CBP/TRS 242/00
EPA903-R-00-010
Chesapeake Bay Program
THE THIRD BIENNIAL
PROGRESS REPORT
OF THE
1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
1998 Federal Agencies-Chesapeake
Ecosystem Unified Plan
•
JUNE 2000
-------
This is the third 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, signed on July 14, 1994, and
the first biennial report of Federal progress on commitment made in the Federal Agencies Chesapeake Ecosystem
Unified Plan, signed November 5, 1998. It was prepared by die U.S. Environmental Protedtion Agency's
Chesapeake Bay Program Office in cooperation with the Federal signatory agencies to these agreements.
Printed on recycled paper by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
THE THIRD BIENNIAL
PROGRESS REPORT
of the
1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
and the
1998 Federal Agencies' Chesapeake
Ecosystem Unified Plan
JUNE 2000
Chesapeake Bay Program
-------
CONTENTS
PROLOGUE: The Role of the Federal
Government in the Chesapeake Bay
Program 1
The Chesapeake Bay Program 1
The Federal Agencies Committee 2
The Federal Agreement and Plan 2
The 1994 Federal Agreement 2
The 1998 Federal Plan 3
Federal Agencies Involvement 4
This Report 4
COMMITMENT PROGRESS REPORT
FEDERAL PARTNERSHIPS FOR
THE BAY 5
State-Federal Cooperation 5
Federal Partners 6
Beneficial Use of Dredged Material 14
Forested Buffers 14
Fish Passage and Habitat 17
"Wetlands, Submerged Aquatic Vegetation
and Vernal Pools 17
Stream Restoration 18
Aquatic Reefs 19
Invasive Species 19
Conservation Landscaping 21
BayScapes 21
Other Efforts 22
NUTRIENT AND TOXICS PREVENTION
AND REDUCTION 23
Source Reduction 23
Monitoring 25
Site Assessment and Education 25
RESEARCH, ASSESSMENT, AND NEW FEDERAL FACILITIES 26
TECHNOLOGIES 7
1994 Agreement Commitments 7 NATIONAL SERVICE 26
Federal Science Conference 7
FACEUP Commitments 8 HUMAN HEALTH PROTECTION 27
CIMS Agreements 8
Nutrient Research 8 SMART GROWTH 28
Nutrient Areas of Concern 8
Nutrient Lag Times 8 REPORTING 28
Long-Term Changes in Water Quality 9
APPENDIX A: 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies
DATA COORDINATION 10 on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
PRIORITYWATERSHEDS 10 APPENDIX B: Federal Agencies Chesapeake
Anacostia River and Rock Creek 10 Ecosystem Unified Plan
Elizabeth River 12
Potomac River and Upper Susquehanna and APPENDIX C: Federal Funding Support for the
Lackawanna Rivers 13 Bay Program, FY99
CHESAPEAKE BAY LIVING RESOURCES AND APPENDLX D: Major Federal Landholdings in the
HABITATS 13 Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Inventory of Restoration Priority Areas 14
-------
PROLOGUE
THE ROLE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
The Chesapeake Bay Program is the nation's premier ecosystem restoration and management effort, focusing
on North America's largest estuary. Established in 1983 by the signing of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the
Bay Program is a unique voluntary partnership between the states of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia;
the District of Columbia; the Chesapeake Bay Commission, a tri-state legislative body; and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), representing the Federal government.
The Chesapeake Bay is approximately 200 miles long and varies in width between four and twenty-five miles.
Its watershed comprises 64,000 square miles and stretches from Cooperstown, New York, in the north, to
Norfolk, Virginia, in the south, where the Bay meets the Atlantic Ocean. The watershed 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 historically productive waters and for its beauty.
The Chesapeake Bay Program relies on wide public support to carry out its multifaceted missions; employing
methods that go beyond environmental laws and regulations by stressing voluntary compliance, strong com-
mitments, and measurable goals. The Bay Program utilizes sound science and innovative methods to address:
• 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 in the protection and restoration of the Bay through the Bay Program. They
own and manage over two and a half million acres of land in the region, and provide technical and financial
assistance to state and local governments and private landowners. As the lead Federal representative to the Bay
Program and a signatory to the Chesapeake Bay Agreement, the EPA Administrator represents all Federal agen-
cies 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
commitments, and reaffirm existing ones. In the Bay Program, most of the goals and commitments are car-
ried out on non-Federal lands in the Bay's watershed.
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
THE FEDERAL AGENCIES COMMITTEE
The Chesapeake Bay Programs Federal Agencies
Committee was formed in 1984 and meets regu-
larly to share information among the participating
agencies and to provide advice and assistance in
implementing goals and commitments of the Bay
Program. The Committee is chaired by the
Director of the EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program
office, and has four Workgroups. The Workgroups
were created to implement the Bay Program's com-
mitments on more than 2.5 million acres of
Federally owned lands within the watershed.
THE FEDERAL AGREEMENT AND PLAN
The 1994 Federal Agreement
On July 14, 1994, the Federal Agencies Committee
convened the Chesapeake Bay Federal Summit at
the Department of the Interior in Washington,
D.C., culminating months of interagency planning
and negotiations. 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 1994
Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem
Management in the Chesapeake Bay (1994
Agreement).
The 1994 Agreement was endorsed and signed by
all of the Federal participants and, as "observers,"
by representatives of the states of Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia; the District of Columbia;
the Chesapeake Bay Commission; and U.S.
Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-Md). (See Appendix A)
The 1994 Agreement formalized the increasing role
of Federal agencies in the Bay Program. There have
always been many and varied Federal programs
and activities that support Bay Program goals, but
not necessarily through the Bay Program.
Consequently, the commitments established in the
1994 Agreement do not summarize the total
Federal involvement in the Bay Program.
Motivated in part by the Clinton Administrations
call for "reinventing government" and in part by a
desire to improve interagency ecosystem manage-
ment and planning, the 1994 Agreement crystal-
lizes the commitments of each agency in the
Chesapeake Bay region. It provides a coordinated
and cooperative framework for action with specif-
ic commitments for research and data coordina-
tion, Anacostia River protection, habitat restora-
tion, nutrient and toxic pollution reduction, and
the use of national service opportunities for work
on Federal lands.
The 1994 Agreement sets precedents by establishing
certain Federal policies for the Chesapeake Bay
watershed that had not been applied elsewhere in
the nation. In addition, some of the policies and
goals set forth in the 1994 Agreement have led to
similar commitments by the Chesapeake Executive
Council. For example, in the 1994 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 water-
shed by the year 2010." The Initiative and its goal
are unprecedented in the nation.
In response to the increasing number of military
installation closures, the 1994 Agreement sought to
assure that the ecological value of any Federal facil-
ities proposed for closure within the Chesapeake
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Bay watershed is addressed in the decision-making
process for future land uses. In addition, the 1994
Agreement formalized the work of the tWo existing
Federal Agencies Committee Workgroups by
directing Federal agencies to cooperate with inter-
agency teams doing pollution prevention and habi-
tat restoration site assessments on Federally owned
lands. The Nutrient and Toxics Reduction
Workgroup, in fact, is committed to performing a
minimum of five Nutrient and Toxies Reduction
Site Assessments annually on Federal facilities
throughout the watershed.
The 1998 Federal Plan
On November 5, 1998, high-ranking officials
from 20 Federal agencies met at the U.S. Army's
Fort McNair in Washington, D.C., to sign the
Federal Agencies' Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
(FACEUP). This new agreement expands current
restoration efforts by adding 50 new commitments
aimed at protecting the Chesapeake Bay water-
shed. Following the framework for protecting
America's waterways set forward under President
Clinton's Clean ~ter Action Plan, these new com-
mitments and initiatives address the Chesapeake
Bay's most pressing environmental issues, includ-
ing Pfiesteria monitoring and research, the reduc-
tion of harmful nutrients, and pollution preven-
tion. FACEUP builds upon the success of the 1994
Agreement, while creating a renewed Federal
emphasis on critical issues such as land use, subur-
ban groWth and development, stormwater man-
agement, wetlands restoration, and human health
protection. Development of FACEUP was coordi-
nated by the EPA's Chesapeake Bay Program
Office and the agencies that actively participate in
the Bay Program.
"Today's announcement renews the Clinton
Administration's commitment to protecting public
health and the environment throughout the
Chesapeake Bay and its many tributaries," said EPA
Administrator Carol M. Browner. "This is a signif-
icant cooperative effort aimed at preserving one of
our greatest national treasures, and we will contin-
ue to build on these efforts among Federal agencies
which are aimed at carrying oUt the President's
Clean IXIater Action Plan in the Bay region."
FACEUP will benefit the living resources of the
Bay by initiating specific habitat restoration proj-
ects on Federal lands, and by assisting state and
local governments and private landowners with
similar efforts. Additionally, the plan targets prior-
ity watersheds for special attention, including the
Anacostia River and Rock Creek in the District of
EPA Administrator Carol Browner, November 5: "This is a signif-
icant cooperative effort aimed at preseving one of our greatest
national treasures. . . "
3
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Columbia and Maryland, the Elizabedi River in
Virginia, and the two American Heritage Rivers
widiin the Bay region—the Potomac River and the
Upper Susquehanna and Lackawanna Rivers.
Specifically, the new FACEUP calls for Federal
agencies to:
• Target programs and resources, such as funds
under the Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program, to the needs of the Bay region;
• Support the restoration of the Bay's living
resources and their habitats;
• Meet and maintain the nutrient and toxics pre-
vention and reduction goals of the Bay
Program;
• Protect human health;
• Ensure state-of-the-art technical support for the
Bay Program partners; and
• Identify and implement new mechanisms to
avoid land development patterns that increase
pollution.
The FACEUP includes commitments to:
• Increase Federal support to the states for
Pfiesteria research, monitoring and response;
• Integrate smart growth principles into the devel-
opment of Federal lands and facilities in the
Bay region;
• Restore a net gain of 100 acres of wetlands
annually on Federal lands beginning in 2000;
• Identify additional blockages to migratory fish
on Federal land by December 31, 1999, and
open priority blockages to 50 miles of streams
by December 31,2003;
• Develop by June 30, 1999, a mechanism to
implement wet weather pollution prevention
on Federal facilities in the Anacostia and Rock
Creek watersheds;
• Implement pollution prevention and related
technologies to achieve a 75% voluntary reduc-
tion from a 1994 baseline in releases of
Chesapeake Bay Toxics of Concern;
• Target priority areas for exotic species control
and specifically for nutria impacts on wetlands;
• Support stream corridor protection and restora-
tion, with a specific goal of restoring 200 miles
of riparian forest buffers on Federal land by
January 1, 2010; and
• Open or enhance public access to 200 addi-
tional shoreline miles of die Bay by January 1,
2005.
FEDERAL AGENCIES INVOLVEMENT
Through the actions laid out in the 1994
Agreement and FACEUP and, perhaps most impor-
tandy, through the coordination of diese actions
within die Chesapeake Bay Program, Federal agen-
cies are helping to restore and protect the
Chesapeake Bay and make the Bay Program a
national model for ecosystem management.
THIS REPORT
This report documents die progress made by
Federal agencies on die commitments in the 1994
Agreement and the FACEUP from April 1, 1997
through April 1, 1999. This is die diird biennial
report on the progress made in implementing the
1994 Agreement, and the first progress report on
FACEUP. The format of this biennial report has
been modified somewhat from past reports in
order to reflect the 50 new commitments of the
FACEUP, while continuing to track the comple-
tion of commitments under the 1994 Agreement.
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
COMMITMENT PROGRESS REPORT
FEDERAL PARTNERSHIPS FOR THE BAY
In 1994, Federal agencies committed, through the
1994 Agreement, to enhance their participation in
the Chesapeake Bay restoration, and to encourage
other Federal agencies to become participants in
the Chesapeake Bay Program.
