CHESAPEAKE BAY INITIATIVES*

                       SEPTEMBER, 1983
*
 1.  The attached statements represent summaries of potential
     Chesapeake Bay program initiatives under consideration.

 2.  These proposals represent a compilation of work to date by
     the Executive and Legislative Branches of State Government.

 3.  These proposals represent an effort to address, in a
     comprehensive way,water pollution, resource restoration,
     and protection of the character of the Bay.

 4.  The primary focus of these initiatives has been to consider
     needed improvements to existing programs as well as to develop
     new strategies.

 5.  These initiatives will be refined during the fall based on:

     a.  The-final recommendations of the EPA Bay Study;

     b.  The recommendations of the Work Groups preparing proposals
         for the December Bay Conference;

     c.  The final recommendations of the December Bay Conference;

     d.  Continued., work with, the Maryland General Assembly and
         Congressional Delegation as well as our neighboring
         states;

     e.  A determination as to available funding resources.

-------
                                          9O3R831O4
                           INDEX
A.  Point Source

    1.  Construction Funding Assistance for Public Sewage
        Treatment Plants
    2.  Expand and Improve Point Source Control Program
    3.  Adequate Management of Public.and Private Sewage
        Treatment Plants
    4.  Disinfection
    5.  Upgrade State-Owned Sewage Treatment Plants
    6.  Use of Suitable State Lands for Sludge, Sludge
        Compost arid Sewage Effluent

B.  Nonpoiht

    1.  State Soil and Water Conservation Programs to
        Address Agricultural Nonpoint Source Pollution
    2.  Enforcement of Erosion and Sediment Control Plans
    3.  Stormwater Management
    4.  Best Management Practices for Existing Urban Areas
    5.  Natural Erosion

C.  Resource Restoration
    1.  Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV)
    2.  Oysters, Finfish, Ducks

    Protection of Land Resources

E.   Resource Enhancement  •

    1.  Recreational Fishing
    2.  Enhanced Mosquito Control Program to Emphasize
        Open Marsh Water Management Techniques
    3.  Freshwater Conservation
    4.  Youth Conservation Corps

f.   Education

G.   Moni tori rig/Man a'gemen't/Research

    1.  Chesapeake Bay Management Committee
    2.  Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office/Data  Center
    3.  Chesapeake Bay Monitoring Program
    4.  Chesapeake Bay Research Coordination in Maryland

-------
              THE VALUE  OF  CHESAPEAKE BAY TO MARYLAND
      The Bay's contributions  in many  areas  —  employment,  food
 production, recreation, transportation,  and  climate of  pleasant
 living — make  it Maryland's  most  important natural  resource
 and economic asset.

      Seafood from the Chesapeake Bay  has been  a traditional
 ,part of American cuisine.   In  fact,  the  traditional New England
 clam chowder currently is made almost  exclusively with  Bay  clams
 because of the depletion of the New England  harvest.  The total
 Chesapeake Bay area fisheries  catch is exceeded only  by that of.
 the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.  In the Maryland Bay in 1980,
 900,000 sportsfishermen and 35,715  commercial watermen  landed
 74,700,000 pounds of seafood valued at dockside at $197,800,000.

      When the economic multiplier  for secondary economic effects
 is applied  to the fisheries catch  alone, the value to  Maryland's
 economy is estimated to be  $550,000,000.  In some regions of the
 State, the Bay'Seafood industry is  a prime source of  income for
 entire communities.

      Recreational use of the  Bay is difficult  to estimate, but
 a recent National Geographic article suggested  that each year
 nine million people use the Bay for recreation.  Sailing and
 pleasure boating on the Bay have become  popular pastimes not only
"for Maryland residents but  for vacationers from across  the  Nation..
 The gross expenditure for recreation in  the  Bay region  is expected
 to reach $960,000,000 in 1990.

      One of the major ports on the Atlantic Coast is
 located on the Chesapeake Bay.  The Port of  Baltimore handles
 about 23.4 percent of the export commerce leaving U.  S.  North
 Atlantic ports.  Since the  Chesapeake  Bay is located close  to the
 coal-producing regions of Appalachia,•it is  expected  to become
 the major coal export port  in  North America.

      Additionally, because of its  protected deep water ports
 and its closeness to Washington, D.  C.,  the  Chesapeake  Bay
 historically has been a primary area for military installations
 creating significant employment and recreational opportunities.

      In summary, the Bay represents billions of dollars in income
 and tens of thousands of jobs  annually.  No  single business or
 industry in our State approaches the impact  of  the Chesapeake
 Bay on Maryland's economy and  money invested in the Bay provides
 an excellent, visible rate  of  return.  The Chesapeake Bay defines
 the central character of Maryland.

