferred to the community
as part of the closure process.
Commitment 13
(5) Completing demonstration site assessments for nutrient management using in-
teragency teams on at least one Federal facility in each of the four jurisdictions
(DC, MD, PA, VA) by December 31, 1994. (EPA Lead)
During 1995, the Federal Agencies Committee performed nutrient management site as-
sessments at: the National Plant Materials Center (USDA), MD, in July; the Coast Guard
Reserve Training Center at Yorktown, VA, in August; Antietam National Battlefield
(National Park Service), MD, facility in November; Boiling Air Force Base in October; and
the George Washington Parkway (National Park Service), VA, in December.
During 1996, the Federal Agencies Committee performed nutrient management site as-
sessments at the Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center, MD, and the Beltsville
Agricultural Research Center, MD, in July and at Rock Creek National Park in the District
of Columbia in October. Two scheduled assessments were canceled due to inclement
weather and staff changes at the Chesapeake Bay Program Office.
The assessments continue to demonstrate the enormous potential of drawing upon the
expertise and resources of inter agency teams. State and local government participation
brought further technical assistance opportunities to the attention of the agencies and fa-
cilities. Bay Program goals and objectives were demonstrated to all agencies involved, fur-
ther promoting partnership and enhancing cooperation. Specific ideas and suggestions were
26
-------
provided to the facilities to enhance natural resource management. At the same time many
positive and beneficial activities at the facilities were brought to the attention of the Bay
Program and the state and local governments.
1. National Plant Materials Center—Managed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
the Center was established in 1938 on 140 acres of the Beltsville Agricultural
Research Center. The primary mission of the Center is to help field centers across the
country acquire plant materials for their regional testing programs. The Nutrient Site
Assessment Team found the Center has made strides toward streamlining and im-
proving its applications of fertilizers and pesticides, particularly with the recent ac-
quisition of a chemical injection sprayer during 1994. The Team recommended sev-
eral changes in pesticide storage practices and record keeping protocols. The Team also
discussed the Center's effort to implement a wetland restoration project and recom-
mended that the Chesapeake Bay Program Office provide advice on noregulatory ap-
proaches to restoring and maintaining such sites. The Team provided a number of
suggestions to the Center pertaining to weeds and erosion controls in fields, by use of
low-cost available materials. The Team also recommended a change in field watering
schedules to avoid the heat of the day.
2. U.S. Coast Guard Reserve Training Center—Located in Yorktown, Virginia, the 154
acre facility is bordered on the north by the York River and on the south by Wormley
Creek. The facility is adjacent to the 9,300 acre Colonial National Historical Park.
The Site Assessment Team was aided by the Training Center's Master Plan, its
Habitat/Natural Resource Preservation Plan, and relevant Geographic Information
System survey data. Jointly, these sources of information provided the Team with an
in-depth preview of the Coast Guard's site development plan.
The Team found that a variety of habitat restoration and resource conservation op-
portunities existed. The Team recommended that the Coast Guard implement
BayScaping practices around its buildings. The Team commended the facility's
grounds maintenance practices and recommended enhancement of the integrated pest
management (IPM) program by the creation of a facility-wide IPM plan. Also, the
Team recommended the creation of a wetland along the York River shoreline using a
segmented offshore breakwater system.
3. Antietam National Battlefield—This 3,300-acre facility is administered by the
National Park Service and located in western Maryland adjacent to the Potomac River.
The Nutrient Site Assessment Team was impressed with the Antietam Park Service
staff's high level of awareness of the Chesapeake Bay Program's restoration goals and
policies for the Bay and its tributaries. Antietam has a good working relationship with
the local Natural Resources Conservation Service field office and the Washington
County Soil Conservation District. Also, Antietam has a strong IPM Program on its
Park Service land. Antietam's 345-acre West Woods forest restoration project appears
to be a success story. Finally, the Park Service's Antietam natural resources staff con-
ducts an array of environmental programs through interpretive tours and information
provided to the public.
The Team recommended that Antietam develop a nutrient tracking system in con-
junction with local farm owners to facilitate both Battlefield nutrient reduction and to
serve as a positive example for the surrounding community. The Park Service adopted
27
-------
a number of the Team's recommendations toward alleviating the erosion along
Antietam Creek. The Federal Agencies Committee and the Antietam Park Service
staff will continue to work together to enhance the dissemination of Chesapeake Bay
issues through Park Service's interpretation programs.