In 1998, agencies reaffirmed and strengthened
their 1994 partnership commitment. FACEUP
created a Bay Parmer Facility program that pro-
vides recognition to Federal facilities with a strong
program of environmental stewardship. Under the
lead of the Department of Agriculture, Federal
agencies have committed to use available programs
such as the Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program, the Environmental Quality Incentives
Program, the Wetlands Reserve Program, and the
U.S. Forest Service's Forest Stewardship Program
and Forest Legacy Program to help states preserve
the ecological integriry of the Bay watershed.
Federal agencies have also emphasized the impor-
tance of the Clean water Action Plan by commit-
ting in 1998 to support the states, through 'parti~-
ipation in teams of Federal and state offiCials, III
their efforts to meet its key goals.
State- Federal Cooperation
Langley Air Force Base, Naval Surface Warfare
Center Dahlgren Division, and other Department
of Defense installations in Virginia have developed
partnerships with the Virginia Department of
Conservation and Recreation in an effort to devel-
op shoreline stabilization and wetland restoration
plans and programs. The Air Forc~ a?~ the ~avy
also continue to partner with the Vuglllia InstItute
of Marine Science to identify, monitor, and
research specific wetland sites on Langley Air Force
Base and Naval Station Norfolk. Through the
Riparian Forest Buffer Gram Program, the Air
Force has developed a team design approach with
the U.S. Army and public schools in York County,
Virginia, to design, install, and use for outdoor
education a restored riparian area adjacent to the
Bethel Reservoir.
Fort Detrick, in Frederick, Maryland, has devel-
oped a partnership with the Maryland Department
of Natural Resources Forest Service, Alliance for
the Chesapeake Bay, and the U.S. Forest Service.
The focus of this effort has been to connect forest
habitats into larger contiguous areas, and to restore
stream corridors with riparian forest buffers.
DOD installations in Maryland continued to work
successfully with State cooperative extension
offices and field personnel of the USDA Natural
Resources Conservation Service for the implemen-
tation of a variery of land management and habitat
restoration programs. These cooperative relation-
ships are established at the local level, and have
proven to be an excellent partnering opportu~ity
for cost efficient technical support and project
implementation.
Orphan Osprey Rehabilitation at the us. Naval Academy's
Greensbul)' Point.
5
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
On July 4, 1998, the DOD and the Commonwealth successfully implemented. In January 1998, the
of Pennsylvania entered into a historic, cooperative, Postal Service and EPA increased the scope of the
multi-site agreement that addresses the assessment original MOU to include Postal Service facilities in
and remediation of selected contaminated DOD the Delaware, New York, and West Virginia por-
sites in Pennsylvania by 2010. The agreement estab- tions of the Bay watershed. The Postal Service has
lishes approaches to be used, including cleanup been very aggressive in implementing their corn-
standards, site assessment procedures, liability relief, mitments and has established a Chesapeake Bay
and die options to use site specific, risk based reme- Program Task Force. This Task Force has success-
diation criteria. The state and Federal partners fully integrated many of the Bay Programs goals
agreed to voluntarily be bound to a course of con- and commitments into the daily operations of its
duct diat includes mutual incentives, accountability 2,100 facilities in the Bay watershed.
provisions, and a dispute resolution process in place
of stipulated penalties or other standard enforce- The National Park Service has also increased its
ment procedures. Other states have since expressed participation in the Bay Program by assigning four
a strong interest in following Pennsylvania's lead for staff members directly to the Chesapeake Bay
this groundbreaking Federal partnership. Prqgram Office. The Park Service's Coordinator
serves as principal liaison to the Bay Program, and
Federal Partners has been joined by a community planner who is
TL ,.A~-TTn • i c . i • • . engaged full time in community-based planning
The FACEUP commits the Federal agencies in the ^^ The Park Service has designated points-
Bay Program to "promote the addition of new of.contact for each of ^ 6l national park unhs
Federal partners, and to strengthen relationships wkhin ^ Chesapeake Bay watershed in order to
among existing partners through resource sharing enhance ^ integration into Bay program activi.
and unified program planning and implementa- ^ ^ initiatives. These contacts act ^ liaisons
tion...." At the FACEUP signing ceremony in for ^ individual parks ^ coordinate with ^
November, 1998, the EPA and the National Narionjd park Service>s Chesapeake Bay Task
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA Forc£ This Task j^ composed of managerS)
signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) resourc£ £xpem ^ int erSj serves to fadli.
which made NASA the fifteenth formd partner in ^ information exchange) decision-makmg, and
the Chesapeake Bay Program. In that MOA, staffingofinidatives. The Task Force has organized
NASA committed to transfer remote sensing data Workgroups in the ^ of communication ^
and related technologies to Bay Program partners educationj communitv ^stwc&, ^ park man.
to support Chesapeake Bay restoration and protec- agement practice w tfack Park ^^^ involvement
tion actions. in the Bay program In the summer of 1998) ^
^ . _, TTr,^ 10 . . , Task Force initiated a Park Needs Survey to identify
In November 1996 The U.S. Postal Service signed inkiatives of ^ Ch ^ B p ^ ^ had
a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with ^ ^ correlation to critical k resource
the EPA with a number of specific commitments, management issues. This has ^ d k
including the Development of an action plan for staff identify ^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^
setting goals. The US. Postal Service Chesapeake ^ ^ most needed ^ ^ ement
Bay Program Action Plan was released in October pfactices ^ protect ^
1997, and outlines specific steps that the agency
will take to ensure that goals of the 1996 MOU are
-------
The Third Biennial Prog;ress Report
RESEARCH, ASSESSMENT, AND
NEW TECHNOLOGIES
1994 Agreement Commitments
The Federal Bay Program Partners agreed in 1994
to coordinate their research agendas in consulta-
tion with the Bay Program's Scientific and
Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), and to
address atmospheric deposition of nutrient and
toxic pollution. Since these commitments were
made, Federal agencies have improved their coor-
dination with the STAC, and have begun a dia-
logue with other Federal, state, and local agencies
about Federally supported science projects and
their applicability to the Chesapeake Bay Program.
Federal Science Conference
In November 1998, the Federal Science
Coordination Workgroup of the Bay Program,
together with the STAC, organized the Federally
Supported Science and the Chesapeake Bay
Program conference, with three main objectives.
First, the conference was to establish a continuing
forum for communicating scientific results from
Tiger Swallowtail Butterfly-U.S. Naval Academy
Bay scientists and engineers. Second, the confer-
ence was to serve as a vehicle for sharing science-
based information with resource managers. Third,
the conference was designed to provide mecha-
nisms for identifYing emerging science needs and
opportunities for technology transfer. Over 200
Chesapeake Bay scientists, engineers, and natural
resource managers attended the event, held at the
PatUxent National Wildlife Visitor Center in
Laurel, Maryland. A number of themes emerged:
. Science-based research in the Bay watershed
must develop the capacity to incorporate and
utilize ecosystem perspectives rather than focus
on isolated components of the system.
. Institutions and agencies must lead in nurtur-
ing and promoting interdisciplinary approaches
to research.
. Improved coordination and joint priority set-
ting between scientists and resource managers is
critical to achieve effective restoration and pro-
tection goals in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
. Broader recognition must be given to the
importance and utilization of science-based
solutions for restoring and protecting the
Chesapeake Bay. A particular emphasis must be
placed on improving the ability to predict the
impact or outcomes of even the simplest man-
agement practices.
. The scientific community should seek answers
to the following questions: "What are we man-
aging the Bay for? What do we want the Bay to
look like?"
. Scientists must define and understand the prior-
ities of citizens in the Chesapeake Bay water-
shed, and develop the ability to describe lifestyle
changes necessary to achieve those priorities.
7
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
FACEUP Commitments
When FACEUP was signed in 1998, Federal sig-
natories promised to renew their efforts to provide
the research, assessment, and state-of-the-art tech-
nical support necessary to accomplish the goals
and objectives of the Chesapeake Bay Program.
Agencies agreed to improve data and information
sharing with other Bay Program partners. They
also agreed to complete a number of inventories
and assessments that address a variety of research
areas, including nutrient loadings, water quality
parameters, habitat, submerged aquatic vegetation,
nitrogen compound emissions from agriculture,
groundwater lag times, river flow effects, and long
term changes in water quality, living resources, and
sea-level rise.
CIMS Agreements
The FACEUP prescribed a new tool for the for-
malized coordination of data among Federal agen-
cies: the Chesapeake Information Management
System (CIMS) agreement. The CIMS agreements
encourage signatory agencies to work with Bay
Program partners to implement a regional distrib-
uted information system to make data and infor-
mation readily available using Internet technology.
In 1998, the U.S Geological Survey (USGS)
signed a CIMS Agreement with the Chesapeake
Bay Program, becoming the first Federal agency to
formally participate in the CIMS partnership. The
USGS specifically agreed to provide data and
information for publication on a publicly accessi-
ble Internet website (http://chesapeake.usgs.
gov/chesbay) which is continuously operational,
and to provide metadata to be linked to each
dataset that is published on the Internet.
Nutrient Research
Nutrient Areas of Concern
The FACEUP commits the USGS to complete a
Bay-wide assessment of potential nutrient loadings
and water quality parameters that "support the
identification of Nutrient Areas of Concern and
serve as a basis for strengthening the ability of local
and state jurisdictions to achieve their tributary
basins' nutrient reduction goals...." Toward that
end, the USGS is relating nutrient sources to deliv-
ered nutrient loads by using a statistical modeling
technique called SPAtially Referenced Regressions
of Contaminant Transport on Watershed
Attributes (SPARROW). The SPARROW model
divides the Bay watershed into about 1,400 seg-
ments, and is being adopted by the Bay Program as
one of the tools to identify Nutrient Areas of
Concern. An initial version of the model was com-
pleted to provide the spatial resolution needed to
help the Bay Program and local governments
develop preliminary Priority Areas. SPARROW
will also be used to help explain the trend results
and link nutrient sources to groundwater loads and
their delivery to surface water.
Nutrient Lag Times
The FACEUP also requires that the USGS prepare
an assessment of "the amount of nutrients and
associated lag times in groundwater, and of impli-
cations for adjustments to tributary strategies'
nutrient reduction goals...." The USGS has esti-
mated the number of years it takes to measure
water quality improvements after implementation
of specific nutrient-reduction practices. Different
surface and subsurface characteristics of the Bay
watershed have led to a scientifically predictable
"lag time" between the implementation of nutri-
ent-management practices and improvements in
surface water quality. The USGS estimates half of
the water and nutrient load entering the Bay trib-
utaries travels through the groundwater system.
8
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
The USGS has also identified the effect that major
hydrogeomorphic regions, which are different
areas of rock and watershed characteristics, have on
groundwater discharge and nurrient load.
Although data indicates that nutrients may take up
to 60 years to move through shallow aquifers
before discharging to rivers, most groundwater res-
idence times are abour 10 years. The USGS also
finds that there may not be a significant difference
berween residence times in different hydrogeomor-
phic regions. Consequently, the Bay Program is
formulating strategies to target further reductions
of nUtrients based on the characteristics of the
groundwater and its relation to hydrogeomorphic
regions. In addition, the Bay Program is working
to understand the magnitude of direct discharges
to the Bay, the role of groundwater discharge for
sustaining aquatic health in streams, and the effect
of high nUtrient concentrations in groundwater on
human health.
