[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
Property of CSC Library 4State of Maryland O Coastal Management ~ Program and ~?'IES Final Environmental Impact Statement U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA COASTA SF.B,,JCES CENTER U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ?i3 Q 5U Ih i 0)SN A VE NU E National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1'1'hLES TON ,SC 29405-24 13 Office of Coastal Zone Managemnent Li~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROPOSED COASTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM FOR THE STATE OF MARYLAND AUTTTT 1978 Prepared by: Office of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Department of Commerce 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 and Department of Natural Resources Energy & Coastal Zone Administration Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, Maryland 21401 STATE OF MARYLAND EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21404 ,c,.,Goo,9,~oW August 21, 1978 Mr. Robert W. Knecht Assistant Administrator foy Coastal Zone Management U. S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Rockville, Maryland 20852 Dear Mtr. Knecht: I have received your letter of August 18, 1978 advising us that the review of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program and the Federal Draft Environmental Impact Statement has been cQmpleted. The review has necessitated changes in the Program which I forwarded to the Secretary of Commerce on December 23, 1978. Please be advised that the changes resulting from the review and planned for inclusion in the Federal Environmental Impact Statement .are acceptable to Maryland and will be incorporated in the Program. I am very pleased that Maryland's Program will be formally approved by the Secretary of Commerce in the Federal Fiscal Year 1978 and that Maryland can proceed to carry out this important Program pur- suant to my Executive Order 01.31.1978.05 of March 8, 1978. Sincerely, Blair Lee III Acting Governor TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NOTE TO READERS . . . . . . . . .. .. i PART I: Introduction Summary (FIIS).. . . . . . . . . . ii DEIS Comments/Responses. .*. . . .... x A. Program Summary ...... .. . . .... .. B. What The Maryland Coastal Program Will Do New . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. 16 C. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA). . . . . . . . 0 . * . . * .. 18 D. Federal Program Requirements. . . . . . . . 20 E. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Requirements . . . . . . . . ... . 22 PART II: The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program (Description of the Proposed Action) Executive Summ ary ........ . ... 23 Chapter I: Program Implementation Framework ...... .... 37 Program Authorities . . . . . . . . 37 Existing Organizational Structure . . . . 40 Implementation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Conflict Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Chapter II: Maryland's Coastal Zone Boundary ..... ..... 73 Legislative Requirements. . . . . . . . . 73 The Maryland Coastal Zone Boundary. . . - 74 Chapter III: Appropriate Land and Water Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Legislative Requirements. . . . . . . . . 81 Goals and Objectives of Maryland's Coastal Zone Maiigenment Program .... 82 Determining Appropriate Land and Water Uses in the Coastal Zone. . . . . . . . 82 General Objectives ,ncl Policies . .... 83 Public Investments. . . . . . . . . ... 89 PAGE Implications of Each Activity, or Use of Concern . . . . . . . .... 91 A. Coastal Waters. . . . . . . . . . .. 94 1. Recreational Boating. . . . . . . 95 2. Commercial Shipping (Oil Spill Containment and Prevention) . . . 103 3. Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material. . . . . . . . . 109 4. Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources. . . . . 115 - 5. Ocean Dumping . . . . . . . . . 121 6. OCS Oil and Gas Exploration, Production and Transportation . . 126 B. Intertidal Areas. . . . . . . . . . . 132 1. Use .f Beach Access . . . . . . . 133 2. Activities in Tidal Wetlands. . . 145 C. Shoreland Areas.. . . . . . . .. . 152 1. Activities in Areas Undergoing Significant Shore Erosion . . . . 153 2. Activities in Coastal Tidal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains. . . . 163 3. Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands... . . . . . . . 170 4. Use of Agricultural Lands . . . . 178 5. Use of Forested Lands . . . . . . 184 6. Channelization (and Small Wateished Projects) . . . . . . . 190 7. Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recre- ational, Open Space and Natural areas . . . . . . . 196 8. Activities Affecting Coastal, Historical, Cultural and Archeo- logical Resources . . . . . . . . 211 9. Shoreland Activities in General . 216 D. Major Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . 227 1. Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . 232 2. Electric Generating Facilities. . 239 3. Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 4. Industrial Parks. . . . . . . . . 256 5. Mineral Extraction Facilities (Sand and Gravel) . . . . . . . . 264 PAGE 6. Large-scale Residential Facilities..270 7. Sewage Treatment Facilities . . ...275 8. Land Transportation Facilites. .285 Chapter IV: Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. ......294 Legislative Requirements .. ......294 Existing Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: Vegetated Tidal Wetlands .. ..........295 Continuing Identification of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: The State Critical Areas Program . . . .* . ... . . 296 GAPCs and State Critical Areas. . . .299 Resource Protection Areas . . .....300 Hazard Prone Areas .. ........302 Developmental Critical Areas . ....303 Areas for Preservation and Restoration. ...........303 Priority of Uses in GAPCs . . . . . . 304 Chapter V: Local Government Involvement . .307 Legislative Requirements. ....... 307 operational Role of Local Governments. . 308 The Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study - A Local-Regional Response to CZM Program Development. .....312 Chapter VI: State and Federal Interactions 322" State-Federal Consultation. . . ....322 The Nat'ional Interest and Uses of Regional Benefit. ..........327 Consideration of the National Interest in State and Local Coastal Resource Management Decisions. ..............328 Federal Consistency. .... . . . ...339 Chapter VII: The Public Role in Coastal Z~one ManAgement. .......365 Public Information: Keeping the Public Aware of Coastal Zone Management Activities. ........365 Public Participation in Coastal Zone 0 ~~~~~Management Activities. ........367 Public Involvement in Coastai Project Assessments. .............371. PAGE AccountahbiiatY to the Public for Coastal Zone Management Activities. o 373 Appeals of Public Decisions Regarding Coastal Zone Management . . . . . . . 374 Chapter VIII: Legal Authority Introduction. . 376 Land and Water U;seR;eguation 377 Resolution of Conflicting Use . � 407 Authority to Acquire Interests in Land and Water .............. 412 Networking Authority . . . . . . . . . . 418 Uses of Regional Benefit. . . . . . . . 431 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 Part III: Draft Environmental Impact Statement Chapter One: Description of the Environ- ment Affected . . . . . . 437 Chapter Two: Probable Impacts of the Proposed Action on the Environment . . . . . . . 445 Chapter Three: Alternatives to the Proposed Action . . . . 450 Chapter Four: Probable Adverse Environ- mental Effects Which Cannot Be Avoided . . . 459 Chapter Five: The Relationship Between Local, Short Term Uses of the Environment and. the Enhancement of Long Term Productivity . . . 460 Chapter Six: Irretrievable and Irrevers- ible Commitments of Resources That Would Result from the Proposed Action. . . . . . . . . . 461 Chapter Seven: Consultation and Coordina- tion with Others. . . . 462 NOTE TO READERS - The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 mandates that an environmental impact statement be prepared as part of the review and approval process of major actions by Federal government agencies which significantly affect the quality of the human environment. It is the general policy of the Federal office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) to issue a combined final environmental impact statement and program document. Part I of this Final Environmental impact Statement (FMIS) was prepared by the Office of Coastal Zone Management and provides summary information concerning the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program including how the State has addressed the requirements of the Federal Coastal Zone Manage- ment Act (FCZMA). Part II of the FEIS is a description of the State's Coastal Manaciement Program and was prepared by the State of Maryland; it has been reviewed by the Federal Office of Coastal Zone Management and is relied upon as a description of the proposed action for purposes of NEPA. Part III fulfills the remaining NEPA requirements for a FEIS and was prepared by the Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) with some assis- tance from the State of Maryland. The Federal action contemplated is approval of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program under Section 306 of the Federal- Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. An immediate effect of approval is the qualification of the State for Federal matching of funds for use in administering the program. In addition, the FCZMA stipulates that Federal activities affect- ing the coastal zone shall be, to the maximum extent practicable, consistent with an approved State management program. For purposes of reviewing this proposed action, the key questions are: -whether the Maryland program is consistent with the objectives and policies of the national legislation; -whether the award of Federal funds under Section 306 of the Federal Act will help Maryland to meet those objectives; -whether the State management authorities are adequate to implement the State program, and -whether there will be a net environmental gain as a result of program approval and implemen- tation. OCZM has made a preliminary assessment that the answers to these questions are affirmative. OCZM wants the widest possible circulation of this document to all interested agencies and parties in order to receive the fullest-expres- sion of opinion on these questions. OCZM thanks those par- ticipating in the review of the Maryland Program and this final environmental impact statement. PART I INTRODUCTION C 7-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ S UMMARY Draft Environmental Impact (OFinal Environmental Impact Statement Statement Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Off ice of Coastal Zone Management. For additional information about this proposed action or this statement, please contact: John Phillips Marion Cox Regional Manager Assistant Regional Manager South Atlantic Region South Atlantic Region NOAA, Office of Coastal Zone Management 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20235 Phone: (202) .254-7494 Written comments should be addressed to: Off ice of Coastal Zone Management National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration Attention, John Phillips 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. (Room 330) Washington, D.C. 20235 1. Type of Action Proposed Federal approval of the Maryland Coastal.-Zone Management Program. CX Administrative ()Legislative 2. Brief Description of Action It is proposed that the Assistant Administrator approve the Coastal Zone Management Program of the State of Maryland pursuant to P.L. 92-583. Approval would permit implementation grants to be awarded to the State, and require that Federal actions be consistent with the program. 3. Summary of Environmental Impacts and Adverse Environmental Effects Approval and implementation of the program will allow the State to better coordinate and more effectively implement existing State authorities for management of its coastal zone. The State will condition, restrict, or prohibit land and water uses in some parts of Maryland's coast, while encouraging development in other parts. The impacts of the Maryland Coastal Program will be generally bene- ficial, although there may be some adverse, short-term economic impacts on coastal users, and the program will entail irreversible commitment of some coastal resources.' The Maryland Coastal Program will produce positive and negative impacts. 4. Alternatives Considered All alternatives would involve a decision by the Assistant Administrator for Coastal Zone Management to delay or deny approval of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program. Delay or denial of approval of the Program would most probably occur under the following conditions: (1) The Assistant Administrator could delay or deny approval if the program is not adequately comprehensive to achieve the goals and objectives of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act as expressed by Congress in Sections 302 and 303 of-the Act. (2) The Assistant Administrator could delay or deny pro- gram approval if the State lacks the ability to insure that the State coastal policies are enforced. (3) The Assistant Administrator could delay or deny approval if the national interest in the siting of facilities or the protection of natural resources in the coastal zone was not adequately considered. As a result of delay or denial for any cause, Maryland could continue to pursue development of a CZM program. Under section 305(d) of the Act, the State would be eligible for both program development and program implementation funds if OCZM found the program approvable after correction of certain specified deficiencies. The 305(d) funding would be used both to address these deficiencies and to implement those parts of the program which had met OCZM requirements. Maryland is now in its 4th and final year of program development fund- ing under section 305 of the Act. With the completion of this 4th year, the State is no longer eligible for 305 development monies and must either enter 306 implementation or request 305(d) funding. 5. List of all Federal, State and local agencies and other parties from which comments have been requested: Federal Agencies U.S. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Commerce u.s. Department of Defense u.s. Department of the Navy U. S. Army, Corps of Engineers U. S. Air Force U.S. Departmen~ of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare U.s. Department of Housing and Urban Development U.S. Department of the Interior U.S Department of Justice U.S. Department of Labor u.s. Department of Transportation Economic Development Administration Environmental Protection Agency General Services Administration Marine Manucal Commission National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration i4uclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Coast Guard U.S. Department of Energy State and Regional Agencies and Local Governments in Maryland U.s. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Economic and Community Development u.s. Department of Health and Mental Hygiene U.S. Department of Natural Resources U.S. Department of State Planning u.s. Department of Transportation Governor's Office Maryland Boat Act Advisory Committee Maryland Environmental Trust Maryland Port Administration Delmarva Advisory Council Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Regional Planning Council Tri-County Council Wilmington Metropolitan Area Planning Coordinating Council 78 coastal towns, villages, cities and counties Maryland General Assembly Maryland Congressional Delegation State and Local Special Interest Groups Members of the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee: Applied Physics Laboratory Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies Chesapeake Bay Center for Environmental Studies Chesapeake Bay Institute University of Maryland Graduate School Bethlehem Steel Corporation Chesapeake Bay Foundation Chesapeake Bay Yacht Club Association Chesapeake Research Consortium Delmarva Power and Light Company of Maryland Home Builders Association of Maryland Izaak Walton League League of Women Voters of Maryland Maryland Association of Counties Maryland Associa~tion of Realtors Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts Maryland Bankers' Association Maryland Chant~er of Commerce Maryland Conservation Council Maryland Farm Bureau Maryland Petroleum Association Maryland Watermens' Association Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wildlife Federation 28 local Chambers of Commerce in coastal counties 23 industrial, business and trade associations in coastal counties 9 sportsmens' clubs in coastal counties 16 soil conservation districts in coastal counties 9 local watermens' associations 14 local farm organizations 42 yacht clubs and charter boat associations .118 regional and community service and improvement associations 147 local and statewide environmental and public interest groups 4 League of Women Voters' chapters in coastal counties Maryland State Bar Association Maryland City Managers Association Maryland Municipal League Vi National Interest Grouns A.M.E.R.I .C.A.N. Center for Urban Affairs AFL-CIO Chamber of Commerce of the American Association of Port U.S. Authorities Chevron, USA, Inc. American Bar Association Cities Service Company American Bureau of Shipping Coastal States Organization American Farm Bureau Federation Conservation Foundation American Fisheries Society Continental oil Company American Forest Institute Council of State Planning American Gas Association Agencies American Hotel and Motor The Cousteau Society Association Earth Metabolic Design American Industrial Development Lab., Inc. Council Edison Electric Institute American Institute of Architects El Paso Natural Gas Company American Institute of Merchant Environmental Defense Fund, Shipping Inc. American Institute cf Planners Environmental Law Institute American LittOral S~ciety Environmental Policy Center American Mining Congress EXXON Company, U.S.A. American Oceanic Organization Friends of the Earth American Petroleum Institute Getty Oil Company American Shore & Beach Preservation Great Lakes Basin Commnission Association Great Lakes Tomorrow American Society of Civil Engineers Gulf Energy & Minerals, U.S.A. American Society of Landscape Gulf Oil Company Architects, Inc. Gulf Oil Corporation American Society of Planning Gulf Refining Company Officials Gulf South Atlantic American Water Resources Fisheries Development Association Foundation American Waterways Operators Independent Petroleum AMOCO Association of America Ashland Oil, Inc. Industrial Union of Marine Associated General Contractors of and Shipbui~lding Workers America .of America Association of Oil Pipe Lines Institute for the Human Atlantic Richfield Company Environment Atlantic States Marine Fisheries institute for Marine Studies commission Interstate Natural Gas Atomic industrial Forum Association of America Barrier Islands Coalition Izaak Walton League Center for Law and Social Policy Lake Michigan Federation Center for Natural Areas .League of Conservation Voters Vii Leagu e of Women Voters Education National Petroleum Council Fund National Petroleum Refiners Marathon Oil Company Association Marine Technology Society National Realty Commission Massachusetts Petroleum Council National Recreation and Mobil Exploration & Producing, Park Association Inc. National Research Council Xcobil oil Corporation National Science Foundation Murphy oil Company National Science Teachers National Association of Association Conservation Districts National Shrimp Congress National Association of National Society of Counties Professional Engineers National Association of National Wildlife Dredging Contractors Federation National Association of National Waterways Electric Companies Conference National Association of Engine Natural Resources Defense and Boat Manufacturers Council National Association of Home The Nature Conservancy Builders Nautilus Press National Association of New England River Basin Realtors Commission National Association of North Atlantic Ports Regional Councils Association National Association of Outboard Marine Corporation State Boating Law Resources for the Future Administrators Rice University Center for National Association of Community Design and State Park Directors Development National Audubon Society Shell Oil Company National Boating Federation Shellfish Institute of National Canners Association North America National Coalition for Shipbuilders Council of Marine Conservation America National Commission on Marine Sierra Club Policy Skelly Oil Company National Conference of State Society of Industrial Legislatures Realtors National Environmental Society of Real Estate Development Association Appraisers National Farmers Union Soil Conservation Society National Federation of of America Fishermen Southern California Gas National Fisheries Institute Company National Forest Products Sport Fishing Institute Association Standard Oil Company of National Governors Association California National League of Cities Standard Oil Company of National Ocean Industries Ohio Association Siin Company, Inc. National Parks and Conservation Tenn-sco Oil Company Association Texaco, Inc. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America U.S. Power Squadrons U.S. Conference of Ma-ors Water Pollution Control Federation Water Transport Association Western Oil and Gas Association Wildlife Management Institute The Wildlife Society World Dredging Association 6. Because of possible funding constraints in Fiscal Year 1979, OCZM would like to approve the Maryland Program on or before September 30, 1978. In order to accomplish this, it is requested that the comment period on the FEIS be kept to 30 days, if possible. ix Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Robert Ryan) (6/28178) (Ryan) (6/28/78) Comments epns 1. Palo 44o. Reference in made to a Secretarial 1. A copy of the signed Secretartal (kder Ls in- Order that will establish the responsibilities of cluded Ln the Addenda to Maryland's Coastal Zone the various Department of Natural Resources (BUR) Management Program at the and of part 11 of the agencies in implementing the Coastal Management t-rogran. Inasmuch as this Program relies on 'net- werking' existing authorities for implementation and a large measure of that authority is distributed throughout the DIII (Water Resources Amfinistration, Power Plant Siting Program, aet.), then a copy of that Secretarial Order, or an outline of its content, should be provided. This would facilitate understand- ing the relationship of these other DH1 activities to the Coastal Management Program. 2. Vase 66. There is a list of actions that will 2. In response to your comminta, text of page 66 be tuakn by the Coastal Zone Unit to insure that has been revised to note that news releases will be all interested parties are aware of projects being prepared and distributed regarding full project evaluated. We teliev* that it would be useful to evaluations to ensure that concerned or affected also require publishing twice In such major news- persons are aware of projects being evaluated. papers serving the affected areas as may be reason- ably calculated to notify concerned or affected Per sons. 3. Pas* 219, First Paragraph. This paragraph in- 3. Thor* was no intention to imply that there wee plies that there is a limit of two units for any a limitation of 'two plants per site La Maryland. given power plant site in Maryland. That to not Since the language referred to has given that correct nor to it consistent with objective 18 impression co sowe readers, it has been deleted. (page 220). goW suggest discussing the nes,1 in The remaining language should provide adequate terms of numbers of units and stating the assuap- description of the situation regarding power plants tion of two units per site to arrive at the needed in Maryland. number of sites. Maryland Fisheries Administration Maryland Fisheries Administration (W.R. Carter LII) (6/218/78) (WR. Carter III) (6/28/78) Comments Responses 1. Page . Goal of increased recreational oppor- 1. The goals and nbJectives ot .taryland'i Prnr im tunitLes/public access to tidal waters. Whenever a have been designed to he o'mpa;ttble so that .in goal or objective is stated as 'increasing" the use objective which encourJaes "tn.reasing" tlw use density of the resource, it Oould be well to qualify density of a particular resource area would this as being ultimately limited by the carrying necessarily take into account other program goals capacity of the system for that use while still and objectives that are designed to provide for adequately providing habitat deoendent values of and protect natural habitat areas. fish and wildlife. 2. Pige 31. The definition of "broad geographical 2. Tbhe description of Coaetal Uses/Activities of areas' in relation to significant impacts needs Concern in Chapter IllI of the Program describes in further definition. -It should be realized that detail what are thought to be activities 'having in a small drainage basin, a relatively small per- direct and significant impact on coastal waters". turbetion has an effect felt throughout the basin's Those descriptions recognize the point made in the aquatic habitat. It would be desirable to define comnt that 'in a smll drainage basin, a rala- "broad' in terms of the sub-sub-basin units of the tively small perturbation, has an effect throughout State's watershed segmentation, such that an impact the basin's aquatic habitat". affecting 'X" percent of a sub-sub-basin's area, or miles of strean, or numbers of primary or secondary streams, could be termed significant. 3. Pege 67. The discussion of CZM's'role in deter- 3. The discussion of cumulative impacts in the mining cumulative impacts needs revision. The FEIS has been modified to respond to the concerns present discussion implies that action regarding expressed in this comment. Please see Chapter III, cumulative impacts will be taken only when cumu- Part II, of the FLIS. lative impacts begin to reach a point of having major adverse affects. The point of considering cumulative impacts is to prevent this fron happen- ing rather than to react when it does. Revision should indicate that this point will only have to be reached once and that the experience of reach- ing it will be used to prevent its recurrence in successive subsystems of the coastal zone. It would be well to focus this concern on the process of urbanization/suburbanization, since this appears to be the most exemplary of functions which produce a chronic, irreversible degrading effect. 4. Page 77 and Subsequent Maps. It is unclear 4. The areas of focus generally do not include whether non-tidal 100-year floodplains are included non-tidal flood plains, but such flood plains are in areas of focus, or whether they are purposely included in the overall coastal zone boundary and excluded. Subtitle 9A of the Natural Resources proposeed projects affecting them will be subjected Article does not discriminate between tidal and non- to a project evaluation if they are likely to have tidal flood hazard areas. significant impact. 5. Page 116. The statement of policies is extreme- 5. The statement of policies in the section on ly misleading. By citing the several subtitles Activities Aasociated with Living Aquatic Resources and sections, it is strongly implied that the reflect the intention of the Coastal Zone Unit to inport of the legislation is that which is written work in conjunction with the Maryland Fisheries here. as policies. While we support the interpreta- Administration to develop fisheries management plans, tion of Subtitle 4 in the manner generally done as evidenced by the recently signed agreement be- here, the language of the legislation is not such tween the two agencies. The permitting agencies as to mandate the different policies stated here have reviewed the policies regarding consideration in the plan. The use of the imperativ maood in of the impact of projects on fisheries and have the language, (of the plan) e.g., stated that they are policies they will follow in in policy 1: '...will be developed...." making periit decisions. Additionally, the Assis- 3: '...shall acquire title to...." tant Attorney General for Maryland's Department of Natural Resources has provided legal arguments. XI Maryland Wetlands Comittee Maryland Wetlands Conmittee (Skinner) (7/7/78) (Skinner) (7/7/78) Coments esponses It is with great regFet that I resubmit the follow- ing but I do not feel that the criticisms of the program which ve voiced at a previous time have been significantly mitigated--indeed, they continue Lo be outstanding weakneeses-and I think the remarks of Hr. Whitten, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Drvia and Mrs. stsn. echoed many of our concerno. 1. The response of the CZM adeinistration to U.S. 1. The State's Watershed Permit Program and the Fish and Wildlife Service's questioning of the U.S. Army Corps of ngizneers Section 40O Permit capacity to protect non-tidal wetlands points up Program, with the Federal consistency requirements the inherent weakness of a networking approach establishing Section 307 of the Federal CZr, vhich depends on legislativo mandates. There is should provide adequate authority for protecting no law to protect non-tidal wetlands in Maryland. those non-tidal vetladrs in aryland within the coastal szoe. The inventory of non-tidel wetlands of greater than five sores recently completed by the Coastal Zone Iilt should provide previously unavailable inforuation regarding the location of non-tidal wvtlands to the administration of those programs. In addition, as part of the first yeer program administrazton work efforts, State regula- tory mechanism will be aelined and revised where necessary to enable the State to accept delegatioo of the Corps of Enineers permit respons- ibility, if appropriate changes are uade in Federal law and regulations. In lieu of delegation, refine- ent of eisting Memoranda of Areemnt with the U.S. Army Corps of Englners will be undertaken to inUre close coordination of State and Federal efforts roegrding non-tidal wetlands. As long as management authority resides only in Nev and broader coastal policieso related to exist- xisting legislationo the mechanisu of project ing legislation, and the Eecutive Order, Secre- reviev is only a weak advisory device. tarial Order and tOUI make the project evaluation process more than an advisory dvice. The Department of State Planning is most reluctant The Department of State PlaDning is bouad to honor to use the Intervetion authority. requests for intervention by the CZU. We urge the Office of Coastal Zone Management to Ifer to the oxecutive Order and to the letter from bold up approval of this plan until the Governor the Governor in the FIS. Approval is proposed on signs orders binding his deprtment and his zecu- the basis of State control. tive ranch and himself to uphold the Goals and Objectivse of this program and the Recomendationl of the CZ administration. We also urge tht your office delay approval of the program until there is a better mechanism for over-all planoing and assuranc� that local jurisdictions will also abide by the Goals and Objectives and reconendations of the CZ administration. 2. Legislation is needed to create a mechanism 2. The ecuticve Order provides the authority stronger than memoranda of uandertanding, so that requested in thin curnt. The Order sttooes that recoemndation� of the CP become binding on (1) the policies and objectives of the Maryland local and state agencies. Coastal Zone anagemet Progran are the State's policies and objectives with respect to coasotal resources and (2) that all State agencies shall conduct their activities in a nmannr consistent xxx Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wetlands Comittee (Skinner) (7/7/78) (Skinner) (717/78) Comments Responses with Lhe Program. 3. The matter of cumulative impacts from all 3. In order to adequately address the question of sources does not appear to be given adequate coo- cumulative ipects, a sufficient information bese sideration in the program. uust be developed and utilized by regulatory uthborities. The description of Program revier Activities in the Section on the various Uses/Activ- ities cf Concern to the Program describe the efforts that will be taken in program implesentation to address questions concerning the curelative iapacts of various types of projects. 4. Increasing demands for water recreation and 4. The sectioq on Recreational Boating in Chapter commercial channels are assumed to be capable of III of the Program describes the efforts that will being met indefinitely without adequate analysis be undertaken and the factors that will be con- of whether this is possible without creating sidered to determine when recreational boating unacceptable problems in respect to water quality facilities and associated channels are likely to and public safety and the disposal of spoil. have adverse environmrntal impacts. 5. What will be the effect of major proposals for 5. The purpose of the project evaluation pro- new deepwater ports, new Chesapeake Say bridges. cesa is to determine the potential impacts of possible new or revived railroad lines, energy such projects on the coastal zone. facilities on the economic, social and environmental fabric of the coastal zone? 6. Can the waters of the coastal zone continue to 6. We agree that this is a problem deserving of withstand the effects of increasing urbanization serious attention. The Coastal Zone Program will of the shoreline if the present methods of treating work with the 208 Program, the Chesapeake Day sewage remain unchanged? That is, discharging Program and other relevant programs to insure chlorinated effluent into the bays with present that this question is adequately addressed and nutrient loads. Or is it necessary to insist on a an effective solution found. serious search for innovative methods of treatment? The program totally fails to address this question, or indicate that if changes are needed the progrsa will seek them. 7. Can the Baltimore Channel be dredged to 50 feet 7. Please refer to the section on Dredging and without creating long-term spoil disposal problems Disposal of Dredge Material in Chapter III, Part II which are essentially insoluble? Is there a true of the FEIS. This section specifically deals with need Tor the deepening? This should be reanalyzed this issue. The Program is committed to environ- by the CZMP. mentally suitable methods of dredging and dredge spoil but has not analyzed in depth the need for dredging haltimore Channel to 50 feet. S. Water Quality Planning under Section 303 FWPCA 8. As noted on page 44 of the DEIS, steps are has moed ahead quite independently of any real being taken to ensure the close coordination of coordination wich the CZMP. Without any CZ manage- the 208 Program and the Coastal Zone Mangement sent framework or overview this will continue. Progrea. Also please refer to response 03 of Mechanisms for integrating river basin plans and the EPA co _Int section. 208 plans into the coastal zone management program should be improved. 9. The program appears, so far, to have failed to 9. It is correct that no use has been totally develop the required carrying capacity study, excluded from Maryland's coastal zone. However, except on a piecemeal basis, and therefore, sig- the descriptions of the Uses/Activities of Con- nificantly fails to have developed a statement re- cern in Chapter III of the Program indicete the garding "permissible uses'. It is interesting that factors including geographic location, extent and the Maryland Program has changed the expression intensity of use that will be used to determine XIII Maryland Wetlands Comittee Maryland Wetlands Comittee (Skinretr) (7/7/78) (Skinner) (7/7/78) Commnts Reoponsss .perndsible uses' to 'appropriate uses'. ALL USES vhether a proposed activity should or should not AnE PERMISSIILE UNDUR MARYLAND'S PROGRAM and go be permitted to be undertakan in Maryland's coastal piority of wasa has been assigned for any land use zone. In man cases, it is the anner in which an or water gse category, except in tidal eItlands activity La undertaken, not the inherent nature of vhere a priority of ugae exists under the Maryland the activity. that mkes it unacceptable. The Wetlands Act, and for tCh beaches at cean City. approach adopted by Maryland's Progra recognized this fact and is consistent with NOAAs regulations for tops. approval. With respect to priority of uses, NO" regulations are clear that these need be established only for designated geographic areas of particular concern (GAPCs). See 15 CT& 923.22. The areas wntionad in the comnnt are designated as GAPCs in the program. 1I. The props. appears to give too little atten- 10. ComAt not sufficiently specific to permit tion to strategies for resource protection and full response. In general terms, 5OM disagrees enhancement as opposed to strategies far utiliza- with the cot. Th statutes and related tio enad development. The bias is obviously legislative history and regulat ions rolled u-on tovards maxima possible utilization. as authorities under the prograa are predomi- mnatly concerned with resource protectlon and enhancement. IZY Lawrence Whitlock (7/6/78) Lawrence Whitlock (7/6/78) Commeo ts Res'orniss 1. I wish to point up citizen concern with respect 1. Maryland is participating in the Chmesapeak, to Chapter VI of the document pursuant to Federal Bay Study and making every effort to ensure that Consistency. While the draft document Identifies this project is not redundant with other Say pro- general methodology, no specifies are given as to jects. Federally funded elements of the Study the effects of 'Plan' endorsement on the many are subject to the Federal Consistency procedures existing and ongoing research projects. For example, of Suction 307 and the implementing YOAA reguLa- the Chesapeake Bay Program within Its proposed tions 1.S CYR 930 related to Federal assistance scope of endeavors Is to conduct a Bay Management and direct Federal activities. Study. Citizens are hopeful that EPA's Bay Manage- ment Study Is not redundant of work already under- taken within the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program and recognizes, upon plan adoption, that the Coastal Zone Unit (CZU) is the lead management agency for Maryland's Coastal Zone. 2. The ability to incorporate existing ongoing pro- 2. The provision(s) for amending approved coastal jects, whatever they may be, into the Maryland Pro- management programs are outlined in the FCZMA rules Brea without duplication. loss of time, or addi- and regulations, Suction 923.81. '(official comment tional expenditure by the taxpayer is essential. period aim this final rulemaking extends until We look toward a coordinated and harmonious rela- August 31, 1978.) This process provides a means tionship through federal Consistency. It La felt of updating and/or modifying approved coastal pro- that this impact must be studied in more specific grass. There is a general concern regarding the terms in the final document. need to make this process responsive and expedient with regard to both time and money. We urge you to submit any comments you have regarding this proparam amendafent process to OCZ)I prior to August 31, 1978. XV Chesapeake say Foundation (CBF) Chesapeluak Bay Foundation (CBF) (Baker) '7/10/78) (Baker) (7/10/78) Comments Responses I. Netorkinl Approach. The overall approach of I. The signed Executive Order binds all State the Plan Is conceptually sound, but it incorpor- agency regulatory authority to the progrnam' atel the deficiencies of the separate regulatory stated goals and policies. Additionally, OIUs rogream involved. Maryland must assure that between specific State agencies and DR seorve as equally thorough coverage is achieved through the added assurance that progra policies and pro- separate regulatory pogram and, most importantly, cedurez will be binding. The Executive rder and assure that each separate progran ust be conducted the 1oU1() signed betwetn the DepartmLnt of Nltural in a manner consistent vith the gols sand objectives Resources Clearly define the legal status of the of the CZM plan. CZl Program and the regulatory progrms. Given the extensive legislation already in existence in The plan makes the assumption that the Maryland En- Maryland, it is appropriate for the State to focus vironumntal Policy Act (MEPA) is sufficient author- on coordinatin the progra authorized by such legis- Ity for requiring state agencies to comply vith the lation and making then vork more effectively rather specific requirements of the plan. KEPA, of course, than enacting new legislation. does not apply to local governments and provides no basis for requiring then to conduct zoning and sedi- ment control activities in accord with the plan. Also, doubts have been raised by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) as to whether the general language of MEPA createos legal duty for even state agencies to comply with specific parts of the plan. Finally, the lack of a clear statutory definition of the legal status of the CZM plan and ite rela- tion to the conduct of *eparate state and local regulatory programs makes the plan difficult for citizens and agencies to comprehend. Czr there- fore reaffirms its longstanding position thnt passage of a basic enabling act would greatly simplify and clarify the exact legal status of the plan, and would facilitate the difficult task of bringing together the diverse elelents of the 'network . 