-------
       Al — CONSTRUCTION FUNDING ASSISTANCE FOR

                PUBLIC SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS


* The EPA Bay Study found that discharges from sewage treatment
  plants are a major source of nutrients contributing to adverse
  water quality of the Bay, and recommended significant elimination
  of phosphorous from plant discharges.

* While phosphorous removal is important to Bay water quality, the
  EPA Bay Study assumed that many other related plant improvements
  would be met in order for:
  \
  — Phosphorous removal to be effectively installed;

  — Secondary treatment to be achieved; and

  — Sludge to be adequately handled.

* In addition to nutrient removal, secondary treatment capability
  and sludge handling, growth and interceptor systems traditionally
  have been funded by the existing federal-state sewage construction
  grant program.

* A continuation of the existing program at the federal and State
  levels would probably meet Maryland's needs over time; however,
  the existing program will not continue.  The following changes
  will occur:

  — Federal grant funds will be reduced (both annual allotments
     and percentage share perproject)•

  — Federal grants will not be available for growth or the
     rehabilitation of interceptor systems at the previous level.

* Therefore Maryland needs to consider whether and how to support
  all categories of projects.

* In redesigning Maryland's construction grant program as it relates
  to the water quality of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries,
  the following points should be considered:

  — There are basically five categories of projects which need to
     be evaluated for purposes of State financial assistance.  These
     are:  (1) nutrient removal;  (2) secondary treatment;  (3) the
     construction and, in particular,  the rehabilitation of inter-
     ceptors and related facilities;  (4) sludge handling; and  (5)
     future growth.

-------
                       -  2 -
Federal funds have traditionally been available to public
sewage treatment plants in Maryland for all of these categories
on a 75 percent matching basis and at a rate of about $60 million
per year.  The State has traditionally provided grants to local
governments for 12% percent of the capital costs, with the local
governments contributing the other 12% percent.  As of October
1984, the federal program will change as follows:  (1) federal
funds will be available only on a 55 percent matching basis per
project;  (2) the only eligible categories will be nutrient
removal, secondary treatment, sludge management, and limited
interceptor work.  The federal sewage construction grant
program must be reauthorized in 1985 and, if continued, will
remain so restricted.  We assume it will provide $60 million
per year to Maryland for the five year period after 1985.  It
must be emphasized that this depends upon Congressional
reauthorization.  If that is not forthcoming, an even more
dramatic change in the redesign of Maryland's program will
be required.

Because virtually all sewage flows in Maryland affect the
Chesapeake Bay, a Bay related initiative regarding State
financial assistance should be developed on a Statewide basis.

State financial assistance should be allocated among the five
basic categories of sewage projects in proportion to the degree
each category directly addresses the attainment of federal and
State clean water goals.

If improved levels of treatment are brought on line at plants,
there will be an attendant impact on local user fees due to
increases in plant operating and maintenance costs.  This
financial impact will be exacerbated given t'he reduction in
the amount of federal grant participation in the capital
costs of each project (20 percent).

With respect to interceptor systems, the vast majority of
need in Maryland is associated with the repair and rehabilitation
of existing, older systems.  The failure to repair these systems
will, in itself, have a significant water quality impact.

There is a State interest in the provision of financial.
assistance to local governments for sewage facilities to
accommodate growth.  This is so because such assistance reduces
the local financial burden associated with high levels of
treatment and therefore reduces resistance to the implementation.
In addition, State assistance could allow the State, if it chose,
to guide growth so that adverse secondary water quality impacts
(runoff carrying pollutants from developed land) will be
minimized.  Finally, such assistance could contribute to the
achievement of other State policies such as preservation of
prime agricultural land.

-------
                            _ 3 —
* This initiative would establish revised State policy concerning
  financial assistance to public sewage treatment plants by
  proposing:

  — To increase the existing levels of State grant assistance
     per project to hold local governments harmless for the
     decrease in the level of federal grant assistance for
     those categories of projects which remain eligible for
     federal  assistance (secondary treatment, nutrient removal
     and sludge handling).

  — To maintain a level of State financial assistance (preferably
     low interest loans on a matching basis)  to local governments
     for those categories of projects for which federal grant
     assistance has been substantially eliminated (interceptor
     systems  and growth).

  — To develop new funding sources to support the provision of
     financial assistance for some or all of the categories of
     projects, including revenue bonds and insurance programs,
     possibly as part of an infrastructure bank.

-------
A2 — EXPAND AND IMPROVE POINT SOURCE CONTROL PROGRAMS


* The EPA Study found that both nutrients and toxics from point
  sources adversely affect Bay water quality.

* These pollutants come from point sources and discharge directly
  into the Bay and its tributaries, especially the Patapsco in the
  case of toxics.

* While the point sources are already subject to a level of
  government regulation, in many cases the degree of regulation
  needs to be made more intense or the effectiveness of inspection
  and enforcement needs to be improved to reach the objective of
  preventing Bay quality deterioration.