4. Boiling Air Force Base—This 607-acre installation on the shoreline of the Potomac
River (at the confluence with the Anacostia River) has 37 stormwater discharges to the
Potomac. The Potomac Shoreline Restoration Project, completed in late 1994, pro-
vided structures to prevent erosion. Boiling operates a strong IPM Program, nutrient
management program, and a centralized toxics management program (the "Pharmacy").
Team members were extremely impressed with Boiling's hazardous and toxic materi-
als management programs and noted that new residents at the base are required to un-
dergo specific training on pesticide, nutrient, and toxics handling issues before they
are given a key to their residence. Team recommendations include: installation of a
sewage pump-out station at the base marina; creation of a revegetation/habitat project
on the peninsula of land separating the marina from the Potomac River; revegetation
of areas affected by riprap from the shoreline hardening project; and protecting the
healthy submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) beds at the marina basin. The Team also
made specific stormwater control recommendations.
5. George Washington Memorial Parkway—The 33-mile Parkway is located in Virginia
along the Potomac River and connects Mount Vernon to Great Falls. The Parkway and
its adjacent lands are administered by the National Park Service and serves as a ri-
parian buffer strip (7,500 acres) for much of its length along the Potomac River. The
Park Service is using strong IPM and nutrient management programs. The Team rec-
ommended a variety of stormwater and land use proposals to Parkway managers per-
taining to the five assessed sites along the Parkway. Of particular interest is the con-
troversial plan to close the heavily eroded Belle Haven Marina and the issue of
development of a steeply graded ravine behind Arlington House by the managers of
the Arlington National Cemetery.
6. Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center—The Center is located along the east
bank of the Potomac River in Charles County, Maryland, and bounded on its eastern
side by Mattawoman Creek. The Team assessed the site for the potential for restora-
tion of SAV and recommended that restoration efforts concentrate on the
Mattawoman side of the facility where SAV is already established. The Team assem-
bled water quality data available from monitoring stations operated by the MD
Department of Natural Resources and will share that data with the facility managers.
7. Beltsville Agricultural Research Center—At 6,800 acres, the Research Center is the
largest single farm in Prince George's County, Maryland. The Center is located within
the Patuxent River watershed and uses an aggressive program of IPM on all roads and
grounds. Facility managers state that IPM has saved money over conventional pesti-
cide use. The Research Center also was commended for its extensive promotion of
woody buffer strips along streams and for using grassy swales and conservation buffer
strips along fields. The Site Assessment Team examined the wastewater management
practices around the dairy operation, which includes a 1.6 million gallon lagoon that
drains into Beaverdam Creek. Better manure management at the airport is recom-
mended. The Team had an opportunity to examine a wetlands mitigation project con-
28
-------
structed by METRO, and made several recommendations to improve that effort. The
Team also recommended that the Research Center install a trash sweeping boom over
Indian Creek. The Team noted that all engineers at the Center are participating in
stormwater management training. The Research Center offered an unusual opportu-
nity to observe the impact of deer population on native forest vegetation in a con-
trolled area.
8. Rock Creek Park—Rock Creek Park is a national park administered by the National
Park Service. The Park abounds the Rock Creek from the D.C.-Maryland border to the
Creek's mouth at the Potomac River. As an urban recreational resource, the Park is
impacted by heavy recreational, commuter, and commercial uses. The Park encom-
passes 3,000 acres, though not all parcels are contiguous. The Site Assessment Team
was impressed with Park Service's efforts to maintain the quality of the Park but was
concerned with the impact of an aging municipal water system that traverses the park
via 60 sanitary sewage lines and 375 stormwater outfalls. The Team made several rec-
ommendations to reduce the impact of stormwater erosion; to more effectively man-
age manure loads at stable facilities; and to control soil erosion caused by heavy recre-
ational use. Park Service negotiations with the District of Columbia over
improvement of the sewage and stormwater systems are difficult, but the Park Service
is reaching out to local businesses and facilities to attempt to correct leakage and ille-
gal hookup problems.
In all of the above assessments, Team members and the facilities learned more about the
Bay Program and each other's management challenges. Contacts made as a result of these
assessments continue to reap benefits for both the Program and the facilities.
Commitment 14
(6) Development of an assessment protocol based upon these demonstration proj-
ects for use in completing at least five additional assessments annually at
Federal facilities in the Basin until September 30, 2000, (EPA Lead)
The Federal Agencies Committee Nutrient Reduction Work Group has developed a
Nutrient Site Assessment Protocol (most recently revised in September 1996) that has been
used successfully to guide assessments undertaken pursuant to this program. The goal has
been to expand from a focus exclusively on nutrient reduction to one that encompasses
wider Bay Program goals and pollution prevention opportunities.