2. Boundaries. It is clear that no rational 2. Baltimore City is not excluded from Maryland's delineation of Maryland's coastal zone can exclude Coastal Zone. While it is excluded fron the pro- Baltimore City. Lowever, the City is exempted visions of the Coastnal Facilities Revlew Act, from coverage under the Coastal Facilities Reviev energy facilities proposed to locate there still Act. This exclusion wvould been to undermine the must neet pertinent State and local regulations stare's reliance upon the Act ar a means of direct- and be subject to the project evaluation process. ing the location of large oil and gas facilities Please refer to UFS planning requireuent. The in the coastal zone. Furthernore, until the major Facilities Study undertaken by Maryland's exemption is eliminated, the entire Act is uncon- Coastal Zone Program provides the infor-mtion base stitutional under the doctrine of Maryland Coal needed for determining the suitability of energy and Realty Co. versus Bureau of Mines, 193 id. facilities in the entire coastal zone whether it 626, 642-643 (1949). be through the Coastal Facilities eview ACt in moet of the coastal zone or through the cootrdi- nated exercise of the various permit program in the State project evaluation process in Jaltimore City. The Maryland Attorney General's office does not share your viev on the constitutionality of the Coastal Facilities Review Act. XVI @2; Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CRF) Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) (Baker) (7/10/78) (Baker) (7/10/78) Comments Responses 3. Appropriate Land and Water Uses. Here again CIF 3. In enacting the Federal CZMA, Congress pro- must reiterate its concern that there is no clear vided the state with a number of techniques for legal authority for requiring local zoning decisions land and water use control (see Section 306(e) (the principal land use determinant in the state) (1) of the Act and related regulation). While to consider or comply with the objectives of the one of those techniques (Section 306(a)(I)(A)) Plan or even with the general environmental policies would require local zoning to be changed to established by law for the guidance of state agencies.meet the Starte's coastel policies, the other techniques (including those being used by Maryland) would not require such local zoning compliance, Maryland has developed a coastal management progras based on State-level author- Cities end OCZM has determined that Maryland has sufficient State-level authorities to manage those areas and uses of State-level concern. 4. Activities in Coastal Waters. CIF strongly 4. We agree with the coment; with respect to endorses the comitmenC of Che CZ Unit to 'in- the last comrent in support for local sediment vestigete the feasibility of alternatives co control programs, NOAA plans to work with the commercial shipping for transporting oil". We State to assure the deficiencies are addressed' also recognize the urgent need to evaluate as part of the first year work program. alternative solutions to the problem nf dredge spoil disposal. We hope that the effort expended on dredging silt from shipping channels will be matched by a comparable effort in preventing silt and sediment from entering state waters in the first place. The state's present level of support for local sediment control programs is woefully inruadequate; one full time employee, plus occasional enforcement personnel assiistance. 5. Use of AvriculCural Lands. CBF urges that the 5. As part of the State's 208 program, the State Plan provide for a thorough examination of soil is working with the Soil Conservation Districts conservation practices on LMaryland farms. In many to undertake the soil conservation practices re- areas, farms are being bought up by developers and quested. The CZU is in the process of working speculators who, unlike the ownmer-farmer, have no with the 208 program to ensure that mutual con- incentive to voluntarily spend time or money on ceres are addressed. soil conservation measures. The passive role CZU outlines for itself (p. 142) is not adequate un- less some other agency demonstrates that it is making a serious effort to solve these problems. 6. Major Facilities. As stated above, the 6. Please refer Co response number 2 above. exclusion of Baltimore City from CFRA is both irrational and unconstitutional. This must be corrected since CFRA 'provides the means whereby Maryland may interact with oil and gas organiza- tions on siting and site evaluation (p. 189)". A major inadequacy in the state's regulation of sand and gravel extraction is the lack of a pro- vision for a public hearing. Presumbly, this cannot be cured without legislation. 7. Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPCa) 7. Maryland will not rely upon the critical areasl program to meet the GAPC requirement. Vegetated The Federal CZM Act requires that the state tidal wetlands have been designated as GAPCS in inventory and identify GAPCa and establish guide- compliance with NOAA regulations (15 CFR 923.22). lines for the use of these areas. Maryland The critical areas program will be used to identify XVII Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF) (Baker) (7/10/78N (Baker) (7/10/78) Comments Responses proposes to satisfy these requirements through its future areas for designation with Section 923.23 critical areas program. In general, it appears the of NOAA regulations. The procedures of the critical critical areas program is one way to identify areas program are adequate for these purposes. resource areas of more than local significance. Local governments uwst forward all suggested areas COMAR Section 16.00.02.08(A). However, the plan for Critical Area Status (this includes any nosina- does not make it clear whether GAPCs will only be tions received from public or private groups or selected from anoug those areas nominated by the individuals), whether they nominate an area for counties as critical areas. If this is so, the designation themselves or not, to the Department local governments will be making detcrminations of State Planning for its final decision on desig- as ro -h.at is of concern to the state. Is it nation. The final designation of an area as a possible that a county could refuse to nominate State critical area will include a management any areas or omit important areas? The plan should plan (to be submitted by the nominating group or clarify the state's intended response (and strategy person) to ensure the protection of the character- for meeting Federal requirements) in case local istics of the area for which it was designated. governments fail to designate substantially all Enforcement of the management plan will be ensured appropriate areas for critical area consideration by strict application of pertinent State permit or fail to follow through with appropriate toning and funding programs and the State intervention changes. This problem may be the most serious process if local mechanisms are by themselves defect in Maryland's proposed network. inadequate. Please see NRDC comsent number 5. 8. CBF would like to see the development of 8. Citizen Standing legislation was passed by the means for citizen enforcement of the plan. The Maryland General Assembly this year. An analysis best avenue for this is the encrtment of legis- of this legislation can be found in Chapter VIII, lation conferring standing upon citizens bring- Part II of the FEIS. Additional mechanisms for ing actions to restrain individuals from vio- citizen involvement in the implementation of the lating the plan (in a way that causes damage to Program are described in Chapter VII of the Program. the coastal environment) or to compel agencies to enforce or comply with the plan. XVIII FMaryland Department of Transportation aryland Department of Transportation (Farragut) (7/19/78) (Farragut) (7/19/78) Comments Response In general, I would like to comend the Energy and NOAA agrees with the cnament and is committed tu Coastal Zone Administration on a well prepared and working with the State In timely execution of the comprehensive Program document. Based on the net- new procedures. working approach outlined in the document, it is anticipeted that Maryland vill be able to provide for a more effective management of it's coastal resources. I would add, however, that this will depend upon the execution of specific procedures outlined in the document in a timely manner. What we need to avoid is unnecessary time delays associated vith the implementation of new regula- tions and programs. XIX League of Women Voters Of MarylandLegeoWonVtrsf ald (Reeves) (7/20/78) ~~~~(Reeves) (7/20/78) Commints K n 1. The League of Women Voters of Maryland support I. Plss refer to the response to comenmt $I of the basic concepts, the goals and objectives. and the EPA ao a section. the management procedures of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Plan. We are fully aware that this concept of 'networking' is being challenged and that several state organizations oppose the plan on the basis that the Coastal Zone Unit does not have adequate authority to implement the plant. The League would like to have these questions resolved, however we support the adoption of this program because we believe that further delay of implementation and/or approval would result in a loss of sameatum and erode support for the program. We support prompt federal approval so char 306 fund- Annual evaluation and recertification of the MCMp ing can be provided. However, we urge chat the will occur undar Section 312 of the Federal Act, and Office of Coastal Zone Manage~ment carefully monitor wiladssteftopoameicnisthug the implemontation of Maryland's program and with- wiluadseqItelfto fundingt defcienioes an odthrough hold 306 funding if severe deficiencies appear. sbeun udn eiin n odtos 2. 'The League considers that the msct important 2. SOAA fully supports the 14ague of Women Voters' aspect of Maryland's progtau is Its statement of position on program monitoring, and plans to assure goals and objectives. We do not consider that Its execution in the first year prant program. these are just window-dressing or motherhood statements. We will carefully monitor this pro- gram by demanding that all implementation activi- ties are In accord with the goals and objectives. XX Department of Energy Department of Energy (Langenksmp) (7/24/78) (Langenkap) (7/24/78) Ctoment Responses 1. We are concerned about the interaction of State 1. Through the establishment of the Power Plant policies for usesa of regional benefit," 'siting and Siting Pogram, the Maryland Legislature estab- operation of major facilities," and "consideration lished that power plants were clearly a use of of national interests' as these policies pertain regional benefit which should not be arbitrarily to the siting of energy facilities. We reconmend excluded by local governments. Through the that treatment of energy facilities as uses of passage of the Coastal Facilities lvriey Act regional benefit should be expanded to include the (CFRA), the Legislature recognized that the need scope of consideration currently provided for for siting oil facilities is environmantally siting and operation of major f�cilities. We suitable areas. It did not recogniaze oil facil- beliove, first, that local land use plans and ities as uses of regional benefit that would zoning ordinances should be reviewed to assess the necessitate a state override of local decisione. extent to which energy facilities not subject to CFRA is an attempt to ensure that needed oil direct State control under the Maryland Power Plant facilities. are sited in areas that can tolerate Siting Program may be restricted by local regula- the environmental impact of such facilities. The tion, Adequate consideration of the national Legislature did not recognize oil facilities as interest in energy facilities of more than local URLs because the demand figures for these facil- concern, in view of the roles of local government ities did not indicate presriag oneds. If an in program �dministration as described especially oil facility is determined by the CZU to be in at pages 286 through 300, should, include evaluation the National Inatrest and if a local action of the extent that such facilities would be consis- arbitrarily excludes this oil facility which tent with local land use plans and zoning ordinances. proposes to locato in an environmentally suit- able areas, the CZU will ask State Planning to intervene. In accord with the DNR/DSP MOU, State Planning will honor this request. If tho local action is found to be arbitrary and capri- cious, this action will be overturnad. At the present time, the proposed siting of large oil facilities would generally require a local action as such facilities would not be fully consistent with local land use plans and zoning ordinances. Intervention will be used to ensure that uses that are in the National Interest are not arbitrarily excluded from the coastal sone. OCZM believes that the analysis contained in Chapter VIII of analysis is unnecessary. The Program is proposed for approval based on a system of State control and is not being reviewed pursuant to 306(e)(l)(A). Second, we encourage reconsideration of the general State intervention authority of the Department of State Planning. The State refers frequently to the intervention authority and clearly intends to use it as an important element of program administra- tion, notwithstanding the reservations stated at page 375. In view of the importance given to this authority, a further analysis pursuant to Section 306(e)(l)(A) does seen warranted. 2. State policies for assessing unreasonable local 2. Local actionas in Maryland would not be incon- restrictions are identified at page 408. We believe sistent with the authorities for and provisions an additional provision should be added to the pro- of local land use plans. Additionally, provisions gram. Local actions inconsistent with authorities of the Secretarial Order ensure that the National for and provisions of local land use plans and Interest is considered in project evaluations. zoning ordinances and actions which are arbitrarily exclusive in nature should be considered unreason- able and a basis for action pursuant to the State's XXI Department of Energy Department of Energy (Langenkamp) (7/24/78) (LAngenuamp) (7/24/78) Co mnts Rsponser intervention authority. Any local action which is considered arbitrarily excluwive in nature would be considered unreason- able and can be used as a basei for State inter- vention. 3. Table VI-5, page 326, lists allocation of 3. Please note editorial revisiona. naphtha for LNG production and prohibition and con- struction orders regarding uee of coal as license and pernit actions. These actions concern direct reguletory orders of DOE end should be listed for review pursuant to CZMA Section 307(c)(1). 4. On page 326, the citetion for allocation of 4. Please note editorial revisions to FES. naphtha for SNG production is listed as the 'Naturl Gas Act"; thils is incorrect, the cita- tion should read Emerlency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973 (15 U.S.C. 751 et "sq)." 5. Ve further note a listing of the Energy Research 5. The ERDA programs listed are also listed in the and Development Administration at page 338 in the catelog of Federal Domestic Assistance, and thusr re, listing of Federal ssisrtence programs. Pe items to the best of our knowledge, grant programs through listed appear to be concerned with energy research which the State and/or local goveromens are eligible and development activities of the Department which for funding. As such, the State is interested in would be regarded as direct Federal activities and reviewing theee for consistency. To the extent that would be certified for consistency through Section ERDA directly carries out R&D, or funds private 307(c)(1). This section of CZMA deals with Federal copeanies to do so, we agree chat it is a direct agencies 'conducting or supporting activities federal action. Peease note changes to Table VI-6 directly affecting the coastal zone.' DOE does for editorial changes. administer a program of financial assistance through arents to States for preparation of State Energy Conservation Plans. The State mey wish to list this program in Table VI-6. 6. Authority to acquire lands is discussed at 6. Please note revisions to FEtS. page 386 of the progr�am. e believe it would be appropriate at this point to reference the /aryland Industrial Land Act which is noted in the program docuent at page 377. U"I U.S. Army Corps of Engineers LU.S. Army Corps or Engineers (Wilson) (7/21/78) (Wilsnn) ;/21/7 ) CIoment s lespnses :. 4arvland's "Area of Focus" concept is generally 1. It is true that the area of focus. as delined based on the 100-year flood plain bordering the tidal by the MCHP, is a prelizinar: designation. The waters of the State. The two tier approach for pro- floodplain mapping process in Maryland is not vet gram management in Maryland is comparable to other fully completed. This will De completed by 1981. states' CZM programs. Hovever, one major difference It is anticipated that the currently designated is apparent in that the "Area of Focus" designated boundaries will vary only slightly once this in the Maryland program is now considered only pre- mapping is completed. liminary. The designation of "Areas of Focus" should be based on a permanent boundary. 2. Some authorities deficiencies in the Maryland pro- 2.a. As noted in Chapter III, Part II of the FELS, gram include: the Maryland CZf will control major development at the state level using State authority. These a. Existing zoning regulation may permit major authorities include CFRA, the Power Plant Siting development which would be inconsistent with the Program, a sedimentation law, flood control laws, Coastal Zone Management Program. As long as this the Wetlands Act and various public investment development is consistent with existing comprehensive controls. OCZK proposes to approve Maryland as a local plans for land use regulation and requires no 306(e)(l)(B) program based on State authority. zoning action by the local government, there appears to be no method by whica Marylana can control such action. There is no state authority to approve or disapprove such projects, as required in Section 306(e)Ul)(C) of the Federal Act. The subject docu- ment recognizes this problem on page 375. b. Comprehensive rezoning by local governmental b. The program is being approved on the basis of bodies is reviewed by the Department of State Planning State controls and so Section 306(e)(1)(c) is not to ensure that the plan is consistent with State plans, applicable. OCZK believes that the State possesses policies, standards and goals. However, the Depart- adequate controls over development through state ment has no power to approve or disapprove such plans authority. The State's discussion of public invest- as required in Section 306(e)(1)(C). On page 364 ment authority serves to supplement the statutory of subject document, it is argued that such admini- authority Maryland already has over development. strative review should be persuasive due to the State's influence over development through such mechanisms as funding-and approval of schools, transportation systems, water and sewage plans, and recreational facilities. Such persuasive techniques do not constitute compliance with Section 306(e)(1)(C) of the Federal Coastal Zone Mandgement Act of 1972. 3. Interstate Coordination 3. Pleas note revisions made to the FEIS in Chapter I, Part II. The Chesapeake Bay, as a natural feature, spans two states, Mtarland and Virginia, yet there is very little attention paid in the document to interstate coordination regarding the management of these re- lated coastal zones. This appears to be a serious oversight. XXIII Maryland Petroleum Association Maryland Petroleur Association (McDonald) (7/20/78) (McDonald) (7/2078) Coments Responses For the reasons discussed in the attached analysis, the Maryland program falls short of the Federal requirements for Section 306 approval. The program, however, appeals to warrant serious consideration for further developmental funding under Section 305 (d) of the Act. Due to the megnitude of the progran, we have not attempted to provide an exhaustive, indepth analysis of its Strengths and weaknesses. We have attempted only to address the program's more significant pro- visions that impact on petroleum industry operations. 1. While the current Development and Approval 1. The Governor's letter stated clearly that the Regulations have coepletely done away with former State of Maryland has adopted the program. Such requirements for adoption, we think it clear that adoption by the Executive !ranch is clearly con- the Act's provisions that a program be 'adopted by sistent with Section 923.47 of OAA regulations. the State ****- must require more than reexamin- ing of existing policies and developing new policies as the present regulations require at 15 C.F.R. 923.1(c)(2). 2. The first problem with enforceability of the pro- 2. The Assistant Attorney General for DNR has posed Coastal Zone Management Program in Maryland is developed legal analysis which supports Maryland's that the program was put together by the Cosstal Zone contention that enabling legislation of the State Unit with no legislative basis or charge. The premiseDNR is broad enough to allov Maryland to develop that the Act establishing the Department of Natural and adopt the NCHP consistent with NOAA regulations. Resources and setting forth its responsibilities The connstor's concerns lie with those regulations, grants the Department of Natural Resources the power not with the Maryland program in particular. The to develop the State's Coastal Zone Management Prograncomentor's national affiliate and a numnbr of its is totally without'foundation inasmuch as 'Coastal corporate members have comenced litigation in Zone Management Program' is nowhere mentioned in the three other states to challenge these and other Act's language, guidelines are not established for portions of the NOA regulations. the development of such a Program, and a specific grant of power and authority to the Department of Natural Resources to tie together existing state policies, programs, and intra-state agency powers into a coherent Management Program cannot be found in the Act's provisions. Only the General Assembly has the authority to require mul-ci-agency compliance with DNR CZN guidelines and program implementation where no such power currently resides with DNR. 3. In the main, the Coastal Zone Unit relies on one 3. NOAA disagrees that Maryland relies only on the piece of existing legislation as the requisite legal Maryland Environmental Policy Act. A full listing authority required by the Coastal Zone Management of the authorities relied upon by the State and by Act. That legislation is the Maryland Environmental NOAA in approving the program is provided in Chapter Policy Act (MEPA). MEPA does not provide the author- VIII, Part II, of the FEIS. icty to establish the state's Coastal Management Pro- gram and to enforce it after it is put into place. The two statutes, NEPA and the CZMA are at times inconsistent and conflicting. State agencies con- ducting their activities consistent vith MEPA have been no obligation to meet these Federal CZH Act requirements. If then the Maryland Coastal Marnge- ment Program depends on MEPA for its policy direc- tion as the Coastal Zone Unit asserts on p. 392, XXIV OF Maryland Petroleum Association Maryland Petroleum Association (McDonald) (7/20/78) (c Doonald) (7/20/78) Comments Responses it does by its own terms fEl short of the require- ments for approval under Section 306 of the CZMA. 4. In addition to being without legislative author- 4. See Chapter VIII, Part II, of the FEIS for a ity to put together a Coastal Zone Management list of the authorities relied upon. Program, the Coastal Zone Unit fails to establish the required inventory of legal inatrumnts (author- ities) presently in force, aa required by Section 305(b)(4), which will allow it to demonstrate that it has the authority required by the Federal Coastal Zone Managemnt Act. If a Coastal Management Program exists which is en- Legal analysis by the State has concluded that the forceable, and it is enforceable only because of the Executive Order is not of the type requiring sub- .ction of the Governor issuing an Executive Order mission to the Legislature. Maryland's program is directing that all Executive Agencies conduct their consistent with existing laws and regulations which affairs in a manner consistent with a proposed pro- provide the legal basis for the program. The gram document, then one must conclude that a Pro- Executive Order ties the program authority togetner gram exists on the basis of the issuance of that in a manner which is fully consistent with existing Executive Order where one did not previously exist. law. This Otder does not create new government If that is so, then it must be said that a new programs within the meaning of Article II, Section governmental program was created by the issuance 24 of the State Constitution. The General Assembly of the Executive Order, and under the requirements has given recognition to Maryland's program by of the Maryland Constitution, that Executive Order establishing the Energy and Coastal Zone Administra- must be sent to the General Assembly in statutory tion in 1976 and by creation of the Chesapeake Say form within the first ten days of regular session and Coastal Zone Advisory Commission within DNR. for approval or disapproval. 5. On the question of the efficacy of the memoran- 5. The enforceability of memoranda of understand- dues of understanding among the various executive ing is a matter of considerable variance among agencies of the State of Maryland, the perroleum states. No blanket statremnt can usefully srmar- industry has taken the firm position elsewhere that ies their legal effect throughout the U.S. NOM that these memorandums are no more than an agreement in every case carries out, with the assistance of to "consider" the statutory responsibilities of other the state, careful analysis of machanitsm required agencies and to 'cooperate' in the implementation and to make such memoranda enforceable. Where such enforcement of their respective programs to the mechanisms are unavailable, the MDU is not in- maximum extent possible. These agreements are of cluded as a means to make the solution enforceable. a voluntary nature and cannot constitute the binding The Program Document clearly states the position legal obligation required for the state to 'control of the State of Maryland and of NOAA as a result development in order to ensure compliance with the of the analysis carried out. Uhile hOUs are volun- program and to resolve conflicts. .. .' (CZMA tarily entered into, the Executive Order makes Section 30b(d)(1)). If the program developers are them legally binding. Policies additionally are going to place such reliance on these memorandums legally enforceable because they are based on as an enforcement mechanism, it would seen appro- Statute. The analysis carried out by NOAA led to priate chat these memorandums should be included the conclusion that an Executive Order must be with the final program submission. signed before the program was circulated for Federal review. This caused several months delay in processing the Maryland program, but it was delay that 1OM believes was essential. 6. As mentioned above, legislative action is re- 6. CFRA will be the basis for initial decisions quired before a Maryland State agency will have the regarding the siting of major facilities in authority to resolve conflicts among competing uses. Maryland's coastal sone. Judicial action will Conflict resolution in the State of Maryland in- then be relied upon for resolving conflicts not volves policy matters beyond judicial or existing answered by use of the Executive Order. Maryland executive jurisdiction or expertise. As an example, and OCZM do not believe that use of the legislative the judiciary should not be called upon to decide process is required to "direct the course of loca- whether a recreational facility should be viewed as tion deterlination'. Maryland Petroleum Association Maryland Petroleum Association (McDonald) (7/20/78) (M ~nad (7/20/78) Commnts Re s ponses a more favorable us* of a given location than a gas proceasing plant. Such judgments are of a policy- making kind which should be undertaken by a body such as a state legislature which has the powr to direct the course of location determination, and to provide for a mechanism which could override local decisions which might arbitrarily exclude or re- strict umies of regional. state or national interest. 7. Natio~nal Interest: 7. a. The project evaluatiom process outlined La the FEIS will serve an a comprehensive review a. The Maryland Management Program must include mechanism affectin thoe. Activities you refer to. affirmative, legally enforceable provisions which im- This processe requires, among other thiags, that the post a duty *tpon relevant state and local authorities National Interest be considered In the decision- to accommodate the national interest in the planning making process. for and In the siting of coastal dependent facili-- ties which are necessary to meet requirements that are raw than local in nature; b. This Maryland Coastal Management Program oust b. This constultation process with Federal provide that the state oust consult with-cognate agencies is inhereat In the MCM? and fully dis- Federal agencies to determine the nature and oetent cussed La Chapter VI, Part 11, of the FRIS. of the national interests which say be affected by state planning and siting decisions; c. The Maryland Coastal Management Program must c. The State has addressud National Interest recognize that it is the Federal view of what con- with retard to any and all direction received stitutme the national Interest which must be given from che federal Ciovernment and wiil continue to adequate consideration, not the state's conclusion do go. as to what to in.the Interest of the nation. S. Unreasonable Rastriction of Uses of Rational 8. All of the uses cited are defined by the State Benefit: as U13, with direct State authority. In addition. OCEK has been assured that the intervention author- Though the issue to addressed at page 306 of the icy will be used where necessary to fulfill this proposed Management Program, the discussion does requirement. Until such time as we Wae reason to not meat the requirement of the Act's provisions believe that an unreasonable restriction ban that an affirmative gparantse against such restric- occurred and that the intervention authority has tionis be incorporated in the Progrza. our earlier not been used, OCZ3( accepts Maryland's method as discussion of the deficieneis to the Program with approvable. respect to a state override of a local veto of projects which may be to the national or regional interest leads us to believe that despite the assurances from the Maryland Coastal Zone Unit. we believe that the Program is not adequate to prevent local units of governmant from prohibiting land or water uses of regional benefit. 9. We believe that there is nothing in the proposed 9. The first sentence is a true statemmnt, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Plan that will assureState do*e not mas" these assurances nor are such or guarantee that now energy facilities can be estab- assurnces required by tin FCZK. The State does lished Lo the coastal zone or that existing facili- believe that the project review procedure will ties can be expanded in connection with Outer Conti- expedite the processing of permits for all nental Shelf activity or any other activity. Mor facilities, including these which arm pecroleum- does the process hold mawh hope for the expoditioue related. processing of permits for petroleum facilities. MVIT Maryland Petroleum Association Maryland Petroleum Association (McDonald) (7/20/78) (McDonald) (7/20/78) Coensts Responses 10. Currently most, if not all, 'f the land in the 10. As previously stated, the- MCMP .111 rely Ip.,n Coastal Zone in Maryland is subject to local and state the iltervention authority tu ensure :h.it th. laws that could greatly restrict if not totally pro- siting of facilities is not unreasonabl:. excluded hibit the siting of energy facilities, and, therefore, by any local government. the industry could be in effect excluded from the Coastal Zone. Hence, the planning process does not appear to afford any effective guarantee that regional and national needs for petroleum related facilities will not be btymled by local regulations. This failure also con- travenes the planning process and national interest requirements of the CZNA. This most serious deficiency must be remedied before the program may be approved. 11. The DEIS issued by OCZM has two essential 11. NOAA disagrees with this characterization of deficiencies. First, it fails to provide a balanced the DEIS. Costs and benefits are discussd. to the and thorough discussion of both the costs and bene- full extent required by NEPA and suggested it, tne fits of the proposed action. Sc(ond, the DEIS comits CEQ Guidelines for the preparation of EISs. itself to one particular course of action--full approval under Section 306 and falls to meaningfully Alternatives are discussed in terms of substantive discuss possible alternatives, including continued reasons for delay or denial of program approval; program development fundinE under Section 305. as indicated in the EIS alternatives section, regardless of the substantive grounds for sucn The authors of the DEIS, by focusing exclusively on denial, the remedies available include continued benefits, have developed a document which does much fund:'g of the program under Section 305(b) or more to promote the approval of the Maryland Program prel.sinary approval under 305(d). To discuss than it does to critically appraise that proposal's alternatives only in terms of different sections environmental impact. Yet the latter is the only of the Federal Act from which funds to tne State purpose of an EIS. It may not be used as a promo- shoul' issue to do the same things would be to tional documaent in favor of the proposal, at the reduce the EIS from a discussion of real-world expense of a thorough and rigorous analysis of en- effects to an intricate legal brief on section vironmentcl risks. numbers of no meaning to the general public or even other Federal agencies. The subject DEIS clearly reveals that OCZH's de- cisionmaking process has not been affected at all by the NEPA requirements, for there is no meaningful discussion of any course of action other than that which the agency clearly seeks to promote--Section 306 approval. Specifically, since the Maryland program is so clear- ly not currently approvable, any adequate EIS must examine the alternative of continued program develop- ment funding pursuant to Section 305. Thus, in discussion alternative choices, the EIS must con- sider the possibility that Section 306 approval at this time might delay or disrupt beneficial coastal uses, and weigh this against continuation of Section 306 funding which would have no such adverse impact. Only through such an analysis can alternatives be meaningfully assessed. XXVII Natural Resources Defense Council Natural Reasources Defense Council Committee Preserve Assateaque Ialand Committee to Preserve Assateaque Island Haryland Conservation Council Maryland Conservation Council Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wetlands Committee (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21/78) (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21/78) Comments Responses 1. To our knowledge, Maryland has not reviewed its statutes and regulations to determine to what extent 1. . The Maryland Attorney Ceneral's Office has state agencies will be legally able and bound to reviewed relevant State statutes and regulations comply with program objectives and policy statements. nd has determined that the Program goals and The program must demonstrate that existing authori- policies re vithin the scope of these statutes ties can fully implement the policies and compre- and regulations. The authorities to be used to hensively control uses which have a direct and implement the Program's goals and policies re signi'icant is pact on coastal waters. broad and do not require issuances of permits when certain criteria have been satisfied. Because State agencies are not forced to issue permita, the Executive Order ensures compliance with coastal goals and policies. a. The program should demonstrate that Maryland's statutory authority is broad enough to allow for state agencies to implement coastal policies. To date, the authorities have been discussed only in the case of an agency's authorization to implement its own statutes. b. The legal analysis of the Environmental Stand- ing Act in Chapter VIII of the program should be re- b. Please refer to the analyses of the Enviro - vised to include a discussion of how the Standing Act mental Standing t in Chapter VIII, Part II of applies to the program's networking authorities and the FEIS. enforceable policies. 2. Floodpleins 2. a. The saection on activities in Coastal tidal a. NRIDC has commented on the timing of implements- and non-tidal flood plains has been revised to r.- tion of the Flood Hazard Management Act in a letter to clud more detai l in im plem entation of the flood the Coastal Zone Unit on March 27, 1978 and again at hazard mnagement program. A table showing the the Public hearing on July 6, 1978. We concluded that completion dates for the detailed delineation of the Flood Hazard Management Program is not in place t both the riverine and tidal 100-year flood plains the present time and therefore OCZM sast determine the in each coastal county has been provided OCZX adequ cy of imryland's program vithout this Act. believes that the program currently has the author- ity to adequately manage flood plains through its It also appears that the state is going astray sediment and storm water management controls and in its implementation of the Flood Hazard Management through its major facility siting controls. Act. The Act establishes minimum requirements for the adoption of interim rules and regulations by local sub- The State is utilizing the information providec divisions. The state is interpreting the adoption of by the detailed mapping undertaken as part of the HUD floodplain maps and regulations as fulfillment of HOUD Flood Insurance Program; however, the State's the requirements for the interim phase of the FLood position is that the regulations adopted by local Hazard Management Act. NRDC believes that this is i- subdivisions in accordance with the Flood Hazard legal because the state's mandated program is broader anagement Act not only must mwet HUD requirements in scope than the Federal program. but also the additional requirements of the State Act. If the state adopts only the HUD requirement,s there is serious question as to whether this would comply vith the intent of the Floodplains Executive Order and the CZMA. b. The program should clearly state the coverage of the Watershed Permit Program and how it helps to b. Tivities n the d Per100-it rora cover s f ll control development in coastal floodplzine. *cti itiee in the lOO-yeer rivrine floot plain including those areas that are influenced by both riverine and tidal processes: activities occurring in those areas which are purely coastal tidal XXVIII Natural Resources Defense Council Natural Resources Defense Council Committec to Pteservc Assateaque Island Committee to Preserve Assateaque Island 1Maryland Conservation Council MarylJnd Conservjtion Council Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wetlands Committee (Mullin and Chasis) (7/:1/78) (Mullin and Chasis) (7, 1'78) Comments Responses floodplains are only presently covered by the '4D flood insurance ordinances that have been adopted by the local governments. Once the detailed mapping of coastal floodplains is complete, activ- itie3 in these areas will be covered by regulations adopted in accordance with the State Flood Hazard Management Act. In addition, the Shore Erosion planning section clarifies that localities will be required to develop shoreline setbacks in conform- ance with both the State Watersnhed Permit program and HUD flood insurance requirements in high risk erosion areas. c. Please refer to the revised section in c. In view of the limitations of these programs Chapter III, Part II, of the FEIS. and the fact that the Flood Hazard Management Act is not in place, NRDC requests a fuller description of policies governing floodplain development in the interim and whether they are -:forceable. 