* To increase the effectiveness of inspection and enforcement, this
  initiative proposes several new programs based on existing efforts
  as well as increased enforcement resources to meet the identified
  needs.

* Toxics from both industrial and municipal sources will be more
  rigorously regulated through the following:

  — The existing pre-treatment program will be enhanced to assure
     adequate State oversight and control of industrial pollutants
     discharged to municipal systems.  This will reduce discharges
     of toxics to the Bay, protect operation of plants and improve
     sludge quality.

  — A new program providing for the biomonitoring of industrial
     and municipal discharges will be implemented which analyzes
     effluents to determine their toxicity to Bay aquatic resources.
     The biomonitoring data is needed to improve the quality of
     State discharge permits.

  -- Other proposals will provide that nutrients be controlled more
     effectively through initiatives aimed at construction and
     maintenance of sewage treatment plants.  However,  it is also
     necessary to increase our enforcement resources to insure that
     plants and their support systems are operated in compliance
     with applicable permits.

-------
    A3 — ADEQUATE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

                  SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS


* The EPA Study found that nutrients from sewage treatment
  plants contribute significantly to adverse Bay water quality.

* Plants need to be adequately maintained if discharge limits
  are to be met.  Unfortunately, public and private operators
  frequently do not provide for long-term maintenance and care.

* This initiative would involve State legislation to require,
  as part of the existing permitting process, that all plants
  demonstrate a capability for long-term adequate management.
  Requirements could include:

  — Adequate fiscal planning;

  -- Adequate rate structure;

  -- Bonding or escrow accounts.

* The proposal could be implemented immediately for all new plants
  and phased in over 3 years for existing plants.

-------
    A3 -- ADEQUATE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC A?\D PRIVATE

                  SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS


* The EPA Study found that nutrients from sewage treatment
  plants contribute significantly to adverse Bay water quality.

* Plants need to be adequately maintained if discharge limits
  are to be met. -Unfortunately, public and private operators
  frequently do not provide for long-term maintenance and care.

* This initiative would involve State legislation to require,
  as part of the existing permitting process, that all plants
 • demonstrate a capability for long-term adequate management.
  Requirements could include:

  — Adequate fiscal planning;

  -- Adequate rate structure;

  -- Bonding or escrow accounts.

* The proposal could be implemented immediately for all new plants
  and phased in over 3 years for existing plants.

-------
               A4 — SEWAGE DISINFECTION
* There remains the need to retain the public health, economic,
  and reliability advantages of disinfection of sewage by
  chlorination.

* However,  chlorinated wastewater discharges are toxic to aquatic
  resources.

* Alternative means of bacteria control have not all proven
  effective in protecting human health, nor have they been
  completely  tested for their environmental impact.

* Approximately two hundred twenty (220)  sewage treatment plants
  in Maryland are installing dechlorination processes.

* This initiative would:

  -- Require  dechlorination using sulfur dioxide or  by other
     means  at remaining approximately 130 municipal  or private
     sewage treatment plants;

  -- Provide  funding support to municipal plants,to  retrofit
     dechlorination equipment;

  -- Set target of two years for compliance with dechlorination
     requirements.

-------
   A5 — UPGRADE STATE OWNED SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS
* The EPA Study found that nutrients from sewage treatment
  plants adversely affected Bay water quality.

* The Maryland Environmental Service operates 20 plants which
  discharge to the Bay or its tributaries.

* These plants should be immediately upgraded to include
  phosphorous removal and land treatment, where possible.
  This upgrade would not only achieve rapid water quality
  benefits but would provide State leadership by example.

* This initiative would establish an expedited schedule for
  the completion of improvements to these plants.

-------
     A6 -- USE OF SUITABLE STATE LANDS FOR SLUDGE,

             SLUDGE COMPOST AND SEWAGE EFFLUENT
* As we move to increase the levels of treatment of sewage
  treatment plants in response to EPA Study, there will be an
  increase in the production of sludge.  This will exacerbate
  the current problems that local governments are experiencing
  in finding solutions for sludge disposal.  Current problems
  derive from increasing difficulties i'n site selection and
  increasing operating costs due to the lack of permanent
  disposal options.

* The State is promoting the use of land application of sewage
  effluent to reduce nutrient levels in the Bay.

* Maryland Environmental Service (MES)  needs to develop new
  markets for sludge compost and to assist the public in
  understanding the beneficial uses of certain kinds of sludge.

* These problems can be assisted by the creative use of State
  lands as disposal areas, particularly as an incentive to local
  governments.

* The initiative involves the issuance of a gubernatorial
  executive order to:

  -- Establish an interdepartmental technical team to produce an
     inventory of State lands potentially suitable for sludge
     disposal (including•"compost') arid land application of sewage
     effluent;

  — Establish MES as a broker to develop and utilize these lands
     for use by local governments;

  — Establish a procurement priority for State agencies to use
     compost in lieu of commercial  fertilizers on their lands.

