Chesapeake Bay Program

A Watershed Partnership

Back

www.chesapeakebay.net

rv

410 Severn Avenue, Suite 109 • Annapolis, Maryland 21403 • 410-267-5700 • toll free 800-YOUR-BAY

On June 28, 2000, the
Chesapeake Executive Council
signed Chesapeake 2000 - a new
and far-reaching agreement that
now guides Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, the District
of Columbia, the Chesapeake Bay
Commission and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
in their combined efforts to
restore and protect the
Chesapeake Bay.

As part of that agreement, Bay
Program partners agreed to work
with the headwater states of
Delaware, New York and West
Virginia to set new, aggressive
nutrient and sediment reduction
goals that will provide the water
quality necessary for the Bay's
plants and animals to thrive.

This process builds on previous
nutrient reduction goals, but
instead of measuring
improvement against broad
percentage reduction goals, the
Program must now meet goals
based specifically on the needs of
the Bay's plants and animals.

Frequently Asked Questions About
Restoring Chesapeake Bay Water Quality

What makes this initiative so unique?

This cooperative effort has resulted in nutrient reduction goals that are much more
protective than those agreed to in the past. Bay Program partners have agreed to
base their success on the attainment of water quality standards, not simply pollution
load reductions. For the first time, partners have developed criteria that take into
account the varying needs of different plants and animals and the various conditions
found throughout the Bay. For example, to drive new, aggressive sediment
reductions, Bay Program partners also agreed to increase bay grass restoration goals
from 114,000 to 185,000 acres baywide. All of these accomplishments were made
due to cooperative efforts among the partners and stakeholders from throughout the
Bay watershed and for the first time ever, the headwater states of Delaware, New
York and West Virginia have been involved in these negotiations.

How much will it cost to bring back Chesapeake Bay?

Since the signing of the Chesapeake 2000 agreement, several Bay organizations
have explored possible funding sources for the restoration of the Bay.

Released in late 2002, the Chesapeake Bay Commission's "Cost of a Clean Bay"
report estimates that approximately $18.7 billion is needed to meet commitments set
forth in Chesapeake 2000. The report estimates it will cost $11.5 billion to achieve the
water quality improvements necessary to bring back the Bay's aquatic plants and
animals to levels seen in the 1950s. Most recently, the Commission has led an effort
to develop a strategy that aims to obtain funds from a variety of sources including
federal, state, local and private sources.

Chesapeake bay
Program

J: , 1983-2003

What kind of economic benefit will result from restoring the Chesapeake Bay?

In 1989, the value of the Bay was estimated at $678 billion. Since Bay restoration
efforts will provide positive economic benefits for the regional economy, economists
believe the Bay's value will increase. For example, cleaner, less polluted water may
add more commercial fisheries and eco-tourism dollars to Bay state economies.
Likewise, expanded underwater grass beds and improved dissolved oxygen levels
may improve regional revenues by enhancing hunting, fishing and other recreational
opportunities. Property values in certain areas may also increase as problem
waterbodies are restored.

more •

The Chesapeake Bay Program is restoring the Bay through a partnership among the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency representing the federal
government, the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the Commonwealth of Virginia, the District of Columbia, the Chesapeake
Bay Commission, and participating citizen advisory groups.

-------
Frequently Asked Questions About Restoring Chesapeake Bay Water Quality

2

How did you conclude that your nutrient reduction
goals will be protective of living resources?

The new nutrient reduction goals are the result of
nearly three years of work by researchers from fed-
eral and state governments, universities and conser-
vation organizations from across the Chesapeake
Bay watershed. The best science available tells us
that meeting the new nutrient reduction goals will
provide the water quality necessary to protect living
resources. Bay scientists confirmed this through a
series of computer model runs that simulate future
water quality conditions resulting from possible man-
agement practices implemented throughout the wa-
tershed. Science drove the development of these
criteria, not political or financial limitations.

How were costs considered in setting new Bay
restoration goals?

While the economy changes over time, the need to
protect the future of the Bay does not. We need to
develop plans today that lay the groundwork for fu-
ture restoration efforts. We cannot base plans that will
take place over the next decade solely on today's
economic conditions.

Financial limitations were not taken into account
when the first Bay nutrient reduction goal was set in
1987, yet with the needs understood, resources be-
came available and technological improvements
enabled Bay Program partners to make significant
strides in our nutrient reduction efforts.

Additionally, over the next decade we expect
improvements in current pollution reduction technolo-
gies and the development of new technologies to
offset some of the estimated costs of restoring the
Bay.

How will technology benefit Chesapeake Bay res-
toration?

When coordinated Bay restoration efforts began in
the 1980s, no one imagined the positive impact im-
proved technology would have on the Bay. What
many considered unattainable then, has become the
standard today. Today's wastewater treatment plants,
for example, have the ability to remove two to three
times as much nitrogen as we thought would ever be
possible in 1987. While we can't count on technology
to be the sole savior of the Bay, we can count on
bold nutrient reduction goals to help drive tomorrow's
technological improvements. New technologies will
continue to develop over time and allow us to better
meet our future goals.

How does the new nutrient reduction goal differ
from the original 40% goal set in 1987?

The reductions are now based on a better under-
standing of the needs of the Bay's living resources

being called for now are much greater than the origi-
nal reductions called for when the partners agreed to
a 40% reduction in nutrient loads to the Bay between
1985 and 2000.

Between 1985 and 2000, total annual nitrogen loads
delivered to the Bay have been reduced by 53 million
pounds. The new goal will require Bay Program part-
ners to reduce nutrient loads by an additional 110
million pounds per year by 2010.

Why are current water quality criteria changing?

