The Chesapeake Bay Program established 14 primary  Midpoint Assessment priorities to support achieving the primary objectives of the Midpoint Assessment. Each of the 14 priorities are listed below with brief descriptions and a listing of the associated supporting documentation and work products. Work products are updated on a variable schedule, depending on the priority and nature of the work product

EPA provides clarity on assessment of “60% by 2017” interim target, including the use of Phase 5.3.2 and the role of numeric and programmatic commitments.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: US EPA
CBPO Contact: Katherine Antos, antos.katherine@epa.gov, 410-295-1358  

60% by 2017 MPA Work Plan – Process of how to credit 60% by 2017, including programmatic progress and timing of assessment, updated February 4, 2013

The Land Use Workgroup is charged with improving the resolution of land uses in the partnership’s decision support tools, including the relative loading rates of nutrients and sediments. The Land Use Workgroup has led the effort, along with the source sector workgroups, to collect finer scale local land cover and land use data. This priority has significant implications for assisting state and local jurisdictions with WIP implementation (states/locals sharing and confirming data) and reporting of progress (improved accuracy of data).

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Land Use Workgroup
CBPO Contact: Peter Claggett, pclagget@chesapeakebay.net, 410-267-5771
Workgroup Contact: Karl Berger, kberger@mwcog.org

• Improve Spatial, Temporal, and Categorical Representation of Land Uses MPA Work Plan - Improve spatial, temporal, and categorical representation of urban, agricultural, federal, and natural land uses and, to the extent possible, assign separate loading rates, updated December 3, 2012.
• Federal Lands MPA Work Plan - Accurate representation of federal land boundaries and land uses within those boundaries.
• Proposed Land Use Classifications - A listing of the proposed and new land use classificiations for the Phase 6 modeling tools
• Phase 6 Land Use Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on the various land use priorities under the midpoint assessment
• 2014 Land Use Projections Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A review of the new land use information, including 2012 Ag Census Data
• Schedule for Land Use Midpoint Assessment Priorities - The schedule for developing the Phase 6 land use efforts, highlighting decision points, deliverables and review periods
• High-resolution Land Cover Proposal - Chesapeake Conservancy proposal to produce high resolution land cover data for the Chesapeake Bay watershed
• Moderate-resolution Gap Filling Methods & Data Availability - Presentation of methods and draft results for mapping the Phase 6 land uses in jurisdictions that did not submit any local land use/cover data
• Land Use Workgroup Commitments Timetable - An overview of when data is due and when major land use decisions are being made in 2015-2016, as well as when partners will have the opportunity to review data and both draft and final land use products
• Progress in Phase 6 Land Use/Land Cover - Update to the Modeling Workgroup on progress in the development of the Phase 6 land use/land cover
• Approved Agricultural Land Uses - The AgWG approved the agricultural land uses at their March 2015 meeting.
• Development of Phase 6 Model Land Use Export Rate Targets - March 26, 2015 update to the Modeling Workgroup
• Land Use and Phase 6 Modeling Timeline - A midpoint assessment timeline that merges key dates from the LUWG and Modeling Workgroup
• Land Use Gantt Chart - Updates on timeline for key deliverables and deadlines for land use priorities under the midpoint assessment
• Phase 6 Model Land Use - Presentation on using local land use/cover data to inform the Chesapeake Bay TMDL
• Proposed Phase 6 Ag Land Uses - A listing of the proposed agricultural land uses
• Phase 6 Local Land Use Methodology - Overivew of methodology, Phase 6 land use classifications, work flow overview
• Review of Phase 6 Local Land Use Data - Opportunities for local review of land use data informing Chesapeake Bay Program models and decisions
• Phase 6 Land Use Database - Version 1 of the Phase 6 land use database
• Agriculture Land Use Loading Rates - Ag land use loading rate subgroup progress report