-------
   Bl — STATE SOIL AND WATER COKSERVATIOK PROGRAMS

      TO ADDRESS AGRICULTURAL NONPQINT SOURCE POLLUTION


* Agricultural conservation programs are coordinated by the
  Maryland Department of Agriculture through the State Soil
  Conservation Committee (SSCC)  and implemented by local soil
  conservation districts.

* The original focus of districts as they were created during the
  late 1930's and 1940's was on the establishment of agricultural
  conservation programs.

* This focus was expanded over time to include- responsibilities in
  the review and approval of small pond construction plans,
  responsibilities in the review and approval of sediment control
  plans, designation as a nonpoint source management agency assisting
  in the reclamation of strip-mined land and most recently, major
  responsibilities in implementing the Maryland Agricultural Cost-
  Share Program for the Control of Water Pollution.

* Progress to date at addressing agricultural nonpoint pollution
  has been limited.

* In 1979, the Governor certified to the Environmental Protection
  Agency  (EPA) Maryland's Statewide Agriculture Water Quality
  Management Program for the Control of Sediment and Animal Wastes,
  commonly known as Maryland's "208 Ag Plan."

* This plan establishes procedures for the designation of critical
  areas, calls for the implementation of Best Management Practices
  (BMP)  on farms, and is designed for,use by soil conservation distri<
  personnel and individual farmers.

* However, funding shortages and other factors have compromised the
  implementation of the plan to assist significantly in the control
  of water pollution.  Moreover, the determination by the EPA-
  Chesapeake Bay Program that nutrients are a major pollutant
  contribution from farm land identifies an agricultural problem
  not addressed by the existing plan.

* Specifically, the Agricultural Initiative involves:

  (1) Upgrading the current program to ensure implementation of
      existing conservation plans, inclusion of  nutrient control
      methods in existing plans, and revision of all outdated plans;

  (2) Targeting resources to critical areas for the purpose of
      conducting an outreach program which will provide concentrated
      awareness and technical assistance to landowners for
      accelerated implementation of Best Management Practices;

  (3) Providing cost-share funds to assist farmers with implementing
      BMPs;

-------
(4)  Providing  funds  for  agricultural monitoring and education
    programs;

(5)  Phased  implementation  of the enforcement component of the
    "208 Ag Plan";      -

(6)  Conducting a program evaluation study five years after
    implementation;  and

(7)  Executive  order  to implement recently announced effort for
    BMPs on all State-owned  agricultural land.

-------
   B2 — ENFORCEMENT OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS


      EPA Study points to sedimentation as one of the major
causes of change in the estuarine environment.

   * Experience during the past ten years indicates that the
     sediment control plans that have been prepared by devel-
     opers and approved by local soil conservation districts
     are adequate but the enforcement of plan compliance by
     local government is poor.

   * Lack of manpower, poor quality of inspection, inadequate
     legal support and a general lack of commitment to follow
     State standards are cited for poor enforcement.

   * Large areas of ground are left disturbed and eroding for
     unreasonable periods without proper controls resulting
     with sediment pollution of our waterways.

   * This is particularly unfortunate because current state-of-
     the-art sediment controls-can be efficient 90-95% of
     the time in keeping dirt on the construction site if
     properly applied in a timely manner.


Options under consideration for remedying this situation are:

                                          -fo-r—p-l-a-n—- eomplian-ee 	
     from local governments to DNR.

   * Transfer direct enforcement authority for plan compliance
     from local government to DNR with a provision for delegation
     of enforcement responsibility to local government based
     on a demonstration of capability, or maintain status .quo
     with authority for DNR to exercise enforcement responsibility
     upon failure of local government to demonstrate adequacy»

   * Provide financial assistance to local governments for
     enhancing enforcement effort, retaining enforcement responsi-
     bility at the local level.

   * Have DNR revise the standards and specifications to improve
     control plans and require timely temporary stabilization.

-------
B4 -- BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR EXISTING URBAN AREAS


 * The EPA Study reports that flushing of pollutants (e.g., stormwatei
   from rooftops, cars,  parking lots, etc.) from existing urban areas
   contributes significant amounts of sediments, nutrients and toxics
   into Bay.                                             .

 * 700,000 acres of State land is now in urban use.  By the year 2000,
   an estimated 265,000  additional acres will be urbanized.

 * The State's sediment  and erosion control and stormwater management
   programs represent a  baseline of protection to address runoff from
   developing areas.   However, there is no compre-hensive program to
   retrofit existing urban areas to reduce runoff and state-of-the-art
   best management practice techniques have not been fully developed.

 * Initiative would establish a State-sponsored demonstration
   program to:

   -- Utilize an interdepartmental team to develop and implement
      retrofit plans for existing State facilities in urban areas.

