using cast to develop implementation plans that meet loading … · 2017. 11. 8. · using cast to...

21
Using CAST to Develop Implementation Plans that Meet Loading Targets in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Webcast sponsored by EPA’s Watershed Academy Thursday, November 09, 2017 1:00pm – 3:00pm Eastern Rich Batiuk, Associate Director for Science, Analysis and Implementation Chesapeake Bay Program Office U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Annapolis, Maryland and Olivia Devereux, Environmental Scientist Devereux Environmental Consulting Webcast Logistics To Ask a Question – Type your question in the “Questions” tool box on the right side of your screen and click “Send.” To report any technical issues (such as audio problems) – Type your issue in the “Questions” tool box on the right side of your screen and click “Send” and we will respond by posting an answer in the “Questions” box. 2 1

Upload: others

Post on 07-Sep-2020

2 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Using CAST to Develop Implementation Plans that Meet Loading Targets in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Webcast sponsored by EPA’s Watershed Academy

    Thursday, November 09, 2017 1:00pm – 3:00pm Eastern

    Rich Batiuk, Associate Director for Science, Analysis and Implementation

    Chesapeake Bay Program Office

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

    Annapolis, Maryland

    and

    Olivia Devereux, Environmental Scientist Devereux Environmental Consulting

    Webcast Logistics

    • To Ask a Question – Type your question in the “Questions” tool boxon the right side of your screen and click “Send.”

    • To report any technical issues (such as audio problems) – Type yourissue in the “Questions” tool box on the right side of your screen andclick “Send” and we will respond by posting an answer in the“Questions” box.

    2

    1

  • Speakers

    • Rich Batiuk, Associate Director for Science, Analysis andImplementation Chesapeake Bay Program Office, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Annapolis, Maryland

    • Olivia Devereux, Environmental Scientist, Devereux EnvironmentalConsulting

    4

    2

  • Chesapeake Bay Statistics

    • Six states and DC• 64,000 sq. mile watershed• 719,000 sq. mile airshed• 18 million people and growing• 78,000 family farms• 470 significant and 3,000+

    nonsignificant dischargers• Over 10,000 miles of shoreline• 21 feet average depth• 15:1 ratio of watershed to tidal

    surface waters

    Since the Chesapeake Bay Program’s foundation in 1983, the partnership have used written agreements to guide the restoration of the nation’s largest estuary.

    3

  • The Chesapeake Bay Restoration: A 50-Year History with a Challenging Future • 1960s-70s Visible decline in Bay resources• 1967 Chesapeake Bay Foundation established• 1976-1982 EPA conducts 5-year Bay study• 1980 Chesapeake Bay Commission established• 1983 First Bay Agreement – Chesapeake Bay Program created• 1987 Second Bay Agreement – WQ Goals: 40% Reduction• 1992 Amendments to Agreement – Tributary Strategies• 2000 Third Bay Agreement – Precursor to Chesapeake Bay TMDL• 2008 Acknowledged Bay impairments will not be addressed by 2010• 2010 Chesapeake Bay TMDL established• 2014 Fourth Bay Agreement – focused on Bay and watershed restoration• 2017 Interim target of 60% of Bay TMDL loads achieved• 2025 100% of practices implemented to achieve TMDL allocations

    Our Vision: An environmentally and economically sustainable Chesapeake Bay watershed with clean water, abundant life, conserved lands and access to the water, a vibrant cultural heritage, and a diversity of engaged citizens and stakeholders.

    4

  • Setting goals and tracking progress holds all our partners accountable for their work.

    Developing new agreements over time ensures our goals are aligned with the best available science to attain restoration success.