The 2010 TMDL documentation and the 2009 Executive Order call for an assessment of the impacts of a changing climate on the Chesapeake Bay water quality and living resources. The airshed, watershed, and Water Quality and Sediment Transport models will be used to examine the impact of climate change on projected water quality. Current efforts are to frame an initial future climate-change scenario based on estimated 2050 conditions.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Modeling Workgroup
CBPO Contact: Lewis Linker, llinker@chesapeakebay.net , 410-267-5741
Workgroup Contact: Lee Currey, lcurrey@maryland.gov and Dave Montali, David.A.Montali@wv.gov

• Climate Change Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting- A status update on this priority, including process and timeline
• MPA Work Plan for Climate Change, Conowingo, Filter Feeders, Refinement of Shallow Water Simulation, and James River Chlorophyll-a - The 2010 TMDL documentation identified five areas to be addressed by the 2017 Midpoint Assessment. These include: the influence climate change will have on water quality standards and the Chesapeake TMDL; the affects of Conowingo infill on Chesapeake water quality standards; the influence of oyster filter feeders on water quality, particularly with increased aquaculture and sanctuary development; the refinement of the shallow water simulation for the improved assessment of open water DOand SAV/clarity standards; a refined assessment of James River chlorophyll.
• Impact of Warming and Sea Level Rise on Chesapeake Bay Water Quality - Presentation of the initial estimate of increased 2050 temperature of tidal water and of sea level rise
• Hydrologic Trend Analysis of the Chesapeake Bay TMDL - Presentation representing estimated increased storm intensity in the 2050 climate change simulation
• Representation of Climate Change in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed - Presentation of an HSPF version of Phase 6 that will have full AGCHEM simulation for the representation of climate change in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

The Modeling Workgroup is working with the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Lower Susquehanna River Watershed Assessment study, and the Scientific, Technical Assessment, and Reporting team for the assessment of trapping capacity behind dams, especially the Conowingo, as well as greater representation of local impoundments and reservoirs throughout the Phase 6 Watershed Model domain.

CBP Oversight Team: Modeling Workgroup
CBPO Contact: Lewis Linker, llinker@chesapeakebay.net , 410-267-5741
Workgroup Contact: Lee Currey, lcurrey@maryland.gov and Dave Montali, David.A.Montali@wv.gov

• Addressing Sediment in Conowingo Reservoir & Other Dams in Bay Watershed MPA Work Plan - Trapping capacity behind dams, esp. Susquehanna, and greater capture of local impoundments and reservoirs.
• Trapping Capacity of Dams & Local Impoundments Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on this priority, including process and timeline
• MPA Work Plan for Climate Change, Conowingo, Filter Feeders, Refinement of Shallow Water Simulation, and James River Chlorophyll-a - The 2010 TMDL documentation identified five areas to be addressed by the 2017 Midpoint Assessment. These include: the influence climate change will have on water quality standards and the Chesapeake TMDL; the affects of Conowingo infill on Chesapeake water quality standards; the influence of oyster filter feeders on water quality, particularly with increased aquaculture and sanctuary development; the refinement of the shallow water simulation for the improved assessment of open water DOand SAV/clarity standards; a refined assessment of James River chlorophyll.
• USGS Conowingo Report - USGS released a report in early February with updated Conowingo sediment results
• Ongoing Conowino Studies - Presentation of the Conowingo Analysis, Research, and Monitoring schedule and how this 2-year plan (until 2016) fits in to the overall midpoint assessment schedule
• Conowingo Infill Studies - Presentation of the two-year investigation of Conowingo infill
• Conowingo Infill Studies - UMCES Conowingo Progress
• Phase 6 Conowingo Calibration - Information and data being developed through the Exelon supported research and monitoring program