The Work Group continues to review candidate site for visits in 1997 and 1998., specif-
ically for their potential contributions to the Special D.C. Tributary Strategy (see
Commitment 10). Sites for 1997 have been nominated by the Department of Defense
(U.S.Army), the National Park Service, and the U.S. Postal Service.
29
-------
TOXIC REDUCTIONS
+ Aid in the reduction of toxic loadings to the Chesapeake and its tributaries by:
Commitment 15
(1) Significantly increasing the adoption of Integrated Pest Management in the
watershed consistent with the Administration's commitment to having Inte-
grated Pest Management implemented on 75% of the country's agricultural
lands by the year 2000. (USDA lead)
This commitment helped to lead the Chesapeake Executive Council to adopt a more
comprehensive and specific Chesapeake Bay Basinwide Toxics Reduction and Prevention
Strategy in 1994. That Strategy commits the Bay Program partners to implement volun-
tary integrated pest management (IPM) practices on 75 percent of all agricultural, recre-
ational, and public lands within the Chesapeake Bay Basin, 50 percent for all commercial
land, and 25 percent of all residential land by the year 2000. During 1995, IPM was used
on over one million acres of cropland in the basin, an increase of approximately 37,000
acres since 1994. The Department of Agriculture's Cooperative State Research, Education
and Extension Service, through representatives to the Bay Program and the individual
states, will continue to help implement these commitments on Federal, state and private
lands throughout the watershed.
The Department of Defense issued a Pest Management Program Instruction in April
1996. This instruction sets Department-wide policy to establish and maintain safe, effec-
tive and environmentally sound IPM programs. Measures of Merit for this program include
adoption of IPM on all Department of Defense facilities by FY 1997 and implementation
of plans and demonstrated reduction in volumes of pesticide used by FY 2000. The IPM
programs also are designed to achieve nutrient reduction. For example, newly adopted fer-
tilization programs used for all grounds maintenance on Langley Air Force Base has cut fer-
tilizer use by 50%.
Excluding administrative buildings leased from General Services Administration, the
U.S. Coast Guard owns 706 acres and leases an additional 225 acres of land within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed. IPM is formally used on at least 345 acres (49%), and some-
what less formally on an additional 200 acres (77% overall). In addition, the National Park
Service, since 1978, has continued to implement IPM practices into park management
programs.
Commitment 16
(2) Using the existing "BayScapes" and other successful programs to expedite com-
pliance with the President's directive on environmentally and economically
beneficial landscaping practices on Federal facilities in the Bay watershed.
(USFWS lead)
BayScapes is an environmental education and outreach program that encourages envi-
ronmentally sound landscape practices that benefit people, wildlife, and the Chesapeake
30
-------
Bay. BayScape principles include conservation landscaping, creating wildlife habitat using
native plants, conserving water, enhancing biodiversity, and utilizing Integrated Pest
Management. Having completed development of BayScapes informational material, the
program now focuses on implementing on-the-ground demonstration projects and ex-
panding the program through various outreach activities. BayScapes has been expanded
from a homeowners' awareness and action campaign to one that emphasizes and facilitates
strong participation from large-scale land managers, including Federal facilities, corporate
landowners, communities, and state and local governments.
During 1996, renewed coordination between the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay led to the development of a long-term workplan, includ-
ing a grant provided by EPA through the Chesapeake Bay Program to support several model
and demonstration projects throughout the watershed, signage for demonstration sites,
and a series of regional BayScapes workshops for land managers and others who will then
become sources of technical assistance. The Fish and Wildlife Service designed demon-
stration sites at four Federal facilities, totaling up to 2.9 acres converted to BayScapes: the
Anacostia Naval Station (D.C.), Naval Academy Golf Course (Annapolis, MD), Oxford
Cooperative Laboratory (Talbot County, MD), and the Fish and Wildlife Service Chesa-
peake Bay Field Office (Annapolis, MD). The Anacostia project has been planted, and oth-
ers are due for completion in early 1997. Technical assistance on project planning was pro-
vided at several non-Federal sites. Plans for 10-20 more demonstration projects are
underway for 1997.