3. a. "Policy Guidelines for Implementation of tne 3. Wetlands Maryland Wetlands Law" are consistent with the statutory authority vested in the State through t:at a. It is unclear whether the "Policy Guidelines Law. This enables the State to enforce these policy for Implementation of the Maryland Wetlands Law" are guidelines. Since Executive Order 01.01.1978.05 legally binding before they are set forth as regula- requires all agencies to conduct their activities in tions. Maryland must either state clearly in the accord with the Program to the extent consistent program and demonstrate that policies based on the with their statutorily prescribed responsibilities, guidelines are enforceable policies and will be the Executive Order requires that these policy followed in all instances or adopt the guidelines guidelines be enforced. as legallyv enforceable regulations prior to program approval. b. OCZM believes that the Program adequately b. The state has not yet addressed NRDC's con- manages activities on lands adjacent to wetlands cerns with respect to activities on lands adjacent through its sediment and storm water management to wetlands. The Wetlands Act establishes a strong controls, through its controls over major faci;- policy for wetlands protection. The coastal program :ties siting, and through its policies related :o has not, but should, coordinate application of all channelization and use of agricultural and forest authorities which can be used to control adjacent lands. uses to ensure that wetlands are protected. c. As noted in the Act, with appropriate State and. c. The Beach Erosion Control District Act une- Soil Conservation District approvals, shore erosion quivocally prohibits the placement of permanent control and storm water management devises may be structures in the legally defined district. If a built in the District. No other type of construc- variance to the construction prohibition is to be tion is allowed. The Program policy, which pro- granted, specific criteria and performance standards hibits the location of structures east of the must be established. dune line, effectively protects the primary dune system, The Fenwick Island/Ocean City area is heavily developed and no secondary dunes remain. The remaining part of Maryland's Atlantic coast is either in Federal or State ownership and is com- pletely protected from development, XXIX Natural Resources Defense Council Natural Resources Defenst C.ouncl, Committee to Preserve Assateaque Island Committe~e to Preserve Assattlaque. ~n Maryland Conbervation Council Maryland Conservation Council Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wetlands Committee (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21/78) (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21!1-8) Comments Responses No variances in the construction prohibition are Contemplated at this time. If1 a variance were to be considered, specific criteria and performance standards would be established. OCS pipelines and ocean autfalls are interpreted by the Program to be prohibited. d. CZNA Section 305(3)(9) requires state pro- d. ?lease refer to the rerlsc? erosion plan- grang to Include 'a planning process for (a) assess- ning element in Chapter Ill, Pare 11 of tne FFEIS. ing the effects of shoreline erosion (however The Coastal Zone Unit, the Army Co-ps of Engineers, caused), and (b) studying and evaluating ways to U.S. Fish and Wildlife and local units of ..-,ern- control or lessen the impact of such erosion, and sent are presently assessing the effects of shore- to restore areas adversely affected by such erosion." line erosion and studying and evc! "utin; ways of The state has not demonstrated that it has met this controlling or lessening Its i-roaz. Stuidy is requirement with respect to Its Atlantic Coast. focusing on Ocean City and the no: thern end of Aasateaque. Management solutions. -re beinre con- sidered which include beazli nouriszuaent, ow~ns and offshore breakwaters. Int: Ooeze&.~ erosion problem is of emergency proport-lots and must be addressed. 4. Maryland's proposals (pp. 106-109, 157-166) do 4. Please refer to the revise: :n:"c access not constitute a 'planning process" to provide planning process in Chapter 111, Par: 11 of th~e public access to recreational areas, open space or FEIS. natural areas. The program simply identities funding programs for the purchase of such areas. No other means of providing access are explored and no mechanism is proposed to assure that the carrying capacity of recreational resources is not exceeded. S. We support the designation of vegetated tidal 5. In the future, additional OA~_- includ-.nz aqua- wetlands an these are indeed natural features of tic resource areas will b'e idertificcz for crnsid- great concern, but we believe the designation eration for designation thro-'gk ch,7 Stz-z's should be expanded to include other types of wet- Critical Areas Program. Tidal fla-3 and beaches lands, particularly tidal flats and beaches. It were considered for designation but were not in- remains unclear to us what criteria Maryland applied cluded as GAPCa because of the variability of to determine that designation of vegetated tidal their importance. Some tidal flats are extremely wetlands alone was enough. important biologically while others are not and some of the smaller beaches were- no: considered important. All of these areas art protected under the Wetlands Act. Vegetated tied! wet:lands were selected because, of their demorszsta~ta ',-logical importance and their iuportar~t cn-r- iou,:.cn to the estuarine system. 6. Critical Areas 6.a. OCZM agrees that critica-. ar'-.s can be nami- nated by State and Federal actnc4-es arnd private a. Since the State Critical Areas Program Is parties subject to approval b'v :ne )expartcent of proposed to fulfill the CZMA requirement for State Planning. designation and management of areas of particular concern, we believe that the State east exercise its full authority over this program. xxx ~~ ~ 0 Natural Resources Defense Council Natural Resources Defense Council . Committee to Preserve Assateaque Island Committee to Preserve Assateaque Island Maryland Conservation Council Maryland Conservation Council Maryland Wetlands Committee Maryland Wetlands Committee (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21178) (Mullin and Chasis) (7/21/78) Comments Responses The critical areas program, as described in the coastal program, appears to rely on local nomination of critical areas. However, we find no legal restraint which would prohibit Department of State Planning designation of areas nominated by a state or Federal agency, a member of the public or DSP itself. b. The Coastal Zone Unit must establish in the b. The Coastal.Zone Unit will nominate Critical FEIS and follow a schedule for its own nominations Areas during the second round of nominations which to DSP to ensure that the Critical Areas Program is expected in late 1979. During the first year includes areas of concern to the coastal program of Program implementation, the CZU will consider such as erosion hazard areas and areas to provide including erosion hazard areas and areas to pro- public access. vide public access in the 1979 nominations. c. We remain concerned about the implementation c. If an area is designated, it must have an of management plans which are developed as part of enforceable management plan. This plan could be the critical area nomination and designatcin process. implemented at the State or local level. If The state lacks'authority to enforce management locally developed, the plan would be subject to plans implemented solely by local controls. the State's intervention authority with ample Charter counties and the City of Baltimore are not grounds for intervention if a local decision required to include critical area management plans was not made in accord with the plan. If a in their comprehensive plans. To the extent that critical area is designated as a GAPC under the state intervention is relied upon as an enforcement Coastal Program, in the event of a deviation mechanism, the authorities are inadequate. The from the management plan for the critical area, Secretary of State Planning is not legally bound the CZU will request that the Department of State to intervene, and even if intervention cakes place, Planning intervenes. DSP is bound to honor the there is no guarantee it will be successful, requests by the CZU for intervention (see the State Planning/DNR Memorandum of Understanding). NOTE. Appendices comments not included. The Governor's Executive Order also requires State Planning to conduct its activities in a manner that is consistent with the Coastal Pro- gram. A decision by State Planning not to inter- vene in such a situation would be inconsistent with the Program. XX I DEULARVA Water Transport Committee Delmarva Water Transport Committee (Pitts) (7/17/78) (Pitts) (7/17/78) Co nts Responses 1. If environmental influences vill not allov some i. The Coastal Zone Program is aware of the situ- flexibility in use of low value wetland areas and as ation expressed in this and the following comment, the lease or purchase of costly upland areas for use and is working with appropriate Federal, State and as dredge spoil areas about every eight to ten years local agencies to develop an approach to dredge is not economically feasible, it is essential that spoil disposal that will address these concerns. dredging operations be expanded to support long distance pipeline pumping and/or barge transport and pumptau operations to transport dredge spoil to avail- able spoil site areas remote from the areas dredged. 2. lour consideration and support of the use of pipe- 2. See response number 1 above. line/pumpih$/bdare transport methods of dredging is critical in order to comply with the environuntal re- strietions and achieve the dredging that is necessary for the economic development and sustenance of vater- borne commerce on the Delmarva Peninsula. XXXII Department of Interior Department of Interior M.Lerorto) (7/24/78) (Meierotto) (7/24/78) Comments Responses . e re concerned that the Governor's Executive 1. We agree that the board ,i Public Wrki Lj no: rder. wnich insures that the State author:ties covered by the Governor's Executive Order. Recause are .xercised consistent with coastal policies does of a lack of time, the Board will nor be blie to not apply to two independent agencies-the Board of review and approve the Program prior to approval. Public Works and the Public Service Commission. The AJ a condition of approval, OCZM is requiring that Board of Public Works, comprised of the Governor, the the board review and approve the Program by March 1, Comptroller and the State Treasurer, has two respons- 1979. The Board's approval of the Program is not ibilities which are important to effective implemen- essential since it must comply with the require- tatiou of the HCPF. First, it approves all disposi- ments of the Wetlands law for permits in State wet- tion of State lands including State wetlands. A lands and can only approve or deny agency public person may not dredge or fill State wetlands without investment proposals. Agency public investment obtaining a wetlands license from the Board. After proposals must be in accord with the Coastal Prc- receiving recommendationa from the Secretary of DNR, gram so that the Board could only deny a fund-nh the Boar4 makes wetlands permit decisions 'taking proposal which was consistent with the Program. into account the varying ecological, economic, de- velopmental, recreational and aesthetic values' (see Article N.R. Section 9-202(c), 1976 Supp.). Second, the Board approves the expenditur. of all suns appropriated through State loans and general funds for capital investment and expendicu;a. The State has identified its authority to control public investment as an important coastal management tool which will be relied upon to manage certain land and water uses. The Public Service Commission makes final decisions regarding the siting of power plants and transmission lines. We recommend that action be taken to insure that the The Public Service Commission, on the other hand, Board and the Commission make these important is covered by the Executive Order and must con- decisions regarding State wetlands, public investment duct its activities consistent with the Program. and siting decisions consistent with the State The Comission's members are appointed by the coastal policies described in the final MCMP. Recog Governor, serve coterminously with him, and can nition and endorsement of the final NCMa by these be removed by him. two entities would be desirable and could be accom- plished through a memorandum of agreement, or through letters of recognition and endorsement from the Board and Commission to the Secretary of DNR. 2. While the explanation of project evaluation on 2. It is difficult to give more explicit criteria page 60-66 is quite detailed, the criteria to be because the appropriate degree of evaluation de- used for determining the appropriate degree of eval- pends upon impacts that a project may have on uation for a particular project are not described. coastal resources and this must be evaluated on a While the Secretarial Order to be signed prior to case by case basis. A section has been added to program approval will discuss this issue, the final the discussion on Project Evaluation which details program should be as specific as possible about the the factors that will be considered in undertaking standards and criteria and time limitations involved a full project evaluation. in making these decisions in order to provide Federal agencies some predictability in this process. 3. Recently, the State legislature enacted the Oil 3. The Oil Pipeline Corporationa Act authorizes Pipeline Corporation Act granting condemnation certain companies to condemn land adjacent to authority to oil pipeline corporations for the existing oil pipelines in certain counties (but development of pipelines within existing rights-of- not more than an extra 50 feet) in order to con- way, This Act is an example of the authority of the arruct and operate additional pipelines along the General Assembly to delegate condemnation authority same right of way. The recent law is not an to the Public Services Commission of Maryland to attempt by the legislature to exercise condemns- provide for development of facilities in the regional tion when local interests threaten to veto the optional siting of a facility of regional or XXXIII !~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 Department of Lntertor Department of �nterior ierocto) (7124/7b) (Meierotto) (7/24/78) Comments Responses and national interest. We recommend that the final national importance. The Act ts expressly lir.itPd program discuss the relationship of this Act with to existing pipelines in eight counties plus 3a'.:i- the national interest provisions of the Coastal Zone more City, and grants the condemnation power ,)nl Management Act of 1972, as amended (CZMA). It to corporations: appears that the ability to site pipelines through established rights-of-way will reduce the likeli- "...engaged in the business of transporting hood that such facilities will be located in refined petroleum products by pipeline as a geographic arere of particular concern (GAPCs). common carrier public service corporation (which are) subject to the jurisdiction of either (FERC) or the Public Service Commission of Maryland." Only property which is 'necessary for the con- struction and operation of additional oil pipe- lines' may be taken, and then only within 50 feet of the existing right of way, This Act cannot nc viewed as an oil facility siting law, and will cor.- tribute little, if and, authority' over the questic: of local vetoes in coaatal zone development. 4. The Maryland Environmental Standing Act of 1978 4. Please -refer to the discussion on the Stanring should also be discussed in the final ;rogram. This Act in Chapter VIII, Part II of the FEIS. Act, which provides citizen standing to bring action against the State for non-enforcement or an environ- mental standard, may enhance citizen efforts to assure State compliance with progran policies and objectives. 5. Finally, numerous coastal policies are based on 5. The revised Watershed Permit regulations have 'revised DhR regulations." The final program should recently been promulgated and are now in effect. clarify when these revisions to the Watershed Permit Issuance of new wetlands regulations is not ntcer- and Wetlands regulations will be completed, and what sary prior to program approval because the wetlands enforcement mechanism will be used in the interim. guidelines in Chapter II, Part II of the FEIS are presently being used as a basis for issuing permits although they have not been formally adopted as regulations. 6. In order to protect these resources and to pro- 6. Until the 100-year flood plain study is con- vide some predictability to State regulatory activ- pleted, the whole of Dorchester County will be ities, we recommend that the final program include treated the same with the 'area of focus" designa- all of Dorchester County as an Area of Focus pend- tion not applicable until the 100-year flood plain ing completion of the 100-year floodplain study. study is complete. In accordance with the proce- Reference to this should be included in Table dures developed with DNR's Wetlands section, all II-1. projects that may involve wvetlands alteration will be reviewed for possible project evaluation action. 7. If Area of Focus boundaries are significantly 7. It is not expected that the Area of Focus altered during program implementation, we recomanc boundaries will be significantly altered during that these changes be reviewed as amendments to the program ilplementation. If the Area of Focus is MCMP. The amendment process, which provides the significantly changed, these changes will be re- opportunity for Federal review, assures that fish viewed as amendments to the Maryland Coastal Manage- and wildlife resource areas will be carefully evel- ent Program. Before any changes are "Ade, fish uated before they are excluded from an Area of Focus. and wildlife resource areas will be carefully evaluated to ensure that they are adequately pr o- tacted. XYS1IV Deparcment uf Interlot Dupartment ,t LnLerlor (Meieruttu) (7/24/78) (Meierotto) (7/.'4/',;) -,:o-. t t S . k;Pn m! ., n. lhe tindl CNMY would be enllanced by specitically 8. The Marylalnd i'.rJ>rllm I, o: l I . , Jddressing and encouraging the use of the Open Marsh the possible use of the Open 'Litr.h 'Waivt d,..',";'u L Water M.anagement (OMWe) method of mosquito control. (OMM) method of mosquito control and thC apor.pri- The MCXP states: 'Drainage ditches for mosquito con- ateness of its use in Maryland's wetlands areas. trol. .are generally allowed if they conform to The Program will fund a study by the State Depart- the drainage standards and specifications of the ment of Agriculture to assess the advisability of Soil Conservation Service, if they are approved implementing (OtWM) on a broad scale. The Program by the Department of Agriculture, and if they are does not feel a policy on this matter is appropriate constructed to minimize adverse environmental until this research is completed. impacts' (p. 138). While this State policy is acceptable, it tends to suggest and encourage ditching as an acceptable method for mosquito control. The OM1 technique of mosquito control is unique since it minimizes ditching, spoil dis- posal and pesticide spraying of wetlands for insect vector control. In view of the coendable efforts by the State Department of Agriculture and the Department of Natural Resources in implementing 0MIM, we believe that the final program nhould include reference to this technique as an 'enhance- ment' policy. Further, we recommend that CZU under- take a research effort in the first year of program inplementation to evaluate the effectiveness of the OMWM method of mosquito control on the marshes of the lower eastern shore of Maryland. 9. The draft CNIP does not distinguish between 9. As noted in the Section on Tidal Wetlands in tidal, private or State wetlands. We recommend Chapter 1II, Part II of the FEIS, the definition that the ters "tidal wetlands' be defined to include of tidal wetlands under State law describes the private and State wetlands and non-vegetated areas differences between private and State wetlands. such as mudflats, submrged aquatic vegetation and (Please refer to Appendix G of the DEIS.) Tidal beaches up to the mean high waterline. Coastal wetlands regularly include private and State wet- policies addressing 'tidal wetlands" protection lands, mudflats and submerged aquatic vegetation should specifically address these non-vegetated and beaches up to the wman high waterline. areas. 10. We note that Maryland's Areas for Restoration 10. The CZU will consider in the aquatic resource pertain only to aquatic areas of degraded water areas designation process those areas of degraded quality. Objective A of the draft MHCP is intended: marph that are in need of restoration. Please also 'To protect, maintain, and where feasible, restore refer to Appendix F, p. 67. the integrity of the tidal wetlands of the State.' We believe that this discussion of APR's should be expanded to include wetland restoration. At present it is Department policy to compensate for unavoid- able losses of public fish and wildlife resources which are caused by water resource projects by replacing and restortin habitats within tne project areas. Without adequate restoration of lost natural resources, each development project sited in the coastal zone will represent an incremental loss of the present resource base. We recommend that the final MC1P expand the discussion of APR's to address this and to provide criteria and procedures for designating areas to be restored. XXXV I)lpartm.nt nf Interinr Department of Interior (HMeer,)t t) (7/24/78) (Melerotto) (7/' 4/78) ommrn rq ._R. fones 11. The tinal MCMP should include the criteria used 11. Please refer to Appendix D, pp. 30-3H. The by the Department of State Planning (DSP? to review criteria for selection or rejection of critical proposed State Critical Areas (SCAs). The criteria areas is based on a site's criticality and whether for rejection of proposed sites and mediation the site is of state concern, Also refer to the procedures for reconciling conflicts should be MOU between DNR and Stste Planning. The DSP is included in the final program. Specifically, we bound to consider CZU recommendations concerning question the grounds on which DSP can reject a Critical Area designations; however, DSP reserves recommended Rasource Protection Ares and the the right to reject a State Critical Area nomina- procedure CZU would use to appeal tl decision. tion if it deems it in the State's interest to do so. 12. The inconsistency in treatint Aquatic Resource 12. State critical Ar.eas can be maniged by any Areas (ARAs) within a specified management scheme combination of State and/or local controls. In at the local level and the program's a1; systems the case of Bay bottoms and wetlands, the State approach to Bay-wide problems (e.g., boating con- exercises full authority through th, Wetlands law. gestion, erosion remedies, OCS development, etc.) The CZU will nominate ARAs in the future witc. should be remedied in the final program. Finally, close cooperation with the locals in the process. the State program should clarify how SCA designa- While ARA designation does imply a special impor-' tion and management plans will corollata with tance for the designated area, state authorities State programs (fishery management plans. fish over aquatic resources will be used to ensure pro- refuges, wildlife management areas) and row ARA tection of areas that have not been designated. conflicts with these State programs vill be ARAs will not be managed at the local level; resolved. Clarification is also needed to deter- management of these areas will be an integral part mine those areas which will be afforded ARA desig- of the Bsy-vide management system. SCA designe- nation and the purposes of such designations. tions must be made in accord with the Coastal Pro- gram and its policies,. 13. The intervention authority could prove to be 13. The Program has made a commitment to use in- particularly useful as a way to present national tervention in National Interest questions. Chapter interest considerations to local decisaonmaking VI, Part II of the FEIS has an adequate description bodies. A more thorough explanation of the poasi- of the use of intervention in National Interest bilities for using the intervention authority in matters. this manner should be included in the final pro- gram document. 14. The draft MCMP indicates that the Coastal Zone 14. -Disagreements" refer to inter-departmental Unit will have the final responsibility for the conflicts. The administrative resolution of State's consistency determination and will recon- these conflicts refers to the fact that depart- cile different points of view on consistency into ment heads will attempt to resolve any conflicts unified State response. owever, the CMP further tnhat arise regarding a CZU consistency determina- states on pages 316 and 317 'Disagreementas rising tion. If this is not possible, the Governor will from this process should lend themselves to admini- resolve the conflict between departments. stracive resolution." This sentence is confusing since it does not clarify what is meant by 'admini- strative resolution." We suggest that this sentence be reworded or eliminated. 15. On page 321, the draft program contains a list 15. A footnote at the bottom of p. 321 clearly of "types of activities which will, generally, explains that Congress has not yet datermined d;rectly affect the coastal zone." Outer Continentalwhether this activity is subject to Federal Shelf leases are included under the subtitle #Acetons Consistency Provisions. Seaward of the Coastal Zone.' It is our position that pre-lease and lease sale activities are not subject to the consistency provisions of the CZMA. we recommand that the State either omit this item from the list or explain that the listing indicates the State's desire to reserve the right to apply XYXVI Department of Interior Department of Interior (Helerotto) (7/2/78) (Mierctto) (7/24/78) Coaments responses consistency to OCS lease activities if the Adan- istratcon or Congress decides that it applies. 16. The draft program elso lists several purposes 16. This 'purpose" has been deleted. This is the of the State's consistency review. One e i purpose i ur of related A-95 clearinghouse revievs with scated accordingly: '. .minimize duplication in vhich coneistency reviews vill often be combined. the performance of agency isesion#." We suggest that this statement be sore fully explained in the final program since it is not clear how this purpose can be accomplished through consistency review. 17. Minerals: 17. Please refer to Part D, Chapter III, Part II of the FEIS and to Appendix F, p. 61. Additional The draft HCMP discussion regarding minerals should information on other minerals vill be developed be expanded to mention stone, clay, lime, peat, during Program implementation. green sand, marl, talc, and soapstone, as well as sand and gravel. A useful addition to this program would be a listing of knowv ::neral deposits vithin each coastal county along wvtt laps showing mineral resource and facility locations. 18. Chapter II, Section E, part (2), entitled 'Air 18. Although important Aquatic ersource Areas and Water Quality,' should be rewritten to more delineation is based on biological resources, in accurately establish whether the areas in question some cases water quality would need upgrading so are Aquatic Resource Areas of the State Critical that these areas could also be listed as Areas for Area program, or are Areas for Restoration. The Restoration. The ter 'Areas of Citical Stcate formr designation is based on biological resources, Concern is language used in the critical areas whereas the latter ia primarily used for areas of legislation; howver, for purposes of clarity, it degraded water quality. The terme areas of Critical should be changed to read State Critical Areas. State Concern' does not appear in the body of the Program and is consequently a source of confusion. XXXV I Federal Energy Regulatory Cosmission Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Shuster) (8/2/78) (Shuster) (8/2/78) Coments Responses 1. Should it be the intent of the MCMP that Cono- 1. Please note changes in the FEIS. wingo or other Federally licenses hydroelectric pro- jects or potential Federal hydroelectric projects be subject to Federal consistency requirements, the MCMP should discuss hydroelectric generating facilities in Chapter III-D. 'Hydroelectric plantst should be added as an additional item under the heading of 'Electric Generating Facilities" on page 210. Appropriate CMXP requirements concerning hydroelectric power plants should be presented on pages 219-225 under the same heading. 2. Natural CGas Facilities 2. a. Please note additions and revisions to the FEIS. Also LNG and OCS are discussed together a. Cove Point on the Maryland coast is the site beceuse CFPA deals with both of these activities of the only major liquified natural gas (LNG) import and 'not because Maryland wanted to disguise the taroinal operating in the United States today (design LNCG discussion. capacity-one billion cubic feet per day). Despite this, LUG is barely mntioned in the MCMP, and in fact is disguised in a section titled "Onshore OCS/ Oil/Natural Gas Facilities." All of these important energy facilities receive the same vague end non- coprehensive treatment, although OCS and natural gas facilities may have a major impact on the Maryland coastal zone. b. The MCtP has not met the requirements of b. Please note that the FEIS has been updated to specificity and predictability of decisions made reflect that the Studies cited have been completed regarding coastal zone uses subject to State manage- and are available for review. In addition, we wnt. Material which should be provided as part of believe the sections on OCS and natural gSa facil- the MCMP is spread oer numerous studies and reports ities, as revised, are adequate to meet progrsam which are not included in the program; e.g., see approval regulationr. pages 213 and 282. The State must at least provide a synopsis of these studies in important areas such as facility siting and State policy on energy facil- ities. c. In addition, the sections on OCS facilities c. The same assessment aend uangement proce- and natural gas facilities should be separated and dures apply to both types of facilities, and we greatly expanded, especially in light of the possi- believe there is no need for a separate discussion. bility of the location of onshore OCS facilities A section has been added describing LNG facilities or addititional LNC terminal facilities in the in Maryland. Maryland coastal area. 3. National Interest 3. MCMP evsluations will be performed for all a. The MCMP lists a nubnher of activities and major project proposals. As part of this project resources in which there may be a national interest evaluation process, the national interest is con- (Table VI-1). However, this list is of little or sidered and this consideration becomes a part of no value since the State intends to independently the final evaluation results. Maryland's procedure sake its own determination of facilities 'in for Energy Facility Siting (EFS) is reactive. Once which there is a clear national interest" (MCMP-p. a facility is proposed, the State will then decide 307). The MCMP should identify those facilities, if the siting of this particular facility is in viz., bulk energy facilities, in which there is a the National Interest. This approach conforms to national interest in a list such as Table VI-1. OCZM rules and regulatione. This would insure that these facilities will be subjected automatically to a MCMP project evalua- tion when one of these projects is proposed. XMVIII. Federal Energy Regulatory Corission Federal Energy Regulatory Comission ,Shuster) (8/2/78) (Shusrer) (8/2/78) Coments Pasponses b. It also should be clearly indicated in the Maryland agrees that facilities located in the .CMP that national interest means benefits are State with benefits outside the Stace could be provided outside of the Stare of .aryland as well determined to be in the National interest. i In the State. Two statements made in Table VI-1 should be sup- Maryland has taken this first quote directly ported. The first is that 'Maryland has recognized from CYIA. The referenced criteria re con- that meeting energy needs is essential .. .' trained in relevant policy sectioos or the This statement should be identified as a legislative management procedures subsection of the pro- finding, policy statement, etc. The other is that grao document. 'criteria for State decisions for each type of energy facility are described in existing State legislation." These criteria should be included within the program document. 4. Uses of Regional Benefit 4. The State listing of uses of regional benefit is adequate to comply with NOAA regulations, which Marvland's definition of "uses of regional benefit,' provide some discretion to decide which classes of i.e., "activities (which) provide services or bene- facilities to include. The CZHA does not include rits to citizens of more than one local unit' (iCKP all e*ergy facilities or even all national interest p. 306), is broad enough to cover many lncra-state facilities to be uses of regional benefit. Other facilities. This corresponds to the latest OCZM states have appropriately drawn the same distine- dictum, however, we strongly disagree with OCZM tion Maryland has between electric facilitiesl, and believe this should be expanded to include which have a regional service area and an advanced interstate considerations for dependency on coastal public planning process, and oil and gas facilities, activities as well as intra-state considerations. which can serve more selective or expansive markets if some other criterion is being used to determine and which are less subject to advanced planning by. uses of regional benefit, it should be listed in the State,. the MCMP. If notr, then other energy facilities besides simply electric generating facilities and transmission lines should be listed as uses of regional benefit. Table VI-2 on page 315 lists only five uses of regional benefit. This list does not include energy facilities, including pipelines and LNG terminals, which obviously serve more than one local unit. 5. Energy Facility Planning Process 5. The major facilities study is now available to all Federal agencies for review. It has been We feel that Maryland has complied with few, if any, completed for sowe time. It was awaiting publi- of the five required elements of a planning process cation only. This study is regarded as important (see specifically 15 CFR 923.1(a)(1) through (a)(5), research and technical material and will be used page H-52 of the MCMP). Although numerous statements as a basis for decisionmaking along with other are made that Maryland has completed the process, no material--as such, it is regarded as part of the evidence is provided in the text of the program. MCMP. All materials referred to in this section For example, the identification of energy facilities ate available from the Maryland CZU upon request. which are likely to locate in the coastal zone is Additionally, while the Power Plant Siting Act is said to be addressed in the Malor Facilitits Study.' not contained in the document itself, the policy However this study has not been published yet, and statements and objectives which use this as their will nor be a part of the MCMP when it is published. basis have the citation attached. Therefores. the Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM) and reviewing Federal agencies cannot determine whether this requirement has or will be met. Similarly, procedures for assessing the suitability of energy facility sites are said to be contained in the State's "Power Plant Siting Act. XXXIX Federal Energy Regulatory Cominssion Federal Energy Regulatory Commilssior (Shuster) (8/2/78) (Shuster) (8/2/78) Comments Responses In order to allow Federal Agencies the maximum Please note changes to the description of the energy amount of time to review the MCMP's energy facility facility planning process in the document. These planning process, the State should be required to changes adequately respond to concerns raised by forego Section 3GS(b)(8) approval at this time. The commentors and by NOAA in reoponse to the DI)LS. State should then submit complete documentation of its fulfillment of the requirements of 15 CFR 923.14 (a) (1) through (a)(5) as an amendment to the M4C" me a later date. In addition, all energy facility studies which the HOG' Identifies as 'in progress' (e.g.. see page 202) should be completed and included as var? of the amendment. 6. Federal Consistency 6. All of the stated coastal policies, as well as stated goals and objectives, are the basis for con- The MC"' states that 'the basis for determining con- sistency determinations. The program document fully sistency of Federal actions with (the MCMP) will be describes those policies, Scale and objectives. the goals, objectives, and policies of the program.' Same means must be foumd to identify specific goals, objectives, and policies of the MMt or of other coastal laws which apply directly to each listed Federal license, permit, or any other consistency decision. In this way the applicant, the Federal agency, the public, and the State decision-maker are all given a clear standard by which to judge a pro- ject. XL ~~ Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Agency (Little) (8/4/78) (Little) (8/4/78) Cogmanta ~~~Coi ~ntzn~ PResponses 1. We note that the Coastal Zone Unit (CZU) vill 1. While the CZU does not have any regulatory have the primary responsibility to review all power, the project evaluation process will be based projects and programs affecting the coastal zone. upon enforceable State coastal policies. The eval- This review vill fulfill the consistency provisions uation process iL designed to comprehensively review of the Coastal Zone Management Act. However, projects proposaed for the coastal aone. The CZU according to the management program, the CZU acta vill decide if a project is in conformance vith the only in an advisory or coordinative manner, with State's coastal program and, if a disagreement little if any enforcement powera of its ovn. This arisea, the CZU has the authority to invoke their serious flaw tende to attenuate the CZU's ability conflict resolution process. Also please refer to implement the goals and objectives of the over- to the revised Project Evaluation discussion in all management program. the rEIS. We recoumend that the program be modified to incor- porate a greater enforcement mechanism into the CZU project evaluation process. This modification will enable the CZU to act in a 'checks and balancees role, especially in its dealings with other State agencies. In the summary of requirements for program 2. The incorporation of Federal air and water approval (p. 18), the necessity for incorporating quality standards is explicitly stated in the the air and water quality requirements, established FCZA aas you have referenced. Karyland is avare pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) and Clean of this and has developed a program based, in Water Acts (CWA), into the Coastal Management part, upon these requirements. Program as stipulated in Section 307 (f) of the CZMA and 15 CFR 923.44 of the implementing regula- tions should be added. Since the incorporation of these requirements is not referenced, NCXP staff or other agency reviewers could be given the mislead- ing impression that the requirements of CAA and CWA need not be met. 3. Areawide water quality uanagement plans ('208' 3. The State has not yet fully determined what the program) are being developed for numerous counties exact relationship between the ICW and '208' plans that will be impacted by MCMP. The program states will be. In part, this iL due to the fact that the that 208 plans "will be an integral part of the latter plans have not been finalized and adopted Coastal Zone Mangement Program' (p. 44). This yet. However, the State intends to utilize draft statement is vague. It is not clear whether 208 plans in an advisory capacity in its decisionmaking. plans will be incorporated and adopted by MCMP or As 208. plans are finalized and it becomes evident will merely serve as a scheme to be consulted but that certai. non-point source pollutants have direct not adhered to, in future coastal decisions. and significant impact on coastal waters, the pro- gram will have to be amended so that these imopcts will be adequately mnaged. 