The CBP partnership, led by the Modeling Workgroup, is revising the watershed modeling system structure, i.e., transition to an all PQUAL model, to enhance decision support and to improve transparency, accuracy, and confidence.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Modeling Workgroup
CBPO Contact: Gary Shenk, GShenk@chesapeakebay.net, 410-267-5745
Workgroup Contact: Lee Currey, lcurrey@maryland.gov and Dave Montali, David.A.Montali@wv.gov

• Graphical interface to the Phase 6 Watershed Model Inputs ^{!! new} - Graphs and maps of the inputs to the Phase 6 Watershed Model for all versions, along with the option to download the source data, is provided to facilitate transparency and offer a common, public platform for reviewing data.
• CAST and BayFAST transition to Phase 6 ^{!! new} - Frequently asked questions about the transition to Phase 6 CAST and BayFAST. Includes downloadable preliminary source data used in the Models. Source data includes load source definitions, BMP definitions, BMP effectiveness, geographic references, and delivery factors.
• EPA and Modeling WG MPA Work Plan - Schedule to achieve an effective balance between sufficient review time for tool revisions/review/ concurrence and sufficient time for target development and implementation planning
• Revise Modeling System Structure to an All PQUAL Model - Revise watershed modeling system structure, i.e., transition to an all PQUAL model, to enhance decision support and to improve transparency, accuracy, and confidence.
• Scenario Builder & Watershed Model Plan for MPA - Summarizes the priorities and identifies lead researchers for each effort. The descriptions here are brief with links to more detailed workplans.
• Atmospheric Deposition Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on this priority, including process and timeline
• Watershed Model Structure Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - Presentation on efforts to date to transition to Phase 6 modeling tools
• Scenario Builder and Watershed Model Plan for the MPA
• January Modeling Workgroup Quarterly Reviews Update - An update provided to the WQGIT about the two Modeling Quarterly meetings that took place in January 2015
• Progress in Replacing Regional Factors: A Multiple Model Approach - Progress in the refined simulation of the fate and transport of nutrients from simulated land uses to simulated river reaches, as well as progress for using SPARROW to replace regional factors
• Crediting Phase 6 Land Segments - There have been recent updates to the land segments in the Watershed Model based on improved line work and precipitation data.
• Phase 6 Watershed Model Schedule Update - Further updates to the Phase 6 Watershed Model development schedule with key links to the overall midpoint assessment schedule
• Representation of Storage Lag Times in the Chesapeake Watershed - A new approach for representing storage and lag times of nutrients in the Chesapeake watershed
• Phase 6 Development Process - Progress on the latest version of the Phase 6 operational prototype based on the HSPF PQUAL simulation and with an updated 1985-2013 precipitation input dataset, hydrology, and sediment simulations
• Record of Modeling Workgroup Decisions - Record of the Modeling Workgroup decisions with the dates of the decision
• Progress in Replacing Regional Factors: A Multiple Model Approach - Progress in the refined simulation of the fate and transport of nutrients from simulated land uses to simulated river reaches, as well as progress for using SPARROW to replace regional factors
• Proposed Changes to NEIEN to Accommodate Phase 6 Reporting - Make changes to NEIEN schema, codes list and appendix such that jurisdictions will NOT need to submit two sets of data in 2015 – one for 2015 Progress and one for Phase 6 calibration.
• Review of Modeling Workgroup Priorities - A status update on the Modeling Workgroup's midpoint assessment priorities given during their April 2015 quarterly meeting
• Phase 6 Watershed Model Schedule - Update on progress for Scenario Builder and the Phase 6 Watershed Model
• Phase 6 Land Use Target Loads - Presentation on the development of Phase 6 Model land use export rate targets
• Phase 6 Model Sediment Delivery Ratios - Urbanized stream source ratio
• Phase 6 Development Progress - Presentation on progress to date with Phase 6 Watershed Model development and calibration
• Finalizing Phase 6 Ag Land Use Targets - The timeline for finalizing the Phase 6 Ag land use loading targets
• Optimization for TMDL Planning & Implementation - Presentation on using optimization to guide implementation planning: from what if to what's best
• STAC Peer Reviews - CBP partnership requests for STAC peer reviews
• Review of Modeling Activities - Review of Modeling Workgroup 2015-2017 activities
• Phase 6 Watershed Model Schedule Update - Scenario Builder and Watershed Model Progress toward MPA - July 2015
• Phase 6 Development Progress - July 2015 update to Phase 6 development progress
• Final Phase 6 Land Use Targets - Export Rate Targets for the July 2015 version of the Phase 6 Watershed Model
• Phase 6 Watershed Model Inputs - Report on the tsunami of 30 years of Phase 6 input data and the Phase 6 input loads relative to the Phase 5 input loads
• Watershed Model Progress toward the MPA - Updates of the development schedule with key links to the 2017 Midpoint Assessment schedule
• Phase 6 Land Use Website and Local Government Review Process - Overview of the Phase 6 land use review process, including opportunities for providing feedback on the Phase 6 land use dataset. Demonstration of a website that will allow local governments to view the land use data they have provided for use in the Phase 6 modeling tools.