Long-Term Changes in Water Quality
The FACEUP commits the USGS to develop
"tools to document the long-term changes in water
quality, living resources, and sea-level rise...." The
USGS has found that population growth, and its
impacts on land use, has caused the most dramat-
ic changes in the Bay ecosystem. For this reason,
the USGS is currently examining the land use
changes in the Bay watershed that may have affect-
ed the ecosystem over several time scales, including
the last several decades and centuries. Preliminary
findings from the Baltimore-Washington area indi-
cate that deforestation began around 1600, and
peaked around the time of the Civil War in the
1860s. Agricultural use has decreased since the
early 1900s, and has been replaced by primarily
urban land uses.
Stress on the Bay ecosystem from human activities
over the last 300 years, compared to long-term nat-
ural variation in ecosystem functions, has raised
questions aboUt the relevance of current Bay
ecosystem restoration goals. Therefore, the USGS
analyzed ecosystem indicator changes in salinity
and dissolved oxygen in the mesohaline portion of
the Bay. Preliminary results indicate that salinity
changes and periods of anoxia have been occurring
in the Bay for the last 1,000 years, and are related
to changes in climate and river flow. However, the
variation in salinity and anoxia increased greatly in
the mid-to-late 1800s, as forests were cleared and
agricultural land use peaked in the watershed.
Additionally, anoxia has reached record high levels
in the 20th century. This is due in part to periods
of wetter weather, which cause increased river flow
and increased delivery of nutrients to the Bay. The
data collected by USGS is valuable to the
Chesapeake Bay Program, as it will help the Bay
Program revise Bay restoration goals to more ade-
quately reflect changes in the system due to natu-
ral variability versus historical land use changes.
0,
..... -. - ..
, ~ - -;:.. ,-~' - --v,~ ,''''''
0(c", .O~'. ~"",_,.;i~.~.~ ..-,~
,,~' ,,~.-- -~" -,' -'""",..' .~-jf;:'r:"<"~',.(~~.
Fish passage constructed pathway
9
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
DATA COORDINATION
The 1994 Agreement established a Workgroup
under the FAC to "assess and evaluate existing eco-
logical resource inventories used by Federal agen-
cies, and to make recommendations to improve
coordination, compatibility, standardization, GIS-
based data layers and interagency transfer of infor-
mation...." The Federal Science Coordination
Workgroup provides direction and defines the sci-
entific and research needs of the Bay Program as
they relate to the capabilities and priorities of
Federal agency research programs. The Workgroup
also works closely with the Scientific and Technical
Advisory Committee to ensure that Federal
research efforts are concentrated on Bay Program
priorities. Recent activities of the Workgroup are
outlined on page 7.
PRIORITY WATERSHEDS
In addition to the renewed Federal commitment in
the Anacostia watershed, FACEUP committed to
provide increased protection and support to other
priority watersheds. Chesapeake Bay sub-water-
sheds designated by states as needing protection
and restoration action under the Clean Water
Action Plan will be supported by Federal programs
and resources. These watersheds include the
Elizabeth River, the Upper Susquehanna and
Lackawanna Rivers, and the Potomac River.
Anacostia River and Rock Creek
The Anacostia River, in Washington, D.C., and
Maryland, is one of the best-studied watersheds
within the Chesapeake Bay watershed. In the 1994
Agreement, Federal agencies committed to support
the Anacostia River Demonstration Project and to
create the first Biennial Federal Workplan for the
Anacostia River Watershed (Workplan) in 1997. The
Workplan provides a historical account of the ecol-
ogy of the Anacostia watershed, an overview of
current Federal efforts to improve this ecosystem,
and recommendations for future Federal action.
The Workplan is designed to be updated every two
years. The second Workplan, scheduled for com-
pletion this year, expands on the first Workplan and
focuses on three specific areas: stormwater man-
agement, chemical contamination and toxics, and
stream corridor restoration. These are the most
pressing environmental problems for the water-
shed, and are a high priority within the Anacostia
Watershed Restoration Committee and the
Chesapeake Bay Program. Topics to be covered in
the 1999 Workplan include low-impact develop-
ment, contamination issues for targeting stormwa-
ter management priority areas, and BayScaping
opportunities. The 1999 Workplan will identify
priority areas and alternatives for action.
In the FACEUP, Federal agencies reaffirmed their
commitment to the Anacostia River by agreeing to
address wet weather pollution on Federal lands in
the Anacostia and Rock Creek watersheds. In
February 1998, the Federal Agencies Committee
convened a Special Panel on Combined Sewer
Overflows and Stormwater Management in the
District of Columbia. The Panel was composed of
representatives from 27 separate Federal, state, and
local agencies, and local nonprofit environmental
groups.
The Special Panel released a set of recommenda-
tions for immediate action in September 1998,
with a special section directed at Federal agencies
with building and land management responsibili-
ties in the Anacostia River and Rock Creek water-
10
Striped Bass
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
sheds. The Panel concluded that a strong emphasis 4) Develop a strategy to brief agencies, the White
on Federal agency action is a critical step in meet- Howe, and Congress on the need for a coordinated
ing watershed restoration goals. planning effort.
Four specific recommendations were made to
ensure diat agencies take action:
1) Accelerate wet weather pollution prevention and
control on Federal lands and at Federal buildings
and associated facilities. Federal agencies were
asked to: (a) meet legal requirements for
stormwater pollution prevention and control;
(b) complete stormwater management plans;
(c) provide input to the District of Columbia
Water and Sewer Authority's Long Term
Control Plan for combined sewer overflows;
and (d) implement stormwater management
controls.
2) Focus Federal financial support and other assis-
tance on wet weather pollution prevention and
control priorities. Federal agencies were asked to
identify their regulatory, financial assistance,
research, and other programs pertinent to wet
weather pollution control in the District of
Columbia and Maryland. Agencies will then
compare the recommendations in the final
Panel Report with these activities, and seek
ways to facilitate their accomplishment.
3) Convene a Federal Workgroup to facilitate com-
munication and provide leadership. Federal agen-
cies were asked to form a Federal Wet Weather
Workgroup in order to: (a) coordinate and sup-
port the implementation of priority stormwater
activities; (b) facilitate communication among
Federal, state, and local agencies; (c) provide
leadership to Federal agencies on stormwater
management planning; (d) provide technical
expertise on the development of comprehensive
stormwater management plans; and (e) assess
sources of funding and assist agencies in
obtaining resources for implementation.
In response to the recommendations of the Special
Panel, a Federal Wet Weather Workgroup was
formed in late 1998 and incorporated into the Bay
Program's Federal Agencies Committee. This
Workgroup is chaired by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), and has met three times to
develop a mechanism to implement stormwater
management in the Anacostia and Rock Creek
watersheds. This information was used as the
foundation to update the stormwater portions of
the 1999 Workplan.
In addition to the Workplan and related efforts, the
Corps has undertaken diree separate studies of the
Anacostia watershed since 1994. The first of these
studies identified 13 restoration projects within
the watershed, which are currently scheduled for
construction between 1999 and 2001. These proj-
ects will restore 80 acres of wedands, five miles of
streams, and 33 acres of riparian buffers. The sec-
ond study focuses on the Northwest Branch tribu-
tary to the Anacostia. The preliminary report for
the Northwest Branch identified the need to
address the degradation of 2,600 acres of wedand,
500 acres of aquatic habitat, and 800 acres of ripar-
ian buffers in this subwatershed. The Corps is cur-
rently working on designing and comparing
restoration alternatives for these sites. The third
study focuses on the environmental effects of mod-
ifying an existing local flood protection project in
Prince George's County, Maryland. The result of
this study will be construction to improve local
flood protection while providing environmental
restoration including wedand creation, terrestrial
habitat improvement, and instream habitat
enhancement.
11
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
The EPA has continued and expanded its leader-
ship role in the Anacostia. The EPA Anacostia
Community Liaison has had a strong focus on
education and was stationed at Anacostia High
School as the manager of its Environmental
Science and Computer Technology Academy. The
Anacostia Liaison has also assisted the District of
Columbia with die implementation of the Bay
Program's 1998 Education Initiative.
In 1998, the EPA officially joined die Anacostia
Watershed Restoration Committee as a voting
member, which allowed die agency to take a more
active role in framing regional policy. Also in 1998,
EPA designated a portion of the Anacostia
Community in the District as a Children's Health
Champion Community, one of only ten designa-
tions nationally. EPA has provided funding to sup-
port this designation.
EPA has also been a sponsor of the Kingman Lake
Restoration Project. And in 1999, EPA Region III
adopted a PCB Reduction Initiative for the
Anacostia to focus existing programs on reducing
and eliminating PCB discharges in die Anacostia
basin. This was in response to the FACEUP com-
mitment for increased support for Toxics Regions
of Concern, which includes die Anacostia River.
Elizabeth River
The Elizabeth River watershed includes portions
of the Tidewater, Virginia cities of Norfolk,
Portsmoudi, Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach. The
FACEUP agreement commits die Federal agencies
to "support die 18-point restoration plan for die
Elizabeth River through active participation in die
programs and projects of die Elizabeth River
Coalition...." The Naval Station Norfolk has rep-
resented the Navy on the Elizabeth River Project
board since 1991, and die Norfolk District of the
Corps became a signatory to the Elizabeth River
Restoration Action Plan in 1998.
12
The Navy's support of the Elizabeth River Project
is recognized through designation of the three large
Naval installations in the watershed as "River
Stars", a program recognizing business and govern-
ment facilities committed to pollution prevention
and habitat enhancement:
The Commander, Navy Region Mid-Adantic,
located at Naval Station Norfolk, was awarded the
first Model Level River Star. This designation is
reserved for entities that serve as community lead-
ers in environmental stewardship with exceptional
pollution prevention or wildlife habitat results.
Naval Station Norfolk provided community out-
reach to share recycling and pollution prevention
strategies for operations, product development,
and purchasing.
Naval Station Norfolk has conducted habitat
restoration through community outreach work,
assessed auxiliary Navy properties along the
Elizabeth River for potential to participate in ripar-
ian forest buffer restoration, and established a fish-
ing pier to promote access to the River. The
Commander, Navy Region Mid-Atlantic also
serves as the coordinator for thousands of military
volunteers annually for the Hampton Roads-wide
Clean the Bay Day effort.
Great blue heron
(Ardea Herodias)
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Naval Medical Center Portsmouth obtained River
Star Achievement Level in 1999, specializing in
low-impact development techniques for new
buildings, including conservation landscape design
and stormwater improvements. Extensive shore-
line stabilization also has been conducted along the
Elizabeth on Medical Center property.
Norfolk Naval Shipyard, a primarily industrial
installation, has reached die Commitment Level of
the River Stars program, agreeing to develop goals
and document successful program implementation.
As the major Federal presence in die Elizabeth
River watershed, the Navy and the Corps will con-
tinue to be integral parts of the Elizabeth River
restoration efforts, including as members of vari-
ous Elizabeth River Project action teams.
Potomac River and Upper Susquehanna and
Lackawanna Rivers
FACEUP commits Federal agencies to fully partic-
ipate in the American Heritage Rivers Program for
the Potomac and Upper Susquehanna and
Lackawanna Rivers. Federal agencies have already
accomplished one of their commitments in this
area by identifying all relevant Federal landhold-
ings within these two watersheds, and providing
GIS maps of those holdings to the Federal River
Navigators.
CHESAPEAKE BAY LIVING RESOURCES
AND HABITATS
In the 1994 Agreement, the Federal government
pledged to support the Chesapeake Bay Program's
Habitat Restoration Strategy and related plans.
Federal agencies have committed to develop a pri-
ority projects list for habitat restoration on Federal
lands, and to use innovative funding sources to
accomplish these projects. Federal agencies agreed
to fully implement all authorities to restore
aquatic, riparian, and upland habitats, and to
assure die beneficial use of clean dredged material
to support habitat restoration. The 1994
Agreement committed Federal agencies to support a
policy to protect and restore riparian forest buffers,
and to provide technical assistance in the restora-
tion of habitat for anadromous fish.