4. Dredge and fill guidelines promulgated by EPA, 4. OCZM believes that this is implicit in the -ursuant to Section 404 (b) of the CWA must be water quality requirement in the Pogram. Please ;norporated into the MCNP as sandated by Section refer to Table D in Part I of the YCIS for a list- J07(f) of the CZMA. ing of the sections of the Pogram that relate to air and vater quality requiremnts. We would also like to note that while a 404 permit will not be issued without a determination of CZM consistency, the reverse is not true. The fact that a proposed 404 permit is consistent with the MCM plan does not dispense with the necessity of fulfilling other subetantive and procedural require- ements for the issuance of 404 permits. The lan- guage of both Section 307 (e) of the CZ.iA and the Federal consistency regulations (15 CFR 930.63(c)) XLI Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Agency (Little) (8/4/78) (Little) (8/4/78) Coments Responses makes it clear that determinations of consistency with approved CZ( plan are not to be viewed as substitutes for complying with applicable require- ments of other Federal lavr. 5. We are concerned that State authority in non- 5. OCZM does not think that there is an incon- tidal vetlands appears to be confined to those sistency in this case. The HCMP has control over areas associated with riverine flood plains. vwetland areas associated with riverinm flood- Other non-tidal wetland areas would therefore plains. it has an interest in other freshwater have little State protection with the Army Corps wetlands but does not have State control over them. of Englaoers having sole authority for the issuance Control is exercised by the kAry Corps. OCZx does of dredge and fill permits. This inconsistency not believe that this lack of control at the State umtr be addressed by the State WRA. level represents an approvability issue as fresh- water wetlands. are not demonstrably connected with coastal resources ind the State's desire to manage these resources. 6. The MCMP should identify the Air Quality Con- 6. Please note changes made to the ntIS. trol Regions (AQCRs) within the coastal zone which are nonattainuent areas and those subject to pre- vention of significant deterioration (PSD) regla- tions. The MCIP should also describe measures to be implemented to prevent additional air pollution in. the AQCIs affected by the plan. 7. State capital budget programs authorizations 7. The Health Department will reviev State capital should be revievwed by the Health Department for budget program authorizations to ensure their adequacy in maeting Federal and State air quality adequacy in meeting Federal and State air quality requirements as well as these for water and sever requirements. It is the responsibility of the systems (p. 90). Department of State Planning. In this process, the Health Department can be called upon to ensure adequacy in meeting Federal and State air quality requirements. 3. In reviewing Maryland's policy chapters, we note 8. Objectives were considered to be generally two levels of statements: general goalr and objec- applicable to all coastal uses if they express con- tives, and Gore 'specific' policy statementr (over cerns that must be considered in evaluating oet 200 of them). Concerning the general goals and types of activities discussed in Chapter IlI. If objectives. EPA also notes that a subset of these an objective applied only to certain types of has bean designated as applying ...generally to activitles, it was listed as pertinant only to car- all coastal uses...'. EPA would like clarification tain activitiesn. on what rationale was used to mak this distinction and what function It serves. For exanple. EPA would like to know why objectives dealing with productive agriculture areas and forest areas (objective #6, page 82) or utilization and disposal of hazardous substances (objective 033, page 82) arc considered generally applicable to all coastal uses, but objec- tives such as promoting recreational opportunities in shoreland areas (objective #8, page 26) or en- couraging inland siting of facilities not shoroline dependent (objective #17, Page 28) are not con- sidered generally applicable. 9. We suggest that all goals. objectives and policy 9. The coastal policies will act, in part, as a statoments include short cenarlios of what the CZU method of determining which propoeals/projects will or will not accept as a project/proposel are suitable for Maryland's coastal sons. Now- affecting the coastal zone. ever, the State would not went to arbitrarily exclude any type of activity (by writing a XLII Lnvironmental Protection Agency Environmental Protection Aecncy (Little) (8/4/78) (Little) (8/4/ 78) Comments Responses scenario of what is acceptable) pr:cr to a full project evaluation. 10. We found significant errors among the wording 10. Please note changes to FEIS. of the program ubjectives. For example, objective #10 on page 28 reads 'To discourage the location nf major new ....facilities. ..."(emphasis) added), but objective #10 on page 236 reads 'To prevent the location of major new... facilities. ...'(empha- sis added?. Similarly, objective 018 on page 220 reads "To encourage the location of new coastal facilities.. .. '(eaphasis added), but objective 018 on page 28 reads "To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities.... '(ephasis added). .Aso, objective 016 on page 28 was never mentioned again in either the generally applicable list of objectives (p. 81 to 83) or any of the specific coastal use objectives. The EPA also found that the numbering system for objectives was not always accurate. For example, objectives ",14, 018 and 019 on page 249 do not correspond with objectives #14, 18 and 019 on pages 27 and 28. While EPA appreciates the demanding task of compiling a document of this nature, it found an unusual number of errors which, in some instances, could make significant substantive inconsistencies. At the very least these errors greatly detract from the usability of the document and should be corrected. II. We are not convinced that the MCMP has adequate 11. OCZM believes that the Maryland Program has legal authorities to control development in the sufficient legal authorities to control develop- coastal zone. We have no assurance that decisions ment in the coastal zone. Controls over tidal reached through the Project Evaluation Process vetlands, beaches and dunes, air and water, pub- will reflect wise coastal management and a proper lic investment, major facility siting, sedimenta- resolution of conflicts. To summarize, the MCMP tion and flood areas combined with other State does not have an effective or legally enforceable authorities give Hsryland broad control over the system ror resolving conflicts, although this is use of coastal resources. The Project Evaluation specifically required by the program approval Process will be based on the coastal policies. regulations (15 CFR 923.41(c)(3)). Conflicts within DNR will be resolved by the Secretary (see Secretarial order), while conflicts between agencies will be resolved by the Governor (see Executive Order, Secretarial Order and !OW'r). XLIII U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Tr�nsportation (Gilmer) (8/4/78) (Ciumler) (8/4/78) Coments bkponses 1. Permit Lettins 1. As your comment notes, Maryland's procedure for listing Federal license� and pereits subject to Table VI-5 of the CZMP provides a listing of consistency determination is in conformance vich licenses and permitc for which Maryland intends to OCZN rules arid regulations. Section 930.50 states require Federal consistency review procedures. that '...ny applicant for a required Federal Page 298 states that Federal consistency review license or permit to conduct an activicy affecting procedures '...will also apply to licenses and land or vwater uses n the coastal sonu...' bshall permits which are unlisted, or which occur outside submit a consistency determination along with the coastal zone if the CZU (Maryland Coastal Zone their application. OCZM believes that this pro- Unit) determiner that they will affect the coastal vider the necessary legal basis for Federal zone...'. While chis is consistent with section license and permit activities to be reviewed for 930.54 of the 29 August 1977 proposed NOAA consis- consistency with a State's Prosgro. OCZN has teoncy regulations, it is the Department of Tranc- allowed states to ore narrowly define the portation's position that -- Federal licenses and perit that they weant to review based on the specific nature of their 'There is no legal basis for vesting in the program. While the state should (and did in States the authority to specify which Federal Maryland's case) consult with the relevant Federal licenses and permits are subjece to State consis- agency in detertining their list of licenses and toncy determinations. Each Federal agency, in permits, DOT's interpretation of the role of consultation with the States, and with NOAM's Federal agencies In deteruining which licenses advice, should identify those licenses and permit and permitr are rclevant ir incorrect. (Please actions subject to the Act's consiscency require- refer to p. 323 of the DEIS for a full description _mnto. It is further recomnded thar such a list of hov the State determines which licenses and specifically delineate which permitting and licens- permits are relevant for consistency review.) ing activities are to be regarded as "major' and The Department of Transportration had full oppor- which as 'minor'. tunity to participate in the review of the con- sistency regulations carried out by the Office of Management and Budget (01M) prior to their final promulgation. A number of the Department's positions were accepted as part of the process; this one vwas not. 2. It is our position that only '"sit specific' 2. The ?CZMA rules and regulations do not licenses and permits are subject to determinations support your interpretation that only 'site of consistency by the states. Examplres of those specific' liconsoe and permits are subject to site-specific permit activities which the Coast consistency dete�rainations. aryland will be Guard considers appropriate for such determinations reviewoving both site specific and non-site are: specific licenses and permits for Federal con- sritency; however, this will not necessarily be 1) Bridge and Causeway Permits 33 USC 401, 491 on a case-by-case basis. Incorrectly identified by and 525 Maryland's Draft as 49 USC 1655. 2) Deepwater Port Development 33 USC 1501 permits. 3) Private Aids to Navigation 14 USC 83 permits not listed by Maryland' Draft. Table VI-4, page 294, should be modified to reflect this concept. Colun three, '307(c)(3)(A)(Subpwrt A)' under 'Federal Action' should be headed "Site specific Federally licensed and permitted activities'. n.Iv U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of ,ransportation (Ginler) (8/4/78) (GCimler) (8/./78) Comments espot es 3. Page 296 of the CZMP States, 'Federal agencies 3. As you have noted, Section 930.39(b) of the should notify the State of pending actions (includ- FCZMA rules and re .lations specify a 90-day noti- ing a consistency determination) at least 90 days fication period. -.ryland's program is in confor- before the Federal activity reeaches a decision mance with rules and regulations and their process stage likely to restrict the use of alternative will continue to.reflect this sue time period. measures.' While this is consistent with section Once again, DOT participated in the OMK directed 930.39(b) of the proposed NOM consistency regula- review of the reguleaions. Disagreements wver tions, it is our position that the specified time resolved *a part oa hat process before the final limit for providing state agencies with a conis- regulations were p: --ulgted. DOT is legally tency determination prior to the decision stage bound by the regul$aons as promulgated. See (c.rrently 90 days) should be deleted. Rather, 15 CFR 930.1. the notification time frame should be consistent with the National Environmental Policy Act Environ- mental Impact Statement procedural requirements. 4. Federal Assistance to State and Local Governments 4. Section 930.9C -f the FCZXA rules and regula- tions specifically scates that Federal assistance Page 308 of the CZHP States, 'Federal assistance to for activities sign:ficantly affecting a State's State and local governments for projects affecting coastal tone shell be panted only after a consis- the coastal zone my only be granted when such tency determination has been made. Section 930.96 activities are consistent with the State's approved specifies thea the 'Stat-e gency has the lead Coastal Zone Management Program." And that "Rele- role in this consistency review procedure. There- vant State and local reviewers will review the fore, your interpre:ation of when funding can be application and indicate... vhether or not the granted and the State's role in consistency deter- action is consistent with the program..." minatione is incorrect and in violation of the adopted regulations. Page 313 continues, 'A Federal agency, upon receipt of an application and attached (State) Clearinghouse comments indicating inconsistency, may initiate pro- cessinS of the application but may not take final funding action on the application unless CZU (Maryland Coastal Zone Unit) tranefers to the Federal agency a final determination of consis- tency.' While this viewpoint is consistent with Section 930.90 of the 20 August 1977 proposed NOAA consistency regulations, it is our position -- "..there is no statutory basis for prohibiting Federal approval (of assistance programs) simply because a State agency provides notice that a pro- posed Federal assistance project requires State agency review. The consistency determination of a Federal assistance program must be made by the Federal agency, not the State." 5. It is recommended that a more positive endorse- 5. We are aware of *-e Coast Guard's activities, ment of Maryland's support of national defense but the National It- eat table was not developed interests be included in the CZMFP. to list the miseion .f specific Federal agencies but rather to ident: National Interest concerns. Also within this section under "National Defense and Aerospace," 'Interstate Transportation,' and 'Pres- ervacion of Life and Property," no specific mention is made of the Coast Guard. It is recommended that Maryland's program reflect the fact chat most Coast Guard activities are coastal dependent, and that the Coast Guard's role in national defense is an eseential element of the national interest. XLV PATUXINT Technical and Legal Comdittee PATUXENT Technical and Legal Committee (Johnston) (7/28/178) (Johnston) (7/28/78) Coam nts bponses 1. Certainly there uest be substantive relevant 1. The proposed Federal alternatives of delay, considerations for alternatives to the present denial or approval of the program cover a broad paper design of an administrative CZN program. For range of issues and considerations. when con- instance, what has been proposed in other states sidering vwhether Program approval should be with hat effects? Wbhat about the fact that while delayed, the need for additional authorities is Maryland .my have statutory authority, relied upon an important part of this consideration. OCZH under the 'nat vorking' approach of the present plan believes that Maryland has the requisite author- plan, it is simply not enforced, such as the state- ities for Program approval. Future Federal wide Lack of erosion control enforcement, even while funds will be used to nsure that these author- erosion has caused and continues to cause damage to ities are enforced so that coastal goals and coastal resources? Are we thus to have a Stste policies are adhered to. program run with Federal funds that marely continues destructive State patterns of control? What were Also please refer to response number 11 of the the intrastate political considerationA leading to Maryland Petrolaeu Institute coMnt section. the choice of the present CZMP, would it not be relevant for the public to be informed of these inportant matters for future decisions under the CZ1? Instead, the Federal authorities have decided that the Federal action is merely the approval, deferral, or disapprovai of the state proposed CZMP, and that these all are the alternatives that mst be con- sidered. and review of the relevant portions of the DEIS verify that this involves no substantive consid- erations other than the possible date of final appro- val of the CZHP. This is a totally sterile interpre- tation of NEPA. 2. Cuttins Off Reasonable Concerns 2. aryloand believed that hr. QGuun's comments were substantially siilwar to those presented by James Gutan, president of the Magothy River Associa- NRDC. OCZ has requested that the State review tion and _enber of the Chesapeake Say Program's the com-nts submitted by Mr. Gutman and eutrophication group, has probably spent as much Mr. Johnston and draft appropriate replies. time as any other public participant studying and evaluating the CZMP. He submitted a written comment at the State hearing on January 18, 1978. He received a one page form response, and an attached response to the comeent by the Natural Resources Defense Council, indicating that since his coo ents were sinilar to those of NRDC that the State response to the NRDC coments would suffice. The undersigned also submitted a major (10 page) written conent for the January 18 State hearing. He also received the same form letter vith the NRDC attachments, which wore welcomed having already reviewed the NMDC coments. Thus the State has ignored two coments raising sub- stantive issues by two of the public participants who have devoted significant time to the development 6f the present CZMP (also through participation in the now defunct Regionml Mvisory Groups) and the under- standing of its implications for future decisional processes. By cutting off candid discussion of substantive issues. and by not giving them official recognition, governmental authorities leave only the threat of suit to the gnored parties.. XLVI National 'arine Fisheries Service National Marine Fisheries Service (Gordon) (8/3/78) (Gordon) (8/3/78) (Leiczell) (8/10/78) (Leitzell) (8/10/78) Comments Responses As. wA e have stated previously, in those cases i. It is State policy to prevent destruction of where an overriding public interest need is served, estuarine or _rine resources. It is believed :he proponents of development should agree to that a policy for compensation may actually implement measures aimed at replacement of resources encourage destruction of resources. As part of and/or their habitats which will be lost or degraded the areas for preservation and restoration nomi- We recommend that the Maryland CZM Program adopt a nation process, the CZU is considering vwtland policy of encouraging, at the very minimum, compen- areas that are in need of rastoration. sation (replace-ent-in-kind) for estuarine or marine resources loset due to development. Further, we recommend that the Maryland CZM staff identify potential sites for restoration in the near future. The above policy should be adopted before 306 approval. 2. Part IV. Section I.A.. Last Paragraph: 2. Please refer to the revised section of Part III of the FLIS which includes a description of The paper states that 'Maryland experiences, on the natural environment affected by this Federal the average, one hurricane per year." This is not action. true. In fact, the average number of years between hurricane occurrences is. 42. The probability of a hurricane entering the coastal area during any one year is only 2%. (This information is available in NOAA Technical Memorandum NWS SR-58, Atlantic Hurri- cane Frequencies Along the U.S. (outline)). Winter coastal storus, sometimes called "northeaster,' are much more common than tropical cyclones and also damage the Maryland coastline. It is reconemndad that these stores be mentioned in the description of the natural environment given in Part IV. 3. The subject document treats onshore sand and 3. At present, Maryland appears to have adequate gravel mining in quite a bit of depth (pp. 218-224) supplies of sand and gravel onshore to meet future and Maryland is to be congratulated for a good job. demand. If these resources appear to be diminishing However, despite noting (p. 219) that, 'In some at a significant rate, a policy will be developed areas of the country, the depletion of onland to ensure adequate uanagement for offshore mining. supplies of sand and gravel will require the dredg- ing ot offshore supplies in the ocean whore large deposits are believed to be located"--the document fails to discuss offshore mining. It does not in- form the reader whether or not that general comment applies to Haryland. The subject could be incor- porated into the discussion of dredging (pp. 83- 88), but at present only harbor channel dredging is treated. XLVII Lover Eastern Shore Counties Lover Eastern Shore Counties (Pollitt) (8/10/78) (Pollitt) (8/10/78) Cosments espone s The County Commissioners of Dorchester, Somerset, Wicoeico and Worcester Counties have followed the progress of Maryland's Coastal Zone Proran, A Partnership for Balanced Action very closely. The proposed plan has brought some mutual concerns that affect our regional area. The folloving comenet are an attempt to identify the major views of the Lower Eastern Shore Counties: 1. Interstate Coordination 1. OCZt vwil be reviewing the Virginia Program, in particular, and the Delaware Program to ensure The Lower Shore Counties feel that in order to that they are consistent with Maryland's Program. properly administer and exercise this program, a Coordinated management of Chesapeake Lay is partic- great deal of interstate coordination is needed. ularly important in this review. Maryland and The program appears to ignore the fact that our Virginia have initiated efforts to coordinate their neighboring States, in a great many cases, affect management activities concerning Chesapeake Bay our coastal areas to a more drastic degree than through the establishent of the joint legislative does the citizenry of this area. To maintain a council for Ily management. successful Coastal Zone Program, it is imperative that adjoining States develop their CZM plans con- sistent with Maryland's established program. 2. A major mistake was Bmde when the Department 2. The Department of State Planning has been of Natural Resources, an exclusively regulatory intimately involved in the development of the agency, was named as the lead agency. The Depart- Coastal Program. As DNR exercises mny of the sent of State Planning might be better equipped and authorities on which the Program is based, it more inclined towards long range planning and also seems to be the best agency to implement the Pro- have a better understanding of the social and eco- gram. We agree that the Program must remain a nomic considerations of our region. comon sense coordinaeting type of effort so that long delays In permitting do not occur with result- ant hardship for the smaller units of government or smll businesses. The location of the Progrla within DNg provides the opportunity for the input of a more comprehensive attitude towards permitting than would be possible if the program was located outside of DOR. 3. Letters of Agreement fron other State Agencies 3. As noted in Chapter VIII of Part II of the FEIS, memoranda of agreement once signed are binding on Although Acting Governor Blair Lee III issued an the parties involved and cannot be changed without Executive Order Number 01.01.1978.05 on March 8, the mutual consent of the agencies involved. If 1978 requiring all State Agencies to 'conduct changes in theei HOUs were to be manode which would their activities in manner consistent with the significantly alter the manner in which the CZ Program," there Is still concern involving inter- program would be implemented, such changes would agency cooperation. The concept of cooperative be considered by OCZM and subject to the review and efforts between various State agencles through amendment procedures required by our regulations. memorandum of understanding is a comendable Such procedures allow for the participation and theory, but past experience leads one to question coment of all parties in the decision, the reality of such an arrangement. What happens to the letters of agreement when there Is a change of the Secretaries, other top individuals, or a revision of policy? These changes could have serious impacts on local government. We recomend that prior to change of Ltters of Agreement, which were part of the Coastal Zone Management Program, the citizens, elected officials and staff have a chance to review and comment thereon. XLVIII Lower Eastern Shore Counties Lower Eastern Shore Counties (Pollitt) (8/10/78) (Pollitt) (8/10/78) Comments Responses 4. The opinions and attitudes of local officials 4. The Coastal Zone Unit (CZU) wull actively seek should be given strong consideration in any manage- the advice of local government officials before ment decisions in the implementation of the CZ decisions are made, recognizing that local officials Management Program. The administration of this have expertise and knowledge that the CZU staff does program must be inclined so as not to erode the not. OCZM does not believe that this Program will concepts of local government. in any way erode the concept of local government. 5. Maryland's Lower Shore Counties do not want a 5. Before approving a state's coastal management Coastal Zone Management Plan at the cost of our program, OCZM muat be convinced that it provides a small business. greater level of predictability for the decision- maker and for the permit applicant than was pro- vided before the development of a program. We believe that the Maryland Program should give a small business the ability to determine ahead of time whether or not a permic is likely to be granted or denied. CZU staff will be available to help in these determinations. When more than one permit is needed, the project evaluation prc- cess should provide faster and more coherent decisions for the permit applicant than is avail- able now. 6. Environment - A Balanced Proposal 6. OCZM believes that the project evaluation approach described in the Program will ensure The Program appears to be oriented toward the detailed consideration of all relevant factors physical environment with very little considera- involved including economic and social concerns. cion given to the economic and social aspects of our surroundings. The recently adopted Goal It 'to protect and promote economic and social stability of coastal communities in an environ- mentally compatible manner' is an initial step towards a balanced proposal. However, more weight should be given to the social and economic need than is currently addressed in the CZM program text. If an approach, which would evaluate all aspects of a problem and assess the actual needs, was included then the Program would better reflect the needs of our Regional area. 7. Definition of Maryland's Coastal-Zone 7. OCZM agrees that more can be done to clarify Management ProRram the program's relationship to local government and other groups. The CZU intends to work closely with Realizing that there has been a considerable amount local governments to ensure that they are integrally of work accomplished already in the clarification involved in the program. We believe the Maryland of the CZn purpose, we feel that much sore can be CZ4P accomplishes the broad goals of the Federal eone to further define the program's relationship Act as set forth in Sections 302 and 303. with local government and other groups. There also needs to be further delineation between The program will allow for future amendments and actual Federal program goals versus Maryland's modifications and will ensure that this process CZ4P. A void seems to exist in that the Progra is an open one. Additionally, this amendment or is so general that internal program goals are not program refineent process will be in conformance defined specifically. Also the plan must contain with approved NOAA rules and regulations. the necessary mechanism to amend or modify as it is needed. XLIX Lower Eastern Shore Counties LwrEaenSoeCute (Pollitt) (8/10/78) ~~~(Pollitt) (8/10/78) Ca"Mets Responses S. Fundina Responsibility S. Wiith the approval of Maryland's CZMQ. a grant The aprovalof Y~yland' C M crriesfor imPlementation will be awarded by OCZK. At a The pprvalof aryands CMI urii with it a uinimwa, we think that Federal funding for Pro- responsibility f or adequate funding of the program. gram Implementation Is assured for the next few years. if Koryland's plan Is approved by the Federal authorities, identification of these funding coomitmienta, and associated reaponaibillties must be recognized and supported by all parties. 9. Kish Water Tables 9.Am presently warded, objective 012 does not abjetly mosor 2 abuldbe tmpeed t r~og- restrict developesnt in all high water tables but nietsitha noter1 alhighd waer tabemareast arechgh states that such development should be properly ni~~~~~~~~~~~~~sehanoalhihwtrtbereaaehg cited and constructed and only if necessary hazard areas. it would be unreasonable to to- restricted. strict development on the Eastern Shore solely on the criteria of high water table. 10. Area of Focus 10. Exact determination of the boundaries of the Ther isno.cler ct bundry or rt a o Fous.100-year flood plain are underway in these four Ther isno.cler cu honday fr Ara o Fous. counties. Once determined, this area will repre- The 100-year flood plain is referred to frequently sent the area of focus. In the interim, the appro- in the plan but is very herd to define. If the priate boundaries of the flood plains have been flood plain is used, the majority of two of the made as shown in Chapter 1I of Part II of the FEIS. Lover Shore Counties would be under the Area of Focus. L~~~ A. PROGRAM SUMMARY 1. The Coastal Area Maryland's coastal area can be divided into two distinct regions; the Atlantic Coast area which has a shoreline of 31 miles'and the Chesapeake Bay area which is characterized by over 4,000 miles of greatly indented shoreline. These two areas have some features and issues in common, but many are unique to one or the other. Maryland's Atlantic Coast is, like most of the Atlantic Coast of the United States from northern Florida to New York, bounded by barrier islands which are backed by coastal bays. Maryland's barrier island coastline consists of portions of two islands. Fqnwick Island, the entire Maryland portion of which is incorporated into the municipality of Ocean City, is developed for intensive recreational use. Just south of Fenwick Island is Assateaque Island which is protected in a natural state as a State Park, a National Seashore, and a National Wildlife Refuge. While Fenwick Island supports intensive recreational development and Assateaque provides passive recreation, access to the entire Atlantic Coastline of Maryland is preserved through a combination of public ownership and a 1975 prohibition of construction east of the dune line by the State Atlantic Coast Beach Erosion Control District Act. Behind the barrier islands is an estuarine barrier island bay system -- Chincoteague and Assawoman Bays. These bays are shallow and quite saline, supporting commercial shell- fish harvesting and extensive acreages of cord grass domi- nated salt marshes. Recreational and second home development pressures are being f-elt, in this area and could present a serious threat to these biologically productive areas. The larger portion of Maryland's shoreline borders on the nation's largest and most productive estuary -- the Chesapeake Bay. While toe two major sources of fresh water to the Bay - the Susquehanna River (which provides over half the Bay's fresh water) and the Potomac River -- are major interstate rivers, the Bay proper lies entirely within Maryland and Virginia. Despite many stresses, the Chesapeake Bay is con- sidered "generally healthy" with principal processes intact and highly productive. The Say proper is 195--miles long and has a mean width of 15 miles. The Say is gradually becoming wider and shallower due to the combined effects of sedimentation and shore erosion. A 1968 study by the Chesapeake Say Institute of the Johnx Hopkins University. The salt content of the Bay varies from seawater at its mouth to almost fresh water at its head where the Susquehanna River flows into it. Nutrients from both rivers and the ocean make it possible for the Bay to support a wide variety of plants and animals. While declining in proportion to other indus- tries, fishing and shellfish harvesting remain important industries in Maryland. The annual dockside value of Maryland's seafood catch is $75 million-with a process value of $100 million. Maryland leads the nation in oyster and crab produc- tion. Rockfish and shad are important commercial fin fish. The seafood industry provides 6,000 jobs in the state, mostly in the Bay'Is Eastern same. The industry has been important since the first settlers came to the Chesapeake's shores and has many unique characteristics which are worthy of protection. waterborne commerce is extremely important in the Chesapeake Bay region. For example, over 160,000,000 short tons of cargo ,was shipped in the Chesapeake Bay last year and most of this cargo passed through the Port of Baltimore. The Port of Balti- more is estimated to prov~de ten percent of the gross state income and jobs within the State. Port related industry is estimated to contribute $1.7 billion to Maryland's economy annually. Petroleum and refined petroleum products are among the major commodities coming into the Port. The shoreline of the Chesapeake Bay is characterized by salt marshes with beaches small or absent with the major concentra- tions of salt marsh being on the Eastern Shore. Cord grass (Spartina), black neddlerush (Juncus) and salt grass (Distichlis) are typical species. The composition of Maryland's marsh commu- nities varies both from the mouth to the headwaters of tribu- taries and from the southern to the northern portion o~f the Bay. This variation is due largely to the'varied salinity conditions. Along the streams of the Lower Eastern Shore, tidal marshes grade into upland swamps. In the northern counties, salt meadow cord grass (S. Patens) quickly grades into cattails and sedges. Maryland's Bay shoreline can be separated, both physiographically and culturally into two distinct subdivisions -- the Eastern and Western Shores of the Chesapeake Bay. The Western Shore contains the two major metropolitan areas on the Bay and its tidewater tributaries as well as the predominantly rural southern Maryland shoreline, an area chosen as the site for both a nuclear power plant and a liquified natural gas facility because of its sparse population. Both the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan region and.-the Southern Maryland counties are. rapidly growing in population and residential and commercial development. 2 The natural environzrent Of the Western Shore is characterized by rolling uplands well suited for agriculture, bounded by deep streaaik valleys. The shoreline often takes the form of steep bluffs and cliffs with narrow beaches at the base. Salt and freshwater marsht.~ fringe the tributaries. Upland forests consist largely of mixed hardwoods -- oaks, hickory, sweetguzn and oak-pine. The Eastern Shore of Maryland is predominantly rural, based on an agricultural and seafood harvesting economy with little industrial development. The Eastern Shore, in particular Dorchester County, contains most of the State's tidal wetlands, and also has extensive wooded swam~ps such as the bald cypress swamp of the Pocomoke River. The upland forests are typically dominated by Loblolly Pine and Virginia Pine. The Lower Eastern Shore experiences economic difficulties associated with high-unemployment and low median income. Environmental regulation has been blamed in part for the difficulties in attracting new industry to the area, although the predominant factor would appear to be the relatively poor access to metropolitan markets. 2. Coastal Problems and Issues Maryland's coastal problems are generally related to the fragility of the two ecosystems which characterize its coastal zone: the marsh/estuarine system of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries and the narrow and exposed beaches and barrier islands of the Atlantic Coast. In the past, these resources have been damaged by unplanned and largely unmanaged development, causing the loss of such valuable coastal resources as fisheries, wildlife habitat, beaches and marshlands. The need for economic growth as well as the maintenance of many local traditions also pose problems to Maryland. The siting of in- dustrial and commercial facilities usually occurs on the heavily populated Western Shore, while the Eastern Shore has a low growth rate. The discussion of coastal problems to follow will be divided into two geographic areas: the Atlantic Coast and the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Although theie are problems common to both areas, most are different in type or in magnitude. a. The Atlantic Coast The Maryland Coastal Zone Program attempts to address a number of important problems in this area,, all of which are associated with heavy'recreational demand for the 31 miles of ocean front beach. This very limited resource is inten- .sively used on a seasonal basis, particularly by residents of the Washington and Baltimore metropolitan areas. Active recreation is offered in Ocean City, the northern section of the State's beach, while to the south more passive recreation forms 'such as swimming, walking and wildlife observation are available. Although the problems in these two areas are obviously different, many activities occurring in one have significant spillover effects on the other. Ocean City has promoted high rise condominium and hotel development at the water's edge so that the natural dune system has suffered. The lack of protective dunes which would normally nourish the beach naturally underscores Ocean City's most important problem -- beach erosion. This erosion has become particularly important in recent years because of the severe winter storms of 1977 and 1978 which washed away most of the sand. Stop gap measures such as moving sand with bulldozers have proved unsuccessful, and beach nourishment is now being considered as at least a temporary means of addressing the problem. The economic health of the areas is so inexorably linked to a viable beach area that an immediate solution is vital. South of Ocean City, )Pssateague Island offers a completely different kind of public recreation; erosion is less of a problem as the dune system is preserved and development pro- hibited. Assa-e's major problem relates to the fragil- ity of this resource and to the fact that heavy public use may damage it. A large visitors center is now being planned in the southern portion of the inland near Chinco- teague. These plans have generated some public opposition, both because of the impacts of such construction and because a visitors center would promote increased use of that section of the Island. Although these two Atlantic Coast islands are used for very different purposes, they do experience some common problems. Severe erosion problems are already being experienced an Fenwick Island, and erosion is becoming a significant pro- blem on __at&g~'s north end as well. it is believed that dune destuto in Ocean City will affect the sand trans- port system between these two islands so that less sand would be nourishing the beach at Maeamie. A second common pro- blem-concerns beach access. People from Maryland's Western Shore and from the Washington Metropolitan area flock to the beaches during the summer months, particularly on the weekends. There is only one access point to serve those crossing the Chesapeake Bay. This situation led for years to traffic jams at the Bay Bridge and long driving times, obviously reducing public enjoyment of the 'beach experience. Construction of a second parallel span has alleviated the problem somewhat but other bottlenecks have emerged on the Eastern Shore. 4 Also of concern to bcth areas are possible impacts from, oil spills and ocean dumping. A tanker accident off the Maryland coast could have disastrous implications for the beaches and for both the environmental and economic health of the area. Additionally, oil spills related to outer Continental Shelf (OCS) development are a concern along the coast. Pipelines from the OCS production areas may be proposed to come ashore on Maryland's Atlantic Coast. Ocean dumping, which occurs in an area to the north and offshore, is another source of concern since emerging knowledge about toxic substances could point to dangers and possibly reduce the use of the beaches until the dumping is phased out. These are some of the basic coastal issues fa-ing Maryland's Atlantic Coast and have been identified as is.