    5

  • 0

    500

    1000

    1500

    2000

    2500

    3000

    0

    20

    40

    60

    80

    100

    120

    1985

    1986

    1987

    1988

    1989

    1990

    1991

    1992

    1993

    1994

    1995

    1996

    1997

    1998

    1999

    2000

    2001

    2002

    2003

    2004

    2005

    2006

    2007

    2008

    2009

    2010

    2011

    2012

    2013

    2014

    2015

    WIP

    2

    Mun

    icip

    al F

    low

    (mgd

    )

    TN E

    OS

    Load

    (mill

    ion

    lbs/

    yr)

    Industrial

    Municipal

    Municipal Flow

    Chesapeake Bay Watershed Municipal and Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facilities Achieved their 2025 Goal a Decade Early!

    Clean Act Air Implementation by the States has Resulted in a 35 Million Pound Reduction of Nitrogen Loads to Chesapeake Bay from 1985 to 2015

    6

  • Chesapeake Bay Watershed

    Nitrogen Loads and Goals: 1985-2025

    142 114 109 108 107 107 112 108 108

    89 72

    34

    40 40 40 40 41 41 41 41

    33 29

    89

    52 52 44 43 41 41 38 36

    44

    38

    5.2

    8.4 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.8 8.6 8.7 8.7

    7.1

    6.3

    0

    50

    100

    150

    200

    250

    300

    350

    1985 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Target

    2025 Target

    mill

    ion

    lbs

    Agriculture Urban Runoff Wastewater+CSO Septic Forest+

    -5

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    35

    40

    PA MD VA WV DE DC NY

    mill

    ion

    lbs.

    Nitrogen Load to be Reduced by 2025*

    *Based on Jurisdictions’ Phase II WIPs and Phase 5.3.2 Watershed Model

    7

  • Chesapeake Bay Watershed

    Phosphorus Loads and Goals: 1985-2025

    11.0 10.5 10.7 10.4 10.4 9.9 8.7 8.5 8.4 8.7 7.4

    2.9 3.0 3.1 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.8 2.5

    2.1

    10.0

    4.0 3.7 3.1 2.9 2.8

    2.7 2.5 2.5 3.4

    2.9

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    1985 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Target

    2025 Target

    mill

    ion

    lbs

    Agriculture Urban Runoff Wastewater+CSO Forest+

    Over the Past Decade, There are Now Lower Nutrient Loads During Higher River Flows

    8

  • Source: Testa, 2017 unpublished

    The Chesapeake Bay’s Summertime Dead Zone is Decreasing in Size!

    Restoration Goal

    nd – No Data, pd – Partial Data, * 2015 data is preliminary, source: VIMS 3/7/16

    9

  • Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Partnering,Leadership

    & Management

    MaintainHealthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality Sustainable

    FisheriesProtect & Restore

    Vital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    Management BoardScientific & TechnicalAdvisory Committee

    Local GovernmentAdvisory Committee

    Citizens’ Advisory Committee

    Chesapeake Executive Council

    Principals’ Staff Committee

    Communications Workgroup

    Workgroups

    Chesapeake Bay Program Management Structure

    Communications Workgroup

    Goal Implementation Teams

    Management Board Scientific & Technical Advisory Committee

    Local Government Advisory Committee

    Citizens’ Advisory Committee

    Chesapeake Executive Council

    Principals’ Staff Committee

    Scientific, Protect & Maintain

    Healthy Watersheds

    Foster Partnering, Technical Sustainable Protect & Restore Chesapeake Leadership Assessment, Restore Water

    Fisheries Vital Habitats Stewardship & Management and Reporting Quality

    Implementation Implementation Implementation Implementation Implementation Implementation Workgroups Workgroups Workgroups Workgroups Workgroups Workgroups Workgroups

    Enhance Partnering,Leadership

    & Management

    MaintainHealthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality

    SustainableFisheries

    Protect & RestoreVital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    Ches. Bay Stock