Previously, water quality criteria for dissolved oxygen
were based on the assumption that all areas in the
Bay were identical and did not take into account the
natural variability found in the Bay's waters. Because
conditions throughout the Bay differ based on depth,
salinity and season, uniform baywide criteria do not
take into account the varying needs of different plants
and animals.

As a result, the water quality criteria have been re-
vised to account for the natural variability in condi-
tions found throughout the Bay. The Bay criteria differ
from one region of the Bay to another, as determined
by the plants and animals residing in that area. Fu-
ture state water quality standards will need to be
revised to incorporate the new water quality criteria.

How does changing water quality standards im-
prove Chesapeake Bay water quality?

This effort is about adopting an innovative approach
that will lead to new water quality standards tailored
to the specific needs of plants and animals in all of
the Bay's different habitats.

To be more protective in areas most critical to migra-
tory fish, such as striped bass or rockfish, new stan-
dards will incorporate dissolved oxygen criteria that
are higher than those currently in state standard.
Science shows that rockfish, during the spring
spawning season, need higher levels of oxygen than
the current 5 mg/l. The new standards will reflect
those needs and call for 6 mg/l during the spring
season in areas critical to spawning rockfish.

In the Bay's deeper habitats, the new water quality
criteria for oxygen are lower than those currently on
the books, but higher than existing water quality
conditions. The new criteria will remain protective of
the species that reside in those areas, and new water
quality standards - which better reflect natural condi-
tions - offer a science-based approach to better tar-
get nutrient reduction decisions.

more •

-------
Frequently Asked Questions About Restoring Chesapeake Bay Water Quality

3

Will bay grasses improve as a result of the
changes in water quality criteria?

The resurgence of bay grass habitat is critical to the
future health of Chesapeake Bay. Water quality resto-
ration goals are being specifically tailored to the
needs of underwater bay grasses. Currently about
85,000 acres of Bay bottom are covered by underwa-
ter grasses. Under this new process, Bay Program
partners aim to expand that to 185,000 acres.

In addition to revising the water quality criteria for dis-
solved oxygen, the Bay Program has developed new
criteria for water clarity. The states will be applying
these new criteria to develop standards that will be
protective of underwater bay grasses in shallow water
habitats.

In order to improve water clarity for bay grasses, ad-
ditional reductions in nutrient and sediment pollution
are needed. For the first time, Bay Program partners
have set a baywide goal for reducing the amount of
sediment flowing into the Bay and its rivers. Large-
scale sediment reductions, when combined with the
new nutrient reduction allocations, will accelerate the
resurgence of underwater bay grasses, as well as
improve the quality of local streams and rivers.

Sediment goals have been set for upland areas and
will be supplemented by additional reductions from
shoreline areas. Shoreline sediment reduction goals
will be developed as part of each state's local tribu-
tary strategy process and will increase the re-
surgence of local underwater grass beds.

How long does it take for the Bay to respond once
management practices are put in place?

Some types of management practices will result in
rapid improvements in Bay water quality while others
may take years or even decades to have an effect.
When nutrient reduction technology becomes opera-
tional at a water treatment facility, there are immedi-
ate reductions in the nutrient pollution loads that
affect Bay water quality. On the other hand, most
land-based management practices do not result in
immediate reductions of nutrient and sediment pollu-
tion loads to the Bay. For some practices, noticeable
improvement may be seen within a few years, for
others, it may take a decade or more.

Improvements in Bay water quality also depend on
the location of the management practices. Reduc-
tions from management practices in the upper
reaches of the watershed will take longer to have an
impact than those that occur closer to the Bay's wa-
ters. The Bay is a complex ecosystem that must be
allowed time to respond.

Will these new goals remove the Bay from the list
of impaired waters?

Based on current science, the nutrient reduction
goals are expected to result in achieving the new
dissolved oxygen criteria in all portions of the Bay
except for one - a portion of the deep water between
Kent Island and the Patuxent River - which
encompasses only about four percent of the Bay's
volume. In this area oxygen levels may occasionally
exceed the criteria in deep waters during the sum-
mer. If this occurs, or if any portion of the Bay does
not meet water quality standards in 2010, then a
TMDL will need to be developed for that part of the
Bay by 2011.

Since the states will have already developed localized
tributary strategies to reduce nutrient and sediment
loads, a great deal of progress toward achieving a
TMDL will have been made. However, additional work
may involve modifications to the strategies.

Since EPA is only publishing guidance, how can
the public be assured that the states will follow it?

It is very important that the public be involved in the
development of state water quality standards. The
states will be soliciting public comment. It is impor-
tant that the public becomes familiar with the EPA
guidance so they can be sure that it is being
followed. Additionally, in 2005 EPA will be reviewing
the proposed standards and will decide whether or
not to approve them.

Has this process involved the citizens of the Bay
region?

Yes. We received hundreds of comments during the
public reviews of the water quality criteria. Many more
opportunities for public review and involvement will
occur during the upcoming years as the states de-
velop water quality standards and tributary strategies
to achieve nutrient and sediment reduction goals.

How does this Baywide goal affect my local river?

In addition to the baywide pollution reduction goals,
river - or tributary - specific reduction goals have
been set in order to meet water quality standards in
localized areas throughout the Bay. Tributary strate-
gies will be developed that will be tailored to meeting
the specific pollution reductions needed to attain
water quality standards in specific locations through-
out the entire Bay.

Achieving these basinwide reduction goals will result
in improved water quality for the thousands of rivers
and streams that eventually flow into the Bay.

For additional information about restoring Chesapeake Bay water quality, visit www.chesapeakebay.net.

4/2003

-------