--es of concern in the Maryland CZMP. The way in which these problems will be-addressed by the Maryland Coastal Program will be dis- cussed in Section 3 to follow which is entitled "Coastal Program Structure". The most important authorities to be used in management will be the Wetlands Act, the Atlantic Coast Beach Erosion Control District AcL and Water Pollution Control Laws. The C-oastal Program will also provide a non- regulatory forum to help to solve such immediate concerns as Ocean City beach erosion -- a problem which necessitates close cooperation between local, state, Federal and private interests. b. Chesapeake Bay The problems associated with management of Chesapeake Bay are far more complex than the problems endemic to Maryland's Atlantic Coast. Its configuration, size and the nature of the lands adjacent to the Bay all contribute to make it a resource badly in need of comprehensive and coordinated management. Its large inflow of fresh water and shallow depth, along with heavy use, make the Bay an area that re- quires intensive management so as to reduce the stresses placed upon it. The discussion of the Bay's management problems to be addressed by the Coastal Program will be divided into the following six categories: recreational use, ports and commercial shipping, fisheries and other living aquatic resources, tidal wetlands and other natural areas, shore erosion and high hazard areas, and the siting of major facilities. The Coastal Zone Program proposes management solutions to each of these problem categories; these solu- tions are discussed in detail in Chapter III, Part 1I, of this document. (1) Recreational use The major problems for the recreational users of the Bay relate to very high demand for boating and boating facilities and the limited public access to shoreline areas. Recreational boating congestion and the impacts of marina development on wetlands and water quality are important issues. The demand for marina facilities already exceeds the capacity of existing facilities, and boat access areas for trailered boats are also in limited supply. This limited access for the boating public is a function of a greatly increasing demand for such facil- ities combined with high land costs, intense competition for land and increasing state and local, restrictions on marina development. Additional restrictions have been needed because of the environmental impacts of boating and related facilities. impacts include increased shoreline erosion and turbid- ity, introduction of human wastes and other pollutants, as well as problems related to safety and congestion. The Coastal Zone Program proposes creative methods of solving these problems in the form of much better infor- mation concerning recreational demand and congestion issues; public investment policies which promote the siting of needed facilities in areas which can sustain them; comprehensive evaluation and review with the par- ticipation by all interested parties in boating activi- ties; and rigorous enforcement of the State Wetlands Act. The problems associated with other forms of shoreline access are less comprehensively treated by this program. While all of the area seaward of the mean high tide is in public ownership, public access is not assured. The small tidal range, lack of broad sandy beaches (such as those found on the Atlantic Coast), extensive marshland adjacent to shorelands, and the small percentage of adjacent shoreland in public ownership combine to limit public access to the Bay. The State will put a high priority on acquiring additional shorefront land on the Bay; one large area, called Wye Island, is now in the process of being acquired by the State for passive recreational purposes. Recreational swimming use of the Chesapeake Bay is limited by the Bay's shallow depth, its warm summer temperatures, and its heavy summer popu- lation of jellyfish.. 6 (2) Ports and Commercial Shipping The continued viability of the Port of Baltimore, as well as smaller ports such as Cambridge and Salisbury, is of great economic importance to the Bay region. Port development and the commercial shipping generated can have significant environmental effects on coastal resources. Of particular concern are the problems associated with dredging and maintaining navigational channels as well as the risks related to oil and liqui- fied natural gas spills. The environmental consequences of dredging and oil spills are well known and will be managed by the Coastal Program. Promotion of the Port of Baltimore is one of the objec- tives of the Program, and solutions to the associated problems of dredging and dredged spoil disposal are a Program commitment. This commitment includes the selec- tion of the Hart-Miller Islands Diked Containment Area for the disposal of dredge spoil material from Blaltimore Harbor and approaches; this area is designed to accomodate over one third of the dredge material to be generated in this area over the next twenty years. Also of importance is a study entitled "Management Alternatives for Dredging and Disposal Activities in Maryland's Waters' which will be heavily relied upon in determining the ways in which additional dredge material might be disposed of in an environmentally sound manner. The disposal of unconfined dredge material from Baltimore Harbor in the open water portion of the Bay will be pro- hibited, and the Program will create a forum for further discussion of the problems and solutions to dredge material disposal. Navigational safety is directly related to the danger of oil spills and is a problem on the'heavily travelled Bay. The Coastal Zone Program will work in close cooperation with the Port Administration to improve navigational aids including the study of the feasibility of vessel traff~ic control systems, and will ensure that permits regulating the loading and off-loading of oil are strictly enforced and that in the event of spills, com- pensation fees are collected to pay for containment and cleanup. (3) Fisheries and other Living Aquatic Resources Commercial and recreational fishing and shellfishing are important uses of the Bay which can be adversely affected by many other activities occurring both within and out- side of the Bay. Over harvesting, competition for scare resources between commercial and recreational users, and water pollution from agricul-ur-l run-off, excess sewage# storm water run-off and industrial discharges all con- tribute to fisheries depletion. 'Nnether problem is the -7 lack of a comprehensive fisheries management program f or the Bay which would include basic data to determine the health and integrity of aquatic biota. Present management of this resource is focused on harvesting regulations and shellfish replenishment activities. Once the Program is approved, the State is committed to developing a fisheries management program which will provide the basic data and policy guidance necessary for ensuring the continued productivity of this resource. Also of importance are management of wetlands to ensure adequate nursery grounds for fisheries and maintenance of sufficient nutrient flow to the estuary. Unified control over the impacts of other activities which may adversely affect fisheries in accord with a set of specific policies is a substantive method of maintaining aquatic resources.- (4) Tidal Wetlands and Other Natural Areas Tidal wetlands, which play a vital role in the health and productivity of the Bay, provide basic nutrients in the food chain and habitat for many fish and wildlife species, and help to protect water quality and to inhibit potentially damaging coastal flooding. Prior to passage of the State Wetlands Act in 1970, large wetland areas were being destroyed each year. There is still consider- able pressure to alter tidal wetlands although all but a few exempted activities in wetlands require permits. in order to further protect this resource, the Coastal ""one Program has designated tidal wetlands as GAPCs with0 associated specific policies for issuing permits. There are other natural areas not presently managed by the Coastal Zone Program which will be designated for "Preservation" or "Conservation" status as part of the State Critical Areas Program. Both the Eastern and Western shores of the Bay have areas which have signifi- cant wildlife or historic value. The Coastal Zone Program will assist county governments' in identifying such areas. Local governments will submit recommendations of such areas for designation as State Critical Areas to the Department of State Planning. These recommendations will .include proposals for ways of managing the areas. (5) Shore Erosion and Flood Hazard Areas Although much of the Bay's shoreline is eroding at a slow rate, approximately 140 miles of it are being lost at the rate of four feet or more per year. The problems associ- ated with erosion include loss of valuable waterfront property and the creation of additional sediments which can cover valuable oyster lands and fill tidal creeks and inlets. Poorly sited development may also further aggra- vate the shore erosion problem. The Coastal Zone Program will deal with erosion in the following ways: it will provide technical assistance to individuals and local- ities; marsh will be protected and erosion control structures will be placed shoreward of the marsh; and state agencies will c,:__-dinate their activities so as to promote shoreline setbacks and to restrict dovelop- ment in high risx erosion areas. Coastal flooding during hurricanes and storms is a major problem in the Bay. Development of riverine floodplains, which increases the magnitude and frequency of serious flooding, has occurred often in the past and has sig- nificantly increased the potential damaging impact of large storms. The Coastal Zone Program will address this problem by 'restricting development in the 100-year flood- plain to minimize danger to life and property, to reduce flooding and to ensure maintenance of water quality, bio- logical resources and other environmental factors. (6) The Siting of Major Facilities Inadequately planned major facility siting has caused significant environmental damage to the resources associated with the Bay, as well as delays in the con- struction of regionally and nationally important facil- ities. The Maryland Coastal Program puts considerable emphasis on managing the siting of such facilities so as to ensure environmental protection while sustaining economic growth. The paragraphs to follow will discuss the issues associated with the following general types of developments of major size: OCS/Oil/Natural Gas, Electric Generation, Industrial, Commercial and Residen- tial, Sewage Treatment, and Land Transportation facilities. The Program has produced a valuable work product, the Major Facilities Study, which was developed as an infor- mation base to enable state agencies and local governments to make better decisions regarding facilities siting. The Study identifies areas that are suitable for siting, both in a socio-economic and environmental sense and proposes methods for evaluating impacts and alternative develop- ment strategies. Now that exploratory drilling has started in the Baltimore Canyon area, the onshore siting of facilities to support Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas. development may occur in the Bay. The impacts associated with the siting of such large facilities as oil refineries could have a sub- stantial impact on the Bay's resources if these facilities are not located properly. The Maryland Program has an excellent information base to use in evaluating proposals to site such facilities in coastal areas, including the previously mentioned Major Facilities Study. Oil related 9 facilities will be comprehensively managed under the Coastal Facility Review Act (CFRA) which includes an exhaustive socio-economic and environmental analysis of the siting to determine whether a CFRA permit should be issued. The production and transmission of energy are potenti- ally major contributors to environmental degradation of the Bay and adjacent lands, and require comprehensive environmental analysis. To solve this problem, the State established an innovative Power Plant Siting Program in 1971 which has been a model to many other states. The process established by this 1971 Act was structured to ensure that future demands for electric power would be met at reasonable costs while ensuring that the natural and socio-economic environments would be protected. The siting decision is made by the State and includes an analysis of the impacts of proposed new generating units, an assessment of impacts associated with existing generating facilities, and the acquisition of alternate sites. industrial, commercial and large scale residential facilities are often proposed for location on or near the Bay and are generally attractive to local govern- men"s. Yet these facilities can place a strain on public facilities, can cause additional flow of pollut- ants to the estuarine waters from non-point sources such as parking lots, and can disturb natural resources if not sited properly. Tihe strain on existing public facilities can create a demand for new water, sewer, and road construction which in turn may promote more growth. These problems will be addressed by the Maryland Coastal Zone Program in the following ways: public investment funds will be used to ensure the proper siting of coastal facilities; and State and local plans and regulatory actions will be reviewed to ensure consistency with the Program in order to avoid undue burdens on public services and to minimize impacts on water qualiey and other valu- able resources. Sewer and land transportation facilities create similar problems, aside from impacts associated with the con- struction phase of a project. Inducement of additional growth in areas that cannot support such growth is of primary importance in the Bay area. The program addresses this problem by providing a mechanism for re- viewing all water, sewer, and transportation plans for consistency with the Coastal Program and by establishing policies which discourage construction of inadequate or inappropriate sewer, water and transportation facilities. 10 3. Coastal Program Structure The Maryland Coastal Program is based on existing laws and authorities. The State's objective in developinq a coastal management program is to establish a comprclhensive coordi- nated approach for the protection, preservation and orderly development of the State's coastal resources. The State has developed specific goals, objectives and policies for management of uses and activities which have a direct and significant effect on coastal waters. Management is to be achieved through the use of existing regulatory programs, an Executive Order, a Secretarial Order, Memoranda of Agree- ment between State agencies, and two new administrative procedures called "Project Evaluation" and "Program Review." Maryland's program will affect a relatively large coastal area extending from its three-mile jurisdiction in the Atlantic Ocean to the inland boundaries of the counties bordering the Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay, and the Poto- mac River up to the District of Columbia. Thus, the counties of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Calvert, Caroline, Cecil, Charles, Dorchester, Harford, Kent, Prince George's, Queen Anne's, Somerset, St. Mary's, Talbot, Wicomico, Worcester and the City of Baltimore are included in Maryland's coastal zone. Within each of these 16 counties and one city, an "Area of Focus" has been identified for special.attention. The Area of Focus in each locality has been established in cooperation with the local government, and in most cases coincides with the 100-year floodplain bordering the State's tidal waters. The second tier consists of the areas within the coastal counties but outside the "Area of Focus". This two-tier approach recognizes that activities occurring within the 100- year floodplain will most frequently have a direct and signif- icant effect upon coastal waters but that certain major uses, such as energy facilities and major industrial facilities, may affect coastal waters regardless of their location within the coastal zone. Management in the First Tier - Areas of Focus The Area of Focus includes coastal waters, bays, estuaries, tidal wetlands, Chesapeake Bay beaches to-mean high tide, Atlantic Beaches to the dune line, and upland areas to the boundary of the 100-year riverine and tidal floodplain. These areas encompass the State's most important coastal resources where direct and significant impacts are most likely to occur. The most important state regulatory authorities for these geographic areas are: Coastal waters, bays & estuaries: Water Pollution Control Laws Wetlands Act State Boat Act Fisheries Laws Tidal Wetlands & Chesapeake Bay Beaches: Wetlands Act Atlantic Beaches: Atlantic Coast Beach Erosion Control District Act 100-year Floodplains: Construction in or obstruction of 100-year flood- plain of free- flowing rivers and non-tidal waters (Art. NR, Section '8-903) Flood Control and Watershed Manage- ment Act of 1976 This list is not comprehensive; authorities which will be described in the following section also apply to the Area of Focus. The purpose of including this limited list of regu- latory authorities here is to show that all geographic areas within the Area of Focus are covered by comprehensive regula- tory programs. The Executive Order requires state agencies to use these authorities to implement the Coastal Management Program. A description of how this is accomplished is described in a section to follow entitled "Role of the Executive Order". The Project Evaluation procedure, which is also described in a section to follow, will insure that nearly all activities proposed for the Area of Focus receive a comprehensive review and evaluation prior to any state agency permit decision. Management in the Second'Tier In the coastal areas outside the "Area of Focus", implemen- tation of the coastal policies will be accomplished through the following state authorities: - Water Pollution Control Laws - Water Appropriation Permits Act - Sedimentation Control Act - Surface Mining Act. - Power Plant Siting Program - Coastal Facilities Review Act 12 -Laws governing Water Supply, Sewage, and Solid Waste Disposal Plans * -~~~Air Quality Laws -Transportation Planning Requirements -Various public investment authorities which guide construction of public facilities, land acquisition and financial aid programs. These laws are applicable throughout the coastal counties both inside and outside the Area of Focus; the Executive order, described below, insures that they will be used to implement the coastal policies. As noted above, nearly all activities in the Area of Focus will be evaluated by the state for compliance with coastal zone objectives and policies. In the second tier, on the other hand, the focus of the evaluations will be on proposed major facilities. Major facilities include OCS/oil/natural gas facilities, power plants, ports, industrial parks, mineral extraction facilities, large-scale residential developments, sewage treatment facilities, and transportation facilities. Other projects will receive an evaluation if they are considered likely to have a significant impact on coastal resources or on other coastal activities. Role of the Executive Order To insure that the preexisting statutes and regulations affecting land and water within the coastal zone are exercised in accordance with coastal goals and policies, the Governor of Maryland has issued an executive order which provides: (1)' That the approved Program constitutes official State policy; (2) That State agencies must undertake their activities in a manner consistent with the Program; (3) That all State agencies must participate in project evaluation; and (4) That all disputes between State agencies be resolved promptly. Before deciding whether to issue or deny a permit or to con- duct proprietary or financial activities in the coastal zone, the Governor's Executive order requires state agencies to review the coastal goals and policies and make their decisions to the maximum extent possible consistent with the Program. 13 Thus when the Water Resources Administration, for instance, is considering a water appropriation application, it is required by the Executive order to consider not only the narrower standards and criteria set out in regulations governing issuance of water use permits but also to con- sider to the maximum extent possible under its statutory mandate whether issuance of the permit would violate any coastal goals or policies expressed in the Coastal Zone Management Program. If the proposed water use would be inconsistent with any of the coastal goals and policies, the Executive order requires that the permit be denied or conditioned so that the coastal policies are not violated. obv'iously there will be differences in the amount of discre- tion that the state agency making a permit decision may exercise. In most instances, however, standards for decision- making set forth in Maryland laws and regulations are broad and the administering agency will have adequate discretion to take'the state coastal policies into consideration. To supplement the Executive Order, Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) are being negotiated between DNR and the key agencies involved in coastal resource management. The MOUs add speci- ficity and detail to the obligations incurred by each agency pursuant to the Executive Order. Such a MOU is currently in effect between DNR and the Department of State Planning; MOUs with the Department of Transportation, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, and the Department of Economic and Community Development will be signed prior to FEIS publication. To insure coordination of activities within DNR, the Secretary of the Department will issue a Secretarial order which addresses: (1) program coordination; (2) project evaluation; (3) program review, and (4) Federal consistency. Project Evaluation Project evaluation is a process which will result in a consoli- dated review and comprehensive evaluation of any major activity proposed for the coastal zone. All local, state and Federal agencies having management responsibility over or an interest in the proposed project will be involved. 14 The end product of this evaluation will be a set of findings and recommendations concerning the proposed project ancl its consistency with the state's coastal policies; the Coastal Zone Unit will be responsible for seeing that these findings and recommendations are presented to each state agency making a regulatory, management or financial decision relating to the activity and that they become a part of -the administrative record of the agency. Program Review in addition to evaluating the impacts of large projects on a case-by-case basis, the Program provides a means for reviewing existing programs and procedures dealing with coastal resources and activities for their consistency with the CZM Program. This program review process will be used to review such things as proposed legislation affecting coastal resources, issuance of new or amended regulations and development and revision of state and regional plans and local comprehensive plans and zoning ordinances. The purpose of the review is to create a forum in which all program participants can define conflicts, potential conflicts, or inconsistencies between programs in- volving coastal resources, and make formal proposals for administrative or legislative remedies. The Coastal Zone Unit of DNR will be responsible for conducting these reviews. B. WHAT THE MARYLAND COASTAL PROGRAM WILL DO THAT IS NEW Although existing state authorities will be used to imple- ment and enforce the Maryland CZM program, several new and very important changes will occur in the way coastal resources are managed in the State. The need for better management of Maryland's coast has long been recognized. By participating in the program established by the FCZMA of 1972, the State has been able to develop a more coordinated and comprehensive system to manage the coastal resources. The most significant changes include: New and specific State coastal management policies: The State Program document (Part II) lists the objectives of the Program and a set of policy guidelines for each of the issues addressed in the Program. These explicit policies, which will be enforced by the State, providie a predictability in State resource decision-making not realized before. People proposing to undertake projects in the Coastal Zone will have a clearer understanding of what the State's position regarding their project will likely be. The Program's objectives and policies also provide the framework for cooperative action among governmental agencies to address coastal problems and resolve coastal policy questions. Networking through the Executive Order and Memoranda of Understanding: The specific policies mentioned above will assume particular importance in Maryland as a result of an Executive Order signed by the Governor which explicitly states that the Coastal Zone Management Program constitutes official policy for coastal resources and that State agencies must comply with these policies. Additionally, the Department of Natural Resources has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of State Planning and is negotiating MOUs with other relevant State agencies to ensure conformance of their programs and activities with the objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program. These other MOUs will be signed prior to Program approval. Program Review Process: As was also discussed previously, the Coastal Zone Management Program has created a new process for reviewing all existing coastal programs and procedures (i.e., current rules and regu- lations, local planning and zoning efforts, State coastal resource policies, etc.) in order to determine their consistency with the State's Coastal Management Program. Project Evaluation Process: This new aditinistrative procedure that was discussed in the preceeding atction, ensures that all major projects proposed for the Coastal Zone are comprehensively reviewed and eval- * ~~uated. It creates, for t'1Z first time, a mechanism by which all interested and/or affected agencies and planning groups are brought together as part of the State decision-making process. The FCZMA provides incentives and a national direction that cannot be provided by the State alone in addressing coastal issues and problems. The following are some of the anticipated effects of Federal Program approval: o Financial assistance to State agencies, particularly the Department of Natural Resources, to assure adequate and specialized staffs to carry out those agencies permit responsibilities in a more expeditious manner consistent with the coastal policies. o Financtial-and technical assistance to county governments in meeting their responsibilities under the Coastal Management Program. o Financial assistance for the Coastal Zone Unit to conduct project evaluations and program reviews. More generally, approval of Maryland's Coastal Management Program will have the effect of providing a more coordinated and more clearly articulated framework for governmental decision-making by establishing the objectives and policies of the Program as the guiding principles for government decisions. Federal approval also will bring into effect the Federal con- sistency provisions' of the CZMA, thus requiring Federal acti.ons which include Federal projects, licenses and permits, and assistance programs to be consistent to'the maximum extent practicable with Maryland's Coastal Management Program. 17 C. THE FEDERAL COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT ACT (CZMA) In response to the intense pressures upon and because of the importance of coastal areas of the United States, Congress passed the Coastal Zone Management Act (P. L. 92-583) which was signed into law on October 27, 1972. The Act authorized a Federal grant-in-aid program to be administered by the Secretary of Commerce, who in turn delegated this responsi- bility to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) office of Coastal Zone Management (QCZM). The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 was substantially amended on July 26, 1976 (P. L. 94-370). The Act and the 1976 amendments affirm a national interest in the effective protection and development of the coastal zone, by providing assistance and encouragement to coastal States to develop and implement rational programs for managing their coastal zones. Broad guidelines and the basic requirements of the CZMA provide the necessary direction for developing tI'ese State programs. These guidelines and requirements for program development and approval are contained in 15 CFR Part 923, as revised and pub- lished March 1, 1978 in the Federal Register. In summary, the requirements for program approval are that a State develop a management program that: (1) Identifies and evaluates those coastal resources recognized in the Act that require management or protection by the State; (2) Reexamines existing policies or develops new policies to manage these resources. These policies must be specific, comprehensive and enforceable, and must provide an- adequate degree of predictability as to how coastal resources will be managed; (3) Determines specific uses and special geographic areas that are to be subject to the management program, based on the nature of identified coastal concerns. The basis for management uses (or their impacts) and areas should be based on resource capability and suitability analyses, socio-economic considerations and public preferences; (4) Identifies the inland and seaward areas subject to the management program; (5) Provides for the consideration of the national interest in the planning for and siting of facilities that meet more than local requirements; and (6) Includes sufficient legal authorities and organizational arrangements to implement the program and to insure con- formance to it. In arriving at these substantive aspects of the management program, States are obliged to follow an open process which involves providing information to and considering the is ~interests of the general public, special interest groups, local governments, and regi.onal, State, interstate and Federal agencies. Section 305 of the CZMA authorizes a maximum of four annual grants to States to assist them in development of a coastal management program. After developing a management program, the State may submit it to the Secretary of Commerce for approval pursuant to Section 306 of the CZMA. If approved, the State is then eligible for annual grants under Section 306 to implement its management program. If a program has defi- ciencies which need to be remedied or has not received Secretarial approval by the time Section 305 program develop- ment grants have expired, a State may be eligible for prelimi- nary approval and additional funding under Section 305(d).- Section 307 of the Act stipulates that Federal agency actions shall be consistent, to the maximum extent practicable with approved State manatgement programs. Section 307 further pro- vides for mediation by the Secretary of Commerce when a serious disagreement arises between a Federal agency and a coastal State with respect to a Federal consistency issue. Section 308 of the CZMA contains several provisions for grants and loans to coastal States to enable them to plan for and respond to on-shore impacts resulting from coastal energy activities. To be eligible for assistance under Section 308, coastal States must be receiving Section 305 or 306 grants, or, in the Secretary's view, be developing a management program consistent with the policies and objectives contained in Section 303 of the CZMA. Section 309 allows th-e Secretary to make grants (90 percent Federal share) to States to coordinate, study, plan, and imple- ment interstate coastal management programs. Section 310 allows the Secretary to conduct a program of research, study and training to support State management programs. The Secretary may also make grants (80 percent Federal share) to States to carry out research studies and training required to support their programs. Section 315 authorizes grants (50 percent Federal share) to States to acquire lands for access to beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical aesthetic, eco- logical, or cultural value, and for the preservation of islands, in addition to the estuarine sanctuary program to preserve a representative series of undisturbed estuarine areas for long- term scientific and educational purposes. 19 D. FEDERAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS The table below indicates which chapters of the Maryland Program Submission describe how the State's program meets the specific requirements of the CZMA program approval regulations. Sections of Approval Title Final Environmental Impact Regulations Statement - Relevant Sections 923.31, 923.32, Boundaries Chapter II 923.33, 923.34 923.11, 923.12 Uses subject to management Chapter III 923.21, 923.23 Areas of particular concern Chapter IV Chapter III, generally 923.41 Means of control Chapter VIII, generally Chapter Vill, generally 923.22 Guidelines on priorities of uses Chapter IV ~0 ~ 923.45 , 923.47 Organizational structure Chapter I 923.25 Shorefront planning process Chapter III, pages 133-144 923.14 Energy facility planning process Chapter III, pages 227-246 923.26 Erosion planning process Chapter III, pages 153-162 923.58, 923.51, - Notice; full participation; con- Chapters I, V, VI, and VII 923.55, 923.3 sistent with Section 303 Chapter I, pages 61-70 923.56 Plan coordination Chapter III, Chapter V, generally Chapter VI, pages 322-327 923.57 Continuing consultation mechanisms Chapter I pages 61-70 Chapter If I, Chapter V, generally Chapter VI, pages 322-327. 923.58 Public hearings Pages 462-464, Appendix C 923.47 Gubernatorial review and approval Letter in Program Document 923.46, 923.47 Designation of recipient agency Letter from Governor (December 1977) See also Executive Order 01.01.1978.05 Sections of Approval Title Final Environmental Impact Regulations Statement -Relevant Sections Chapter I, generally 923.41, 923.47 Authorities Chapter III, generally Chapter VIII, generally 923.51, 923.52 Adequate consideration of national Chapter VI, pages 327-337 interests 923.24 Areas for preservation/restoration Chapter IV, pages 303-304 923.41 Administer regulations, control Chapter VIII, pages 376-412 development; resolve conflict 923.41 Powers of acquisition, if necessary Chapter VIII, pages 412-418 923.41, 923.42 Techniques of control Chapter III, generally Chapter VIII, generally 923.13, 923.41, Uses of regional benefit Chapter VI, pages 327-328. 338 923.43 Chapter VIII, pages 431-434 923.51 Federal-State Consultation Chapter VI, generally Appendix F 923.44 Incorporation of air and water Executive Suary Executive Summary quality requirements Chapter III, Section A, generally, Section C.9, Section D Chapter VI, page 336 Appendix F, pages F 47 to F 49 (EPA) Chapter VIII, pages 400-401 E. NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1969 REQUIREMENTS On January 1, 1970, the President signed into law the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which required each Federal agency to prepare a statement of environmental impact in ad- vance of each major action that may significantly affect the quality of the human environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must assess potential environmental impacts of such action. To comply with NEPA's requirement of preparing an EIS, OCZM has combined the State's coastal management program with a dis- cussion of the environmental impacts. The CZMA is based upon the premise that the environmental aspects of the coastal manage- ment program should receive significant consideration in the development of State programs. Therefore, as you read this EIS, you should be aware that the State coastal management program is the core document included in its entirety, supplemented by the requirements of NEPA, Section 102(2) (c). For the reviewers who are familiar with the NEPA requirements for the content of an EIS, the Table below will provide this information. TABLE 2 Description of the proposed action ...... .. Part Description of the environment affected . . Part III, Chap. 1 Relationship of the proposed action to land use plans, policies, and controls for the affected area ................... Part II, Chap. l&3 Probable impact of the proposed action on the environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part III, Chap. 2 Alternatives to the proposed action .... Part III, Chap. 3 Probable adverse environmental affects which cannot be avoided . . . . . . . . . ... .. Part III, Chap. 4 Relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity . . . Part III, Chap. 5 Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be involved in the pro- posed action should it be implemented . . . Part III, Chap. 6 Consultation and Coordination with Others . Part III, Chap. 7 22 PART II THE MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Prepared by: Department of.Natural Resources Energy & Coastal Zone Administration Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, Maryland 21401 Suzanne Bayley, Director TAPLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Executive Summary . . . . . ........ 23 Chapter I: Program. Implementation Framework ........... 37 Program Authorities . . . . . ... . . . . 37 Existing Organizational Structure . . . . 40 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . 5g Conflict Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Chapter II: Maryland's Coastal Zone Boundary...... . .. .. 73 Legislative Requirements. . . . . . . . . 73 The Maryland Coastal Zone Boundary. . . . 74 Chapter III: Appropriate Land and Water Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Legisletive Requirements. . . . . . . . . 81 Goals and Objectives of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program . . . . 82 Determining Appropriate Land and Water Uses in the Coastal Zone. . . . . . . . 82 General Objectives and Policies . . . . . 83 Public Investments.. . . . . . . 89 Implications of Each Activity, or Use of Concern. . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . 91 A. Coastal Waters ........ . 94 1. Recreational Boating. . 95 2. Commercial Shipping (Oil Spill Containment and Prevention) . . . 103 3. Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material. . . . . . . . . log 4. Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources. . . . . 115 5. Ocean Dumping ......... 121 6. OCS Oil and Gas Exploration, Production and Transportation . . 126 B. Intertidal Areas. . . . . . . . . . . 132 1. Use of Beach Access 133 2. Activities in Tidal wetlands. . . 145 C. Shoreland Areas ............ 152 1. Activities in Areas Undergoing Significant Shore Erosion .. 153 i~~~~~~~~5 PAGE 2. Activities in Coastal Tidal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains. . . . 163 3. Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands. . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 4. Use of Agricultural Lands . . . . 178 S. Use of Forested Lands . . . . . . 184 6. Channelization (and Small Watershed Projects) . . . . . . . 190 7. Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recre- ational, Open Space and Natural areas . . . .. ..... 196 S. Activities Affecting'Coastal, Historical, Cultural and Archeo- logical Resources . . . . . . . . 211 9. Shoreland Activities in General . 216 D. Major Facilities. . . . ..227 1. Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities...... . . . . . . 232 2. Electric Generating Facilities. . 239 3. Ports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247 4. Industrial Parks. . ...... . 256 S. Mineral Extraction Facilities (Sand and Gravel) . . . . . . . . 264 6. Large-scale Residential Facilities . . .. ....... 270 7. Sewage Treatment Facillities ; 275 8. Land Transportation Facilities. 285 Chapter IV: Geographic Areas of Particular Concern . . . . . .294 Legislative Requirements. . . . . . . . 294 Existing Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: Vegetated Tidal Wetlands. . . . . . . . . . . .295 Continuing Identification of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: The State Critical Areas Program . . . . . . . . .. . . 296 GAPCs and State Critical Areas . . . . . 299 Resource Protection Areas . . . . . . 300 Hazard Prone Areas. . . . . . . . . . 302 Developmental Critical Areas. . . . . 303 Areas for Preservation and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 Priority of Uses in GAPCs . . . . . . . 304 Chapter V: Local Government Involvement. � 307 Legislative Requirements. . . . . . . . 307 Operational Role of Local Gcvernments - 308 PAGE The Baltimor, Metrorolian Coastal Area Study - A Locai-le'iona1 Response to CZM Program Development ....... 312 Chapter VI: State and Federal Interactions 322 State-Federal Con~u/tation. . . . . . . 322 The National Interest and Uses of Regional Benefit. . . . . . . . . . . 327 Consideration of the National Interest in State and Local Coastal Resource Management Decisions ..... .... . . . 328 Federal Consistency . . . . ... 339 Chapter VII: The Public Role in Coastal Zone Management . . . . . . . 365 Public Information: Keeping the Public Aware of Coastal Zone Management Activities . . . . . . . . 365 Public Participation in Coastal Zone Management Activities . . . . . . . . 367 Public Involvement in Coastal Project Assessments...... . . . . ... 