    Assessment Committee

    Stream Health Workgroup

    Fish Passage Workgroup

    Agriculture Workgroup

    Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

    Workgroup

    Wetland Workgroup

    Forestry Workgroup

    Land Use Workgroup

    Urban Stormwater Workgroup

    Wastewater Treatment Workgroup

    Watershed Technical Workgroup

    Decision Framework Implementation

    Workgroup

    Watershed Health Workgroup

    Education Workgroup

    Public Access Planning Action

    Team

    Land Conservation Priorities Action

    Team

    Milestone Workgroup

    Trading and Offsets Workgroup

    Maryland and Virginia

    Interagency Oyster Teams

    Invasive Catfish Task Force

    Communications Workgroup

    Budget and Assistance Agreement Workgroup

    BMP Verification Committee

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Modeling Workgroup

    Climate ResiliencyWorkgroup

    Integrated Trends Analysis Team

    Data IntegrityWorkgroup

    Criteria Assessment Protocols

    Workgroup

    Integrated Monitoring Networks

    Workgroup

    Status and TrendsWorkgroup

    CBP Goal Implementation Teams’ Workgroup Structure

    Enhance Partnering, Leadership

    & Management

    Goal Implementation Teams

    Maintain Healthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality

    Sustainable Fisheries

    Protect & Restore Vital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    Ches. Bay Stock

    Assessment Committee

    Stream Health Workgroup

    Fish Passage Workgroup

    Agriculture Workgroup

    Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

    Workgroup

    Wetland Workgroup

    Forestry Workgroup

    Land Use Workgroup

    Urban Stormwater Workgroup

    Wastewater Treatment Workgroup

    Watershed Technical Workgroup

    Decision Framework Implementation

    Workgroup

    Watershed Health Workgroup

    Education Workgroup

    Public Access Planning Action

    Team

    Land Conservation Priorities Action

    Team

    Milestone Workgroup

    Trading and Offsets Workgroup

    Maryland and Virginia

    Interagency Oyster Teams

    Invasive Catfish Task Force

    Communications Workgroup

    Budget and Assistance Agreement Workgroup

    BMP Verification Committee

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Modeling Workgroup

    Climate Resiliency Workgroup

    Integrated Trends Analysis Team

    Data Integrity Workgroup

    Criteria Assessment Protocols

    Workgroup

    Integrated Monitoring Networks

    Workgroup

    Status and Trends Workgroup

    10

  • Partnership’s Decision Support Tools

    Bay Watershed

    Model

    Bay Water Quality Model

    Bay Airshed Models

    Role of Models in Partnership Decision-Making

    CAST Implementation

    Planning and Decision Making

    22

    11

  • Challenges of Modeling Watersheds

    • Always improve

    • Keep it simple

    23

    Challenges of Modeling Watersheds

    • Always improve …

    • Keep it simple …

    24

    12

  • Challenges of Modeling Watersheds for Scientists

    • Always improve …and use my scientific research

    • Keep it simple…and use multiple models

    26

    Average Load + Inputs * Sensitivity

    Land Use Acres

    BMPs

    Land to Water

    Stream Delivery

    River Delivery

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    Phase 6 Model Structure

    13

  • Include Everything Average Load + Inputs * Sensitivity

    Land Use Acres

    BMPs

    Land to Water

    Stream Delivery

    River Delivery

    *

    *

    *

    *

    *

    Keep It Simple

    27

                           Phase 6 watershed model is calibrated to 215 phosphorus water quality monitoring sites

    14

  • Chesapeake Bay Watershed High Resolution Land Cover Data Phase 6 Phase 5 Phase 6 Phase 5 1 meter 30 meter 1 meter 30 meter

