Chesapeake Bay Program Expert Panel Assessments of BMP and Management Actions

1. Chesapeake Bay Program Expert Panel Assessments of BMP and Management Actions Mark Dubin Agricultural Technical Coordinator University of Maryland Extension-College Park Modeling Quarterly Review Meeting April 17, 2012

2. Mark DubinAgricultural Technical Coordinator University of Maryland Extension-College ParkCollege of Agriculture and Natural Resources USDA-NIFA Mid-Atlantic Water Programmdubin06@umd.edu EPA Chesapeake Bay Program Officemdubin@chesapeakebay.net

3. Best Management Practice Review Why evaluate BMPs? • Partnership recognized best management practices (BMP) are based on currently available scientific information and best professional judgment at the time of their development. New scientific data may initiate a re-evaluation periodically to adjust associated definitions and effectiveness values. • Partnership experiences in tracking, verification and reporting BMP implementation may also initiate a re-evaluation.

4. Best Management Practice Review Why evaluate BMPs? • Similar to when the Tributary Strategies were developed in response to the Chesapeake 2000 agreement goals, implementation of currently approved BMPs may not achieve the goals set forth in the 2010 TMDL without incorporating new management opportunities. • In addition to increasing implementation of the existing BMPs, new technologies are constantly arising, supplementing or replacing traditional practices that may have been in place for years.

5. Best Management Practice Review Why evaluate BMPs? • Interim or provisional BMPs that have been proposed by the jurisdictions and approved by the CBPO are available for planning purposes only; e.g. WIPs, Milestones. • To allow the reporting of these new interim BMPs for progress towards the 2010 TMDL goals, the interim BMPs must go through the partnership approved evaluation process to be officially recognized.

6. Best Management Practice Review • Through the partnership approved “Protocol for Development, Review and Approval of Loading and Effectiveness Estimates for Nutrient and Sediment Controls”, new and interim BMPs are considered and evaluated for inclusion in the modeling tools, and long-standing BMPs are re-evaluated to be sure they are still properly portrayed. • A number of workgroups have identified a listing of priority BMPs that, once incorporated, will improve the modeling tools.

7. Expert Review Panel Status • Agriculture Workgroup • Nutrient Management Panel: (Active)Evaluation of multiple forms of agricultural nutrient application management systems. • Poultry Litter Subcommittee: (Active)Evaluation of poultry litter nutrient concentrations and volumes being regionally generated. • Conservation Tillage Panel: (Formed)Evaluation of multiple forms of agricultural crop residue management and tillage systems. • Cover Crop Panel: (Formed)Evaluation of multiple forms of both traditional and commodity agricultural cover crops.

8. Expert Review Panel Status • Agriculture Workgroup • Manure Treatment Technologies Panel: (FFY 2012)Evaluation of multiple forms of processing agricultural livestock and poultry manures. • Animal Waste Storage Systems Panel: (FFY 2012)Evaluation of agricultural livestock and poultry waste management systems. • Manure Injection/Incorporation Panel: (FFY 2012)Evaluation of multiple forms of injecting and incorporating livestock and poultry manures. • Cropland Irrigation Management Panel: (FFY 2013-14)Evaluation of differences in effects of non-irrigated versus irrigated agricultural cropping systems.

9. Expert Review Panel Status • Urban Stormwater Workgroup • Stormwater Retrofits Panel: (Active)Evaluation of multiple forms of retrofitting existing urban stormwater management systems. • Stream Restoration Panel: (Active)Evaluation of multiple forms of restoring stream channels and riparian flood plains. • LID and Runoff Reduction Panel: (Active)Evaluation of effects of LID and other forms of stormwater reduction systems. • Urban Fertilizer Management Panel: (Active)Evaluation of multiple forms of urban nutrient management systems .

10. Expert Review Panel Status • Urban Stormwater Workgroup • Erosion and Sediment Control: (June 2012)Evaluation of E&S BMP proposal by West Virginia. • Illicit Discharge Elimination: (June 2012)Joint evaluation by Urban and Wastewater Workgroups. • Impervious Disconnect: (FFY 2013) • Floating Wetlands: (FFY 2013) • S4 Minimum Management Measures: (FFY 2014)

11. Expert Review Panel Status • Forestry Workgroup • Riparian Buffers Panel: (Active)Evaluation of grass and forest riparian buffer management systems. • Urban Tree Planting Panel: (Active)Evaluation of effects of urban tree plantings. • Forest Management: (FFY 2013)Evaluation of forest management plan implementation. • Urban Filter Strips and Upgraded Stream Buffers: (FFY 2013)Joint Urban and Forestry Workgroup evaluation.

12. Expert Review Panel Status • Wastewater Workgroup • Septic Panel Part 1: (Active)Evaluation of on-lot septic management systems effectiveness. • Septic Panel Part 2: (FFY 2013)Broader evaluation of on-lot septic management systems.

13. Tetra Tech Support -Collecting Technical and Modeling Information on BMPs • Technical information on practices implemented in federal/state programs in CB Watershed • Operational conditions relative to these practices: • Program guidelines • Permits • Regulations • Restrictions

14. Tetra Tech Support -Collect Technical and Modeling Information on NM BMPs • Work with modelers to identify how BMPs will be handled in current applicable CBP models • Help incorporate into BMP definitions and effectiveness estimation information to support data tracking, reporting, and analysis requirements of CB models

15. Tetra Tech Support-Interviews • Why? • To obtain research papers, project reports, fact sheets, websites, etc. that can provide information on NM BMPs • To obtain information on areas where BMPs are implemented and programs that have adopted the BMPs • Who? • Expert Panel members • State/federal program experts • Other experts identified by WG and Panel

16. Tetra Tech Support-Scientific Literature Search • To assist Expert Panel • BMP definitions • BMP effectiveness • Tt searches and screens articles for applicability, usefulness, and quality • Peer-reviewed literature back to January 1, 1985 • Tt provides citations and abstracts

17. Tetra Tech Support-Teleconferences and Meeting Support • Help set up teleconferences for Expert Panel • Assist with meetings as appropriate

18. Tetra Tech Support-Evaluation Recommendations • Compile available information for each BMP identified by Panel for recommendation • Assist Panel in developing BMP definitions and effectiveness values • Follow criteria for Phase II TMDL, Current Progress Reporting (Phase 5.3.2), and Phase III TMDL Planning (Phase 6.0) • Seek a balance between the science and practicality

19. Tetra Tech Support-Review Process • Source Sector Review • Assist with presentations of Panel recommendations for review by WG for recommendation of approval by the Water Quality Goal Implementation Team (WQGIT) • Technical components of recommendation • Technical Review • Assist with presentation of Panel recommendations for review by the Watershed Technical Workgroup (WTWG) for recommendation of approval by the WQGIT • Modeling components, tracking, and reporting • Recommendation Approval • Assist with presentation of Panel recommendations for review by the WQGIT for final approval • Process used and consistency with existing approved BMPs

20. Tetra Tech Support-Documentation and Reporting • Documentation and Reporting • Fully document completed and approved BMP evaluations • Report to include the documentation and reporting elements delineated in BMP Protocol. http://archive.chesapeakebay.net/pubs/Nutrient-Sediment_Control_Review_Protocol.pdf

21. Questions? Questions?