Exhibits, presentations, and informational materials reached thousands of citizens and
professionals throughout the watershed. Other program partners in various BayScapes ac-
tivities include the MD Department of Natural Resources, the Wildlife Habitat Council,
and MD Department of Agriculture.
The U.S. Coast Guard, with the assistance of the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, ini-
tiated several BayScape projects in 1995 and 1996. Station Little Creek, a Coast Guard sta-
tion in Norfolk, VA, that was completely rebuilt during this time period, used native plants
in its new landscaping plan. These plants were not all originally part of the plan, but the
Station Officer-in-Charge requested the changes to comply with Chesapeake Bay Program
goals. Station Crisfield, MD, worked with the Alliance to develop a comprehensive
BayScapes plan for the facility. The plan, which is divided into three zones to facilitate par-
tial implementation if necessary, will be planted during spring 1997. In order to comply
with this BayScapes Commitment and the President's directive, the Coast Guard
Information Systems Center developed a BayScapes plan for landscaping around the new
front gate area. This BayScape will be planted during 1997.
The AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps at Perry Point, MD, has trained
Corps members to apply BayScape concepts in their projects, whenever possible.
31
-------
Commitment 17
(3) Highlighting releases of the Bay's priority "Toxics of Concern" from Federal
facilities in reports under Executive Order #12856. (EPA lead)
Federal facilities reported their 1994 releases and off-site transfers of chemicals required
for reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
Executive Order 12856 for the first time. Releases and off-site transfers from Federal facil-
ities within the watershed were compiled in the summer of 1996, when the data were re-
leased. These data will be used as a baseline to measure progress in achieving the follow-
ing commitment in the Chesapeake Bay Program's 1994 Chesapeake BayBasinwide Toxics
Reduction and Prevention Strategy.
By 2000, achieve a 75 percent voluntary reduction in releases and off-site trans-
fers of Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern and chemicals listed under section
313(c) of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, from a
1994 baseline, for federal facilities within the Chesapeake Bay basin.
The Federal Agencies Committee will work with the Bay Program's Toxics Subcom-
mittee to develop a strategy for achieving this commitment by the year 2000.
The National Park Service is using bioremediation and other techniques to remove
PCBs, coal tars, and other toxics originating from historic contamination at various park
sites in and around the District of Columbia. Further, the Park Service is working with EPA,
the U.S. Navy, and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on a hazardous ma-
terials study and mitigation measures on underground storage tanks and Superfund sites
impacting Park Service trust lands from U.S. Navy lands. The Park Service is also working
with the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences to mitigate ground water nutrient impacts
from urban areas adjacent to the park.
FEDERAL FACILITIES
Commitment 18
+ Assure that the ecological value of any Federal facilities proposed for closure with-
in the Chesapeake Bay watershed is addressed in the decision-making process for
future land uses . (DoD Lead)
The most recent round of Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) recommendations was
completed in 1995. Final disposition of bases listed for closure is ongoing, and Department
of Defense representatives continue to work actively with the Bay Program to monitor
property transfer studies. Ecological studies are one of the many components of the BRAC
process, and BRAC transfers typically are thoroughly evaluated as part of a National
Environmental Policy Act process.
32
-------
Significant closure activities and studies are continuing at Fort Ritchie (Army), Vint Hill
Farms (Army), the Naval Surface Warfare Center at White Oak, and as part of the transfer
of the Naval Radio Transmitter Facility to the Naval Academy. Potential partnering on eco-
logical considerations for these facilities continues to be investigated and may have partic-
ular environmental benefits associated with the Naval Radio Transmitter Facility.
Examples of BRAC activities in the watershed includes:
1. Cameron Station (Army), Alexandria, VA — The 164-acre facility officially closed on
September 30, 1995, and was sold in December 1996. The property was divided into
three pieces, one of which was transferred to the City of Alexandria for park and pub-
lic access uses, and another parcel (including a lake) was transferred to the National
Park Service.
2. Vint Hill Farms Station (Army), Warrenton, VA — The 701-acre facility is transfer-
ring from the Army to the local community in September 1997. The Army is con-
tinuing base transition coordination until that time.
3. Fort Ritchie (Army), Washington County, MD — The 640-acre facility will be trans-
ferred in October 1998 to Washington County. The facility's Integrated Natural
Resources Management Plan was recently updated and is being used as a reference
during the transfer process. The Army and the County continue to work together on
preservation and transfer details.
