CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM WATER QUALITY STEERING COMMITTEE Conference Call May 19, 2008 SUMMARY OF DECISIONS, ACTIONS, AND ISSUES WOSC Schedule for May through October 2008 Rich Batiuk, EPA CBPO, walked the Water Quality Steering Committee members through the conference call schedule for the Steering Committee, the Reevaluation Technical Workgroup's conference call schedule and the CBP Subcommittees and Workgroup's Bay TMDL related work schedules through October 2008. See Attachments A. B. and C. ¦ Although the Water Quality Steering Committee members asked for a face-to-face meeting in July, the Steering Committee will not meet until fall because there will not enough substantial issues ready for decision by July that would warrant a face-to-face meeting. The Steering Committee can continue to use the scheduled conference calls for making the necessary decisions and providing direction to the Reevaluation Technical Workgroup and other CBP subcommittees and workgroups. ¦ The next face-to-face Steering Committee meeting will likely be in late October 2008 when sufficient Steering Committee request modeling scenarios have been run, quality assured and initially evaluated by the Reevaluation Technical Workgroup. ¦ Kenn Pattison, PA DEP, raised concern that the Reevaluation Technical Workgroup's schedule was very ambitious, with many significant issues for discussion and resolution. o Rich Batiuk clarified that we will take more time for the listed issues and conference calls as necessary and will reflect these changes in the Steering Committee's schedule. POST CONFERENCE CALL NOTE: Steering Committee should note that the Reevaluation Workgroup's conference call schedule has extra conference calls which are currently without assigned topics built into the schedule which help address Kenn Pattison's schedule concerns. DECISION: The Water Quality Steering Committee approved the proposed Steering Committee's and Reevaluation Technical Workgroup's conference call and work schedules through October. ACTION: Chesapeake Bay Program Office staff will update the Bay TMDL excel spreadsheet schedule to reflect the Steering Committee decision on conference call/meeting/work schedules. ACTION: Chesapeake Bay Program Office staff will re-distribute the Steering Committee's updated conference call schedule reflecting the Steering Committee's input and decisions on the Reevaluation Technical Workgroup's conference call and work schedule. ------- COAST Updates and Future Plans Scott Phillips, USGS, presented an overview of the Chesapeake Online Assessment Support Tools (COAST). See Presentation 1 Part 1 and Attachments D and E. ¦ Chesapeake Bay Program Office and USGS staff are working together to develop COAST which should help to inform management decisions by the partners. ¦ COAST is a web-based decision support tool meant to enhance implementation, help the objectives of the Chesapeake Action Plan's water quality goal, and aid federal, state, local governments and NGOs in implementing watershed management actions. ¦ COAST will include tools to select areas for implementation, choose most effective actions, monitor water quality response, and better understand factors to adjust actions. ¦ Version 1.0 of COAST will be available in September 2008. Test cases will be pursued with individual interested partners over the summer to improve Version 1.0. ¦ Future directions for COAST include linking the tool to more local scales, improve the usability of it, and further incorporate it into the demands of the Chesapeake Action Plan. ¦ Kenn Pattison cautioned that targeting should look at large areas and say where actions will be implemented, and then BMPs should be chosen based on the local circumstances. Kenn added that in Pennsylvania, conservation districts know better than anyone else what BMPs are needed and where. Scott Phillips presented an agricultural test case for priority watersheds for agricultural actions. See Presentation 1 Part 2. ¦ The COAST agricultural test case tests the utility of COAST in aiding managers in making decisions about where to direct resources, provides a consistent decision- making process for identifying agricultural priorities, and creates an information foundation for building local watershed tools. ¦ Priority watersheds are identified using a variety of data sources, including nutrient yields, agricultural field information and land cover, water quality, and agricultural nutrient sources. ¦ Currently, the test case team is identifying some pilot counties for using COAST's agricultural test case. Workshops will be held in test counties to introduce and demonstrate COAST to county agricultural partnerships. COAST Version 1.0 would then be rolled out to key decision makers in the fall. Olivia Devereux, UMD/CBPO, provided an overview of Vortex, a decision support tool in COAST for testing alternative scenarios. See Presentation 2. ¦ Vortex was originally created to generate inputs into the Watershed Model but is also used to compare changes in nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment loading under varying management scenarios. ¦ Vortex will be an on-line tool for use by state and county planners at the Bay-wide, state, and county levels to support decision-making. ¦ Vortex can bring in actual monitoring data to compare progress after installing a BMP or changing land use. 2 ------- ¦ The goal of the model input part of Vortex is to take all of the pollutant sources and apply them to the land, take into account application variables, transformations and losses, and distribution. ¦ The Vortex accounts for changes in yield over time. ¦ Vortex users can explore different management scenarios by changing BMPs, sources, land use, and crop management. ¦ A limited version of Vortex will be ready by the end of this year with accurate base data and accurate and reliable calculations. In one year, a full version will be ready and will include projected nutrient sources, an interactive map viewer, and state reported BMP data via NEIEN. Next Water Quality Steering Committee Conference Call Monday, June 16, 2008 1:30 - 3:30PM Topic: Reevaluation Technical Workgroup Recommendations—Defining Natural Background Loads, Definitions for the "All Forest" and "No Action" Scoping Scenarios, Establishing the Ocean Boundary, Atmospheric Deposition Allocations, Daily Loads Methodology, and Bay TMDL Documentation: Jennifer Sincock, Bob Koroncai, Lewis Linker Topic: Year 2 BMP Efficiencies Project Update: Sara Weammert Participants Diana Esher EPA Region 3 esher. diana(3),epa. gov Ruth Izraeli EPA Region 2 izraeli.ruthfo),epa.gov Rich Batiuk EPA/CBPO batiuk.ri chard® eoa.gov Olivia Devereux UMD/CBPO odevereux(a),che sapeakeb av. net Jeff Sweeney UMD/CBPO i sweenevfS),chesaoeakebav.net Sara Parr CRC/CBPO sparr (a), chesapeakebav.net Lee Currey MDE lcurrev(S),mde.state.md.us Kenn Pattison PA DEP kpattisonfo),state.pa.su Pat Buckley PA DEP DbucklevfS),state.pa.us Alan Pollock VADEQ aepollock(a),deq .Virginia, gov Arthur Butt VADEQ aibutt(3),dea .Virginia, gov Chip Rice VADCR chip.ricefo),dcr.virginia.gov Moira Croghan VADCR moira.croghanfo),dcr.virginia.gov Monir Chowdhury DDOE monir. chowdhurv(S),dc. gov Randy Sovic WV DEP r sovi c(a);wvdep. org Ed Reilly NY DEC exreillv(S),gw.dec.state.nv.us Scott Phillips USGS swDhilli(a),usgs. gov Cassandra Ladino USGS ccladino(3),usgs. gov Carlton Haywood ICPRB chav wood(a),i cprb. org Andrew Parker Tetra Tech andrew. parker(a>,tetratech-ffx. com Clifton Bell VAMWA cbellfa),Dirnie.com 3 ------- |