Watershed Implementation Plans - Clean Chesapeake Coalition

Tracking the Efficacy of the Bay’s Pollution Diet

Photo by Will Parson/Chesapeake Bay Program

Background

The Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) was established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to a 2009 Executive Order signed by President Obama and a May 2010 settlement of a lawsuit between the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and the EPA (Fowler v. EPA), which created what is locally known as the “pollution diet” for the Chesapeake Bay.

Under the TMDL, limits are established with respect to the threshold in the amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment which may be released into the Bay in order for it to function as a healthy estuary.

porttobaccoriver.org

As part of the TMDL, each state within the Chesapeake Bay watershed (MD, VA, WV, PA, DE, and NY) must establish a Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) to achieve these goals within a specific timeline, with an ultimate end date of 2025.

Maryland’s Watershed Implementation Plans

Maryland has already completed the creation of three WIPs: Phase I Phase II, and Phase III in the hope of satisfying these TMDL mandates.

The Phase II WIP also required local governments to establish WIPs at the county scale, with the combination of all of the county WIPs supporting the overall State WIP.

In the WIPs the State further instructed that certain measures must be undertaken to achieve the TMDL goals with regard to “source” sectors, including septics, stormwater, agriculture and wastewater treatment plants.

Each county in Maryland is also required to prepare, implement and report on a WIP to reach TMDL goals by reducing the levels coming from point and non-point sources, including stormwater, wastewater and agricultural runoff.

Issues with MD’s WIPs

These requirements were adopted with limited consideration of their economic implications for local governments, raising concerns about disproportionate fiscal impacts on local jurisdictions and taxpayers. The framework established under the State’s Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) relied heavily on a centralized, uniform approach that did not consistently account for local conditions, priorities, or capacity.

The third and final phase of implementation, Phase III, requires jurisdictions to develop Phase III WIPs outlining the actions they intend to undertake between 2019 and 2025 to achieve the objectives of the Chesapeake Bay Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL).

Maryland’s Final Phase III WIP and that of the six other jurisdictions was published on August 23rd, 2019.

Maryland’s Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) reflects an acknowledgment of the practical limitations encountered under Phase II, and the Clean Chesapeake Coalition’s (CCC) submitted comments recognize and welcome this more collaborative approach.

The Phase III WIP identifies the owner of the Conowingo Dam, Exelon/Constellation, as one of the entities responsible for addressing pollution that has accumulated in the reservoir and is mobilized into the Upper Chesapeake Bay during extreme weather events, when spill gates are opened and sediment scouring occurs.

Draft Phase III WIPs for each jurisdiction (excluding Conowingo) were released for public review and comment through early June 2019. The versions currently under consideration are available below.

Coalition counties also welcome the State’s increased focus on natural aquatic filtration as a long-term strategy to improve water quality and enhance climate resilience.

At the same time, the Coalition has raised concerns regarding the emphasis placed on aquaculture relative to wild oyster restoration. A healthy, self-sustaining wild oyster population can provide long-term ecosystem benefits, including natural reproduction, habitat creation, and shoreline stabilization. Many aquaculture oysters are triploid and therefore do not reproduce, and are typically harvested at smaller sizes. In addition, the use of floating or bottom cages does not contribute to the formation of new oyster reefs, which can support broader ecological functions such as habitat provision and erosion reduction.

Click Here for 2022/2023 Milestone Priorities for Maryland’s Phase III WIP

Photo by Will Parson

Photo by Jay Flemming

EPA Evaluations of WIPs

On December 14, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its evaluations of the final Phase III Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) submitted by Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, and the District of Columbia to reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment pollution entering the Chesapeake Bay.

EPA’s review of Pennsylvania’s Phase III WIP has drawn concern from downstream states and non-governmental organizations, which have characterized the plan as falling short in its nitrogen reduction commitments, constrained by limited funding and insufficiently aligned with county-level implementation efforts. Given Pennsylvania’s substantial contribution to overall pollution loads within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, the adequacy of these commitments remains an important consideration for protecting downstream restoration investments, including those made by Maryland.

With EPA’s approval of the Phase III WIPs, focus now turns to the development of the Conowingo WIP. It is essential that this plan include effective measures to address the “Conowingo factor,” including sediment management strategies and the removal or mitigation of sediments already accumulated in the reservoir in order to restore or enhance trapping capacity.

Under Phase III, each jurisdiction established goals based on midpoint assessments of progress and scientific analyses of water quality and related indicators, with implementation actions scheduled for the 2019–2025 period. As part of the review process, the Maryland Department of the Environment has called for the creation of a new jurisdiction specifically addressing the Conowingo Dam and its surrounding area.

Draft Conowingo WIP

In October 2020, the Conowingo WIP Steering Committee released a draft Conowingo WIP for public comment. The Coalition has expressed concerns regarding the approach taken by the Steering Committee and its consultants, noting a continued reliance on established best management practices (BMPs) and downstream mitigation strategies, while, in the Coalition’s view, insufficient attention has been given to evaluating the potential role of sediment management and dredging as part of a comprehensive response to the Conowingo factor.

Click here to see January 2021 CCC Comments on Draft Conowingo WIP

2022: EPA Declares “No Confidence” in Conowingo WIP

In a January 24, 2022 letter to state officials (attached below), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated that it lacked confidence in the proposed Conowingo Watershed Implementation Plan due to identified funding deficiencies and provided Bay states with 60 days to respond. Absent an EPA-approved Conowingo WIP, the additional nutrient loads associated with the Conowingo factor, equating to approximately 6 million pounds of nitrogen and 0.26 million pounds of phosphorus annually, would be allocated across Bay states under the Chesapeake Bay TMDL. Such an outcome would have significant implications for downstream jurisdictions, which could be required to assume responsibility for pollution loads originating upstream.

EPA-Cover-Letter-re-Conowingo-WIP-Evaluation-1-24-22

See a news article discussing the matter here: EPA Declare “No Confidence” in Conowingo Cleanup Plan
Bay Journal (Feb. 1, 2022)

2023 : Conowingo Watershed Implementation Plan (CWIP) Two-Year Milestones Progress Summary – January 2023

CWIP-Progress-Report-Summary-Jan2023-2 Download

Other States Phase III WIPs

Delaware
D.C .
Maryland
New York
Pennsylvania
Virginia
West Virginia

Everything Matters

Ours is not an either/or position. While we have focused much attention on the Conowingo factor and upstream pollution, we acknowledge the importance of addressing localized pollution sources and the water quality in our tributaries, creeks and streams.

We embrace an all-of-the-above strategy to improving and maintaining the health of the Chesapeake Bay; but with concerted attention on the largest point sources of pollution loading to the Maryland portion of the Bay and priority given to the most cost-effective endeavors.