4. Woodbridge Army Research Facility/Harry Diamond Laboratory (Army), Wood-
bridge, VA — The 579-acre facility, located in Prince William County, is scheduled
for transfer to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on June 1, 1997. The property is lo-
cated along the Potomac River and offers wetlands, shorelines, and natural areas and
is well known for its quality bird habitat.
5. Naval Surface Warfare Center (Navy), Annapolis, MD — On-going transfer studies
include an emphasis on approaches to redevelopment, transportation, and public ac-
cess issues and waterfront protection considerations. The Navy plans to conduct a
cultural resources study on the property prior to transfer. The 44-acre facility is
unique in that it is "landlocked" by the Naval Station, Annapolis. The southeast por-
tion of this developed facility is bounded by the Severn River, and the waterfront lo-
cation is considered a valuable asset and important consideration in future land use
planning.
As part of a separate interagency effort, the Department of Defense participates in the
EPA's Federal Interagency Working Group on Brownfields. Through this Working Group,
the Department of Defense is working to additionally consider the role that closing excess
lands can play in community revitalization when these lands are located within an identi-
fied Brownfields pilot project location. Efforts such as these ensure that adequate care is
given to all aspects of land management decision making during the BRAC property trans-
fer process.
33
-------
NATIONAL SERVICE
Commitment 19
+ Provide mutual benefits to the Bay and to national service through environmen-
tal improvement training and project proposals and other opportunities to work
with 250 Corps members and 45 staff being located in Aberdeen as part of the
National Civilian Community Corps, as well as other initiatives of the Corpora-
tion for National Service (A*NCCC lead).
The AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps (A*NCCC) moved its location
from Aberdeen to Perry Point, Maryland, reduced staff, and cut the number of Corps
members to 68. The A*NCCC, however, has continued its strong support for Bay restora-
tion activities.
On October 10, 1996, the Chesapeake Executive Council held its annual meeting in
Harrisburg, PA. The Council adopted a Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative for the entire
Chesapeake Bay watershed, which includes a goal of restoring 2,010 miles of buffers by the
year 2010. To highlight this new initiative, the A*NCCC at Perry Point was asked to pre-
pare a demonstration site planting of a riparian forest buffer along the Susquehanna River
on the morning of the Executive Council meeting. The planting occurred on one of the last
privately-held segments of what has become the Capital Area Greenbelt, which encircles
the entire City of Harrisburg. A*NCCC Corps members worked with officials from EPA,
the U.S. Forest Service, PA's Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, PA's
Department of Environmental Protection, the City of Harrisburg, and local conservation
groups to design and plant the trees. They also participated in a tree planting ceremony at
which officials from the states and EPA planted a ceremonial state tree.
The Bay Program has worked to increase participation and involvement with the
A*NCCC and to introduce Corps partnerships with Federal, State, local, and private enti-
ties that are working on various projects in the Bay watershed. Bay Program representatives
have participated in training Corps members about Bay Program goals, ecology and tech-
nical issues. The Bay Program has also provided the A*NCCC with specific project pro-
posals and assisted in forming partnerships between the A*NCCC and other groups. The
A*NCCC has worked closely with the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay on a number of
restoration projects throughout the Bay watershed, and the two groups have formed a part-
nership in a Statement of Understanding.
The A*NCCC began its third year by concentrating on projects within a one-hour drive
of their location at Perry Point. The year consisted of projects throughout the Bay water-
shed. The following are among the environmental and conservation activities undertaken
by the A*NCCC in the Chesapeake Bay watershed which further the commitments and
goals of the Bay Program.
• Boordy Vineyard, Gittings, MD—Along a 3/4-mile stretch of a newly planted riparian
forest buffer (500 trees) beside Long Green Creek, the A*NCCC cleared away thick
multi-flora rose bushes and developed riparian forest buffer maintenance guidelines
for landowners.
34
-------
EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner and Governor Parris N. Glendening "break ground" for the
planting of a riparian forest buffer on the shores of the Severn River in Annapolis, Maryland.
The Administrator and Governor were joined by volunteers from the U.S. Naval Academy
and AmeriCorps. The planting took place on property owned by the U.S.Naval Academy on
March 19, 1997. (Photo courtesy of Richard Tomlinson, Governor's Press Office)
• Hart-Miller Island, MD—The A*NCCC removed storm debris from 500 yards of
shoreline where!62 trees were planted in 1995.
• John Evans Memorial Park—Along 200 yards of shoreline on the Octoraro River, the
A*NCCC cleared natural flood debris away from the trunks of 50 trees, filled and
graded a small dirt parking area, and erected a 500 foot fence around the park.