371 Accountability to the Public for Coastal Zone Management Activities. . 373 Appeals of Public Decisions Regarding Coastal Zone Management . .e. . . . . 374 Chapter VIII: Legal Authority Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376 Land and Water Use Regulation . . . . . 377 Resolution of Conflicting Uses. . . . . 407 Authority to Acquire Interests in Land and Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412 Networking Authority . . . . . . . . . . 418 Uses of Regional Benefit. . . . . . . . 431 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 iii~~~~~3 LIST OF TABLES Table Page ES-1 The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program's Goals and Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 I-I status of County Planning and Zoning . . . . ...55 I-2 coastal Resources Advisory Commission . . . . . . . . 60 II-1 Coastal Zone Management Boundary Areas of Focus . . 78 II-2 Federal Land Owning Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78 III-1 Activities/Uses of Concern in the Coastal Zone . . .. 93 TII-2 Public Beaches in Maryland's Coastal Zone . . . . . . 133 111-3 Completion Dates for the Delineation of 100-Year Flood Plains in Coastal Counties . . . . . . . . . 167 III-4 Existing and Proposed Acquisition Relating to Recreational, Open Space, and Natural Areas in Maryland's Coastal ,one . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 IV-1 Geographic Areas of Particular Concern o Management Authorities ........... 298 VI-1 National Interest Considerations in Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program . . . . . . . . . . 331 VI-2 Uses of Regional Benefit in Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338 VI-3 State Agencies Which May Participate in Major Consistency Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341 343 VI-4 Federal Consistency Matrix Diagram . . . . . . . . . 343 VI-5 Federal Licenses and Permits Subject to Consistency Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351 VI-6 Federal Assistance Programs Subject to Consistency . 361 iv LIST OF rIGURES AND MAPS Page Figure I-1 Organization of Coastal Zone Management Program . .41 Figure I-2 Department of Natural Resources ...........45 Figure I-3 Drpartment of State Planning .......... . . 47 Figure 1-4 Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Environmental Health Administration ........ 49 Figure 1-5 Initiating the Project Evaluation Process ...... 63 Figure 1-6 Full Project Evaluation ............... Map 1: Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program: Boundary Map 2: Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program: Excluded Federal Lands Map 3: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Anne Arundel County Map 4: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Baltimore County and City Map 5: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Baltimore City Inset Map 6: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Calvert County, Map 7: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Caroline County Map 8: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Cecil County Map 9: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Charles County Map 10: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Dorchester County Map 11: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Harford County Map 12: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Kent County Map 13: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Prince George's County Map 14: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Queen Anne's County Map 15: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, St. Mary's County v Page Map 16: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Somemset Bounty Map 17: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Talbot County Map 18: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Wicomico County Map 19: Coastal Boundary: Area of Focus, Worcester County Figure III-1 Transportation Systems Planning Process . . . . . 23 Figure VI-1 Flow Diagram of OCS Plan Consistency Review . . . . 358 Figure VI-2 Federal Consistency Review Through Clearinghouse . 360 vi EXECTIV SUMMA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~RY, The Coastal Zone - A Timeless Resou~rce Times have changed since the prehistoric predecessors of Modern Man roamed what is now the State of Maryland. The land and water were both enemy and provider to these primitive people, who foragedi, hunted, and fished to wrest a subsistence living from the wild abundance of the natural resources around them. Times have changed. The land is no longer an obstacle to our cars, trucks, mining equipment, and construction machinery. The water is no longer an obstacle to our recreational boats, our cargo vessels, and our off-shore oil rigs. And vast expanses are no longer obstacles to our jumbo jets. Human beings can now control in large measure the fate of their own environment, and they can control the fate of the other living species with which they share that environment. Times have changed. But something has remained unchanged from prehistox-' to the present day: the desirability and importance of land close to the water. ,The fertility and accessibility of coastal lands attracted our prehistoric ancestors, as evidenced by the fact that there are in Maryland an average of two prehistoric sites for every mile of shoreline. In fact, two-thirds of all the known archeological *sites in the State's coastal counties are located within 200 feet of the water. Today, the coastal zone is of no less importance. Maryland's part facilities provide nearly a quarter of a million jobs, and directly contribute l�billion to the State's economy - 11% of the entire gross state product. The coastal zone is literally the'heartbeat of the State: 90% of the power which keeps Maryland's cities and towns lighted, warm, and functioning is generated in the coastal zone. W ~~People are increasingly using the coast. Nearly three quarters of Maryland's entire $1.2 billion tourist trade is in the coastal zone, and many of those who come initially for a visit return later as permianent residents. The 1970 census showed that 76% of Maryland's total population lived in the coastal zone, and projections indicate that this percentage will increase to 85% by 1980. Thus, Maryland's coastal- zone is perhaps the single most vital factor in the State of Maryland's economic well-being, energy. production, recreational activity, and population growth. But the resources of Maryland's coastal zone are not infinite. As more people flock to the state's shores., as more industry brings more economic activity to the area, as more facilities and services are required to meet the needs of increased populations, the State's coastal resources can be stretched beyond their capacity, upsetting the delicate balance of inter-relating circumstances which have made Maryland's coastal zone so desirable for centuries. In fact, the horizon of the coastal zone's capacity to adsorb random growth may already be in sight. in the years between 1908 and 1968, some 200,000 acres of wetlands were lost. The State's harvests of striped bass have been fluctuating wildly, from a low of 314,000 pounds in 19'3, to a high of over five million pounds-in 1961. dwindling again to less than two million pounds in 1976. While Maryland led the antion in oyster harvests in the 1880's with annual harvests of between eight and fifteen million bushels, recent harvests have been less than 2� million bushels. 23 Man is no longer foraging, hunting, and fishing along Maryland's coastal zone with primitive too~ls and with a limitless supply Of fish and game. With technological sophistication, he now has the capacity to alter the land, to construct immense residential developments and industrial complexes, to dig for fuel at unimaginable depths under the water, and inadvertently to alter or eliminate the very resources that have made the coastal zone the vital asset that it is. The Development of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program The Federal Act Recognizing the value and the precarious position of the nation's coastal resources, the federal government passed the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. Through this Act, federal assistance was provided to coastal states to develop and administer management programs which "preserve, protect, develop, and, where possible, restore our coastal resources'. It is this Act which has made possible the development of the Marylan~d Coastal Zone Management Program. Basic Premises, Goals and Objectives Because of its7 desirable location, richness in resources, and natural beauty, Maryland's coastal zone has attracted a broad diversity of industries, activities, and interests. it was recognized at the outset of the development of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program, that to be totally effective, a management program would have to balance these widely divergent activities and interests, taking into account the capacity of coastal resources to accommodate them. It was recognized that the coastal zone could in fact accommodate a wide variety of activities, and that the management program should strike a balance between preservation, conservation, and utilization, in order to provide the0 greatest possible benefit for the greatest number of Maryland's citizens, both economically and environmentally. Since the coastal zone contains diverse areas of particular scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological, recreational, or ecosystem maintenance importance, the need to establish priorities for the use of different areas was clearly perceived. Four criteria were articulated as basic necessities in the evaluation of the compatibility between a coastal activity and the area in which it occurred. Any activity would be considered on the basis of the degree to which it: 1) preserved the quality of the State's coastal resources and the natural character of its shoreline, 2) required or was enhanced by a shoreline location, 3) resulted in long term benefits, and 4) was consistent with state interests and met needs expressed in a local comprehensive plan. Second, it was recognized that certain areas are particularly vulnerable to natural hazards such as erosion and flooding, and should therefore receive special attention. It was also recognized that certain activities such as the siting and operation of major facilities (e.g., power slants) may degrade coastal resources significantly unless special attention is given to siting and operating themi in a manner compatible with surrounding coastal resources. 24 Third, a basic premise of the development of Maryland Coastal -one Manaaement Program was the recognition that no area or activity should be considc.red in isolation, that national, state, and local interests should therefore be considered, and that the cooperation of federal, state and local agencies, under the leadership of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, would be necessary for implementa- tion of an effective Coastal Zone ManaGement Program. Finally, it was recognized that federal and state funds would have to be r'ovided to state and local government agencies to implement fully the Coastal Zone Management Program. It took three years to develop the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program from these basic considerations and premises. In the first year, a thorough examination of past and present management efforts in coastal areas was undertaken. Inventories of coastal resources were taken. Significant coastal issues were identified and studied, and efforts were begun to establish the means of ongoinq public participation in the Program. In the second year of development, a study of onshore development associated with Outer Continental Shelf activities was begun, and a comprehensive plan for disposal of dredge spoil was drafted. The inventory of coastal resources was completed, and an analysis of existing institu- tions and legal authorities relevant to management cf coastal areas was undertaken. In the third year, the framework for public participation was completed, and through regional coordinators placed with local governments, local involvement in the determination of goals and objectives was obtained. Other technical studies, such as the Recreational Boating Study and the Upland Natural Areas Study, were also conducted to generate additional data needed for the development of the comprehensive Coastal Management Program. The result of this three-year process is a coastal zone management program which is comprehensive in scope, and which takes into account not only coastal resources and activities, but also all existing authorities regarding the various aspects of these diverse resources and activities in the coastal zone. Specific goals and objectives for the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program have been developed. With their roots in the Program's basic considerations and premises, these goals and objectives have specific application to the various coastal uses and activities addressed by the Program,. and they are reinforced by the strength of legislation which already exists. Thus, the validity and efficacy of these *oals and objectives are not dependent upon the enactment of new legislation.. These goals and objectives are listed on pp. 26-30. Program Content: Federal Thresholds Perhaps the best way to summarize the content of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program is in terms of the federal thresholds on which the Program will be evaluated by the federal government. Seven thresholds were established by the federal Office of Coastal Zone Management, which reviews each state's coastal zone management program against these thresholds to determine whether or not the program will receive federal support for implementation. 25 Table ES-1 THE MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM'S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES GOAL Is To Preserve and Protect Coastal Resources OBJECTIVES: (1) To protect, maintain, and where feasible improve air quality in the State's coastal zone in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare, and the quality of the State's environmental resources. (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (3) To protect coastal aquatic areas of significant resource value and where possible, restore presently degraded areas of potentially significant resource value, such as viable oyster bars and clam beds, important fish migratory pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas, and wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (4) To protect, maintain, and where feasible, restore the integrity of the tidal wetlands of the State. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value-areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as non- tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas of migratory birds. (6) To promote the protection and wise management of productive coastal agricultural and forested areas through cooperation with programs of the local Soil Conservation Districts, the Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation, the Maryland Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Forest Service, the Department of State Planning and the Maryland Environmental Trust. (7) To protect coastal cultural, historical, and archeological resources. (8) To promote increased recreational opportunities in shoreland areas, to promote increased public access to tidal waters, and to assure that these occur in a manner which protects the quality of coastal resources and which maintains public health and safety. 26 GOAL 2: To Protect and Promote the Economic and Social Stability of Coastal Conmmunities in an Environmentally Compatible Manner. OBJECTIVES: (9) To assist the people living in the coastal zone iwmrove the quality and productivity of their lives in an environmentally compatible manner. (10) To recognize, protect and promote the economic and social stability of coastal communities and the industries located therein through proper resource management, acknowledging that coastal residents, communities and industries are valuable resources in themselves. (11) To ensure that management decisions concerning coastal resources and activities include consideration of measures to maintain or improve the economic and social stability of coastal communities. (12) To promote, in cases in which existing and proposed coastal practices and activities must be modified, the identification of alternatives which will both provide protection to coastal resources and assist, to the maximum extent possible, the maintenance, protection, and improvement of the economic and social standards of coastal communities and the region of which they are a part. . GOAL 3: To Protect the Public Interest, Safety and Welfare in Natural Hazard Areas OBJECTIVES: (13) To give priority to non-structural management techniques for controlling tidal and riverine flood hazards, including the use of flood plains for open space uses such as agriculture, forestry and recreation, in order to lessen the danger to life and property, and to minimize advezse effects-on biological resources and water quality. (14) To promote the use of shoreline setbacks--andthe restriction of development in high risk erosion areas in order to reduce erosion-caused danger to life and property and to minimize the cost to the public and private sectors. (15) To promote the use of shore erosion control techniques, where necessary, in a manner which provides long-term protection, minimizes adverse effects on natural systems (both biological and physical), and avoids damage to adjacent property owners. 27 (16) To promote the proper siting, construction, and where necessary the restriction of development in other natural hazard areas such as steep slopes and high water table areas to reduce the danger to life and property and to prevent adverse environmental impacts. GOAL 4: To Locate Major Facilities only in Appropriate Coastal Areas so that Environmental Quality is Maintained OBJECTIVES: (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shoreline dependent, and to encourage the location of necessary shoreline-dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts can be minimized. (18) To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities whether ind'strial, comnmercial or residential, in already developed areas capable of accommodating additional development, in areas su~ able and planned for redevelopment, or in areas determined by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for development. (19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (20) To ensure the viability of Maryland's port areas, and to ensure that their development is carried out in an environmentally sound manner. (21) To encourage the wise use of coastal mineral resources, with due regard for protection of the environment, and to encourage sequential multiple use of mineral lands where mineral extraction is deemed appropriate. GOAL 5: To Promote Appropriate Methods of Use of Coastal Areas in Order to Prevent Deterioration of Coastal Resources OBJECTIVES: (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater), and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. 28 (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for providing adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developments are approved by state and local government * ~~~~agencies. (25) To ensure that adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decisions concerning the siting of public facilities in coastal areas, particularly those involving transportation and waste treatment facilities. (26) To ensure the incorporation of storm water management measures in state'and local regualtory programs that would require runoff from a development site, to maintain, to the maximum extent Possible, the water quality and quantity conditions that prevailed prior to development. (2?7) To promote the maintenance of natural buffers along, and natural drainage ways feeding to, coastal tributaries and estuarine waters, to minimize adverse environmental effects of coastal developments and activities. (28) To idenr--'fy and encourage the use of environmentally suitable methods of dredging and disposal of dredged material (including beneficial use of dredged material) to meet long-term needs resu~lting from navigational projects, state and local governmental projects, and major private projects, and to oppose thre use of methods found to be environmentally unsuitable. is ~~(29) To prevent the filling of the State's tidal waters unless there is no feasible alternative and the proposed project is in accordance with the goals, objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Programt. (30O) To oppose the'dumping into ocean wat-ers off the State of Maryland of any material which would adversely affect human health, welfare or amenities, the marine environment, ecological systems, or resources of economic value. (31) To ensure the use of thorough assessments of probable energy costs and benefits, positive and negative economic effects, probable social and environmental impacts,-and the value of the public resources involved, as the basis for decisions on the develop et ndreduction of Outer Continental Shelf resources. X.2) To ensure that the coastal counties, if affected by development related to energy facilities, obtain sufficient financial and technical assistance to adequately plan for and cope with the social, economic or environmental impacts of such development-. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of -in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. 29 GOAL 6: To Promote Intergovernmental Coordination and Public Participation in Coastal Zone Management Program Development and Implementation. OBJECTIVES: (34) To undertake studies and inventories, where needed, to provide the most complete and accurate information base possible for all levels of government and the public to use in management decisions and activities affecting coastal resources. (35) To encourage the analysis of possible impacts on energy production and consumption, both natural and man-induced as part of management decisions concerning coastal resources and activities. (36) To ensure the establishment of repositories of coastal zone- related documents, reports, and materials which are easily accessible to the general public in each of the coastal counties. (37) To promote standardization of techniques and compatibiiity of federal, state and academic research efforts in the State's coastal areas. (38) To ensure coordination and use of existing state and local government programs to achieve the CZMP's objectives. (39) To ensure interstate coordination of plans for the management of resources which are shared with neighboring states such as migratory aquatic species. (40) To ensure the review of state and local governmental programs, and those of the local Soil Conservation Districts, in order to identify possible modifications needed to facilitate achievement of coastal zone management goals, objectives, and policies. (41) To promote coordination of state and local governmental programs with those of federal agencies and neighboring states to further the goals of the Coastal Zone Management Program, and to minimize duplication of efforts, conflicting actions, and regulatory permit processing delays. (42) To provide adequate representation of the interests of the State of Maryland in federal decisions regarding the exploration, development and production of Outer Continental Shelf Resources. (43) To provide full opportunity for participation by relevant federal, state, and local government agencies, concerned organizations and the general public, in .he development A-nd implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program. 30 Boundaries Each state's coastal zone management program must identify the specific boundaries of its coastal zone, both inland and seaward. Maryland's coastal zone boundary extends seaward to Maryland's three-mile jurisdiction in the Atlantic Ocean, and inland to the inland boundaries of the counties bordering the Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay, and the Potomac River up to the District of Columbia. Thus, the counties of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Calvert, Caroline, Cecil, Charles, Dorchester, Harford, Kent, Prince George's, Queen Anne's, Somerset, St. Mary's, Talbot, Wicomico, and Worcester are included in Maryland's Coastal Zone, as is the City of Baltimore. Within each of these 17 boundaries, an "Area of Focus" has been identified for special attention. The Area of Focus in each locality has been established in cooperation with the local government, and in most cases coincides with the 100-year flood plain bordering the State's tidal waters. This two-level geographical distinction (described in detail in Chapter II) simply reflects the greater probability of activities in coastal shorelands having a direct and significant effect upon coastal waters. Land and Water Uses The federal Act requires the State to identify uses of land and water in the coastal zone which are permissible, but which have direct and significant impacts upon coastal waters. The Act requires States to develop guidelines on these uses, and to ensure that local coastal regulations are without undue restriction of uses which are of regional benefit. As a result of the inventory and analysis which was made of known activities and uses in the coastal zone, three basic criteria were developed to identify which of the many uses should be classified as "Uses and Activities of Concern" to the otate's Coastal Zone Manacement Program: 1' The activity must have a discernible impact upon coastal resources; 2, 'lle impact must be direct; and 3, The impact must be significant. "Impact" is defined in this context as documentable change in any factor relevant to the maintenance of a coastal resource. An impact is "direct" when there is a documentable, causal relationship between the activity and the impact on the coastal res..irce. An impact is considered to be "significant" when a) it is broad in geographical scope, b) it affects a critical resource of concern to the State, c) 't potentially violates State environmental standards, or d) it potentially conflicts with State or State approved local, economic, fiscal, land use, transportation, or water quality plans. In adaition to --he nature of the use or activity itself, consideration has been give:. to the specific area in which it occurs - coastal waters, intertidal areas, sl-.Dreland areas, or areas within the inland boundaries of coastal counties. Uses and activities in the first three.areas are most likely to have direct and sion-_ficant impacts apon coastal waters, and most of the Program's attention thereforc focuses L.rgely on them. There are, however, significant exceptions, such as the sitinq and operation of major industrial facilities, whose size and method of operation will proba'ldy have an impact unon coastal waters, regardless of their specific location within the Coastal Zone. 31 Based on these criteria, the uses and activities listed below were identified as Uses or Activities of Concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program. Each of the uses and activities is dealt with in detail in Chapter III, and relevant goals and objectives are listed for each. The goals and objectives cited are drawn into sharper focus in specific policies, and management procedures reflecting these goals, objectives, and policies are specified in detail, with references to the relevant legal authorities. This document has been designed to facilitate reference to any of these individual activities or uses, each of which is dealt with'in a self-contained section of Chapter III, the backbone of this document, complete with references to goals, objectives, policy, management procedures, and legislative authorities. Background information is also provided on the existing situation and issues regarding the use or activity. Thus, anyone desiring a complete perspective an the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program's treatment of a specific Use or Activity of Concern can simply remove the section of Chapter III from the rest of the document. USES AND ACTIVITIES OF CONCERN TO THE MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM A. Activities Occurring in Coastal Waters 1. Recreational Boating 2. Commerical Shipping (Oil Spill Containment and Prevention) 3. Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material 4. Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources S. Ocean Dumping 6. OCS Exploration, Production and Development B. Activities Occurring in Intertidal Areas 1. Use of Beach Areas 2 . Activities in Tidal Wetlands C. Activities Occurring in Shoreland Areas 1. Activities in Areas with Significant Shore Erosion 2. Activities in Coastal Tidal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains 3. Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands 4. Use of Agricultural Lands S. Use of Forested Lands 6. Channelization (and Small Watershed Projects) 7. Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recreational, open space, and Natural Areas S. Activities Affecting Coastal Historical, Cultural, and Archeological Resources 9. Shoreland Activities in General D. Major Facilities In The Coastal Zone 1. onshore Outer Continental Shelf/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities 2. Electric Generating Facilities 3. Ports 4. industrial Parks 5. Mineral Extraction Facilities 6. Large-scale Residential Facilities 32 7. Sewage Treatment Facilities 8. Transportation Networks (Large-scale marinas were origina]]v considered to be major facilities but upon further consideration have been incorporated into the section on Recreational Boating becauise they are located solely in the shoreland areas and because the boating activities that they engender is a major concern of the coastal zone management program.) Geoqraphical Areas of Particular Concern This threshold of the federal Act reauires State Programs to identify areas of particular concern in the Coastal Zone and to make special designations where required to restore or preserve these areas. Accordingly, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program has identified "Geographical Areas of Particular Concern", which will be managed through the State's Critical Areas Program. Geographical Areas of Particular Concern (see Chapter IV) will include Resource Protection Areas (tidal wetlands, upland natural areas, productive and agriculture land, archeological and historic sites, and aquatic sensitive areas), and Developmental Critical Areas (power plant sites, facility sites related to activities on the Outer Continental Shelf, sites for heavy industry, large-scale residential projects, large marinas and ports, anr mineral extraction areas). Public arA Government Involvement A State's pcograw is required by this federal threshold to include the partic.pation of federal, state, and local governments, as well as other relevant public or private interests. Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program has established the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, composed of representatives from state, federal, and local governments, and representatives from the private sector (public interest, industrial, and commercial). This group will beinvolved in all project evaluations, will ensure a fair assessment of all projects, and will prevent any sinq'L interest group from exerting disproportionate leverage in any aspect of the Program. State-Federal Interaction A State is required to obtain federal involvement in the development and implementation of its coastal zone management program, and federal agencies are required (through "federal consistency") to abide by guidelines of the state's management program in any projects which they may undertake in the coastal zone. 'Phe Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program itself has been developed with the full involvement and cooperation of the federal government, as described in Chapter VI. When the Program is approved and fully implemented, all relevant federal agencies will be involved in project evaluations or other actions, and all federal activities in the coastal zone (such as development projects, federal assistance programs, licenses and permits. and Outer Continental Shelf activities) will be required to conform to the policies o. the Maryland Coastal Zone Manaqement Program. 33 Organization and Authorities These federal thresholds require state programs to show how the state plans to control uses of land and water in the coastal zone, and to document that the state agency administering the nrogram has the authority to do so. The inventory and analysis of Maryland's legislative authorities concluded that the State of Maryland, through the Department of Natural Resources and other state agencies, has ample authority to implement and enforce the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program. The fact that Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program has based its recommendations upon already existing state legislation should not be taken to mean that the Department of Natural Resources will not recommuend new legislation to meet future needs. However, at the present time, to the extent that problems have been identified and are understood, and to the extent that a technical basis for making vailid decisions exists, there is sufficient authority in the State of Maryland to satisfy the requirements of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act. Maryland has a broad variety of statutes controlling development of activities within the coastal zone, statutes which can be interpreted in the context of the policies and objectives of the Maryland Environmnental Policy Act. Furthermore, the Maryland Courts have recognized that police powers may be used broadly to protect the natural resources of the state. Thus, by law, Maryland has adequate control over its coastal resources. Authority to acquire interests in lands and waters is vested primarily within the Department of Natural Resources. The state owns all lands and waters below mean high tide, and the Department of Natural Resources may acquire land for purposes related to recreation, fishery, wildlife, conservation and power plant siting. Other state agencies may act to preserve historical sites and9 agricultural land. In addition, many land acquisition programs are financed by special funds. Thus, the State of Maryland'can, with legislation which already exists, carry out its Coastal Zone Management Program. Through the process of project evaluation, Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program will implement the concept of "networking" to draw together the organizations and legal authorities which have jurisdiction over one or another aspect of a coastal zone activity. The Coastal Zone Management Program's project evaluation process will enable the consolidated review and evaluation of all major projects proposed in the coastal zone. This process will result in a net saving of time and money to both the applicant and the regulatory agencies. As soon as a major project with the potential for significant impacts is proposed in the coastal zone, the Coastal Zone Unit will draw together appropriate government agencies, other interested parties, and the applicant, to identify issues implicit in the proposal, and to select a team to evaluate the proposal. The Coastal Zone Unit is the staff component of the Department of Natural Resources vested with the responsibility for implementing the Coastal Zone Management Program. In the evaluation process, the on-site and off-site cumulative impacts of the proposed project will be identified and examined. Based on the findings of that evaluation, each of the regulatory agencies involved will formulate its decision, and through this process, the efficiency, scope, and depth of decisions should be superior to what would be possible in an otherwise fragmented process. 134 Thus, through the project evaluation process, the Coastal Zone Management Program will identify and combine the diverse issues related to a specific coastal activity (or combination of activities). It will then draw together a network of the various agencies, statutes, and private interests relevant to the issues at hand, and will combine thes,. di'1,r-e input- into a single coherent focus on the coastal activity. The Energry and Coastal Zone Administration of the Department of Natural Resources will have responsiblity for the leadership in this process, with the participation of other units of the Department of Natural kesources, the Departments of State Planning, Agriculture, Economic and Community Development, Health and Mental Hygiene, and Transportation, the State Public Service Comm~ission, the State Board of Public Works, the coastal zone counties, municipalities, and the Soil Conservation Districts serving them. In addition to the evaluation of specific projects in the coastal zone, the Maryland Coastal Zone l'.anagement Program will include the ongoing review of regulatory and management programs relevant to the coastal zone. Thus, the Program will have a built-in mechanism to ensure that the State's legislative and organizational authorities will have the flexibility to keep current with the needs and pressures of changing times. Significance of the Marylafid Coastal Zone Management Program The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program offers the citizens of Maryland a comprehensive program which addresses the broad spectrum of public and private needs and resources associated with the coastal zone. It provides the method, the organizational framework, and the legal strength to balance the many pressures on the coastal zone, so that development, economic progress, and preservation of valuable natural resources can be accomplished in a reasonable manner, without the over-exertion of one influence at the expense of another - without the exploitation of natural resources which can lead to their eradication, and without, cn the other hand, the halting of economic growth and development . The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program brings the interests of local, state, and federal governments, the interests of industry and commerce, and the interests of the public at large, into the coastal zone management process itself, through the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee and the networking concept. The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program, through the project evaluation process, gives substance to the networking concept and prevents potentially harmful activities from taking place unnoticed, by requiring their comprehensive review with the participation of the various public and private interests likely to be affected beneficially or adversely. The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program recognizes the need and provides the means for financial assistance to government agencies seeking to alleviate c:: prevent adverse impacts on coastal resources. And, finally, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program is the first comprehensive, consolidated poliLcy statement on the States most economically anr aesthetically valuable resource: the coastal zone. With its foundations in exist.ring state and fedezal law, and with the built-in participation of public and private inte~rests, the Program represents not a tentative collection of hopes for the future, but rather a solid program with roots in the present, and with the flexibility to meet the challenges and chanu u9 circumstances of the future. 35 Conditions have changed, and will continue to change. But the ilmntto of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program can ensure that the State' s most aesthetically beautiful, recreationally active, naturally fertile, cormmercially viable, and economically significant resource - the coastal kzone - can survive the stresses of the present and the uncertainties of the future. In the centuries since our prehistoric predecessors roamed the coastal zone, the vital importance of our coastal resources has not diminished. By involving and drawing into focus the divers'e government agencies, private interests, and legal authorities relevant to the coastal zone, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program represents a Partnership for Balanced Action to preserve and enhance the value of the State's irreplaceable toastal resource, for present and future generations. 36 CHAPTER I OVERALL IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK 0~ II0 11 --~~~~~~ I. �7'ERALL IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK I. Intro .