   — Establish a companion State demonstration matching grants
      program to local governments in urban areas for installation
      of BMPs.

   — .Through demonstration effort, goal would be to perfect BMPs
      technologies leading to more permanent program.

-------
              B3 — STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
* EPA Study identifies urban runoff and runoff from developing
  areas as a major source of nutrients, toxics, and sediment to
  the Bay system.

* Pursuant to State law, on July 18, 1983 DNR promulgated rules
  and regulations which establish criteria and procedures for
  local government to follow in implementing a stormwater
  management program by July 1, 1984.  A local stormwater
  management program must have:

     (1)  An Administration-approved stormwater
         management ordinance in effect;

     (2)  Stormwater management planning and
         approval procedures that provide:

         (a)  Stormwater management for
             every land development
             subject to the law, and

         (b)  The ability and the information
             necessary to review adequately
             proposed installation and
             maintenance measures for
             stormwater management, and

     (3)  Inspection and enforcement procedures
         that ensure the proper construction
         and maintenance -of approved stormwater
         management measures.

* In general, local governments are poorly staffed to handle
  all aspects (plan approval, inspection and maintenance) of
  implementing a stormwater management program.  The new State-
  wide program will require a substantial increase in effort
  even for those jurisdictions that currently have a stormwater
  management program.

* The proposed initiative will require legislation and budgetary
  action to authorize a program of financial assistance to local
  governments to insure adequate implementation of the new State
  program.

-------
                    B5 — NATURAL EROSION
* EPA study documents erosion of the Bay  shoreline  resulting
  in heavy sediment loadings to the Bay system, destroying
  marshes and wetlands, and decreasing habitat  for  living
  resources.

* Of Maryland's 4,360 shoreline miles, about 1,340  are eroding;
  376 miles are eroding critically  (more  than 2 feet per year).
  Sediment loads to the Bay from shoreline erosion  are equal
  to erosion from other sources.

* Continual dredging of channels is underway due to erosion
  merely to maintain the channels at passable levels.  The
  Army Corps of Engineers allocates about $4 million per year
  to dredge 1 to 2 million cubic yards and the  State expends
  $500,000.

* The existing shore erosion control program using  structural
  methods is designed for critical erosion.

* Initiative:

  — Triples current structural approach  for critical areas.

  — Establishes a non-structural approach for  non-critically
     eroding areas through vegetative planting.  Two-pronged
     approach:  financial assistance to private landowers and
     State planting in conjunction with dredging projects.
     The non-structural approach should help stabilize the
     maintenance dredging efforts (i.e., keep the dredged
     material from silting back into the channel) and provide
     additional benefits in habitat creation and buffer
     protection.

  — In areas of high bank erosion,  the experience  of the State
     Department of Transportation along highways using hydro-
     seeding will be explored.
                                                       nsion Education
                                                  mveraty Of Maryland
                                                College Park, Md. 20742

-------
       Cl — SUBMERGED AQUATIC VEGETATION (SAV)


* EPA Study has documented almost total disappearance of SAVs
  throughout Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.  The scientists
  have learned that increased nutrients in the upper Bay have
  detered the ability of the SAV to regenerate.

* SAV beds enhance the productivity of fish and shellfish, provide
  food for wildfowl,  and slow down natural shoreline erosion.

* Some planting of SAVs has been carried out piecemeal with little
  coordination and often in poor quality waters.

* EPA Study has shown areas where regeneration could be successful
  now.

* This initiative will:

  — Create a 5-year planting and study effort to improve planting
     techniques, to assess best species of vegetation for various
     areas of the Bay, identify water quality and bottom substrate
     needed for yearly emergence.

  — Initiate effort in Dorchester and Talbot Counties first where
     success can be assured.  Experience and knowledge will permit
     expansion into upper Bay as habitat improves.

  — Provide seed beds and greenhouses to create the stock of ••
     various species.

  — Require a resurvey of SAV distribution to  confirm reports of
     permanent regrowth and provide for analysis of  changing
     conditions if reports are valid.

-------
 C2 — RESOURCES RESTORATION - OYSTERS, FINFISH, DUCKS


* The EPA Study documented the decline in living resources over
  the past several decades and generally correlated declines in
  water quality with declines in living resources.  If our ini-
  tiatives were limited strictly to pollution control actions,  it
•  could take 10 to 15 years for natural populations to reproduce
  sufficiently to sustain the commercial and sports fishing-
  industries and related economies.  In the interim, it is important
  for the State to support the maintenance of basic stocks.

* These initiatives all have a pay back greater than the public
  investments:

  1.   Oysters

      — Oyster industry generates about $80 million dockside value
         and employs close to 10,000 Marylanders — it is an economic
         stabilizer of many, if not most, tidewater communities.

      -- Available funds have decreased to allow planting and seedinc
         less than one-half percent of public bars  (215,000 acres)
         compared to 2 to 3 percent five years ago.