The Modeling Workgroup is revisiting Watershed Model calibration methods with the goal of improving local watershed results, including revisiting regional factors. This effort also includes activities to extend the simulation period and to revise the Airshed and WQSTMs.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Modeling Workgroup
CBPO Contact: Lewis Linker, llinker@chesapeakebay.net , 410-267-5741
Workgroup Contact: Lee Currey, lcurrey@maryland.gov and Dave Montali, David.A.Montali@wv.gov

• Revisit Watershed Model Calibration Methods MPA Work Plan - Revisit Watershed Model calibration methods with the goal of improving local watershed results, including revisiting regional factors. The workplan also includes activities to extend the simulation period and to revise the Airshed and WQSTMs.
• Watershed Model Calibration Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on this priority, including process and timeline.
• Scenario Builder and Watershed Model Plan for the MPA
• Land Use Loading Rate Targets - Presentation to the AgWG on the status of development of the land use loading rate targets for the Phase 6 Watershed Model.
• BMP Credit Duration - A charge to the source sector workgroups to establish credit duration for CBP partnership-approved BMPs.

EPA first laid out its expectations for all three phases of the WIPs in a November 2009 letter from the EPA Regional Administrator to members of the Principals’ Staff Committee. EPA clarified its expectations for Phase I and II WIPs in short guides distributed in April 2010 and March 2011, respectively, as well as in subsequent communications to the Bay jurisdictions. EPA intends to follow the same process for the Phase III WIPs.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: US EPA
CBPO Contact: Katherine Antos, antos.katherine@epa.gov , 410-295-1358

• Phase III WIP Expectations MPA Work Plan - Timeline for establishing EPA’s expectations for Phase III WIP
• Science Collaboration - Provides more detail about the scientific support from STAR for the MPA
• MPA Roles & Responsibilities - Discussion of the roles & responsibilities of the partnership groups under the MPA
• Stakeholder Assessment Proposal - Proposal for the stakeholder assessment, which will recommend improvements to Phase III WIP development, evaluation, and implementation
• Final Federal Facility Targets Protocol - Protocol for setting targets, planning BMPs, and reporting progress for federal lands
• Phase III WIP Stakeholder Assessment - A presentation of draft findings from the Water Quality GIT-supported Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) stakeholder assessment involving over 100 interviews with a focus on local partners and stakeholders.