~...ion: Program Authorities Coastal zone management in Maryland will be the combined and coordinated exercise of all existing and future land and water management authorities of several governmental units of the State. The Coastal Zone Unit's inventory and assessment of laws and the agencies which administer them reveals that six executive departments, two independent agencies, 16 counties, Baltimore City, and several municipalities already exercise considerable regulatory authority over Maryland's coastal zone with regard to land and water use. To the extent that problems have been identified, are understood, and a sufficient technical basis for decision-making exists, there is sufficient authority in Maryland (1) to carry out the Program proposed in this document, (2) to satisfy the requirements of Section 306 of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, and (3)t(-. address the State's top priority coastal resource management problems. All-encompassing coastal zone mana ement legislation would duplicate exist�_r state-wide management programs. The authorities requirements of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act include the following: Section 306(c)(7) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act requires that: "Prior to granting approval of a management program submitted by a Coastal State, the Secretary shall find that.. .the state has the authorities necessary to implement the program, including the authority required under subsection (d) of this section." Section 306(d) requires that: "the state, acting through its chosen agency or agencies, including local governments, areawide agencies designated under Section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966, regional agencies, or interstate agencies, has authority for the management of the coastal zone in accordance with the management program. Such authority shall include power - (1) to administer land and water use regulations, control development in order to ensure compliance with the management-program, and to resolve conflicts among competing uses; and This Chapter is intended to present the framework of the Program, and thus summarizes both the federally mandated requirements for program authority and organization, and the State laws, regulations and procedures that respond to thosea recuirements. A more complete legal analysis cf the authorities of the Program is found in Chapter 1T11. 37 (2) to acquire fee simple and less than fee simple interests in lands, waters and other property through condemnation or other means when necessary to achieve conformance with the management program." Chapter VIII contain.= an inventory of relevant constitutional provisions, legislation, amendments, regulations, and judicial decisions, as required by the Act, Section 305(b) i4). It also documents that the State and local govern- ments have fully adequate powers of acquisition. Section 306(e)(1) requires that an approvable management program provide for: "any one or a combination of the following general techniques for control of land and water uses within the-coastal zone: (1) State establishment of criteria and standards for local implementation, subject to administrative review and enforcement of compliance; (2) Direct state land and water use pianning and regulations; or (3) State administrative review for consistency with the management program of all development plans, projects, or land or water use regulations, including exceptions of variances thereto, proposed by any state or local authority or private developer, with power to approve or disapprove after public notice and an opportunity for hearings." Chapter III,"Appropriate Land and Water Uses" further describes the laws and techniques which can be used to manage each appropriate land and water use. Discussion provided in that chapter identifies the management technique - i.e., state standards for local review, direct state planning and regulation, or state administrative review - employed by each law cited. Section 305(b) (3) o:- the Act requires a management program to include "an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern with the coastal zone". The Act further states that a management program shall include "broad guidelines on priority of uses in particular areas." (Section 305(b) (5)). Chapter IV outlines Maryland's approach to Geographic Areas of Particular Concern and the management techniques available through the State Critical Areas Program. 38 While at present, sufficient authorities are available to allow state and local government~ to carry out a coaiprehensive program for management of coastal resources, these separate authorities must be fitted together through coordination of state and state-local programs. In the course of developing the State's Coastal Zone Management Program the Coasaii Zone Unit identified stumbling blocks that prevented coherent operation of coastal zone program based on the cooperative exercise of a combination of authorities. 1. No clear statement of policies and priorities for coastal zone management had been assembled and officially endorsed. 2. Most permitting programs are designed to look at only one aspect of coastal impact. 3. Duplicative or overlapping evaluations often cause delays in permit letting for beneficial projects. 4. There is often disagreement on which inventories or studies constitute the best and most recent inform.ation on which to base management decisions. E. There is no point of responsibility for assessing cumulative impacts of various permit actions. 6. Not all local comprehensive plans recognize existing state performance standards. 7. State programs often demonstrate unfamiliarity with local management priorities, problems, and plans. This program document, particularly this chapter and Chapter III, describes now Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program overcomes these obstacles, through establishing or clarifying objectives and policies, and through coordinating and broadening the regulatory review process for coastal projects, in accordance with an Executive Order of the Governor and Memoranda of Understanding between t1e Department of Natural Resources and the other Executive Departments involved in the program. The next section of this Chapter addresses the organizational framework for implementing a Coastal Zone Management Program. Measures being taken or proposed to overcome the problems identified will be detailed. These measures include four implementation tools: (1) committing all program participants to a set of goals, objectives, and policies, (2) enhancing intergovernmental coordination in carrying out the Program, (3) providing for comprehensive review of all major activities in the coastal zone, and (4) assuring consideration of cumulative impacts in coastal management decisions. The Chapter concludes with a discussion of conflict resolution mechanisms. 39 II. Existing Organizational Structure The federal Coastal Zone Management Act requires that the State be organized to implement its coastal management program (Section 306(c) (6)). In addition, the State Program must include: "... a description of the organizational structure proposed to implement the management program including the responsibilities and interrelationships of local, areawide, state, regional and interstate agencies in the management process." (Section 305(b) (6)). The Program m-ust also identify the single state agency designated to receive and administer federal grants, and the lead agency for program implementation. The chart on the following page (Figure 1-1) shows the overall organizational structure of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program, consisting Of six state execu- tive departments, two additional agencies, .16 counties, Baltimore City, and the municipalities within the coastal zone, and the soil conservation districts which serve each coastal county. Within this network of state and local agencies, the Department of Natural Resources is-the lead agency for program implementation. The roles of each state and local program participant are described below. A. The State Role: Executive Departments and Agencies in general, the role of state government in the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program is to manage resource use either directly, or through setting and reviewing standards for local implementation. Any activity related to water quality or appropriation, or any activity which uses lands directly associated with state waters (submerged land, tidal wetlands, 100-year riverine flood plains, Chesapeake Bay beaches to the mean high tide, and Atlantic beaches to the dune line) are regulated directly by the State. Direct planning and regulatory activities. of the state also include impact evaluation and/or siting of major facilities (power plants, coastal oil facilities, sewage treatment plants, port facilities, marinas, surface mining operations, and highways). With the exception of coastal oil facilities and surface mining operations, -the State may acquire sites specifically for these uses. In certain other types of resource management activities, the State has, or is in the process of promulgating, standards and guidelines for local implementation. These activities include grading and sediment control, storm water management, the designation and management of State Critical Areas, the management of historic districts and scenic rivers (the Patuxent, the Severn, the wicomico, and the Pocomoke), and comprehensive watershed flood management. Each of these state programs is carried out or overseen by one of six executive departments or one of two independent agencies. The executive branch in Maryland is organized in secretariats. While an executive department may consist of several administrations, divisions, or bureaus, each of these units is responsible to one secretary, who in turn is responsible to the Governor and is a member of the Governor's cabinet. Each executive department functions as a cohesive unit. The secretary in charge of the department is responsible for: 40 ORGANIZATION OF COASTAL ZONE MANAGENT PROGRAM GOVE NOR | BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKSGOVENOR I STATE SECRETARIES I DOT DOA DHMH DNR DSP IDECD PSC| ENERGY a8 COASTAL ZONE ADMINISTRATION CRAGC |O ASTA e s > ,ACADEMIC COASTA L | INSTITUTIONS I ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM F FEDERAL STATE AGENCIES AGENCIES L 1 _L_ I ___ ! _ 1I 1 I l ! w d| ' " i - 95 ~ ~ i -i 9 4 4 4 hi - hi Wi~~~L3 - establishing policy to be followed by the agencies, offices and other units of state government within his Department; - efficient and orderly administration of the Department; - comprehensive planning of programs and services within the jurisdiction of his Department; - reviewing and approving the plans'of all units of state government within his jurisdiction; - the budget of his office and other units within his jurisdiction; - the organization of h~is office, and recommendations to the Governor for changes in the organization and placement of units of state government within his jurisdiction; - creation of citizen advisory bodies he deems necessary for the operation of his Department; - advising the Gove--nor of any modification, abolition, and transfer of advisory bodies within his jurisdiction; - counseling and advising the Governor on any matters assigned to the Department; and - carrying out the Governor's policy in matters assigned to the Department. The Governor is responsible for the orderly and efficient operation of the executive branch. Any conflicts which arise between principle departments of the executive branch are ultimately settled by the Governor's office. The Governor is responsible for preventing overlap in duties and responsibilities between departments by transferring agencies between departments, issuing orders clarifying the duties of departments, or creating interdepartmental task forces when necessary (Article 41, Section 15C (1971)). The Governor has issued an Executive Order which formalizes the structure of the Coastal Zone Management Program within the-Executive Branch. The Executive Order states that the objectives and policies enumerated in the Coastal Zone Management Program are the policies of the state for management of coastal resources. The Executive Order also requires all State agencies, to the extent consistent with their statuatorily pr~escribed responsibilities and authorities, to: a. conduct their activities in a manner consistent with the Program; b. participate in the project evaluation process specified in the Program; and C. address promptly and, to the extent feasible, resolve any conflicts with other agencies. The Executive Order also reiterates that the Department of Natural Resources is the State agency designated to receive and administer Coastal Zone Management grants and instructs the Secretary of DNR to ensure that the State's interest is adequately represented in the administration of the federal Coastal Zone Management Program. 42 1. Department of Natural R-:sources The Departmnent of Natural Resources is the agency designated (by letter of the Governor of Maryland to the Director of the Federal Office of Coastal Zone management, March 12, 1973) as the single agency to receive and administer the Coastal Zone Management Administration Grants. The Secretary of Natural Resources is authorized to: "...apply for, accept, and administer for the State any federal funds or appropriations of money for any purpose which may be hereinafter made out of the federal treasury by any act of the Congress." (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-103(c) (1974)). The Department is also the lead agency for implementation. The Coastal zone Unit within the Department provides the staff to support the Program, including the federally prescribed duties of a lead agency in applying for and administering federal coastal zone management funds, reporting periodically to the federal office of Coastal Zone Management on implementation of the Program, and coordinating consistency reviews of federal actions. Duties of the Department of Natural Resources include stewardship of the State's waters, fish and wildlife, forest, minerals, and recreational resources. The Secretary who heads the Department is responsible for: "...the development of coordinated policies for the preservation conservation, enhancement, wise use and perpetuation of the natural resources of the State. He is responsible for the efficient coordination of all natural resources activities of the State including the settlement of conflicts which arise among units within the Department of Natural Resources." (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-203(b) (1974)). The Department may acquire by condemnation land, earth, gravel, stone, timber, material, or any improvement when necessary to carry out any legisla- tive act or advance forestry, parks, recreation, or the work of the Department. The Department has a Board of Review consisting of seven members appointed by the Governor which hears appeals on any decision of the Secretary or unit of the Department, subject to administrative review. The following units within the Department of Natural Resources are responsible for land and water use management programs: Water Resources Administration (WRA) Energy and Coastal Zone Administration (E&CZA) Maryland Environmental Service (MES) Maryland Environmental Trust (MET) Capital Programs Administration (CAP) Maryland Geological Survey (MGS) Maryland Wildlife Administration (MWA) Maj'yland Fisheries Administration (MFA) Maryland Forest Service (MFS) Maryland Park Service (MPS) Boat Act Advisory Committee (BAAC) Natural Resources Police (NRP) Maryland Membership on Interstate Commissions The Secretary of Natural Resources will issue a Secretarial Order which will formally establish the responsibilities of the various agencies of the Department in the implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program. The Order will spell out procedures for agency participation in project evaluation, program review, and federal consistency reviews. (Figure 1-2 is an organizational chart of DNR). The Water Resources Administration of the Department of Natural Resources is responsible for the formulation of the State's Water Quality Management Program under Section 208 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. This program is the focal point of the State's attempt to manage water quality and the Coastal Zone through control of point and nonpoint sources of pollution as well as residual wastes and other regulatory and non-regulatory mechanisms, as appropriate. The 208 Water Quality Management Program, when completed, will be an integral part of the Coastal Zone Management Program. Therefore, the staffs of the 208 program and the Coastal Zone Unit have and will work closely together in development of their two programs. They have recently issued a statement clarifying the relationship between the two programs. This statement stressed the following points: 1) The two programs have joint objectives for water quality management; 2) By virtue of the fact that the 208 program will be an integral part of the Coastal Zone Management Program when completed, the two programs will utilize the State's existing regulatory authorities for water quality management and other procedures as may be developed by the 208 program to accomplish these joint objectives; 3) Coordination in program development will be achieved through: a) joint utilization of the two programs' public participation mechanisms as much as possible, and b) Coastal Zone Unit support in the execution of the State's 208 work program is specified in that document. 44 Figure 1-2 Department of Natural Resources _____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Office of the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I ~~~~~~~Secretary Legal j Board of Review Advisor Board j Boards & Trusts L Extension Service I Public information Licensing & CodsmlGnesralo Service. JevcsAmiisrt Regional Activities Maryland Conservationist Registration and Titling Fiscal Administiation Recreational Services Sportifihing Regional Service Centers Personnel Administration 4, ~~~~~~~~Library Equal Employment Opportunities (.1w I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Data Processing Services Mail and Printing Maryland I IBoard of ICapital Programs EnvironmentalTrust jWell Drillers j Administration I Keep Maryland Beautiful Licensing Land Planning Program Open Space Waterv~ay Improvement Stiore Erosion Control Fisheries Wildlife Park Forest Natural WtrMaryland Energy and Maryland Admin. Admin. se rvceSrvc Resources IResources I Environ.I Coastal Gooia Police Force Admi n.Srv Zone Admin. Sre Shellfish Forest Wildlife State Park State Forest Marine Enforcement Project Power Plant Hydrogeology Tidewater Waterfowl Management Operation Enforcement Permits and Development Siting & Hydrology Finlish Upland Wildlife Forest Fire Inland Certification Design and Coastal Zone Environmental Inland Purbearairs & Control Enforcement Technical Construction Management -Geology Fisheries Moving Mammals; Roadside TreesI & Bueuo Coastal and Non-Game A Protection srieOperatiosABra onf Estuarine Technical Endangered Speies Technicail Water Resource Maintenance Mines Geology Assistance/ Environmental Review Forestry �Planning EnergyArhelg Ernvironmental Land Management Reforestation Policy Office Arhelg Rewif-w & Technical Services 2. Department of State Planning The Department of State Planning (DSP) functions as the Governor's principal planning department and serves all state and local agencies in an advisory, consultative, and coordinating capacity on state planning matters. While DSP powers are largely advisory, it has many responsibilities which give it great influence on A variety of state and local government Activities. It uses its advisory influence to produce a balanced and integrated program for development and use of the State's resources. The Department is p .sently preparing plans for the development of the State, including a State Land Use Plan. Once formalized, these plans will serve as a framework for the development, planning, and regulatory activities of all units of State government. The Department of State Planning is responsible for preparation of the State's Capital Budget. It reviews all departments' capital improvements proposals for inclusion in the State Capital Budget, and assists all departments in preparation of short- and long-term capital improvements plans. The Department of State Planning also administers the A-95 Clearinghouse, prepares official State and county-wide and employment projection=, and operates the Maryland Automated Geographic Information System (MAGI) which is available for use by other State agencies besides the Department of State Planning. The major role of DSP in coastal zone management will be implementation of the two programs assigned to it by the State Land Use Act of 1974. These programs are the State Critical Areas Program (which will be the means of designation and management of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern within the coastal zone), and the review of local planning and zoning activities to determine when state intervention in land use decisions is necessary. Because of this overview and coordinating role, DSP will be involved in project evaluations, program reviews and consistency reviews on a regular basis. Because of the major role DSP plays in coastal zone management, the staffs of DSP and the Coastal Zone Unit have worked closely in the development of the Coastal Zone Management Program. Points of agreement on program implementation have been formalized in a Memorandum of Understanding between the Secretaries of DSP and DNR (see Appendix I) and include: Points of Agreement a. Goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. b. Operation of the program within the framework of plans for the development of the State. 46 Fighre 1-3 Department of State Planning Governor Assistant Attorney Secretary State Planning General Commission Deputy Secretary General Administration Regional and ResearCapital Comprehensive Local Program Improvement State Planning Programs Planning State Clearinghouse c. The procedure for Coastal Zone Unit participation in the process of Critical Area designation. d. Department of State Planning intervention in local land use decisions concerning coastal resources upon request by Department of Natural Resources. e. Plan and permit review by Department of State Planning using coastal zone management program goals and objectives. f. Data management and the Maryland Automated Geographic Information System. g. Cooperation between regional employees of the Department of State Planning and county-employed coastal technical assistants. . Figure 1-3 shows the organization of the Department of State Planning. 3. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DHMH), has an extremely wide range of responsibilities. Ls with DNR, all administrative units of D*MH answer to the same Secretary. All the responsibilities of DHMH which pertain to coastal zone management, however, are located within one DHMH administration - the Environmental Health Administartion (EHA). The Environmental Health Administration (EHA) assists WRA of the Department of Natural Resources in implementing the State's water quality program. The Environmental Health Administration administers sewage treatment facility construction grants authorized by P.L. 92-500 (federal Water Pollution' Control Act Amendments of 1972) and the State's sewage treatment construction funds, in conjunction with DNR and DSP. It is responsible for overseeing the ooun-y water and sewerage planning process, establishing standards for individual water and sewerage facilities, and permitting the construction of water and sewage treatment facilities and individual additions to water and sewerage systems. Department df Natural Resources and EHA have 'exchanged a series of letters which establish procedures for the sewage treatment planning, funding, and permitting process. The relationship between DNR and EHA is also spelled out in the State's Continuing Planning Process for water quality. The Environmental Health Administration is also responsible for the State's shellfish sanitation program, and determines when certain areas should be closed to shellfish harvesting. The Department of Natural Resources then enforces the closures. Department of Natural Resources and ERA have established a Memrandum of Understanding on the running of the shellfish sanitation program. Additionally, EHA is responsible for the State's air quality and noise regulation programs. A Memorandum of Understanding between EHA and DNR on coastal zone management is being negotiated, and will address the following points: a. Exercise of EHA's authorities consistent with the Coastal Zone Management goals, objectives and policies to the extent allowed by its legislative mandates. 48 FIGURE 1-4 Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Environmental Health Administration Office of the Director I I I Bureau of Air Quality Bureau of Bureau of and Noise Control Sanitary Engineering Food and Drugs .0 Division of Division of Construction Compliance Division of Engineering Division of Grants Unit Division of . and Air Water and Food Enforcement Monitoring Sewerage Control '. L PormDivision of Dvison of Program Division of _ _S f DivisionfPlanning Division of Solid Waste Division of Drug Compliaiio and Analysis General Control Milk Control Compliance and Analysis ~Sanitation control Division of Division of Planning Product and Division of Safety Compliance Radiation Control b. incorporation of air quality standards into the Coastal Zone Management Program, and involvement Of EHA in project evaluations when air quality matters are concerned. c.Incorporation of water quality standards- into the Coastal Zone Management Program, and involvement of EHA in project evaluation when water quality, sewage treatment and refuse disposal are concerned. d. Environmental Health Administration review of county water sewerage, and solid waste disposal plans for consistency with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Program. e. Consistency of sewage treatment funding priorities and construction with the goals, objectives: and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program. f. Participation of EHA in federal consistency reviews as appropriate. Figure 1-4 shows the organization of the Environmental Health Administration. 4. The Department of Transportation The Maryland Department of Transportation (MOT) has within its jurisdiction two administrative units which carry out major activities in the coastal zone. The State Highway Administration (SHA) is responsible for the State's primary and secondary road system and has extensive long-range highway planning responsibilities. It should be noted that all construction of highways by SHA requires grading and sediment control approval by WRA, as well as other permits involved in bridge or other stream bed alterations, or wetlands filling. Another unit of the Department of Transportation is the Maryland Port Administration (MPA) which was created for the purpose of improving existing port facilities and creating new port facilities when the public interest so requires. The Maryland Port Administration is involved in promoting and maintaining the Part of Baltimore and in developing othe'r small port facilities in the State. Again, port development activities supported by MPA which involve dredging or filling require wetlands licenses and/or permits. The Department of Transportation, in conjunction with other State agencies, has developed the Maryland Transportation Plan as the comprehensive statement of goals, objectives, and priori.ties of the Department of Transportation. Consistent with the Transportation Plan, the Department of Transportation has established an Action Plan which details the procedure by which transportation projects are identified, given funding priority, and routed and designed. The Plan provides for full participation of citizens, local governments and state agencies. While !4DOT was required to establish this process only for highway plannig, it has also committed itself to applying the Process to all modes of transportation (highway, port, aviation, rail, and mass transit). 506 The Department of Transportation has established an Action Plan which details the procedure by which transpcrtation projects are identified, given funding priority, and routed and designed. The Plan provides for full participation of citizens, local governmernt and state agencie;. Whilce MrOT was leluirtd to establish this process only fu. .-ghway planning, it has also conmlitted itself to applying the process to all modes of transportation (highway, port, aviation, rail, and mass transit). A Memorandum of Understanding between MDOT and the Department of Natural Resources will cover the following points: a. Support of Coastal Zone Management goals, objectives,and policies in the transportation planning and construction processes through eontinued liaison between CZU and the MDOT comprehensive planninglunit. b. Methods by which project evaluation is carried out within the framework of the Action Plan and participation of DNR in that process. C. Recogpition of the Consolidated Transportation Program as an expression of the State's priorities for transportation funding, provided that projects therein meet State socio-economic and environmental standards and plicies. d. Recognition of the need for maintenance and enhancement of the State's ports,particularly the port of Baltimore, and the need for proper planning, design and implementation of port related facilities to minimize disruption of valuable environmental coastal resources. e. Participation of MDOT in federal consistency reviews where transportation matters are involved (which will include, but not be limited to, all instances where roads cross navigable waters, and where commercially important channels are dredged). 5. The Department of Economic and Community Development The Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD) was created to promote the economic and cultural welfare of the people of Maryland. The Department investigates and assembles information on the industrial opportunities and economic resources of the State, and encourages new industrial enterprises, expansion of existing businesses, and recreational and tourist development. Important to implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program are: (1) the assistance given by DECD to local governments in economic and community development planning, (2) acquisition and development of industrial park sites, and (3) the activities of the Maryland Historical Trust. DECD and DNR have developed a draft Memorandum of Understanding which will address the following major points: a. Support of the Coastal Zone Management Program goals, objectives and policies in the Department of Economic and Community Development's promotional activities, programs for sustained economic development, and historic preservation activities. b. Participation of DECD in the project evaluation process and recognition of the process as a means of resolving potential conflicts or making necessary trade-offs between environmental and economic goals for the coastal zone. 51 C. Participation of DECO in federal consistenrcy reviews when matters of social, economic, or fiscal impacts of p'rojectsi arc involvod. d. Department of Economic and Community Development assistance to DNR in developing and implementing its Coastal Energy Impact Program. The Department of Economic and Co mmunity Development has also accepted a major role in establishing the State Development Plan. The State Development Plan is mandated in Article BBC and is the responsibility of the Department of State Planning. These two departments have signed Memorandum of Understanding which clarifies their roles in development of the plan. 6. Department of Agriculture The Secretary of Agriculture has general supervision, direction, and control of the provisions of the agricultural laws and 11... generally of all matters in any way relating to the fostering, protection and development of the agricultural interest of the state," (AG Article Section 2-104(1974)). The important functions of the Department of Agriculture in coastal zone management include the regulation of pesticides, the preservation of productive agricultural land, and management of soil erosion problems. Since the relationship of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Natural Resources in the regulation of pesticides, hazardous substances and sedimentation is defined in the relevant legislation, it has not yet been 'determined if a Memorandum of Understanding is necessary. A Memorandum may be desirable to ensure the interests of the Department of Agriculture are fully reprcesented in the program. 7. Independent Agencies Two agencies which are not in these departments but which have coastal zone management responsibilities are the Public Service Commission and the Board of Public Works. The Public Service Commission comprises the Department of Public Utilities and is responsible for regulating common carriers and utility companies, including licensing of electric power plants. Its members are appointed by the Governor. In conjunction with the Power Plant Siting Program in the Department of Natural Resources, the Public Service Commission cannot license a power plant until it receives a recommendation on the site by the Power Plant Siting Program. The Board of Public Works, consisting of the Governor, the Comptroller and the Treasurer of the State, is responsible for approving all disposition of state lands (including state wetlands). The Board of Public Works is responsible for approving expenditures of all sums appropriated through state loans, and funds appropriated for capital expenditures (except roads, bridges, and highways). 8. Maryland Council on the Economy, the Environment, and Energy A Maryland Council on the Environment was created by an Executive order of the Governor -in 1970. This Council was reconstituted in June of 1978 by Executive order 01.01.1978.08. The Council now consists of the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, and the Secretaries of Budget and Fiscal Planning, Economic and Community Development, Health and Mental Hygiene, Natural Resources, State Planning and Transportation. The Council is to assist in the development of coordinated policy, and in the resolution of conflicts between the interests of private industry and the protection and development of the state's environment. 52 B. The Local Role 1. Planning and Zoning Resource management plaaninri r nd decisions made at the state level often have wide-reaching land use ramifications. Nevertheless, the actual] assiqnment of specific types of land uge to specific areas, which we know as .1,niini, 'In, should remain the province of local governments in Maryland. State involvement in local land use decisions is required only when these decisions would produce an adverse impact on the State's natural resources, would interfere with the orderly operation of state-wide programs and furtherance of state policies, or would have implicationsfor land and water uses in other jurisdictions. State participation in such decisions will occur through the intervention technique authorized in Article 88C, Section 2(q) of the State Code. State administrative review of local development plans, zoning ordinances and variances, and special exceptions thereto for consistency with the state coastal management programsis carried out by the Department of State Planning. The Department of Natural Resources and other departments assist DSP in this process. in cases where local decisions are in conflict with the State's interest DSP will intervene. Further explanation of the intervention technique, and how it can be used to meet the federal Coastal Zone Management Act authorities requirement, is provided later in this chapter, and in Chapter VIII. The full text of the guidelines for intervention in local land use decisions promulgated by the Department of State Planning is provided in Appendix E. Maryland's local governments (counties and municipalities) are divided into three categories: chartered, non-chartered, and code. All have a similar, extensive degree of planning and zoning powers. Chartered counties are given an express grant of the State's police power (delineated in Article 24, Section 5). They may thus pass their own ordinances (so long as these do not conflict with state laws) and the State General Assembly may not pass a law specific to them. In effect, then, chartered counties have the most procedural freedom. Non-chartered counties and municipalities exercise their planning and zoning powers pursuant to Article 66B, which'spells out the relationship between comprehensive planning and zoning and certain procedures to which the county must adhere. While code counties may pass some ordinances in the manner of chartered counties, they derive their planning and zoning authority from Article 66B. The following are the coastal chartered, non-chartered, and code counties: Chartered Non-Chartered Code Anne Arundel Calvert Kent Baltimo~re Caroline Worcester Harford Cecil Prince George's Charles Talbot Dorchester Wicomico Queen Anne's Somerset St. Mary's Baltimore City is a municipality, but has a special charter. Its planning and zoning authority are spelled out in the State Code in Article 66B, Sections 2.01 to 2.11, and in the City Charter. Because of its size and importance, Baltimore City. like the counties, serves as a functional unit of the State for the implemeatauion of state programs. 53 Table 1-i shows the date of the most recent comprehensive plan, athmoe nn ordinance, and the subdivision regulations of each coastal county and Balthzoingr City. It should be noted that many counties also have building codes. Consistent with the comprehensive plan Must be the water, sewerage, and solid waste disposal plans of the county which show the staged development of servicing over a 10-yearW period. These plans - which must also conform to state level water supply and water quality planning - form the basis for evaluation of permits for construction of new hookups or facilities by the Environmental Health Administration. The coastal zoneC boundaries, goals, objectives and policies, and geographic areas of particular concern are all guidelines for local governments' coastal zone management activities. Local governments will be- asked to review all planning, zoning and other regulatory actions for consistency with the Coastal Zone Managemeint Program. When actions occur that appear inconsistent with these guidelines, the coastal Zone Unit (through project evaluation or program review) will determine whether the action is inconsistent, and will seek a consistent solution. When no consistent solution can be negotiated, the Coastal Zone Unit will request other state agencies with pertinent regulatory responsibility to enforce the guidelines of the Program. If this approach is not feasible, the Coastal Zone Unit will ask the Department of State Plarvning to intervene on behalf of the Program. The Department of State Planning has agreed to do this in the Memorandum of Unde-standing with the Department of Natural Resources. Further discussion of the local role in implementing the program will be found in Chapter V. 2. State Intervention in Local Decisions The intervention authority is stated in Article BBC Section 2(q): The Department of State Planning shall have the right and authority to intervene in and become a party to any admini- strative, judicial, or other proceeding in this State concerning land use, development or construction. Upon iIntervention, the Department shall have standing and all rights of a party in interest or aggrieved party, including all rights to apply for judicial review and appeal. In additi.on, it may file a formal statem~ent of environmental or economi~c impact expressing the views of the Department and any other unit of the State govern- ment. The right of intervention in any administrative, judicial or other proceeding in this State may be exercised only in accordance with applicable rules of procedure and law as they relate to the proceeding. The Department and the governing bodies of the local subdivisions shall establish procedures for notification of the Department of applications for zoning, permits, or authority to use,.develop, or construct upon land which involves more than a local impact and is of substantial State or regional interest. While the intervention regulations (see Appendix E for full text) make clear that intervention does not constitute a direct veto power, the technique does give the State a reasonable and rational mechanism for injecting the State's. concerns into the decision-mak~ing process. Further, the Department of State Planning will be able to initiate an administrative or judicial appeal of a decision if it feels that the state viewpoint is not adequately taken into account. 