In 1998, the Federal partners of die Chesapeake
Bay Program agreed to a new round of commit-
ments for the Bay's living resources and habitats in
FACEUP. This renewed effort took die form of
nine ambitious tasks. Agencies recommitted to
preparing an annual list of priority projects for
habitat restoration, and to complete at least two of
these projects each year beginning in 2000. Federal
agencies agreed to establish demonstration sites for
stream corridor restoration technologies on three
facilities by December 1999, and to restore 200
miles of riparian forest buffers on Federal land by
2010. Federal agencies committed to a wetland
restoration goal for Federal facilities of 100 acres
per year beginning in 2000, and also agreed to
open priority fish passage blockages to 50 miles of
streams by December 31, 2003. Under FACEUP,
conservation landscaping will become a higher pri-
ority with the development of a guide for use by
Federal facilities, and with the integration of these
techniques into Federal specifications and design
criteria by July 31, 2001.
13
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Inventory of Restoration Priority Areas
Through its Park Needs Survey, the National Park
Service Chesapeake Bay Task Force has identified
projects at 12 different parks that resource man-
agers proposed for inclusion on the Habitat
Restoration Priority List.
Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
Under the 1994 Agreement, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers has the lead to find beneficial uses for
material dredged from the Bay and its tributaries.
Four beneficial use projects were undertaken by
the Corps in the Chesapeake Bay in 1997, 1998,
and early 1999. The best known of these projects
is the Poplar Island Environmental Restoration
Project. This project, designed to use dredge mate-
rial to restore over 1,000 acres of Poplar Island,
Maryland, as a wetland and waterbird sanctuary,
began construction in 1998. The construction is
anticipated to continue in phases into the future,
as suitable material becomes available.
The Corps is also in the process of creating 335
acres of wetlands, upland, island, and aquatic habi-
tat at Hart-Miller Island, Baltimore, Maryland.
Poplar Island-A Beneficial Use Project
14
Currently, design is underway for a bird habitat at
the island that includes approximately 20 acres of
freshwater ponds, one acre of island-type nesting,
200 acres of wetland and mudflats, and 90 acres of
upland songbird habitat, using clean dredged mate-
rial from navigation projects around Baltimore
County and Baltimore City. Construction is antic-
ipated to begin in the near future.
Corps operations projects with benefits to the
Chesapeake Bay also include smaller projects that
use sediment dredged from small Federal naviga-
tion projects. Two projects dredged in 1998, the
Honga River and Fishing Bay channels, provided
beach nourishment benefits during disposal.
Approximately 30 acres of beach were restored
along the Bay as a result of these projects.
Forested Buffers
The 1994 Agreement requires Federal agencies to
improve habitat by "supporting development in
the Bay watershed of a policy favoring the creation
of forested buffers along streams...." In 1996, with
the leadership and coordination of the U.S. Forest
Service, Northeastern Area, State and Private
Forestry, the Chesapeake Bay Riparian Forest
Buffer Initiative was adopted for the Chesapeake
Bay signatory states and District of Columbia.
Implementation of the Initiative began that year.
This initiative calls for the restoration of 2,010
miles of riparian forest buffers by the year 2010.
Federal agencies are committed to restoring 200 of
those 2,010 miles. As of April 1, 1999, riparian
forest restoration has occurred along 59 miles of
streams, rivers, and shoreline on Federal lands.
Numerous projects have been initiated in the
watershed in support of the riparian forest goal.
BetWeen 1997 and 1999, the Corps restored
approximately three shoreline miles of riparian for-
est buffer at Raystown Lake, Pennsylvania.
Restoration measures include shoreline restoration,
old field plamings, and new mowing restrictions.
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
These efforts provide two major benefits: first, the
shoreline stabilization reduces erosion and con-
comitant water quality effects, and second, the
restored buffer provides wildlife habitat and
encourages increased biodiversity.
The Air Force planted 750 trees along tidal ditch-
es and the banks of the Back River during 1998 in
an effort to restore native riparian buffers at
Langley Air Force Base. Under a Riparian Forest
Buffer Habitat Grant from the Bay Program, the
Air Force has cleaned up an old concrete landfill
and connected two forest fragments at Langley.
Native shrub and tree species have been installed,
as well as a native forage grass seed mix.
. Federal agencies that are not major landholders in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed have also commit-
ted themselves to the implementation of the
Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative. For example, the
U.S. Geological Survey National Mapping
Division has committed to provide complete base
cartographic data, including Digital Orthophoto
Quadrangles at 1 meter resolution for the entire
Bay watershed, so that Bay Program partners can
use this information as a planning and landscape
Partially buffered stream at the us. Naval Academy Dairy Farm
analysis tool for riparian forest buffers. The
National Mapping Division and the Water
Resources Division will also provide information
on stream sediment and groundwater flow, water
quality, and characteristics loads for selected reach-
es in the Bay watershed.
The USGS Biological Resources Division provides
assistance with land cover mapping and informa-
tion on species diversity, invasive species, and habi-
tats. The Geologic Division continues to provide
information on surface and bedrock geology, and
several divisions have committed technical
resources for the development and tracking of for-
est buffers within the watershed.
The USDA Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) owns two miles of streams on its
plant materials facilities: one in Beltsville,
Maryland and the other in New York. In addition
to maintaining buffers along these streams (at least
100 feet of trees, shrubs, or grasses), the NRCS
assists private landowners with the establishment
of riparian buffers through a number of programs,
including the Conservation Reserve
Program/Conservation Reserve Enhancement
Program, the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program,
the Forestry Incentives Program, the Wetland
Reserve Program, and the National Conservation
Buffer Initiative.
In addition to these specific activities and projects,
a number of Federal agencies have adopted riparian
forest buffer implementation plans. These plans are
meant to assist agency property managers in imple-
menting the Riparian Forest Buffer Initiative. The
chart on Page 16 tracks the miles of buffer estab-
lished in the 1997-1999 timeframe, by agency.
15
-------
RESTORED RIPARIAN FOREST BUFFERS, BY AGENCY, 1996-1999
Agency Miles of NOTES
Miles of
Restored Buffers
a!
a.
I
s-
I
Army Corps of Engineers
Department of Defense
US. Forest Service
US. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Natural Resources
Conservation Service
TOTAL (1996 to early 1999)
10.7
21.2
24.3
0.0
0.8
2.0
59.0
Includes the Anacostia River and Raystown Lake projects
Approximately 9.4 miles of land on the Eastern Neck, Presquile,
Woodbridge, and Rappahannock Refuges have been identified as having
restoration opportunities due to current management practices for feed
crops for waterfowl and other birds.
A recent survey determined that of the 1,020 miles of intermittent and
perennial streams that are on Park Service lands within the Bay watershed,
approximately 23.3 miles have restoration potential.
Continuous conservation
32.7 planned for the near future. The total mileage, 91.7 miles, is 118.3
miles short of the restoration initiative annual goal.
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Fish Passage and Habitat
National Park Service 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.
Fish passage construction at the Little Falls Dam on the
Potomac River
Wetlands, Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, and
Vernal Pools
The Air Force recently received all required per-
mits to begin construction on 1,300 linear feet of
shoreline stabilization and wetland restoration
project in the Back River portion of Langley Air
Force Base. The purpose of this project is to
improve eroding shorelines while restoring a native
wetland marsh fringe at the site.
Since 1997, the DaD Legacy Resource Man-
agement Program has supported a multi-year effort
for the monitoring and restoration of submerged
aquatic vegetation along DaD shorelines. The
prototype for DaD involvement with the SA V
program was initiated at the U.S. Army's Aberdeen
Proving Ground in Maryland. Installation natural
resources management personnel actively conducted
on-site water quality monitoring and assessment of
existing SA V beds under a cooperative agreement
with the Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay (ACB)
and with the support of the National Aquarium in
Baltimore, Universiry of Maryland's Chesapeake
Biological Laboratory, and the Virginia Institute
for Marine Science. Active duty military divers and
volunteer DOD civilian divers have also partici-
pated in the SAV plaming and monitoring activi-
tles.
Installations that have participated in the Legacy
program include the U.S. Naval Academy
(Annapolis, MD), the Naval Surface Warfare
Center Indian Head Division (Indian Head, MD),
Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren Division
(Dahlgren, VA), Naval Amphibious Base Little
Creek (Norfolk, VA), Langley Air Force Base
(Hampton, VA), Fort Eustis (Newport News, VA),
Fort Monroe (Hampton Roads, VA), Navy
Solomons Complex (Solomons Island, MD),
Bolling Air Force Base (Washington, DC), U.S.
Army Blossom Point Facility (Blossom Point,
MD), and Naval Weapons Station Yorktown
(Yorktown, VA). This major DaD cooperative
effort in support of the Bay Program's SAV goals
has expanded to include work with ACB and the
US Fish and Wildlife Service for production of a
revised SA V identification and restoration guide,
scheduled for completion in Summer 2000. Under
a separate Legacy grant, tWo Navy installations also
are working with the ACB to study the utilization
of restored SA V beds by fish species, contributing
to the science of Bay habitat restOration.
The Air Force's incorporation of SAV restoration
with other shoreline management planning at
Langley Air Force Base provides an excellent exam-
ple of the success of DOD SA V efforts. The work
at Langley required six months of water quality
testing at four potential sites to determine which
site(s) was suitable for planting. In the end, only
one site, located adjacent to an airfield, qualified.
Test plots were planted at the selected site in
17
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
October 1998, and this site will likely be targeted
for large-scale SA V restoration in 2000. The Air
Force will monitor the health and progress of these
beds with the assistance of the Alliance for the
Chesapeake Bay.
The National Park Service has had three major
projects over the past two years.
. Rock Creek Park, in Washington, D.C., with
support and funding from the U.S. Geological
Survey and the Chesapeake Bay Program, has
conducted field inventories of potential vernal
pool restoration sites. Plans and designs are cur-
rently being developed to facilitate park staff in
constructing several of these pools to sustain
habitat requirements of herpetological species.
. The National Park Service is also initiating a
cooperative cleanup of the restored marsh adja-
cent to the Fort McHenry National Monument
in Baltimore, Maryland, in order to enhance its
ecological function and appearance. The Park is
Saltmarsh cordgrass plantings at the US. Naval Academy's
Greenbury Point.
18
working with the National Aquarium in
Baltimore to establish a monitoring program in
advance of further restoration activities.
. The National Capital Parks-East resource
management staff is working toward the
reestablishment of native species habitat at
Kingman Lake and the Kenilworth Marsh in
Washington, D. C.
Stream Restoration
In 1996 and 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) designed and constructed a
stream and riparian restoration project at the
Agriculture Research Service's Beltsville Agri-
cultural Research Center. The project site, located
on a tributary to the Little Paint Branch, suffered
severe erosion due to previous ditching and
increased runoff from upstream development. The
project transformed approximately 2,000 feet of a
rapidly eroding entrenched channel with little or
no habitat value into a more stable stream with
greater flood protection, increased quantity of rif-
fle and pool habitats, and decreased sediment load-
ing. Riparian and upland trees were planted to
restore a 2.S-acre buffer strip providing additional
streambank stability, shade, and wildlife habitat.
The Agriculture Research Service, USFWS, and
EPA provided funds for equipment and materials.
USFWS, with assistance from the Natural
Resources Conservation Service and Maryland's
Department of Natural Resources, designed the
project and supervised all phases of construction,
while the Agriculture Research Service provided a
significant amount of in-kind support, including
labor and construction equipment. The project has
been used as a stream and riparian restoration
demonstration site for numerous training work-
shops, and was featured in a stream restoration
tour organized by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service for the Ecosystem Conser-
vation Society of Japan.