      — A stable harvesting and processing oyster industry requires
         about 2.5 million bushels annually compared to 1.5 million
         in 1982-83.

      — Private leases about 9,000 acres, with 2,000 to 3,000
         productively used.

* The initiative:

  --  Permit oyster bar rehabilitation in areas improving in water
     quality and clear of MSX.  Should produce an additional 1  to
     1.5 million bushels annually.  Increased and stable supply will
     provide incentive to processors to develop new markets.  Will
     permit new oyster hatchery propagation of seed oysters and
     encourage greater aquaculture.

  2.   Finfish                 .

      — Low levels of recruitment of shad and striped bass are now
         of serious concern in terms of ultimate survival.  Important
         to produce millions of fry to release in Bay tributaries
         until wild populations increase steadily each year.

      --' Present hatchery operations require too much handling and
         result in poor survival.

      -- Landings by sport and commercial fishermen decreased from
         23.6 million pounds to approximately 18.6 million pounds.

-------
* The initiative:

  — In concert with Pennsylvania, construct and operate an intercep
     hatchery adjacent to Conowingo Dam on current State land where
     anadromous fish may be easily captured, spawned, and reared by
     modern techniques.  Will produce 10,000,000 striped bass and
     shad fry.  Needed for multi-million dollar recreational
     fisheries and provide stock to support wild reproduction.

  3.  Ducks

     -- Duck population has declined more than 80 percent in last
        30 years due to decreasing habitat, quantity and quality.

     — Private landowners are currently creating duck habitats but
        ducks, particularly black ducks, are not available for
        release.  Presently acquiring 18,000 mallards from Wisconsin
        Not available after 1986.

     — Hunters contribute about $10 million per year to economy
        if adequate populations maintained.

* The initiatives involves:

  -- Construct and operate a duck rearing facility to permit stockin
     of available habitats with hand-reared ducks.  Hatchery will
     produce a minimum of 20,000 ducks per year with emphasis on
     non-mallard species.  Within 3 years, approximately,60,000 acre
     of suitable habitat will be available.

-------
              D — PROTECTION OF LAND RESOURCES
* EPA study documents .land use changes over last 30 years
  contributing to Bay's ecological stress:

  — Conversion of agricultural and forested land to
     development increased 182%;

  -- Rate of population growth in watersheds doubled the
     rate elsewhere;

  -- Sedimentation rate has tripled since World War II;

  -- Sewage effluent  into Bay and tributaries has doubled.

* Only 900 miles of forested shoreline remain -- forestland
  contributes the least amount of nutrient pollutants to
  Bay's waters.

* 14,000 acres of non-tidal wetlands were lost during period
  of 1963 to 1973 --  non-tidal wetlands important to water
  quality, habitat maintenance, water retention, and flood
  control.

* The objectives of this initiative include:

  — The establishment of a primary management area -- this
     area would be defined sensitive land -- area along the
     .shoreline of the Bay and its tributaries;

  -*- Improve the effectiveness of the State's Critical Areas
     Program in general and, in particular, in cooperation
     with Coastal Zone Management Program.

* This initiative would establish:

  —A program for the retention of existing forestland,buffer
     along the shoreline of the Bay and its tributaries;

  -- A program for the protection of non-tidal wetlands;

  — A program to address improvements in local comprehensive
     planning in such areas as growth centers, water and sewer
     planning, agricultural land preservation;

  -- Priority in allocation of State funds within primary
     management areas for acquisition of land for purposes of
     conservation, preservation, and public access, and to
     establish a special improvement program for significant
     entry points to  the Bay.

-------
              El -- RECREATIONAL FISHING


* Recreational and noncommercial harvesting of the Bay's resources
  need to be recognized, supported, and encouraged.  If reasonable
  opportunities and access for a successful fishing experience
  exist,  thousands of residents and nonresidents will use the Bay
  for recreational fishing.  Also, many Maryland citizens supplement
  their food needs through fishing.  State investments to increase
  fishing opportunities return ample dividends to the citizens of
  Maryland.

* This initiative will:

  — Provide for platforms on new and existing bridges (15 currently
     suitable).  Fishing piers and groins will be constructed at
     county and State waterfront spaces and at State parks.

  — Construct underwater fish reefs and fish attracting devices.

  — Expand production at existing fish hatcheries, those species
     attractive to sportsfishermen in tidal waters such as yellow
     perch, white perch, largemouth bass, catfish as well as shad
     and striped bass.

  -- Provide extension services to organized sportsmen's clubs and
     civic organizations and help to organize and run fishing fairs
     and derbys.

-------
    E2 — ENHANCED MOSQUITO CONTROL PROGRAM TO EMPHASIZE

           OPEN MARSH WATER MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES


* While EPA Program did not explicitly identify a Bay problem
  associated with the chemicals used for mosquito control,
  there is broad concern over the widespread use of insecti-
  cides (toxics) in wetlands.
                          \
* Maryland's control program utilizes a combination of chemical
  spraying and marsh management to reduce rnosquitos.