• Gunpowder Falls State Park, MD—The A*NCCC constructed rock cribbing along a
Vi-mile stretch of trail; stabilized existing wood cribbing; constructed one wooden
water bar and one rock water bar; and created log and rock stream crossings.
• Little Pipe Creek, Union Bridge, MD—The A*NCCC drew a site map for a half mile
stretch of the Little Pipe Creek. In addition, Corps members constructed six perma-
nent site-markers that are used for surveying the stream and monitoring its level and
rate of degradation, and surveyed and recorded one area of the stream.
• Long Green Run, Madonna, MD—The A*NCCC planted 1,300 small trees to create
a riparian forest buffer along a 3/4-mile stretch of Long Green Run,, and removed tree
shelters from approximately 100 river birch trees.
35
-------
• Chickahominy River, Richmond, Virginia—In Joseph Bryan Park, along the
Chickahominy River, the A*NCCC planted sixty-seven 10-20 foot trees and potted
over 100 small trees.
Benefit to the Community
In the course of their work, the A*NCCC Trailblazers created riparian forest buffer
maintenance guidelines for landowners. The A*NCCC also promotes a message that the
youth of America are interested in investing their time and energy in environmental preser-
vation projects. Further, the riparian forest buffer projects undertaken by the A*NCCC pro-
mote the Chesapeake Bay Program's new Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative.
Benefit to the A*NCCC
The projects undertaken by the A*NCCC provided Corps members with an opportunity
to learn about the effects of degraded tributaries to the Chesapeake Bay and about the ben-
efits derived from riparian forest buffers. Members were also introduced to the skills of sur-
veying and to alternative landscaping options available through BayScaping. The
A*NCCC, at Perry Point, MD, has trained Corps members to apply BayScape concepts in
their projects whenever possible. A*NCCC members were exposed to a broad array of ca-
reer opportunities and volunteer opportunities in the environmental field.
REPORTING
Commitment 20
+ Finally, we agree to report biennially on progress in the implementation of this
agreement, beginning April 1, 1995. (EPA lead)
This document is the second of the biennial progress reports.
36
-------
APPENDIX A
Chesapeake Bay Program
AGREEMENT OF
FEDERAL AGENCIES ON
ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
July 14, 1994
~X~\7~7~HEREAS, the National Performance Review
\\/ under the direction of the Vice President has
V V called upon Federal agencies to develop cross-
agency ecosystem planning and management; and
WHEREAS, the restoration of the Chesapeake Bay is a
readily accessible example of ecosystem management carried
out by a partnership of State and Federal agencies engaged in
the integrated management of the waters, the air, the living
resources, and human dimensions of the landscapes of the Bay
Region, all with the common goal of restoring the Chesapeake
watershed to a healthy ecosystem; and
WHEREAS, this partnership is embodied in the 1987
Chesapeake Bay Agreement, signed by the States of Maryland,
Pennsylvania and Virginia, the District of Columbia, the
Chesapeake Bay Commission, and the Federal Government,
which reaffirms the commitments of all parties "to restore and
protect the ecological integrity, productivity and beneficial uses
of the Chesapeake Bay system;" and
WHEREAS, the thirteen Federal agencies which have
signed formal agreements to be part of the Chesapeake Bay
Program manage public lands, support state implementation
through cooperative programs, and bring a broad range of ex-
pertise in land, water, air, and living resource management to
the restoration effort, and believe the Bay partnership can pro-
vide even greater opportunities to achieve ecosystem-based
planning and management; and
WHEREAS, the Chesapeake Bay Program is a national
leader in the use of sound science to set clear goals and to
measure progress in such areas as reductions in nutrient and
N.
toxic loadings to the Bay and its tributaries, the recovery of
underwater grasses, and the removal of blockages to migratory
fish; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Agencies Committee of the
Chesapeake Bay Program has supported these efforts through,
among other actions, the establishment of Work Groups on
Nutrient Reduction and Habitat Restoration, which have initi-
ated a program of nutrient and habitat assessments of major
Federal facilities in the Bay watershed; and
WHEREAS, the President, in a Memorandum of April
26, 1994, for the Heads of Executive Departments and
Agencies, has directed agencies to adopt environmentally and
economically beneficial practices on Federal landscaped
grounds, which practices are in many cases similar to those
already being proposed in the facility assessments being under-
taken by the Chesapeake Bay Federal Agencies Committee; and
WHEREAS, toxic emissions and releases from private
industry to the Chesapeake Bay have been reduced by over 50%
in five years, and the President, in Executive Order #12856 has
recently called for a similar 50% reduction in toxic releases from
Federal facilities by 1999, along with progress reporting to begin
July 1, 1995; and
WHEREAS, the President with the support of Congress,
has established the Corporation for National and Community
Service under the National and Community Service Trust Act,
under which the National Civilian Community Corps has estab-
lished its first Operations and Training Center at Aberdeen
Proving Ground, on the Chesapeake.