The CBP partnership, led by Virginia, is conducting a criteria assessment to determine if any changes are needed in order for the criteria to meet water quality standards in the James River.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Water Quality Goal Implementation Team
CBPO Contact: Lewis Linker, llinker@chesapeakebay.net , 410-267-5741
Workgroup Contact: John Kennedy, John.Kennedy@deq.virginia.gov

• James River Chlorophyll-a Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on efforts to date for James River criteria
• MPA Work Plan for Climate Change, Conowingo, Filter Feeders, Refinement of Shallow Water Simulation, and James River Chlorophyll-a - The 2010 TMDL documentation identified five areas to be addressed by the 2017 Midpoint Assessment. These include: the influence climate change will have on water quality standards and the Chesapeake TMDL; the affects of Conowingo infill on Chesapeake water quality standards; the influence of oyster filter feeders on water quality, particularly with increased aquaculture and sanctuary development; the refinement of the shallow water simulation for the improved assessment of open water DOand SAV/clarity standards; a refined assessment of James River chlorophyll.

As part of the Bay TMDL midpoint assessment, the seven Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions are expected to “clean up” the information on BMP information and wastewater treatment plant discharges that they have submitted to the Chesapeake Bay Program Office. Information on BMP implementation and wastewater plant discharges that is as accurate as possible is integral to calibrating the Phase 6 Watershed Model, planning and reporting future actions, using monitoring data to assess impacts of past efforts, and assessing the critical period of 1993-1995.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Water Quality Goal Implementation Team
CBPO Contact: Matt Johnston, mjohnston@chesapeakebay.net, 410-267-5707
Workgroup Contact: thtesler@pa.gov

• Historic Data Cleanup Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on this priority, including process and timeline
• Historic Data Cleanup - Information on the historic data cleanup process, including schedule
• FAQs on Historical BMP & Wastewater Data Cleanup - Provides detailed information about process, schedule, and deliverables associated with historical data cleanup
• Wastewater Historical Data Cleanup - Detailed information specifically for wastewater historical data cleanup

The Agriculture Workgroup is identifying and utilizing available datasets and prioritizing development of new datasets to enable and support enhanced analyses and decisions.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Agriculture Workgroup
Contact: Matt Johnston, mjohnston@chesapeakebay.net, 410-267-5707
Workgroup Contact: Curtis Dell, Curtis.Dell@ars.usda.gov

• Model Data Processing MPA Work Plan - The evaluation of existing model data processing and the identification and prioritization of improved processing methods to support enhanced analyses and decisions.
• Modeling Baseline/Input Data and Assumptions MPA Work Plan – Provide access to improved baseline/input data and assumptions which are incorporated into functional models that operate collaboratively.
• Agricultural Model Data Inputs and Assumptions Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - A status update on this priority, including process and timeline
• Detailed AMS schedule - work flow for the priorities undertaken by the AGWG's Agricultural Modeling Subcommittee
• AMS Update - April 2015 update from the Agricultural Modeling Subcommittee on addressing midpoint assessment priorities

The CBP will enhance the assessment and explanation of monitoring information as part of the Bay TMDL’s midpoint assessment. The CBP partners have endorsed an integrated approach that includes three primary pieces of information to assess progress toward water-quality standards: (1) Reporting of water-quality management practices; (2) Trends of nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment in the watershed; and (3) Attainment of dissolved oxygen, chlorophyll-a, and water clarity/SAV standards.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Scientific, Technical Assessment, and Reporting Team
CBPO Contact: Scott Phillips, swphilli@usgs.gov, 443-498-5552

• Assess & Explain Water Quality Changes MPA Work Plan - Enhanced Analysis and Explanation of Water-Quality Data for the TMDL Mid-Point Assessment
• Water Quality Trends Presentation for WQGIT F2F October 2014 Meeting - Presentation on measuring and explaining WQ trends in the Bay watershed - support for the MPA
• BASIN Water Quality Report - Briefing to the WQGIT on the draft findings and recommendations from the upcoming BASIN water quality report.
• Insights Report - Report recently released by UMCES, USGS, and CBP monitoring team that summarizes major lessons learned from 40 studies across the watershed where there was implementation of BMPs and water-quality monitoring to document the response.
• Water Quality Trends for Tidal Waters - Presentation of new maps developed to show water quality trends in the tidal waters
• Eastern Shore Trends Report - Understanding nutrients in the Bay watershed and implications for management and restoration on the Eastern Shore
• MEOWQT STAC Workshop - Explaining management effects on water quality trends
• Water Quality Criteria Attainment Patterns - Description water quality attainment patterns and trends within each Chesapeake Bay segment and broken down by designated use.
• GAMs Development - Status update on the General Additive Models (GAMs) method for detecting and describing trends in estuarine waters
• Measuring and Explaining Trends in Water Quality - Introduction to the upcoming release of trends in nutrient