* This initiative would reduce the reliance on chemicals,
  particularly in marshes, by expanding the use of open marsh
  management techniques which require increased availability
  of equipment and personnel.  Where chemicals are used it would
  assure that the most effective ones are employed.  Specifically
  it would:

  -- Increase the use of open marsh water management program,
     i.e., ditching, pond .construction, or otherwise modifying
     salt marshes,to enhance predatory fish movement and
     survival, thereby allowing for natural control of
     mosquito breeding.

-------
             E3 — FRESHWATER CONSERVATION
* EPA Study and Corps Study identify that freshwater in-flow
  from Bay tributaries directly affect the Bay's salinity
  regime/ a critical habitat component.

* Consumptive losses (i.e., water used that is not available
  for subsequent use) will average 2,480 MGD by 2020.  Record
  low flow in 1964 was 5,230 MGD.  Such losses could signifi-
  cantly alter Bay's salinity regime.

* Salinity important for distribution and abundance of oysters,
  clams, MSX.  Freshwater in-flows critical for effective
  dilution and for spawning reaches of anadromous fish (e.g.,
  rockfish, shad).

* Initiative will require:

  — State to identify desired amounts and distribution
     of freshwater in-flows to the Bay and most bene-
     ficial techniques for maintaining in-flow; take
     action to •require make-up of consumptive losses
     by large users.

  — State to structure and promote a water conservation
     ethic and program for all water users, domestic,
     commercial and industrial.

-------
   E4 — THE MARYLAND YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS (MYCC)


* Habitat rehabilitation and creation are important components
  of an effort to enhance the quality of the Chesapeake Bay and
  its tributaries.

* As water quality improves, fisheries habitat such as grasses
  must be improved, stream blockages removed, and erosion stabilized
  to increase fisheries reproduction and survival.

* Work needed for habitat rehabilitation and creation can provide
 > productive employment, satisfying experiences,  vocational
  opportunities, and Bay awareness for inner city and disadvantaged
  youth.

* Legislation enabling the establishment of a Maryland Conservation
  Corps was enacted in 1981.

* The initiative, if enacted, would permit 800 to 1,000 youths each
  summer to:

  — Work with experienced technical people, State and private, whil
     observing and monitoring projects to enhance and restore living
     resources;

  — Obtain meaningful employment and vocation/career planning;

  — Understand the importance of the Chesapeake .Bay and its
     tributaries to all Maryland citizens;

  — Help increase the reproduction of fisheries and wildlife.

* This initiative involves:

  — Creating the Maryland Youth Conservation Corps in conjunction
     with the Federal Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA);

  — Providing State funds for overall management and administration
     and using JTPA funds for- salaries and fringe benefits;

  — Using. Department of Natural Resources staff to provide field
     supervisory assistance.

-------
              F — ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION


* To ensure continuing preservation of the Chesapeake Bay, future
  Maryland citizens must be committed to its maintenance.  Maryland
  students should be taught to appreciate the Chesapeake Bay, to
  understand the ecology and complex relationships which impact this
  environment, to make informed decisions about environmental issues
  and to act responsibly to help preserve this valuable resource.

* A framework exists.  For example:

  — State guidelines exist for environmental education and bylaws <
     have been enacted by the State Board of Education for science
     and social studies.  The curriculum frameworks outlined in
     those bylaws indicate how environmental education should be
     integrated into the total school program.

  — Excellent curricular and instructional materials related to the.
     study of the Bay have already been developed.

* To build on the framework:

  — Programs need to be instituted which expose students to the
     complexities of the biological, political, social, and economic
     factors which are involved in making decisions on issues relate
     to the Bay.

  —Teachers need training to be able to implement these environ-
     mental education programs.  This training must include both
     content background, and new teaching strategies.

  —-There are outdoor environmental education centers in operation
     which allow students direct field experiences on the Bay.  Thes
     programs need added support to upgrade and expand their progran

  — There is a .need for more coordination of environmental educatic
     efforts among State agencies, local school systems, colleges ar
     universities, independent organizations, and the states of
     Virginia and Pennsylvania.

* The initiative would establish a major environmental education
  effort which could include:

  — Assistance to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation to increase the
     number of students and teachers who participate in their
     State supported Estuarine Field Studies Program and to expand
     their teacher training program.

  — A State specialist in environmental education who would provide
     leadership and coordination for the project.

  — Curriculum implementation grants for local school systems for
     improvement of local environmental education programs,
     especially those related to the Chesapeake Bay.

-------
                       - 2 -
Statewide inservice efforts that would focus initially on.
training teams of specialists from local school systems to
become leaders in environmental education.  Then, grants
would be provided to support local school systems in conducting
their own inservice teacher training.