I ow, therefore, we, the undersigned representatives of the participating Federal agencies, commit ourselves to
managing the Chesapeake Bay watershed as a cohesive ecosystem, and recommit to working together and with the states and other
parties to achieve the goals of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement. Specifically, we agree to:
partnership + work to bring all our programs into the partnership for Chesapeake Bay ecosystem management, and to urge
other Federal agencies to become participants with us, where appropriate;
research + coordinate our research agendas in consultation with the Bay Program's Scientific and Technical Advisory
Committee, to address priority management needs for restoration of the Chesapeake Bay; initially including
the role of atmospheric deposition in nutrient and toxic pollution of the Bay and the impact on the natural
system (NOAAlead);
data coordination + establish a Work Group under the Federal Agencies Committee to assess and evaluate existing ecological
resource inventories used by Federal agencies, and to make recommendations to improve coordination,
37
-------
compatibility, standardization, CIS-based data layers and interagency transfer of information by December 31,
1995 (EPA lead);
Anacostia River * provide full support to the Anacostia River Demonstration Project as an opportunity to apply ecosystem man-
agement concepts in an urban environment, through a coordinated biennial Federal workplan beginning in FY
1995, in concert with the Anacostia Watershed Restoration Committee (Corps of Engineers lead);
habitat restoration * support full implementation of the Bay Program's Habitat Restoration Strategy and related plans by:
(1) including innovative use of public and private funding sources, restoration of habitat at Federal facilities,
and development annually of a list of priority projects for habitat restoration on Federal lands in the water-
shed (FWS lead);
(2) fully implementing all habitat restoration authorities to improve the condition of aquatic, riparian and
upland fish and wildlife habitat and assuring beneficial use of clean dredged material to support fish, migra-
tory waterfowl, and other wildlife habitat in the Bay (Corps of Engineers lead);
(3) supporting development in the Bay watershed of a policy favoring the creation of forested buffers along
streams, in order to help achieve both nutrient reduction and habitat restoration goals of the Chesapeake
Bay Program (USFS lead); and
(4) providing technical assistance in fish passage design, providing stock for restoring newly opened spawning
habitat, and determining needs for restoring upstream spawning habitat (NOAA lead);
nutrient •reduction • commit to do our share to meet the goal to reduce by 40% the loadings of nutrients to the Bay by 2000 through:
(1) supporting the goals and action items of the tributary strategies as they are affected by Federal lands and
programs;
(2) developing by December 31, 1995, a Special Tributary Strategy for Federal lands in the District of Columbia,
where the Federal Government is a major landholder (EPA lead);
(3) delivery of Federal assistance by integrated resources planning on a watershed basis to deal with nonpoint
sources of pollution, consistent with the 1993 Agreement between the USDA and the Bay Program (SCS
lead);
(4) completing upgrades of wastewater treatment facilities to remove nutrients at Federal facilities, with prior-
ity on facilities in excess of 0.5m gallons per day being upgraded by January 31, 2000, to levels consistent
with the applicable tributary strategy (DOD lead);
(5) completing demonstration site assessments for nutrient management using interagency teams on at least
one Federal facility in each of the four jurisdictions (DC, MD, PA, VA) by December 31, 1994 (EPA lead);
and
(6) development of an assessment protocol based upon these demonstration projects for use in completing at
least five additional assessments annually at Federal facilities in the Basin until September 30, 2000
(EPA lead);
toxic reductions
federal facilities
national service
E
• aid in the reduction of toxic loadings to the Chesapeake and its tributaries by:
(1) significantly increasing the adoption of Integrated Pest Management in the watershed consistent with the
Administration's commitment to having Integrated Pest Management implemented on 75% of the country's
agricultural lands by the year 2000 (USDA lead);
(2) using the existing "BayScapes" and other successful programs to expedite compliance with the President's
directive on environmentally and economically beneficial landscaping practices on Federal facilities in the
Bay watershed (FWS lead); and
(3) highlighting releases of the Bay's priority Toxics of Concern from Federal facilities in reports under Executive
Order #12856 (EPA lead);
• assure that the ecological value of any Federal facilities proposed for closure within the Chesapeake Bay water-
shed is addressed in the decision-making process for future land uses (DOD lead);
* provide mutual benefits to the Bay and to national service through environmental improvement training and
project proposals and other opportunities to work with the 250 Corps members and 45 staff being located in
Aberdeen as part of the National Civilian Community Corps, as well as with other initiatives of the Corporation
for National and Community Service (NCCC lead).