    Urban/Suburban Settings Rural Settings

    3.0

    3.5

    4.0

    4.5

    5.0

    5.5

    6.0

    6.5

    7.0

    7.5

    8.0

    8.5

    9.0

    9.5

    3 0 3 5 4 0 4 5 5 0 5 5 6 0 6 5 7 0 7 5 8 0 8 5 9 0 9 5

    assuming +/ 10% uncerta nty in WRTDS estimates

    Evaluating Model Calibration Using Monitoring Data

    y = 0.9889x R² = 0.92566

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    35

    40

    0 5 1 0 15 2 0 25 30 35 40

    Nitrate Per Acre Load, NSE = 0.9243

    y = 0.9754x R² = 0.6632

    0.0

    0.3

    0.6

    0.9

    1.2

    1.5

    1.8

    2.1

    2.4

    0.0 0 .3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.1 2.4

    Phosphorus Per Acre Load, NSE = 0.6099

    y = 0.9416x R² = 0.94272

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    35

    40

    0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

    Nitrogen Per Acre Load, NSE = 0.9370

    y = 0.9863x R² = 0.64849

    0.0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1.0

    1.2

    1.4

    1.6

    0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

    Sediment Per Acre Load, NSE = 0.5696

    [1] Model calibration is made to improve agreement with monitoring data [2] Simulated vs. WRTDS Per Acre Load and the Geographic Efficiencies

    [3] Simulated vs. WRTDS loads

    . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    SIM

    ULA

    TED

    LO AD

    S ( l

    bs/y

    ear )

    USGS - WRTDS LOADS ( lbs/year )

    1-to-1

    TOTN

    1E3 1E4 1E5 1E6 1E7 1E8 1E9

    1E3

    1E4

    1E5

    1E6

    1E7

    1E8

    1E9

    ‐ i

    BASIN Sept June Phase 5 SUSQ -01 % -03% -01% POTO -09 % -09% -22% JAME -09 % -02% -07% RAPP -11 % -07% -10% APPO -18 % -07% -02% PAMU -08 % 00% 06% MATT 06% 07% -06% PATU 08% 05% 19% CHOP -01 % 08% -13%

    [4] Agreement between the simulated and WRTDS loads at the RIM sites

    15

  •   PHOSPHORUSSUSQUEHANNA RIVER

    31

      PHOSPHORUSSUSQUEHANNA RIVER

    32

    16

  • Partnership Models • 5 years in development, calibration, review and approval• Series of workshops used to seek and incorporate feedback and

    direction from a wide array of partners• 26 different BMP expert panels• Entire year of partners’ review of four beta versions• Extensive independent scientific peer reviews of each model

    and decision support tool• Fatal flaw reviews by partners and stakeholders and

    collaborative decision making on resolutions• Senior policy makers final sign-off for management applications

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Partnering,Leadership

    & Management

    MaintainHealthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality Sustainable

    FisheriesProtect & Restore

    Vital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    ImplementationWorkgroups

    Management BoardScientific & TechnicalAdvisory Committee

    Local GovernmentAdvisory Committee

    Citizens’ Advisory Committee

    Chesapeake Executive Council

    Principals’ Staff Committee

    Communications Workgroup

    Workgroups

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Partnering, Leadership

    & Management

    Maintain Healthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality

    Sustainable Fisheries

    Protect & Restore Vital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    Goal Implementation Teams

    Implementation Workgroups

    Implementation Workgroups

    Implementation Workgroups

    Implementation Workgroups

    Implementation Workgroups

    Implementation Workgroups

    Management Board Scientific & Technical Advisory Committee

    Local Government Advisory Committee

    Citizens’ Advisory Committee

    Chesapeake Executive Council

    Principals’ Staff Committee

    Communications Workgroup

    Workgroups

    Chesapeake Bay Program Management Structure

    17

  • Enhance Partnering,Leadership

    & Management

    MaintainHealthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality

    SustainableFisheries

    Protect & RestoreVital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    Ches. Bay Stock