A Statewide conference program which would bring together
representatives from State agencies, local school systems,
the Maryland State Department of Education, business and
industry, environmental organizations, and colleges and
universities.  These conferences would provide a forum for
the exchange of ideas, materials, and expertise.

A much needed regional environmental education conference
which would bring together Pennsylvania, Virginia, and
Maryland to coordinate efforts and exchange materials.

-------
          G — MONITORING/MANAGEMEyrr/RES'EARCH


1.  Chesapeake Bay Management Coinmitt.ee

    * Includes representatives from Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania
      District of Columbia,  EPA, Chesapeake Bay Commission,
      Susquehanna River Basin Commission, and the Citizens Program
      for the Chesapeake Bay.

    * Has met monthly over the last several years to oversee the
      EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program effort.  It has coordinated
      review and finalization of Synthesis Report, Characterization
      Report, and Management Report.

    * Initiative would recommend the continuation of the Management
      Committee:

      — Meet on monthly basis to ensure proper Federal/interstate
         Bay Coordination of Bay restoration efforts.
                                                     •%_
      — One vehicle to continue interstate cooperation as a means
         of securing federal assistance.

      — Meet periodically with State elected officials and EPA
         Administrator to get guidance, review progress, resolve
         any lingering problems.

2.  Chesapeake Bay Liaison Office/Data Center

    * In a -significant action, EPA together with Maryland, Virginia
      and Pennsylvania have agreed to provide a centrally located
      and jointly maintained data center.

    * The EPA liaison office will be continued and located at the
      EPA's Central Regional Laboratory facility (Bestgate Road).

    * Liaison office will coordinate Federal/interstate management
      system and operate computer database center including historic
      and program data generated by the EPA Study.

    * Initiative would provide Maryland's share of the funding and
      personnel to accomplish operation, maintenance, and utilizati<
      of the system.

3.  Chesapeake Bay Monitoring Program

    * The EPA Study has documented the need to expand baseline or
      trend monitoring network of collecting physical and chemical
      data in the Bay and in major tributaries.

    * Living resources must be monitored in more detail, over
      shorter periods of time, in selected areas which represent
      typical or critical (i.e. spawning) biological habitats.

-------
                        - 2 -
* The current consensus of Bay scientists is that an expanded
  monitoring program which addresses the entire Chesapeake Bay
  watershed is necessary to understand general trends or cause
  and effect relationships.

* Building on earlier cooperative decisions, such as focusing
  Chesapeake Bay Program on nutrients, toxics, and submerged
  aquatic vegetation, the purpose of monitoring program is to
  provide a sound technical basis, to:

  — Assess trends in water quality;

  — Determine association and potential cause and effect
     relationships;

  — Determine the effectiveness of management decisions;

  — Provide a framework for directing applied research;

  — Continue the protection of human and environmental health.

* Initiative would:

  — Provide that each State would have monitoring responsibility
     for its own tributaries and EPA would be responsible for the
     main stem  of the Bay.

  — Maryland's portion of the plan would increase number of
     baseline monitoring'.stations.

     — Increase frequency of baseline sampling and number of
        parameters covered;

     — Continue the assessment of biological resources and
        habitat relationships in the coastal areas of the
        State (which was started with Federal funds in 1983).

Chesapeake Bay Research Coordination in Maryland

* Important management '.actions are being taken to help preserve
  and restore Chesapeake Bay.  These actions are based on reports
  scientific findings of the Chesapeake Bay Program.  Yet, the Be
  Program does not remove the need for further research.

* In spite of 'numerous existing institutions, managers and
  scientists are not interacting as effectively as possible
  within the State.

* Research or special studies should:

  -- Complement and derive from the water quality and biological
     resource monitoring; test hypotheses on cause-effect rela-
     tionships that are derived from trend data and correlations.

-------
                        - 3 -
  — Fill in "gaps"  identified by EPA at the terminations of
     the Chesapeake  Bay program.

  — Contribute to understanding whether management actions are
     effective and whether modifications are required.

  — Advance the technical approaches to studying the
     Chesapeake Bay.

* Initiative would:

  — Create a formal mechanism, the Chesapeake Management/
     Science Council, to bring together the leaders of the
     appropriate scientific communities in Maryland, particularly
     the University  of Maryland,  with those branches of State
     government charged with managing the environment and"
     resources of the Chesapeake Bay.

  — Council would provide forum for environmental managers to
     communicate their sense of priorities of research needs to
     the scientific  community; for scientific community to
     communicate technical advances and perceived problems to
     agencies regulating the Chesapeake Bay resources.

  — Council would coordinate scientific program with others
     being developed in the State.

  — Sources of funds for research projects could be general
     funds, possibly a portion of Power Plant Siting funds, and
     Federal funds.

-------