inally, we agree to report biennially on progress in the implementation of this agreement, beginning April 1, 1995 (EPA lead).
38
-------
FOR THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
- -
£ Carol M.
trPjjciasepe, Assistant Administrator/or Wfcter
Pecp-H.-Kostmayer, Regional Administn
r^
i, Director, C/tesapeofce Bay Program Office
itc, Secretary
L -
George T. Framptpn, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Fishp Witdti/e
& Parks l / I
Elizabeth^nn Rieke, Assistant Secretary for Water 6? Science
FOR THE U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
FOR THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
FOR THE NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
FOR.THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Dr. Ronald Pulliam, Director
\U^,7l M)ytr(k\)
Richard E. Rominger, Deputy tecrewry
R. Lyons, Assistant Secretary for Naturaf Resources and
Environment
39
-------
FOR THE US. FOREST SERVICE
FOR THE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE
FOR THE EXTENSION SERVICE
FOR THE AGRICULTURAL STABILIZATION
AND CONSERVATION SERVICE
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
/ ADr. Leodrey Williams, Acting Administrator
Grant Bunwock, Administrator
'SbltuAVassermantjooHman, Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Environmental Security)
Robert Pirie, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Installations and
Environment
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE
AIR FORCE
FOR THE DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
I/J- £,
Robert M. Walker, Assistant Secretarj^br Installations, Logistics
and Environment
II* III Johi^ff. Zirschk{y&ctmg Assisp&t Secretary for Civil
•••••J i' ^
'i! Work
Rodney A. Coleman, Assistant Secreifiry for Manpower, Reserve
Affairs, Installations, and Environment
w—
Vice Admiral Edward M. Straw, Director
FOR THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
D. James Baker, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and
Administrator
40
-------
FOR THE U.S. COAST GUARD
FOR THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
Re^rr Admiral
William J. Ecker, Commander, Fifth District
FOR THE CORPORATION FOR
NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
FOR THE NATIONAL CIVILIAN
COMMUNITY CORPS
FOR THE SUSQUEHANNA RIVER
BASIN COMMISSION
Observers:
FOR THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF
PENNSYLVANIA
FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA
FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FOR THE CHESAPEAKE BAY COMMISSION
U.S. SENATOR PAUL SARBANES
!i Segal, President ana Executive Officer
gj Brigadier General Donald L. Scott, Director
'ole, Federal Member, U.S. Commissioner
41
-------
APPENDIX B
Federal Landholdings in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed1
Department
AGRICULTURE
Agency
Agricultural Research Service
Animal Plant Health Inspection Service
Natural Resources Conservation Service
US Forest Service
Tbtal Agriculture
COMMERCE
DEFENSE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
Corps of Engineers
Air Force
Army
Navy2
Defense Logistics Agency
Tbtal Defense
INTERIOR
US Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Tbtal Interior
TRANSPORTATION
INDEPENDENT
AGENCIES
Coast Guard
National Aeronautics and Space Admin.
Smithsonian Institution
Tbtal, Independent
Agencies
GRAND TOTAL
Number of
Facilities
7
1
2
3
13
3
18
3
21
40
2
84
16
26
42
11
2
1
3
155
Tbtal Acreage
7,998
128
803
824,720
833,649
435
80,296
10,880
205,643
129,019
1,485
427,323
45,370
286,000
331,370
706
1,927
2,600
4,527
1,598,000
^•Does not represent total Federal landholdings as not all agencies with property in the area are represented
in the CBP.
Includes the Marine Corps Base, Quantico, VA
43
-------
-o o
» 3
g S'
X1 03
9 g
75'
3- (D
< (fl
2* OT
CD
> ^ o m c
2^3-33
w
CD rf.
' ^> ~^ -f
;s?8
l-i ?'
CO
CD
O
------- |