    Assessment Committee

    Stream Health Workgroup

    Fish Passage Workgroup

    Agriculture Workgroup

    Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

    Workgroup

    Wetland Workgroup

    Forestry Workgroup

    Land Use Workgroup

    Urban Stormwater Workgroup

    Wastewater Treatment Workgroup

    Watershed Technical Workgroup

    Decision Framework Implementation

    Workgroup

    Watershed Health Workgroup

    Education Workgroup

    Public Access Planning Action

    Team

    Land Conservation Priorities Action

    Team

    Milestone Workgroup

    Trading and Offsets Workgroup

    Maryland and Virginia

    Interagency Oyster Teams

    Invasive Catfish Task Force

    Communications Workgroup

    Budget and Assistance Agreement Workgroup

    BMP Verification Committee

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Modeling Workgroup

    Climate ResiliencyWorkgroup

    Integrated Trends Analysis Team

    Data IntegrityWorkgroup

    Criteria Assessment Protocols

    Workgroup

    Integrated Monitoring Networks

    Workgroup

    Status and TrendsWorkgroup

    CBP Goal Implementation Teams’ Workgroup Structure

    Enhance Partnering, Leadership

    & Management

    Goal Implementation Teams

    Maintain Healthy

    Watersheds

    Protect & Restore Water

    Quality

    Sustainable Fisheries

    Protect & Restore Vital Habitats

    Foster Chesapeake Stewardship

    Ches. Bay Stock

    Assessment Committee

    Stream Health Workgroup

    Fish Passage Workgroup

    Agriculture Workgroup

    Submerged Aquatic Vegetation

    Workgroup

    Wetland Workgroup

    Forestry Workgroup

    Land Use Workgroup

    Urban Stormwater Workgroup

    Wastewater Treatment Workgroup

    Watershed Technical Workgroup

    Decision Framework Implementation

    Workgroup

    Watershed Health Workgroup

    Education Workgroup

    Public Access Planning Action

    Team

    Land Conservation Priorities Action

    Team

    Milestone Workgroup

    Trading and Offsets Workgroup

    Maryland and Virginia

    Interagency Oyster Teams

    Invasive Catfish Task Force

    Communications Workgroup

    Budget and Assistance Agreement Workgroup

    BMP Verification Committee

    Scientific, Technical

    Assessment, and Reporting

    Modeling Workgroup

    Climate Resiliency Workgroup

    Integrated Trends Analysis Team

    Data Integrity Workgroup

    Criteria Assessment Protocols

    Workgroup

    Integrated Monitoring Networks

    Workgroup

    Status and Trends Workgroup

    Rich Batiuk Associate Director for Science, Analysis

    and Implementation U.S. EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Office

    410-267-5731 Work 443-223-7823 Mobile

    [email protected]

    www.chesapeakebay.net

    18

    http:www.chesapeakebay.netmailto:[email protected]

  • Questions?

    37

    Speaker Contact Information

    Rich Batiuk U.S. EPA

    [email protected]

    Olivia Devereux Devereux Environmental Consulting

    [email protected]

    19

    mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

  • Next Watershed Academy Webcast

    Check back with us at www.epa.gov/watershedacademy for more details!

    39

    Participation Certificate

    https://epa.gov/sites/production/files/201711/documents/watershed_acad_webcast_certificate_110917_508.pdf

    40

    20

    www.epa.gov/watershedacademyhttps://epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-11/documents/watershed_acad_webcast_certificate_110917_508.pdf

  • Questions?

    41

    Thank You!

    42

    21

    Using CAST to Develop Implementation Plans that Meet Loading Targets in the Chesapeake Bay WatershedWebcast LogisticsSpeakersChesapeake Bay StatisticsThe Chesapeake Bay Restoration: A 50-Year History with a Challenging FutureOur VisionThe Chesapeake Bay’s Summertime Dead Zone is Decreasing in Size!Chesapeake Bay Program Management StructureCBP Goal Implementation Teams’ Workgroup StructurePartnership’s Decision Support ToolsRole of Models in Partnership Decision-MakingChallenges of Modeling WatershedsPartnership ModelsChesapeake Bay Program Management StructureCBP Goal Implementation Teams’ Workgroup StructureQuestions?Speaker Contact InformationNext Watershed Academy WebcastParticipation CertificateQuestions?Thank You!