The Chesapeake Bay jurisdictions implement BMPs to achieve the goals set forth in the Bay TMDL. Through the Protocol for Development, Review and Approval of Loading and Effectiveness Estimates for Nutrient and Sediment Controls, newer practices and technologies are considered and evaluated for inclusion in the CBP partnership modeling tools. Existing practices are re-evaluated to ensure they reflect the best available scientific data and information.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Water Quality Goal Implementation Team
CBPO Contact: Lucinda Power, power.lucinda@epa.gov, 410-267-5722

• Update of BMP Definitions and Efficiencies MPA Work Plan - The reevaluation of prioritized approved BMPs, and the evaluation and establishment of new BMPs to improve their definitions and associated effectiveness values through the partnership approved BMP protocol process
• Phase 6 BMP Panels 12.2.14 - Expert Panels convened and expected to be convened to evaluate BMPs for the Phase 6 Watershed Model
• Agricultrual Workgroup Expert Panel Organization - Process for launching expert panels including the development of the charge, scope, timeline, and identification of the needed expertise and leadership, and the mechanisms through with future expert panels are staffed and supported.
• Allocated Resources for Ag BMP Expert Panels - A list of resources dedicated to agricultrual BMP Panels
• Oyster BMP Panel Briefing Paper - The Oyster Recovery Partnership's Recommendations for an Oyster BMP Panel
• July 2015 BMP Expert Panel Updates - Updates to current and future BMP panels
• BMP Expert Panel Protocol - Revised Protocol approved by the WQGIT on July 13, 2015

EPA, in collaboration with the CBP partnership, will consider the results of the midpoint assessment and jurisdictions’ Phase III WIPs to determine whether modification of the 2010 Chesapeake Bay TMDL is necessary and appropriate. Future changes to Phase II planning targets and TMDL allocations are not a presumption of the results of the midpoint assessment. After midpoint assessment is complete, EPA will work with the Partnership to set Phase III WIP planning targets. Based on the midpoint assessment and Phase III WIPs, EPA, with input from the partnership, will determine whether to modify the 2010 Bay TMDL.

CBP Oversight Team: US EPA
CBPO Contact: Katherine Antos, antos.katherine@epa.gov, 410-295-1358

• Bay TMDL Modification MPA Work Plan - Lays out the why, how, when of a possible Bay TMDL modification

In accordance with Executive Order (EO) 13508, the federal government should lead the effort to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay. Federal agencies continue to demonstrate commitment to this effort in accordance with the EO and accompanying strategy. A Federal Facilities Workgroup has been established to identify and implement water quality improvement efforts of federal facilities within the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

Priority CBP Oversight Team: Water Quality Goal Implementation Team
CBPO Contact: Greg Allen, allen.greg@epa.gov , 410-267-5746
Workgroup Contact: Greg Allen, allen.greg@epa.gov

• Background on the federal targets protocol- This document describes the process for setting nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollutant reduction targets for federal facilities consistent with the 2010 Chesapeake Bay TMDL (Bay TMDL) and the Executive Order 13508 Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed (EO12308 Strategy). The Protocol was developed by the Federal Facilities Targets Action Team and was approved by the Management Board in June, 2015.
• Background on the letter - A letter sent by EPA Regional Administrator Shawn Garvin to senior officials in Federal Departments and Agencies to address BMP planning and progress reporting requirements.