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
The USFWS conducted a pilot stream channel
assessment project at the Naval Air Station,
Patuxent River in 1998. Results of die assessment
are being evaluated and protocols are being revised
to provide Federal facility resource managers with
the information required to target priority projects
for stream corridor protection and restoration
plans.
The Maryland Department of Natural Resources
(DNR) is working in cooperation with the Army
Environmental Center and the Naval Facilities
Engineering Command to assess stream miles on
approximately 15 DOD facilities in Maryland. A
grant from the DOD Legacy Resource
Management Program is supporting DNR's inno-
vative approach, in which Maryland Conservation
Corps members are trained to conduct initial
assessments and documentation of stream condi-
tions. This statewide study will allow DOD to tar-
get continuing partnership opportunities with the
state and other Federal resource agencies to priori-
tize detailed analyses and stream restoration pro-
grams. The findings of this study will be available
in 2000. The Baltimore District of the Army
Corps of Engineers has also conducted more
detailed stream corridor assessments for selected
installations. The combined results from these
assessments can be used to provide a snapshot of
the overall condition and continuing management
needs for streams on Federal lands in the Bay
watershed.
Aquatic Reefs
The Corps has committed to an effort to restore
oyster populations in Maryland through the
Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery project. This
project, initiated in 1997, includes the construc-
tion of disease-free oyster bars, rehabilitation of
unproductive oyster bars, and construction and
operation of oyster nurseries for disease-free pro-
duction. Initial shell placement and "seeding" with
disease-free spat was undertaken in 1997 at sites in
Kedges Strait, Choptank River, and Patuxent
River. Shell placement and seeding at several loca-
tions in the Chester River was finished in 1998,
and in the Patuxent, Magothy, and Severn Rivers
in 1999. Construction of a seed bar was also fin-
ished in Eastern Bay during 1999. Construction is
scheduled to continue through September 2000.
Naval installations located along large tidal tribu-
taries and the Bay shoreline also have supported
creation of oyster reefs. Naval Weapons Station
Yorktown partnered with the Virginia Marine
Resources Commission for installation of a three-
dimensional oyster reef along the York River near
the mouth of Felgates Creek. Under the leadership
of the Naval Facilities Engineering Command,
oyster habitat creation work also has been con-
ducted at the Naval District Washington's
Solomon's Complex, MD, in partnership with
NOAA, the Maryland Department of Natural
Resources, and the Virginia Marine Resources
Commission. This project incorporated an aquatic
reef as a component of an integrated shoreline
management program.
Invasive Species
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has
implemented invasive species controls on Service
lands. The USFWS has worked with state, Federal,
and private partners to manage populations of
non-indigenous species in Chesapeake Bay, includ-
ing nutria, mute swans, Phragmites, and non-
native live bait. Nutria, a large fur-bearing rodent
native to South America, was introduced to
Maryland decades ago for the fur trade.
Populations have expanded dramatically, particu-
larly on the lower Eastern Shore, and the foraging
of these animals has contributed to the loss of up
to 5,000 acres of marshland in Maryland. To help
reverse this impact, the USFWS is conducting a
pilot study of methods to eradicate nutria and
19
-------
The Third Biennia! Progress Report
Waist-high Kudzu at Fort Story, Virginia
restore marsh habitats in Blackwater National
Wildlife Refuge. This project, being done in part-
nership with over 20 organizations, will use dean
dredged material to restore marsh substrates at the
Refuge.
The mute swan population in the Bay has grown
dramatically since their introduction in the late
1960s. This highly territorial, exotic species out-
competes native birds for nest sites and brood-rear-
ing habitat in Bay marshes. Mute swans also dam-
age submerged aquatic vegetation by eating the
tender shoots of many of these plant species. The
USFWS, in conjunction with the Maryland
Department f Natural Resources and the Virginia
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, has
been conducting late-summer surveys of swan
brood distribUtion in order to assess reproduction
rates and habitat use by these animals. These aeri-
al surveys use global positioning systems to accu-
rately map the distribution of the birds and
identify suitable sites for swan control.
J
Marshes throughout the Chesapeake Bay have also
been invaded by Phragmites plants. Phragmites is a
perennial species that forms dense stands, often
eliminating native plant communities and dramat-
20
ically reducing the value of marshes as fish and
wildlife habitat. In order to assist in Phragmites
control, the USFWS has conducted a Bay-wide
aerial survey to determine the distribution of
Phragmites and allow identification of vulnerable
marshes.
In partnership with Anne Arundel Community
College (AACC) and under a grant received from
the DOD Legacy Resource Management Program,
the Department of Defense has conducted
Phragmites management investigations at several
installations. The focus of AACC's and DOD's
work has been to identify priority areas for
Phragmites control. This multi-service initiative is
being managed by the Navy, and surveys have been
conducted at the u.s. Army Adelphi Lab
(Adelphi, MD); Naval Surface Warfare Center
Dahlgren Division; the u.S. Naval Academy;
Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head
Division; Naval Air Station Patuxent River
(Lexington Park, MD); Fort Eustis; Fort Belvoir
(Alexandria, VA), Fort Story (Virginia Beach, VA),
Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek; Naval Air
Station Oceana (Virginia Beach, VA); Naval
Station Norfolk (Norfolk, VA); Dam Neck;
Langley Air Force Base; and Fort Monroe. In addi-
Phragmites aLong a nature trail at Little Creek Amphibious Base
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
tion to the site investigations for Phragmites,
AACC also has conducted two related training
workshops for DO D natural resources and pest
management personnel, and will be presenting
preliminary findings regarding the Phragmites
work and other prioriry invasive species identified
at mid-Atlantic DOD installations at a summer,
2000 workshop.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has also initiated a
two-year study of the potential for introduction of
non-indigenous species to Chesapeake Bay waters
through international trade in live bait. The results
of the study will aid in describing and controlling
a potential source of non-indigenous species intro-
ductions.
Conservation Landscaping
BayScapes
The USFWS, as the lead agency for BayScapes, has
moved forward in implementing the BayScapes
Program on Federal lands. The 1994 Agreement
called for the use of BayScapes to "expedite compli-
ance with the President's directive on environmen-
tally and economically beneficial landscaping prac-
tices on Federal facilities in the Bay watershed."
From the spring of 1997 through the end of 1998,
the USFWS completed 21 demonstration projects
totaling five acres on Federal and non-Federal facil-
ities. Funding for several of the projects completed
on non-Federal lands was provided through a grant
from the Chesapeake Bay Program. Implementation
involved approximately 700 citizen volunteers and
numerous government and non-government part-
ners, thus providing an educational opportuniry
for local citizens.
BayScapes installed on Federal sites included a
showcase garden at the Fish and Wildlife Service
Chesapeake Bay Field Office in Annapolis,
Maryland; a "rain garden" landscaped stormwater
bioretention area at the Burger King restaurant on
U.S. Army Fort George G. Meade, Maryland; and
a wetland garden at the new wing of the NOAA
and DNR Laboratory in Oxford, Maryland. The
Fort Meade planting event was honored by speak-
ers from several agencies and the Bay Program,
attended by 150 volunteers, and highlighted by
local television and print news media. As a follow-
up on this effort, EP A's new laboratory at Fort
Meade was redesigned using BayScapes principles.
The USFWS is also working with the Maryland
State Highway Administration to plan a two-acre
demonstration BayScape planting at the Maryland
Welcome Center on 1-95 in Laurel, Maryland,
which receives two million visitors annually.
In addition to actual plantings, the USFWS has
participated in BayScapes educational opportuni-
ties over the past two years. BayScapes presenta-
tions were given by USFWS staff at several work-
shops to promote the use of BayScapes at Federal
sites. The Federal Highway Administration's
Eastern Resource Center, along with the Maryland
State Highway Administration and the Chesa-
peake Bay Program, sponsored a workshop entitled
Volunteers M a Bayscapes planting.
21
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
New Approaches for Utilizing Native Plants on
Roadsides: Tools for Developing a Practical,
Environmentally Friendly Roadside Vegetation
Strategy. The workshop examined techniques for
creating more environmentally friendly roadsides,
and examined issues such as the creation of a
Chesapeake Corridor that would create a unique
educational experience along highways in the
watershed.
Moving to meet commitments under the FACE-
UP, the Federal Highway Administration dedicat-
ed $12,000 through an interagency agreement
with USFWS to develop a guide to BayScaping on
Federal facilities. The guide is scheduled for release
in 2000.
The U.S. Postal Service (USPS) has begun imple-
menting BayScapes agency-wide, by producing a
Grounds Management Plan to guide BayScaping
on their facilities in the watershed. USPS is also
developing new specifications to direct contractors
in designing beneficial landscaping at all new facil-
ities in the region. The USPS has already complet-
ed a number of BayScapes projects at their facilities
throughout the Bay watershed, including Easton,
Maryland; Binghamton, New York; Oxford, New
York; Manassas, Virginia; Colonial Heights,
Virginia; Forest Hills, Pennsylvania; and
Washington, D.C. In addition, there are plans for
BayScapes projects at ten more facilities throughout
the watershed, including Lynnhaven/Virginia
Beach, and Williamsburg, Virginia; and Altoona,
Harrisburg, Millersburg and Milton, Pennsylvania.
The Fish and Wildlife Service will work to assist
other agencies in following the USPS example, by
July 2001, as called for in die FACEUP agreement.
The U.S. Coast Guard has developed two
BayScapes projects in the past two years. At Coast
Guard Station Crisfield on Maryland's Eastern
Shore, approximately two acres were landscaped
widi vegetated islands and a butterfly garden
through a partnership with die Alliance for die
Chesapeake Bay, and was completed in September
1998. At the Coast Guard TISCOM facility in
northern Virginia, 400 trees were planted on five
acres through a partnership widi the Fairfax
ReLeaf program. This project, completed in April
1998, utilized over 40 volunteers from three sepa-
rate Coast Guard units, and built upon die Coast
Guard Unit Master Plan.
In October 1998, the U.S. Coast Guard
Portsmouth Industrial Support Center completed
a large BayScaping project. The facility purchased
and planted 450 native trees and shrubs on a 4.5
acre piece of lawn. The project was accomplished
in cooperation widi the Elizabeth River Project,
which provided the project design and participat-
ed in the planting along with more than 100 youth
volunteers. The facility continues to scope out
areas for additional planting projects, and plans to
host a nutrient reduction site visit from die Federal
Agencies Committee. The Coast Guard also con-
tinues publication of its quarterly newsletter, The
Chesapeake Chronicle, to keep all personnel in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed informed about events
such as BayScapes projects.
Other Efforts
At Langley Air Force Base (AFB) in Hampton,
Virginia, the game warden has planted clover, per-
simmon, indigobush, and graystem dogwood on
the base to improve wildlife habitat. In addition,
students from Bethel Manor Elementary School
constructed 50 bluebird houses made of recycled
materials for use on the Base.
National Park Service staff from Fredericksburg
and Spottsylvania National Battlefield Park are
working with the Fish and Wildlife Foundation to
restore native grass habitat to enhance quail
22
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
populations, and are working with Mary
Washington College to complete a fish inventOry
of the Park.
NUTRIENT AND TOXICS PREVENTION
AND REDUCTION
Federal parmers in the Bay Program have made a
commitment to meet and maintain the Bay
Program's nutrient and tOxies reduction goals,
which have been the cornerstOne of Bay protection
efforts since the Bay Program was first established.
In 1994, Federal agencies committed to support
the Bay Program's TribUtary Strategies, and to
develop a Special Tributary Strategy fir Federal
Lands in the District of Columbia. They also agreed
to provide Federal assistance with non-point
sources of pollUtion, and to upgrade Federal waste-
water facilities.
In 1998, Federal agencies created new commit-
ments for the prevention and reduction of pollu-
tants. Under these new commitments, nutrient
management plans for Federal lands within the
watershed will be developed by 2001. These plans
will focus on nutrients from agriculruralland, con-
struction activities, turf areas, golf course and other
recreation areas, and developed lands. Agencies
agreed to adopt plans for the prioritized improve-
ments of septic systems on Federal lands by
December 31, 2000. Federal parmers agreed to
ensure that personnel are trained to implement
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) on 75 percent
of Federally-owned lands by December 31, 2000.
Agencies will establish a peer review panel to eval-
uate at least five Federal IPM plans each year
beginning in 2001. Federal agencies have agreed to
employ pollUtion prevention technologies to
achieve a 75 percent voluntary reduction from a
1994 baseline in releases of the Chesapeake Bay
Toxies of Concern and chemicals required for
reporting under section 313 (c) of the Emergency
Planning and Community Right-tO-Know Act.
Agencies also agreed to establish 30 Federal facili-
ties as mentors in the Chesapeake Bay Program's
Businesses for the Bay program by January 1, 2000.
Source Reduction
The U.S. Coast Guard has made toxies control a
high priority over the past tWo years, incorporating
pollUtion prevention principles into activities at its
facilities. The PortsmoUth Industrial Support
Center was a Coast Guard pollUtion prevention
award winner over the past tWo years. The facility
institUted a program of pollUtion prevention and
reduction that included the refurbishing of
Building 33 into a "green building." Other efforts
include the use of recycled carpets, installed with-
oUt adhesive, and the installation of low-use water
fixtures, windows with non-reflective heat mir-
rored glass, skylights, and room occupancy sensors.
The National Park Service continued its efforts to
meet Bay Program nUtrient and tOxies reduction
goals in 1997 and 1998.
. A three-year effort to clean up polychlorinated
biphenyl (PCB)-contaminated soil and restore
riparian habitat in Glover Archibald Park in
Washington, D.C. was recently completed.
23
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Drainage from a U.S. Navy facility had histori-
cally contaminated portions of the park and
Foundry Branch, a tributary of the Potomac
River. National Park Service staff from Rock
Creek Park and the National Capital Region
worked closely with the Navy, District of
Columbia, and community representatives to
remove over 2,000 tons of contaminated soil
and to restore riparian habitat in the excavated
area. Repairs to several chronic sanitary and
storm sewer problems were made as well. This
major collaborative effort resulted in eliminat-
ing a point source of PCB pollution to the
Chesapeake Bay and increasing the limited
riparian habitat in Washington, D.C.
• National Park Service staff also completed
annual dry weather surveys of 75 stormwater
outfalls in the Rock Creek drainage to identify,
trace, and repair illegal stream discharges.
Visual inspections were performed for 55 sani-
tary sewer stream crossings and exposures to
discover and report leakage repair and stabiliza-
tion needs. The park also worked with the D.C.
Government and a local developer to initiate
major repairs and internal lining of a deterio-
rated sanitary sewer that was a chronic source of
sewage leaks to local streams. The National
Park Service continues, as it has since 1978, to
integrate IPM practices into park management
programs.
• In March 1998, after seven months of intense
National Park Service review and comment,
mounting public opposition, and, ultimately,
state elected official opposition, the Cardinal
FG Glass Plant withdrew their permit applica-
tion to construct a major new source of air pol-
lution (including 867 tons per year of nitrogen
oxides) in close proximity to Shenandoah
National Park. The proposed Kernstown,
Virginia, site is in the Chesapeake Bay water-
shed and airshed, so the permit withdrawal
eliminated a potential new source of nitrogen
24
loading into the Bay. Subsequently, the NPS
and the U.S. Forest Service collaborated to offer
review comments to the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality (Virginia DEQ)
regarding their proposal to substantially weaken
their minor new source (of air pollution) review
regulations. In November 1998, Virginia DEQ
withdrew their proposal in response to adverse
public comment, thus reducing the potential
for increased nitrogen deposition into the Bay
from numerous proposed minor sources.
Rock Creek Park contracted for site investiga-
tions to identify potential pollution sources at
facilities throughout the park. These evalua-
tions were completed at three horse stables, an
18-hole golf course, the central maintenance
yard and associated material storage areas, and
14 miles of park roads with adjoining parking
lots. The project report describes pollution and
stormwater problems and recommends repairs
and best management practices (BMPs) for
each site to mitigate water quality and quantity
concerns.
The U.S. Air Force also continues its efforts to
address nutrient and toxic releases from its facilities
at Langley Air Force Base in Virginia.
• Currently, the animal waste disposal process is
being evaluated and alternative disposal options
will be offered to die Langley Saddle Club, in
collaboration with the Virginia Cooperative
Extension Program.
• Langley's antiquated sanitary sewer system will
be overhauled. One aspect of this overhaul is a
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
project to upgrade the primary sanitary sewer
lift station. The construction contract will be
awarded in the near future to complete the
repairs, thus eliminating numerous discharges.
• The Air Force is also negotiating a design proj-
ect to replace approximately 17,700 linear feet
of sanitary sewer lines. The service area is in one
of the oldest portions of the installation, and
numerous cross-connections between the storm
sewer and sanitary sewer system are believed to
exist. The repair construction project will begin
during Fiscal Year 2000.
• The sanitary sewer infrastructure maps at
Langley are also being updated to help the base
focus repair efforts on problem areas that are
subject to excessive inflow and infiltration,
which result in discharges.
• The Air Force intends to award a construction
project to complete Phase 2 of sanitary sewer
system repairs and to have continuous infra-
structure repairs programmed and scheduled
annually through Fiscal Year 2005.
• The Langley Entomology Shop has researched
and evaluated the use of the hot water weed
treatment on large concrete surfaces to reduce
the amount of herbicide used during weed con-
trol operations. Langley's Entomology Shop is
also in the process of purchasing "Weed Seeker"
nozzles that only allow spraying to occur when
a weed is sensed. The equipment allows 85 per-
cent chemical reduction and a more efficient
use of spray time.
Monitoring
Appomattox Court House National Historical
Park, with assistance from the USGS, has estab-
lished water quality monitoring stations on the
portions of the Appomattox River and Plain Run
that run through the Park. Quarterly analysis of
sampling data from these stations will assist Park
managers in developing methods to improve or
protect these Bay tributaries.
Several DOD installations are also involved in
water quality monitoring activities. Ongoing water
quality monitoring is being conducted under the
Legacy Program at Boiling Air Force Base, Langley
Air Force Base, Army Adelphi Lab—Blossom
Point, Yorktown Naval "Weapons Station, and
Naval Air Base Little Creek. Langley Air Force
Base continues to monitor the health and progress
of Spartina test beds with the assistance of the
Alliance for die Chesapeake Bay. Meanwhile,
Boiling Air Force Base recently completed a study
of the dry weather flows from its 37 storm
drainage sheds that discharge directly into the
Potomac River, and also analyzed the discharge
into a retention pond from a parking area. In each
study, the Base detected no significant pollution.
Site Assessment and Education
The Nutrient and Toxics Reduction Workgroup
continues to perform five site visits each year at
Federal facilities that are willing to host an assess-
ment, in accordance with the 1994 Agreement and
1998 FACEUP. The Workgroup has found that
nutrient pollution is still a problem on Federal
lands, but there is an increasing concern over issues
relating to toxic releases. Stormwater pollution
prevention and integrated pest management are
specific topics of concern for land and facilities
managers. For these reasons, the protocol for the
nutrient reduction site assessments has been
revised to account for this change in emphasis.
In November 1998, the U.S. Army Northern
Regional Environmental Office and the U.S.
Army's Chesapeake Bay Program hosted a work-
shop on stormwater management for Federal facil-
ities in EPA Regions I, II, III, and IV. This work-
shop served as a forum for the communication of
regulatory and non-regulatory approaches that
25
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
Federal facilities can take to control stormwater,
and had presentations on riparian buffers, conser-
vation landscaping, low-impact development tech-
niques for stormwater control, and various other
methods and examples of stormwater control and
treatment technologies.
FEDERAL FACILITIES
The 1994 Agreement commits the signatories to
"assure that the ecological value of any Federal
facilities proposed for closure within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed is addressed in the deci-
sion-making process for future land uses." and
assigns the lead in this effort to DaD. Since sign-
ing this agreement, DaD has come out with sev-
eral iterations of its Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC) protocols and directives. These require-
ments, applicable to all BRAC installations and
facilities in DaD, include the consideration of the
ecological value of lands to be transferred and the
value of future land uses at those sites after privati-
zatIon.
NATIONAL SERVICE
The 1994 Agreement lays oUt the basis to "provide
mUtual benefits to the Bay and to national service
through environmental improvement training and
project proposals and other opportunities to work
with the .National Civilian Community Corps, as
well as with other initiatives of the Corporation for
National and Community Service." Toward that
end, numerous projects have been undertaken by
the National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC)
within the Bay watershed on behalf of various
Federal agencies.
26
The National Park Service has received assistance
from NCCC on several occasions during the
1997-1999 period. In November 1998, the
NCCC assisted with forest fighting, including
removing hazardous debris, stamping oUt "hot
spots" and clearing fire lines during the Swan fire
in Buena Vista, Virginia. The second occasion was
the restoration and repair of hiking trails at
Catoctin Mountain Park in Thurmont, Maryland.
Next was an ecosystem restoration project in
December 1999 at Harper's Ferry National
Historic Park in West Virginia. There, the NCCC
team removed exotic vegetation while repairing
trails and fences. In April and May 1999, several
NCCC members were stationed at Prince William
Forest Park, in Triangle, Virginia and at
Shenandoah National Park in Luray, Virginia,
assisting in forest fire fuel reduction and controlled
burns at the parks. Another NCCC team was sta-
tioned at Harper's Ferry National Historic Park for
construction and repair activities, and planted
native trees, constructed a stone wall, and repaired
damaged trails and a historic structure.
Other NCCC projects included renovation of
trails, removal of exotic species, and development
of a community participation plan for the u.S.
National Arboretum in Washington, D.C. The
Bridge Piers, Harpers Ferry, WV-the Shenandoah River
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
NCCC also partners with non-Federal entities to
perform restoration, environmental, and emer-
gency assistance throughout the watershed. Some
non-Federal partners include the 4-H Club;
Fairfax County Park Authority; Kimberton Hills,
Inc.; the Lackawanna River Corridor Association;
the Maryland Department of Natural Resources;
the Maryland - National Capital Parks and
Planning Commission; the Nature Conservancy;
and Otsego (NY) Emergency Services.
HUMAN HEALTH PROTECTION
The outbreaks of Pfiesteria and similar toxic organ-
isms in 1997 highlighted the connection between
environmental protection and human health.
Pfiesteria has been studied for possible effects on
human health from direct exposure to toxins pro-
duced as the organism attacks fish. In addition,
there are threats to human health, such as pollu-
tion to drinking water from both nutrients and
toxics, the accumulation of toxic substances in fish
and shellfish and the pollution of water used for
recreational purposes.
In FACEUP, Federal agencies committed to renew
their efforts to protect human health from pollu-
tants that enter die Bay. Federal agencies have
agreed to several new efforts which will help ensure
that people who live within the watershed and
those who utilize the Bay and its resources will not
experience adverse health impacts. These efforts
include the coordination of Federal funding,
research, monitoring, and response to harmful
algal blooms and the effect of Pfiesteria and similar
harmful organisms on human health, finfish, and
shellfish. Federal agencies also agreed to begin
identifying high levels of nitrate in groundwater.
Federal agencies agreed to identify and help reopen
closed shellfish beds adjacent to Federal facilities,
and to address release of toxics from their facilities
that affect fish for consumption. Finally, Federal
agencies promised to address storm drain outfalls
on Federal lands that may direaten human health
through exposure to pollutants by inhalation,
ingestion, or body contact.
In addition to contributions of research and assess-
ment on Pfiesteria and other harmful microorgan-
isms, Federal agencies also coordinate widi each
other to improve their response to threatened
resources. As an example, when fish lesions were
reported at the Big Bethel Reservoir near Langley
Air Force Base, Langley collaborated with natural
resource staff from the U.S. Army's Ft. Monroe on
a fish habitat study and potential restocking pro-
gram.
The U.S. Geological Survey has conducted prelim-
inary healdi assessments of fish health related to
Pfiesteria. Fish kills related to Pfiesteria caused the
closure of some fisheries and affected human
health along the eastern seaboard in 1997 and to a
lesser degree in 1998. Lesions on fish are one of the
criteria used to close fisheries because diey can be
related to Pfiesteria. The USGS has conducted pre-
liminary health assessments offish widi lesions and
found an invasive fungus associated with the
lesions. Therefore, further work is being conduct-
ed to determine the relation between the invasive
Pfiesteria, and other environmental factors that
may weaken the immune system of the fish. This
information is needed to determine management
options.
SMART GROWTH
The Federal Agencies Committee, responding to
recent state and Federal initiatives relating to
growth and development within the Chesapeake
Bay watershed, included a section on Smart
Growth in the 1998 FACEUP. This section has
commitments to identify and implement new ways
to prevent pollution from development, encourage
27
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
redevelopment of urban areas, and raise the quality
of life. Specifically, these commitments address
vehicle miles traveled, road and highway construc-
tion, reuse and recycling of brownfield sites,
stormwater management, low impact and energy
efficient construction design, BayScaping and con-
servation landscaping, Federal facility relocation or
expansion, and public access to the Bay.
The Federal Agencies Committee has created a
Workgroup to help manage and track the accom-
plishment of this new round of commitments. The
Smart Growth Workgroup will meet regularly to
discuss diis section of FACEUP, and will periodi-
cally report to the Federal Agencies Committee on
progress made toward completion of these tasks by
their respective deadlines.
REPORTING
The Federal Agencies Committee commits to con-
tinue with biennial progress reporting on bodi the
1994 Agreement and FACEUP.
28
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A:
1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
APPENDIX B:
Federal Agencies' Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
APPENDIX C:
Federal Funding Support for the Bay Program, FY99
APPENDIX D:
Major Federal Landholdings in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed
29
-------
APPENDIX A:
^••WH^^^
Chesapeake Bay Program
AGREEMENT OF
FEDERAL AGENCIES ON
ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT
IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY
July 14,1994
~\"Y7~7"HEREAS, the National Perfotmance Review
\X/ 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, die 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 pan 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
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.
N.
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 die states and other
parties to achieve the goals of the CJiesopeofce Boy 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 die 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 die Bay and the impact on the natural
system (NOAA lead);
data, coordination 4- 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,
31
-------
Appendix A: 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
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 dean 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
• 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);
4- 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 die 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).
32
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
FOR THE US. ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Assistant AAninistrator/or \Xfcter
Pctef-H. Kbstmayer, Regional Administrator^RegiJn nl
ifci, Director, C/iesapeafa: Bay Program O/fice
tt, Secrcdiry
^
istant Seactafy
I
George T Framplbn, Jr., Assistant Secretary for FishJ& Wildlife
Rieke, Assistant Secretary /or Water & Science
FOR THE US. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE
FOR THE US. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
FOR THE NATIONAL BIOLOGICAL SURVEY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
jalhcs R. Lyons, Assistant Setretary /or Natural Resources OTK!
33
-------
Appendix A: 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay
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
JaWcWard Thomas, Chie
Paul W JohnsorCte
Lcodrey Williams, Acting Administrator
Grant Buntrock, Administrator
SHeiK'wassennan Goodman, Deputy Under Secretary ofDefi
V-
Robert Pine, Jr., Assistant Secretary far 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
Robert M. Walkei; Assistant
ond Environment
'or Installations, Logistics
ZiRchfcLftctJng Assisip«ht Secretary for Civd Works
(/
t£a^
Rodney A. Coleman, Assistant Secrelmy far Manpower, Reserve
Affairs, Installaticms, and Environment
Vice Admiral Edward M. Straw, Director
FOR THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
D. James Baker, Under Secretary for Oceans and Atmosphere and
Administrator
34
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
FOR THE US. COAST GUARD
FOR THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
vr
Admiral William J. Eckcr, Commander, Fi/t/i 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
US. SENATOR PAUL SARBANES
i Segal, President
-------
APPENDIX B:
Chesapeake Bay Program
FEDERAL AGENCIES'
CHESAPEAKE ECOSYSTEM
UNIFIED PLAN
NOVEMBER 5,1998
WHEREAS, the Clean Water Action Plan charts a
course toward fulfilling the original goals of the
Clean Water Act and calls upon Federal agencies to
develop a unified policy to enhance watershed management in
which Federal, state, and local governments and the public
work together to identify critical problems, focus resources, rec-
ognize waters of exceptional value, include watershed goals in
Federal planning, and implement effective strategies to solve
problems; and
WHEREAS, as reported in the April 1997 Second Biennial
Progress Report of the 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on
Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay, the Federal
agency partners of the Chesapeake Bay Program have accom-
plished, and are committed to accomplish, the numerous goals
of that 1994 Agreement; and
•V Tow, therefore, we the undersigned representatives of the participating Federal agencies, establish the following unified
f^k I plan to meet the goals of the 1987 Chesapeake Bay Agreement and subsequent amendments and directives, and to build
J. ^1 on the achievements of the 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in the Chesapeake Bay, consistent
with our missions and our success in securing the necessary resources. Specifically, we further agree to be:
WHEREAS, the community of Federal agencies with signed
formal Chesapeake Bay partnership agreements has expanded
to include 15 agencies dedicated to enhancing stewardship on
Federally-managed public lands, supporting cooperative state
and community implementation, and contributing expertise in
resource management, science and planning to achieve ecosys-
tem-based management; and
WHEREAS, the Chesapeake Bay Program's directives on
Nutrient Reduction, Habitat Restoration, Wetlands, and Ripar-
ian Forest Buffers, and its Local Government Participation
Action Plan and Community Watershed Initiative continue to
advance the Program as a national leader in the use of partner-
ships and sound science for targeting, developing and imple-
menting restoration and protection programs.
PARTNERS FOR THE CHESAPEAKE
creating new opportunities for Federal agencies to
work with states to carry out the commitments
of the Clean Water Action Plan. We commit to:
1. target Conservation Reserve Enhancement funds to Bay
watershed states in support of efforts to protect farmland
and forests and reduce nutrient inputs to the Chesapeake
Bay (USDA lead);
2. work to integrate opportunities to benefit the Bay through
existing Federal initiatives such as USDA's Environmental
Quality Incentives Program and the Wetlands Reserve pro-
gram (USDA lead);
3. support the development of state Unified Watershed Assess-
ments and Action Plans for Priority Watersheds;
4. encourage the development of permanent teams within
each Bay watershed state, comprised of Federal and state
officials with responsibilities for implementing the Clean
Water Action Plan;
5. promote the addition of new Federal partners, including
agencies that deal with transportation and other infrastruc-
ture; establish or update memoranda of understanding with
all Federal partners; and strengthen relationships among
existing partners through resource sharing and unified pro-
gram planning and implementation; and
6. develop and adopt a Bay Partner Facility program by March
1,1999, and seek the designation of at least 30 Federal facil-
ities as partners by December 31,2000, and 60 Federal facil-
ities by December 31, 2005.
PROTECTORS OF
PRIORITY WATERSHEDS
targeting various Federal programs and resources to meet
the needs of priority watersheds, particularly those
designated by states under the Clean Water
Action Plan. We commit to:
1. support geographically-specific programs, such as the
Chesapeake Bay Program's Regions of Concern for toxics
and Nutrient Areas of Concern;
2. develop, by June 30, 1999, a mechanism to implement wet
weather pollution prevention on Federal facilities in the
Anacostia River and Rock Creek watersheds and transfer
these technologies to other appropriate Federal facilities and
urban areas (EPA lead);
3. implement the Biennial Federal Workplan for the Anacostia
River Watershed and provide biennial updates beginning in
June 30,1999 (COE lead);
4. support the 18-point restoration plan for the Elizabeth River
through active participation in the programs and projects of
the Elizabeth River Coalition (COE lead); and
5. participate fully in the American Heritage Rivers Program
for the Potomac and Upper Susquehanna/Lackawanna
Rivers by: a) identifying relevant Federal landholdings by
December 31,1998; b) establishing partnership agreements
with community-based efforts in the Heritage Rivers water-
sheds by April 30, 1999; c) and supporting directed applica-
tion of technical and funding resources to aid revitalization
efforts (EPA lead).
37
-------
Appendix B: Federal Agencies Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
STEWARDS OF THE BAY'S LIVING
RESOURCES AND HABITATS
supporting the restoration of Chesapeake Bay living
resources and their habitats by fully implementing
fish and wMife conservation efforts and aU
habitat restoration authorities on all lands,
including Federal lands, in the Bay watershed.
We commit to:
1. develop an inventory of habitat restoration needs on Federal
lands in the Chesapeake Bay watershed to aid in the cre-
ation of an annual list of restoration priority areas, from
which two projects will be completed each year beginning in
2000 (NOAA lead);
2. support the Chesapeake Bay Program's Wetlands Directive
by assisting states in implementation of their strategies for
net gain of wetlands and establishing a restoration goal for
Federal facilities of 100 acres per year beginning in 2000
(EPA lead);
3. support conservation and restoration of stream corridors on
Federal lands by: a) establishing demonstration sites and
implementing restoration technology on three Federal facil-
ities by December 31, 1999 (USFWS lead); b) adopting
riparian area conservation policies for Federal lands by Sep-
tember 30, 2000 (USFS lead); c) adopting a stream assess-
ment and inventory protocol for Federal lands by May 31,
2000 and an inventory of stream systems on Federal lands by
January 1, 2005 (USFWS lead); and d) restoring 200 miles
of riparian forest buffers on Federal lands by January 1, 2010
(USFS lead);
4. identify additional blockages to anadromous fish on Federal
lands by December 31, 1999, and open priority blockages to
50 miles of streams by December 31, 2003 (NOAA lead);
5. identify 4 areas for aquatic reef siting at near shore areas
adjacent to Federal facilities, in accordance with the Chesa-
peake Bay Program's Framework for Habitat Restoration
and the Aquatic Reef Habitat Plan, by December 31, 1999
(NOAA lead);
6. target priority areas for terrestrial and aquatic invasive
species control on Federal facilities by January 1, 2000 and
implement controls on priority sites (USFWS lead);
7. expand conservation landscaping on Federal facilities, in
keeping with the Presidential directive on beneficial land-
scaping, by: a) completing a Conservation Landscaping and
BayScapes Guide for Federal Land Managers by January 1,
2000; and b) integrating conservation landscaping into Fed-
eral agency specifications and design criteria by July 31,
2001 (USFWS lead);
8. develop model lease provisions by September 30, 1999 for
facilities, oudeases, rights-of-way, and other Federal actions
to provide a means for Chesapeake Bay stewardship goals to
be considered in the issuance of leases by or to Federal agen-
cies within the watershed (GSA lead); and
9. work with state conservation agencies to determine the
effects of nutria on tidal wetland loss and to evaluate meth-
ods of controlling this exotic species (USGS lead).
LEADERS IN NUTRIENT AND TOXICS
PREVENTION AND REDUCTION
ON FEDERAL LANDS AND FACILITIES
working to meet and maintain the nutrient and toxics prevention
and reduction goals of the Chesapeake Bay Program, tuith an
emphasis on non-point source controls, and extending
our efforts beyond year 2000. We commit to:
1. provide technical assistance and training for Federal land-
holders for development of nutrient management plans by
December 31, 1999 (NRCS lead), and develop nutrient
management plans for Federal lands within the watershed
by December 31, 2000, emphasizing agricultural, construc-
tion, turf, golf course and recreation, and developed lands;
2, assess the performance of Federal on-site septic systems and
adopt management plans for priority improvements by
December 31, 2000 (USPS lead);
3. expand our existing Chesapeake Bay Program Federal facil-
ity site assessment protocol beyond nutrients to include tox-
ics reduction and habitat restoration opportunities, and
continue to complete at least five such assessments annually
within the Bay watershed (NRCS lead);
4. ensure, by December 31,2000, that personnel are trained to
strengthen and implement comprehensive Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) on 75% of all Federally-owned lands in
the watershed, and establish a peer review panel to evaluate
at least five Federal IPM plans annually (USDA lead);
5. implement pollution prevention and related technologies to
achieve, by January 1, 2000, a 75% voluntary reduction
from a 1994 baseline in releases of Chesapeake Bay Toxics of
Concern and chemicals required for reporting under section
313(c) of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
to-Know Act for Federal facilities in the Chesapeake Bay
basin CEPA lead);
6. establish, by January 1, 2000, participation of 30 Federal
facilities as mentors in the Chesapeake Bay Program's Busi-
nesses for the Bay to implement pollution prevention initia-
tives (DoD lead); and
7. compile and provide information on the reported occur-
rence of toxics in wildlife in the Bay ecosystem by January 1,
2003 (USGS lead).
GUARDIANS OF HUMAN HEALTH
focusing renewed efforts on the protection of human health
through actions we take to control the effects of harmful
pollutants in the Bay watershed. We commit to:
1. coordinate Federal funding and response systems in support
of state and local efforts in the Chesapeake Bay watershed
for major events, including Pfiesteria-type outbreaks and
other harmful algal blooms (NOAA lead);
2. support and target research and monitoring efforts on the
relation of harmful microorganisms such as Pfiesteria to
aquatic resources and human health (NOAA lead) and the
effects of other physical and biological stressors on fin fish
and shellfish (USGS lead);
38
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
3. provide preliminary identification of nitrate levels over the
maximum drinking water contaminant level in shallow
aquifers throughout the watershed by January 1, 2001
(USGSlead);
4. identify dosed shellfish beds adjacent to Federal lands in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed by December 31, 1998 and par-
ticipate in re-opening priority areas by January 1, 2005
(NOAA lead);
5. locate releases of toxics from Federal facilities in the Chesa-
peake Bay watershed, with priority on drainage areas where
fish consumption advisories exist, and work cooperatively to
address these releases by December 31,2000 (EPA lead); and
6. work with local governments to address pollution from
storm drain outfalls on Federal lands that pose a human
health risk through exposure by inhalation, ingestion, or
body contact such as swimming (EPA lead).
PROVIDERS OF RESEARCH,
ASSESSMENT, AND
NEW TECHNOLOGIES
assuring "state-of-the-art" technical support for Chesapeake Bay
Program partners, ranking research needs, and identifying
requirements to develop new technologies. We commit to:
1. sign Memoranda of Agreements to make Chesapeake Bay-
related data and information Internet accessible by all Bay
Program partners through the Chesapeake Information
Management System by July 1, 1999 (EPA lead);
2. complete, by March 1,1999, a Bay watershed-wide assessment
of potential levels of nutrient loadings (USDA lead) and water
quality parameters (USGS lead) that support the identifica-
tion of Nutrient Areas of Concern and serve as a basis for
strengthening the ability of local and state jurisdictions to
achieve their tributary basins' nutrient reduction goals;
3. complete an inventory, by January 1, 2000, of current
science-based technology available for implementation to
achieve the agricultural component of Bay nutrient reduc-
tion goals (USDA lead), and identify the sources that
restrict the production of submerged aquatic vegetation and
associated habitat in the middle and upper Bay and tidal
tributaries (USGS lead);
4. define and assess, by January 1, 2003, the contribution and
implications of nitrogen compound emissions (e.g., ammo-
nia) from agricultural activities; and develop models that
characterize the transport of emissions and deposition of
these compounds (NOAA lead);
5. provide an assessment, by July 1, 2000, of the amount of
nutrients and associated lag times in ground water, and of
implications for adjustments to tributary strategies' nutrient
reduction goals, and identify follow-up research needs to
further address management needs by January 1, 2002
(USGS lead);
6. develop an index of river flow, by January 1,2001, and other
tools to document the long-term changes in water quality,
living resources, and sea-level rise (USGS lead);
7. develop an index that demonstrates the changes in climate
affecting the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem, as needed to refine
restoration strategies by January 1, 2003 (NOAA lead);
8. conduct research and provide information needed to iden-
tify species and habitats on Federal lands in need of special
management efforts to maintain biodiversity and the
integrity of the Chesapeake ecosystem by January 1, 2003
(USGS lead); and
9. complete an analysis of forest distribution and condition in
the Chesapeake Bay watershed and host a regional confer-
ence to discuss issues related to fragmentation of forest land-
scape by January 1, 2000 (USFS lead).
SUPPORTERS OF SMART GROWTH
identifying and implementing new mechanisms to avoid
development patterns that increase pollution problems,
to encourage redevelopment of urban areas, and to
raise the quality of life. We commit to:
1. evaluate and implement alternative work practices and
other policies of Federal agencies in the watershed to reduce
vehicle miles traveled (EPA lead);
2. promote funding for research into the effects of road and
highway construction on growth and development within
the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and on increasing storm
water flow and inputs of nutrients and toxics to the Bay and
its tributaries, including air pollution and land use changes
(FHWAlead);
3. give preference to re-use and recycling of Federal brownfield
sites, and discourage development in greenfield sites (EPA lead);
4. fully cooperate with local governments, states, and other
Federal agencies in carrying out voluntary and mandatory
actions to comply with the management of storm water
(EPA lead);
5. encourage construction design that: a) minimizes natural area
loss on new and rehabilitated Federal facilities; b) adopts low
impact development and best management technologies for
storm watei; sediment and erosion control, and reduces
impervious surfaces; c) utilizes energy efficient technologies;
and d) considers the Conservation Landscaping and Bay-
Scapes Guide for Federal Land Managers (GSA lead);
6. develop, by January 1, 2000, a protocol by which Federal facil-
ities proposed for relocation or major expansion within the
Chesapeake Bay watershed will assess the direct and secondary
ecological, economic, and community effects (DoD lead);
7. increase public access to the Chesapeake Bay, with at least
200 additional miles of Federally-owned shoreline and tidal
waters opened or enhanced for public access by January 1,
2005, and participate in the development of water trails to
improve access and appreciation of the Bay and its resources
(NFS lead); and
8. establish annual meetings, beginning in 1999, with the
Office of Management and Budget to assess regional im-
pacts associated with major Federally-funded actions in the
Chesapeake Bay watershed (EPA lead).
"Cinally, we agree to supplement our biennial reporting on the 1994 Agreement of Federal Agencies on Ecosystem Management in
r the Chesatxake Bffv with progress in the implementation of this new unified plan, beginning April 1,1999 (EPA lead).
39
-------
Appendix B: Federal Agencies Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Carol M. Browner, Administrator
QCt£
Jonathan C Fox, Ajji
fjr Water
WWidad
Region III
Aanunistrato^
Brace Babbitt, Secretary
Patricia]. Btoeke, Assistant Secretory/or
Water 9 Science
FOR THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
FOR THE US. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
FOR THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
. Robert C.
40
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Envuwuiicjiccu Secunty
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Robert & Pitie, Jt, Assistant Secretory /or
Imtallanoro and Environment
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
'. Westphal^fcsistant Secretary /or Owl Work
Apgar &l, Assistant
t Logistics ttnd
/or
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Iby B. DeMesmef AssiStant Secretafj /or Manpower,
A/fairs, Installations, and Environment
FOR THE DEFENSE LOGISTICS AGENCY
' Lt. Gen. Heniy T. Glisson, Director
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FOR THE US. COAST GUARD
FOR THE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION
D. James IJdkei, Administrator
41
-------
Appendix B: Federal Agencies Chesapeake Ecosystem Unified Plan
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
USDA
FOR THE FARM SERVICE AGENCY
FOR THE US. FOREST SERVICE
Michael B Dombeck, Chief
FOR THE NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION
SERVICE
FOR THE GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
David J. Bartam, Administrator
FOR THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
FOR THE US. POSTAL SERVICE
William J. Hendefcon, Postmaster General
and Chief Executive Officer
FOR THE NATIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION
FOR THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
I. Michael Heyman, The Secretary
42
-------
The Third Biennial Progress Report
OBSERVERS:
U.S. Senator Paul S. Sarbanes
Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton
For the State of Maryland
For the Dispnct of Columbia /
;ion
43
-------
APPENDIX C:
FEDERAL FUNDING SUPPORT FOR THE
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM, FY99
SOURCE Million $$
Natural Resources Conservation Service $4.8
National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration $4.2
US Geological Survey $3.4
US Fish & Wildlife Service $1.5
National Park Service $0.9
US Army Corps of Engineers $0.6
Department of the Navy $0.5
US Forest Service $0.4
US Postal Service , $0.2
Subtotal (FY 99)~~~$16-5
EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Funds (FY 99) $ 18.9
Total Funds from Federal Agencies (FY 99) $35.4
This table accounts for funding used in direct support of the Bay Program. These
federal agencies contribute additional funds that provide indirect support.
45
-------
APPENDIX D:
MAJOR FEDERAL LANDHOLDINGS IN THE
CHESAPEAKE BAY WATERSHED
Department
AGRICULTURE
Agency
Agricultural Research Service
Natural Resources Conservation Service
U.S. Forest Service
Total, Agriculture
COMMERCE
DEFENSE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Army
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Defense Logistics Agency
U.S. Navy2
Total, Defense
HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
INTERIOR
National Institutes of Health
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
National Park Service
Total, Interior
TRANSPORTATION
U.S. Coast Guard
Federal Highway Administration
Federal Railroad Administration
Total, Transportation
VETERANS AFFAIRS
INDEPENDENT
AGENCIES
U.S. Soldiers Home
Architect of the Capitol
Central Intelligence Agency
General Services Administration
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
U.S. Postal Service3
Smithsonian Institution
Total, Independent Agencies
GRAND TOTAL
Number of
Facilities1
8
I
13
3
3
21
18
2
40
84
3
u
77
!
13
I
2
1
3
2
2,127
3
2,138
Acreage1
8,126
803
1,440,726
1,449,655
435
10,880
206,315
80,296
1,485
129,019
427,383
989
332,844
305,058
637,902
706
118
49
573
319
262~
294
967
1,927
2,875
6,325
2,523,881
'Does not represent total Federal fecilities or acreage amounts as not all Federal agencies have comprehensive fecility/acreage totals available.
Includes the U.S. Marine Corps Base, Quantico, VA
'The U.S. Postal Service is working to compile baseline information on the total area of facilities within the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
47
-------
Chesapeake Bay Program
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM
410 Severn Avenue
Annapolis, Maryland 21403
1-800-YOUR-BAY
------- |