54 TABLE 2-1 STATUS OF COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING Subdivision Building P&Z Budget County Plan Zoning Regulations Code Staff FY 76 Baltimore MetropolitI---irea Anne Arundel 1972 197i 1969 X 48 $ 642,090 Baltimore City 1973 1971 1971 X 129 2,204413 Baltimore County 1972 1974 1972 X 70 1,179,029 Harford 1969 1957 1959 X 15 224,054 Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area Prince George's 1964 1949 1961 X 117 2,184,520 Southern Maryland Calvert 1974 1967* 1972* X 4 97,491 Charles 1974 1974 1974 X 7 97,000 St. Mary's 1974 1974 1974 7 168,366 Upper Eastern Shore Caroline 1967* 1967* 1972 2 31,760 Cecil 1974 1962* 1976 X 5 72,473 Xent 1975 1975 1975 4 31,870 Queen Anne's 1965* 1964* 1965* 5 54,665 TaLbot 1973 1974 1974 4 39,900 Lower Eastern Shore Dorchester 1974 1975 1972 6 75,072 Somerset 1975 1971 + 4 32,950 Wicomico 1962 1966 1957 X 10 133,127 Worcester 1976, 1965* 1967* 5 70,113 *Readopted in 1974 +Currently in adoption process 55 Intervention would Mean little in a state in which local governments did not carry out an active planning and zoning process# since there simply would not be appropriate land use proceedings in which to intervene. This situation, however, is not the case in Maryland. All coastal counties have a comprehensive zoning plan and zoning ordinance which covers 100 percent Of their land area. Zoning ordinances are backed up by subdivision regulations in all coastal counties. Comprehensive plans, as well as individual zoning decisions, are subject to Department of State Planning review. The intervention process thus is designed to support and take advantage of a strong, existing planning and zoning system. An example of the use of the intervention procedure is found in the Otter Point Creek case. The Harford County League of Women Voters requested state assistance in a case involving a large-scale development which had potential for serious impact on Otter Point Creek marsh. Based on a report by the Coastal Zone Unit on the values of the marsh and the potential impact of the development, the Department of State Planning decided to intervene in the case. Specifically, it entered into the review of a decision by Harford County to allow a higher density of subdivision than was originally approved. The Department of State Planning also worked with the Department of Natural Resources to develop the State's position on the Corps of Engineers permit for tnte development and the .associated state water quality certification. As a result of the intervention, the housing development was redesigned to move a portion of the development out of non-tidal marsh and flood plain areas and to institute stricter controls over the vegetation between the development and the marsh. As a result of the developer's agreement to these changes, intervention proceedings were dropped. (See Appendix E for full text of pleas). The intervention procedure's greatest advantage, however, is that it can be used to prevent state-local conflicts, rather than simply to react to such conflicts. For example, if an area were zoned for high density development on a county zoning map but were within the boundary of wetlands, the county would be notified of this inconsistency with state law and policy through intervention. Whether or not the county zoning map reflected the wetlands boundary, the development would be generally unacceptable under the Wetlands Law. On the other hand, if all county zoning maps did reflect wetlands boundaries, the time, effort, and expense that went into a development proposal and its state level review could be saved. C. Soil Conservation Districts Each coastal county has a corresponding local soil conservation district within the Department of Agriculture. Each district coummission consists of five Soil Conservation District supervisors, appointed by the State Soil Conservation Conmmittee. A soil conservationist is assigned to the district by the U.S. Soil 56 Con&servation Service. Underc the State Sediment Control Law, the Soil Conservation Districts must approve sediment control plans before local governments may issue construction permits. A major function of the disti_,jt is to qive farmers assistance, in develoviln(I conservation plans for their farms. In addition, the districts max' adot and use regulations, subject to the Secretary of Agriculture's approval, to heln conserve soil, water, other natural resources, and wildlife. At present, however, districts have found it necessary only to adopt advisory guidelines. The districts are playing a major role in the implementation of Phase II Water Quality Plans (non-point source pollution planning pursuant to Section 208 of the federal Water Pollutions Control Act Amendments of 1972). The desirability of Memoranda of Understanding between DNR and the various coastal Soil Conservation Districts is under consideration. Since several units of DNR (notably the Water Resources Administration, the Forest Service, and the Wildlife Administration) have already established such Memoranda with the Districts, a set of Coastal Zone Managment Memoranda may be redundant. The Coastal Zone Unit will continue to explore means of ensuring coordination with the Districts, and among other DNR units, which would not add unduly to the Districts' administrative burdens. D. Interstate Coordination Maryland participates actively in several interstate coordination efforts. These efforts include efforts to improve a basic understanding and coordination of management efforts for the Chesapeake Bay, River Basin Commissions, and efforts to communicate with other coastal states in the Mid and South Atlantic regions on issues of mutual concern. 1. Chesapeake Bay The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in the United States, and the only estuary which is divided laterally between two states. This situation has led to a great deal of concern over coordinated management of this resource at both the federal and state levels. While informal management coordination has existed in the past, several recent activities have been directed at more formal coordination of research and management concerning the Bay. Tn 1968 the Corps of Engineers undertook a major effort to catalog the existing conditions of the Chesapeake Bay. This effort culminated in The Existing Conditions Report. Subsequently, a Future Conditions Report was issued in 1977 to indicate what pressures are projected for the Chesapeake Bay in the future and to recommend management approaches to address such pressures. It is the State's understanding that the Corps of Engineers will ensure that efforts to implement these recommendations will be undertaken in a manner consistent with Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. In 1975 Congress directed the Environmental Protection Agency to undertake a major five year study of the Chesapeake Bay. This Study, carried out by EPA in conjunction with both Maryland and Virginia, is directed at developing new information about several high priority problem areas, primarily the input of toxic substances into the Chesapeake Bay, eutrophication, and the decline of Submerged aquatic vegetation. Also anticipated is a study of the management 57 network existing among federal, state, interstate and local agencies in the Bay area. As a result of this study, alternative means of improving management coordination will be proposed. The Department of Natural Resources has been given the responsibility for coordinating the StatEe's inputs into the Chesapeake Study. Part of this responsibility will be to ensure the consistency of the efforts undertaken as part of the Chesapeake Bay Study with Maryland's Coastal Zone Man-aqcrent Proqram. In April of 1977 the Governors of Maryland and Virginia called a Bi- State Conference of governmental officials, researchers, scientists and concerned citizens to assess the status of Chesapeake Bay resources and-to discuss means of improving Bay management. This conference generated a high level of interest in both Maryland and Virginia. Subsequently, in 1978, both General Assemblies passed resolutions creating a Joint Maryland-Virginia Legislative Advisory Coummissoin on Chesapeake Say. The Resolution recognizes the Chesapeake Bay is a single natural system of great value and directs the Joint Maryland-Virginia Conmmission to report to the General Assemblies of both states prior to the 1980 session with reconunendations on appropriate management and coordination of the Chesapeake Bay and on available alternative proposals for improved and eff-ective coordination and management of the Chesapeaxe Bay and its uses. 2. River Basin Conmmissions Maryland deals with impacts of major interstate tributaries which enter Maryland waters through participation in the following interstate organizations which are discussed in more detail in Chapter VII: The Susquehanna River Basin Cormmission, The interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin, and The Potomac River Fisheries Coummission. 3. Regional and National Coordination The Mid-Atlantic Governor's Coasta) Resources Council serves as a means for the Mid-Atlantic States to commnunicate regularly on issues of regional concern. Its major focus has been on keeping the States of the region informed on issues concerned with the development of the Outer Continental Shelf and onshore and offshore impacts which may result. Maryland also participates in the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Compact (see Chapter VIII, p ) in the Coastal States Organization, and in periodic meetings of Coastal Zone Program managers in the South Atlantic Region. III. Implementation Four mechanisms will be used to ensure that all'government units use their coastal management authorities to carry out the State's Coastal Zone Management Program. First, a consolidated set of goals, objectives, and policies for coastal zone management in Maryland has been promulgated (these are listed in the Executive Sunmmary). These goals, objectives, and policies will be formalized through an Executive order and through Memoranda of Understanding between the lead agency for coastal zone management - the:Department of Natural Resources - and other government units. Second#, an advisory group - the Coastal Resources Advrisory Commnittee - has been established to represent local governmental program participants, citizens and special interest groups. Third, a procedure has been established by which individual proposals for projects which affect the coastal zone can be comprehensively evaluated for consistenicy with the state program. Fourth, a method for evaluating prograrmmatic policies and decisions which influence coastal resources management has been established. Be A. Goals, Objiectives And Policies The goals, objectives, and policies enumerated in Chapter III are consistent with policy statements in Maryland Law and Regulations and result from consensus of all interests and units of government with concerns and expertise in coastal zone matters. These goals and objectives will be formalized throuqh the followinq process: 1. Certification of the Program by the Governor. 2. Formalization of the goals, objectives, and policies in an Executive Order of the Governor. 3. Establishment of Memoranda of 'Understanding between the Department of Natural Resources and each participant executive department1 on (1) the participant department's role in implementing the goals, objectives, and policies, (2) the participant department's role in project and program evaluation, and (3) the interaction of specific programs of the department with coastal zone management. * 4. Establishment of work agreements between the Department of Natural Resources and each county, which describe the tasks the local jurisdictions propose to accomplish in support of the goals and objectives including activities which assure compatible local and state plans, programs, management policies, and other joint actions relating to the coastal zone. B. Coastal Resources Advisory Comuittee The Coastal Resources Advisory Committee has been formed to represent all participants in the Coastal Zone Management Program. The government of each coastal county and the Mayors of Baltimore City and Ocean City are represented on this Committee. Each county and the five regional citizen advisory groups each have chosen a citizen representative to the Committee. In-addition, many interest groups are represented as voting members. Repre- sentatives of each of the --ix state executive departments, each of the federal agencies with coastal zone management responsibilities, and academic institutions provide non-voting technical support. Table 1-2 shows the committee's compositionship. The Coastal Resources Advisory Committee was constituted in June, 1977. The membership represents the organizations with responsibilities relating to coastal zone management and is able to function in the implementation of an approved and operational program. The Commnittee provides a forum where entities involved in coastal resource activities can be kept aware of program actions and present their views on proposed program proposals. While the various interests represented on the Commnittee may lNo memorandum of understanding is anticipated with the Public Service Commission or the Board of Public Works. The criteria these agencies must use in approving licenses for power plants and state wetlands alterations is defined by state law in such a way that they support the proposed coastal zone management program. Further, these agencies must rely or the evaluation and recommendations 9 ~ ~of the Department of Natural Resources in 'making licensing decisions. See Annotated Code of Maryland, Department of Natural Resources, Article Section 9-305 et se. and Article 78A, Section 54. 59 TABLE I-2 Coastal Resources Advisory Committee Appointed by Secretary Coulter Appointed by Local Governments State Agencies Special Groups Local Representatives U.S. Department of Agriculture Bethlehem Steel Corporation Anne Arundel 2 u.s. Department of Economic & Community Development Chesapeake Bay Foundation Baltimore 2 U.S. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene Chesapeake Bay Yacht Club Association Calvert 2 U.S. Department of State Planning Chesapeake Research Consortium Caroline 2 u~s. Department of State Planning Chesapeake ResearchCConsortiu U.S. Department of Transportation (Md. Port Admin.) Citizen Regional Representatives (5 at-large) Cecil 2 U.S. Department of Transportation (other units) Delmarva Advisory Council Charles 2 Lt. Governor's Office Delmarva Power & Light/Baltimore Gas & Electric Dorchester 2 Maryland Boat Act Advisory Committee and PEPCO (1 at-large) Harford 2 Maryland Environmental Trust Home Builders Association of Maryland Kent 2 o Izaak Walton League Prince George's 2 Federal Azencies League of Women Voters of Maryland Somerset 2 Maryland Aggregation Association St. Mary's 2 Maryland Association of Counties Talbot 2 Department of Aiculture Maryland Association of Realtors Wicomico 2 U.S. Depa rtment of Agmrcute Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Dist. Worcester 2 U.S. Department of CoDmerce Maryland Bankers Association Baltimore City 2 US. Department of DEfenser Maryland Chamber of Commerce Ocean City 2 U.S. D~epartment of Energy Maryland Conservation Council Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Maryland F arm B ureau Environmental Protection Agency Maryland P etroleum Associa tion U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Developmen ton General Services Administration Maryland Watetmens Assocation U.S. Department of Health, Education & Welfare Maryland W etlands Committee Maryland Wildlife Federation u. S. Department of the Interior Regional Planning Council Nuclear Regulatory Commission eln Pang oci Nuclear Regulatory C ission Trn-County Council of Southern Maryland U.S. Department of Transporation Academic Institutions Applied Physics Laboratory (Johns Hopkins University) Center for Environmental & Estuarine Studies (University of Maryland) Chesapeake Bay Center tor Environmental Studies (Smithsonian Institution) Chesapeake Bay Institute (Johns Hopkins University) University of Maryland Graduate School July, 1978 not always be in total agreement, the committee's role as a regular communication channel ensures that they will be provided an opportunity to have their views considered and that they will be aware of the technical, environmental, and economic bases for decisions, The Committee also provides a framework for formal public involvement and for coordination with local governments. Without the support of the public and of local governments which are aware of, have helped shape, and support the implemen- -cation of a Coastal Zone Management Program, there is little chance such a program will ever survive or effectively serve the public interest. The Committee shall play an intensive advisory role in program implementation, primarily through the efforts of subcoummittees and task forces. Each should have a broad composition containing representatives of State agencies, local governments, special interests, and citizen groups. Among the specific areas that the Committee, and the smaller groups it creates, may address include: (1) the Project Evaluation process, including the procedures and criteria that should be used'in designating and evaluating projects; (2) the identification of coastal problems requiring further research and analytical studies for resolution; (3) the overall allocation of 4he Program's technical and financial resources; (4) Federal Consistency review; and (5) the implementation of the Coastal Energy Impact Program that was established by the 1976 Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments. C. Project Evaluation The purpose of the project evaluation process is to ensure that comprehensive review is undertaken on all projects likely to have a significant impact on coastal resources. it should also enhance participation and cormunication in the existing comprehensive reviews of major facilities * ~such as power plants, OCS/oil and natural gas facilities, sewage treatment plants and land transportation facilities. The process will not relocate decision-making in various agencies, nor will it require that regulatory or funding agencies exceed their statutory authority.- It will ensure ~hat all relevant factors - social, economic and environmental - are fully evaluated and that the activities of the various planning regulatory and enforcement agencies involved are coordinated before decisions are made. 1. Procedures for Initiating the Project Evaluation Process In order to initiate the project evaluation process, a systematic procedure for alerting the Coastal Zone Unit to possible projects for evaluation must be established. Thus the Coastal Zone Unit will utilize the following sources of notification: a. Counties: Counties will notify the Coastal Zone Unit of proposals for major facilities as described in Chapter 111, "Land and Water Uses", and for other projects within the Coastal Zone which have potential for direct and significant impact on coastal resources. The type of activi- ties likely to have such a potential are described in Chapter III. To accomplish such notification of the Coastal Zone Unit, the existing noti- fication procedures already established by the counties with the regional staff of the Department of State Planning will be utilized to the greatest extent possible. In most counties, the Coastal Zone Management Program 61 has funded a technical assistant to work for the county an coastal zc~ne matters. This person could assist the county in identifying projects for possible evaluation. b. Department of State Planning - To implement its intervention responsi- bilities mandated by the State Lead Use Act of 1974, the Department of State Planning screens and reviews zoning amendment applications, variances, special exceptions, comprehensive plans, subdivisions, and other land use actions of greater than local concern. The Department of State Planning's regional planners are responsible for the initial screening of local actions and notification of the State office of projects which should be considered further for intervention activities. Additions to or C~ha~nges to existing DSP criteria and procedures for screening and notification will be worked out to assure that CZU will be notified in an appropriate and timely manner. These criteria and procedures will minimize duplication and maximize cooperation between the agencies field and central offices. In addition, the DSP State Office will insure that the Coastal Zone unit is notified of all proposed projects'in the coastal counties in which the Department of State Planning is considering intervention. The Department of State Planning is also responsible for the A-95 State Clearinghouse Process and the State Capital Budget and Program. 'New Clearifighouse procedures will be developed, by the time of program approval, to assure proper Coastal Zone Unit participation in and review of projects through the State Clearinghouse. These procedures will minimize duplication and maximize cooperation between the two agencies without requiring additional or duplicate paper work of Clearinghouse applicants. The CZU will be provided an appropriate opportunity to commtent on State Capital Budget and Program projects that are potentially in conflict with the goals, objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program. All of these procedures will be in accordance 44th and in fulfillment of Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of N~atural Resources and the Department of State Planning signed in February 1977. c. Other State Agencies - The other state agencies fund, undertake, and permit projects in the coastal areas of the State. Through Memoranda of Understanding (and for other units of the.-Department of Natural Resources, Secretarial Order) procedures will be established for these agencies to submit projects to the Coastal Zone Unit that entail the potential for direct and significant impact on coastal resources. Types of projects likely to have such impacts are described in Chapter 111. d. Federal Agencies - Federally conducted or funded projects appropriate for project evaluation will be identified through the State Clearinghouse process. Federally licensed or permitted activities will be identified through referral procedures spelled out in Chapter 1II, or will be established upon mutual agreement of the federal agencies and the Coastal Zone Unit. e. other sources - Requests for project evaluation will be accepted from individual citizens, interest groups, other State agencies, and local governments, and will be reviewed by the Coastal Zone Unit for possible project evaluation. 2. Determining Applicability The level of involvement of the Coastal Zone Unit in the evaluation of a project will depend upon the nature of the project and the scope of the existing regulating procedures. As shown in Figure 1-5, the project evaluation process undertaken by the Coastal Zone Unit will consist of the follow-9.~ s-eps: 62 FIGURE 1-5 INITIATING THE PROJECT EVALUATION PROCESS AGENCIES PLANNING REVIEW TO DETERMINE IF PROJECT 1S APPLICABLE ? 1 NOT APPUCABLE RELEVANT FOR CZU ANALYSIS "I* ~ NO PROJECT EVALUATION INDICATED POSSIBLE PROJECT EVALUATION INDICATED INITlAL INFORMATIONAL MEETING BY CZU RA REVIEW a OR OTHER AGENCY COMMENT e/ BY CZU TO APPROPRIATE AGENCY NO CZU FU LL ACTION PROJECT CRAC NECESSARY EVALUATION TASK FORCE 63 a. Upon notification of a proposed project, the Coastal Zone Unit will review the project and decide (usually within 30 days) if it is appli- cable for Coastal Zone Unit consideration. b. If it is decided that the project'is of Coastal Zone Management concern, the project will be reviewed for possible conflicts with Coastal Zone Management Program objectives/policies. c. If a possible conflict with the Program's objectives or policies is found, the Coastal Zone Unit will undertake (usually within 30 days) one of the following actions: i. Further review of the project and comment to the appropriate agencies on the aspects of the proposed project about which the Coastal Zone Unit has relevant information from its studies or from other sources. ii. Convene a meeting of relevant State and local agencies, and/or attend a meeting held by a State or local agency, to obtain more information on the project and to determine if coordina- tion of governmental efforts is needed because of involvement of more than one unit of government. After Lhese meetings, the Coastal Zone Unit may decide that (1) no further involve- ment is appropriate, (2) comments on certain aspects should be made to the relevant regulating agencies, or (3) a full project evaluation is necessary and the project should be submitted to CRAC for its consideration as described below. iii. Immediately submit the matter to CRAC because a full project evaluation is called for. d. The full project evaluation process is described below. This level of evaluation would be automatic for most types of major facilities as defined in Chapter III including OCS/oil/natural gas facilities, sewage treatment facilities, and land transportation facilities. The other types of major facilities noted in Chapter III, namely industrial parks, mineral extraction facilities, and large-scale residential development, will be subjected to the project evaluation process and a full project evaluation undertaken if appropriate. In many cases, such as those involving power plants, sewage treatment plants, public ports, and transportation facilities, other governmental agencies may take the lead, with the Coastal Zone Unit participating as described in Chapter III and the respective Memoranda of Understanding. In such cases, coastal zone management concerns will be incorporated into existing evaluation and review procedures (including the time periods allowed for review). A full project evaluation will also be undertaken, after consultation with the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, on projects (1) upon request from other state agencies or local units of government in consultation with the Coastal Zone Unit, (2) upon determination by the Coastal Zone Unit staff that a full project evaluation is necessary to ensure a comprehensive review of the project to determine its consistency, or (3) upon request from citizens or interest groups, provided that the Coastal Zone Unit agrees that a full project evaluation is needed to assure consistency with the program's goals and objectives. 64 All requests for project evaluation will be subject to one of'the above levels of review, and the rationale for choosing the level of review selected Will be . documented. The undertaking of a project evaluation will be timed so that the results will be available to relevant state and local decision-makers. 3. Procedures for a Full Project Evaluation (See Figure 1-6). a. After notification- has been made that a coastal project is proposed and an initial determination has been made by the Coastal Zone Unit that a full project evaluation is warranted, the project will be submitted to CRAC for its consideration. If CRAC indicates that its involvement is warranted, a task force will be established inmmediately to aid the Coastal Zone Unit in the project evaluation. A meeting of the CRAC task force will then be held on possible issues that should be considered. The Coastal Zone Unit, at appropriate points during the project evaluation, will also meet with the CRAC task force to obtain its comments. b. A technical round-table meeting will be convened for technical repre-. sentatives of relevant governmental units and the applicant (if he desires to participates. The purpose of such a meeting will be to determine: i. The issues which need evaluation including any related to national interest concerns. ii. The information required by various approving authorities. iii. The methods to be used to evaluate the project. iv. The in-house information-gathering and analysis that each participating agency will undertake. v. Additional information that will be. required through contractual studies. The Coastal Zone Unit will send to the CRAC task force a summary.of the results of the meeting for its review and comment. c. Following the round-table meeting, the CoastAl Zone Unit will initiate the technical analysis of the project, which will consist of: i. Gathering information on the nature and extent of the proposed project and the characteristics of the area in which it is to be undertaken. Appropriate maps and other 'existing sources of information will be used. FIGURE 1-6 FULL PROJECT EVALUATION CZU CRAC TASK FORCE TECHNICAL ROUNOTABLE MEETING WITH CZU, APPULCANT AND I REGULATORY AGENCIES ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED LONG TERM ISSUES AND CRAGC REVIEW DATA REQUIREMENIS RECOMMENDATIONS I STATE GATHERS NSULTANT INFORMATION ' / . ' I CZU EVALUATES 1i I COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ! NonnFYCRA s--cOM.Eo a. RECOMMENDATIONS CZU A6ENCIES SECRETARY HEARING RECORDS 66 ii. Necessary contractual studies. iii. Analysis of alternatives with the project, without the project, and with modification of the project. iv. Incorporation of the results of analysis by the other government agencies. v. Quantification of the impacts (economic, social, and environmental) wherever possible, associated with each of the alternatives. d. Upon completion of a project evaluation, the findings and recommendations of the project evaluation, including any related to national interest concerns, will be brought by the Coastal Zone Unit to CRAC for its review. The findings and recommendations along with CRAC's comments will be submitted to the Secretary of Natural Resources and the relevant regulatory agencies for their action and for inclusion in public hearing records on any regulatory decisions that may be involved. 4. Considerations in Undertaking a Full Project Evaluation The following factors are to be considered to determine whether they should be examined in detail in a full project evaluation. These will include but are not necessarily limited to the following: A. Potential Environmental, Social, Economic Impacts 1. water quality impacts (point discharges, non-point discharges including stormwater runoff, sedimentation, toxic discharges, etc.) 2. air quality impacts 3. dredging and filling associated with the project 4. impacts on wetlands 5. impacts on fisheries 6. impacts on wildlife 7. rare and endangered species that may be affected 8. flooding and/or erosion risks related to the project 9. impacts on surface and/or groundwater supplies 10. impacts on agricultural and forestry resources 11. impacts on areas of recreational, aesthetic, historical or archeological significance 12. social, economic and cultural impacts, whether beneficial or adverse 67 13. impacts on coastal dependent developments 14. cumulative impacts resulting from similar developments 15. adequacy of public services proposed for project 16. impacts of projects on existing public service~s (water and sewer, transportation facilities, etc.) B. Planning Concerns 1. The relationship of the project to local c.~omprehensive plans, water and sewer plans, zoning and other local regulations and the position of the local government on the project 2. The compatibility of the project with the state land use, fiscal, economic transportation 3. Concerns of interested State and federal agencies 4. Key concerns of interested or affected citizenrs S. Public Information Activities Related to Project Evaluation in order to keep all interested parties aware of the projects which are being evaluated, the Coastal Zone Unit will: a. Notify counties of all projects impacting their jurisdictions which the Coastal Zone Unit is going to evaluate. b. List and briefly describe (location, type of activity) all projects subject to a full evaluation in the Maryland Register. C. Briefly describe in the minutes of the meetings of the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee the status of project evaluations underway and the recommendations of the Committee regarding projects proposed by the Coastal Zone Unit for project evaluation. Anyone can request to be put on the mailing list to receive copies of these minutes. d. Report project evaluation activities in the Coast and Bay Bylines. e. Prepare and distribute news releases regarding full project evaluations to ensure that concerned or affected persons are aware of projects being evaluated. f. Explore means of further dissemination of this information with the Department of Natural Resources' office of Public Information. D. Program Review in addition to evaluating the impacts of large construction projects on a case by case basis as described under Project Evaluation, the Coastal Zone Management Program will review existing programs laws, regulations, and procedures deal with coastal resources and acti.---tis for their consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Program. The impact of new programs and procedures concerned with coastal resources will also be reviewed. 1. Proposed legislation affecting coastal resources and activities. 2. Issuance of new or amended regulations for any of the laws cited in this document (e.g., wetlands, water quality standards, State Critical Areas program). 3. Development of federal and state plans on which substantial future resource management decisions will be based (e.g., water quality management Plans, 208 plans, transportation- plans, state develorwnint plans). 4. Development of local comprehensive and water and sewerage plans, annual comprehensive and water and sewerage plan updates, comprehensive rezoning based upon the comprehensive plan, etc. 5. Patterns of decision-making.on small, individually insignificant projects which cumulatively have severe, adverse impacts on coastal resources. The purpose of such reviews is to create a forum in which all program par- ticipants can (1) define conflicts or potential conflicts between programs or actions and the goals, objectives and policies for coastal resource management, (2) identify conflicts or inconsistencies between programs involving coastal resources and activities, or different state agencies, or state and local govern- mental agencies, (3) determine whether the conflicts arise from lack of technical information, and if so, call on the Coastal Zone Unit to supply such technical information, and (4) make formal proposals for administrative or legislative remedies, if necessary. One of the most important roles of the Coastal Zone Unit in program reviews will be to determine the cumulative impacts of individual projects, and to identify when such actions may begin to hdve mayoe adverse impacts on natural systems or on economic and social well-being, both in localized areas and in the Chesapeake Bay and Atlantic coastal bays system. Once a greater unaerstanding ot cumulative impacts is obtained, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with other governmental units to ensure that consideration of cumulative impacts are given sufficient weight in the decisions of state and local government, so that significant adverse impacts are prevented in order to provide the information base needed to undertake such evaluation, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with relevant government agencies regulating or funding coastal activities, to establish project tracking systems which would contain information on the type of project proposed, its location, and action taken on it. Program review will taxe place at two levels. The first level will involve cooperative efforts among the Coastal Zone Unit, other state agencies, and/or local governments to-resolve inconsistencies and policy differences between the Program's goals and objectives and state or local governmental programs. [he technical assistants working with local governments, funded by the Program, 69 will provide needed staff support to enable local governments to participate in such reviews. In these situations, cooperative work efforts between the coastal Zone Unit and state agencies and/or local governments should be sufficient to resolve the conflicts. An example of this type of review would be review and modification of local zoning ordinances and state regulatory policies, to ensure that compatible criteria are used at state and local levels for the siting of marinas and associated recreational boating facilities. The second level of program review would involve situations in which there are major policy conflicts between program objectives, or in which inadequacies in existing programs are identified which need legislative or significant admini- strative remedy. For example, the question of providing adequate protection to non-tidal wetlands, while allowing reasonable use of coastal areas for agricultural practices, residential development, may require review. A program review will be initiated upon determination of a programmatic inconsistency by the Coastal Zone Unit, upon request for assistance by other state agencies or local governments, and upon presentation of issues for programmatic conflicts by citizens, organizations, and other interested groups. Proposals for program reviews will be brought to CRAC for its advice. Since the first type of review will involve an agreed-upon approach to resolution of the problem, the review effort will be more informal, with a commnitment to implement the review results at both the state and local level by appropriate agencies. in the case of the second type of review involving significant policy differences and possible program changes, a more formalized approach will be necessary. As with project reviews, the first step will be a meeting of all appropriate agencies to discuss (1) the nature of the conflict or inadequacy, (2) specific issues the review should address, and (3) information that may be needed to resolve the issues. The Coastal Zone Unit, with the assistance of appropriate agencies, will then undertake a detailed study of the issue, and will prepare a report de- scribing the issues involved, possible alternatives for resolution, and their ramifications. Such alternatives may involve legislative action or significant changes in administrative regulations. The report containing the Unit's findings will be submitted to the CRAC for its review. The Unit's report containing suggested actions will be forwarded to the Secretary of N~atural Resources and other governmental bodies. They will then take action to resolve the issues (including seeking new legislation if needed). '70 IV. Conflict Resolution Each of the implementation tools described - goals, objectives, and policies, the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, the project review process, and program review - are designed to enhance coordination and resolve potential conflicts before they appear. Whenever, in the process of project evaluation or program review, intergovernmental conflicts arise that cannot be resolved through those procedures, the following resolution mechanisms will be employed: A. State-Local Conflicts The Department of State Planning will be asked to intervene in any irresolvable conflict between the actions of state agencies or local governments and the goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. While the final decision to intervene resides with the Secretary of State Planning, the Department of State Planning has agreed to use Coastal Zone Management Program goals and objectives in making determinations on when to intervene, and to honor requests of the Department of Natural Resources for intervention. Information developed as part of project evaluation or program review will be entered into the hearing record involved. The Coastal Zone Unit will develop any additional technical information necessary to support the intervention by the Department of State Planning. B. Intradepartmental Conflicts The Secretary of Natural Resources has issued a Secretarial Order which requires that all Units of the Department of Natural Resourc~s ensure that their activities are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program. All Units are further directed to fully cooperate with and whenever appropriate actively participate in both the project evaluation and program review processes. Any conflict that arises between the Coastal Zone Unit and another agency of the Department of Natural Resources concerning the implementation of the Program which cannot be resolved at the staff or administrative level, will be referred to the Secretary's office for resolution, based on the Secretary's interpretation of the goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. C. Interdepartmental Conflicts Conflicts which arise between the Department of Natural Resources and other state departments in the implementation of the Program which cannot be resolved at the staff level or through remedies proposed by the Coastal Zone Unit with the advice of the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, will require cabinet level negotiation. As head of the lead agency for implementa- tion of the Coastal Zone Management Program, the Secretary of Natural Resources will take appropriate action to resolve 'uzh conflicts through cabinet level negotiation and, if necessary'bringing them to the attention of the Governor. If the Secretaries or the Governor deem it appropriate, the Maryland Council on the Economy, the Environment, and Energy Production can be convened to. consider the-problem. The Governor, as head of the Executive Branch, is, and will remain, the final arbiter of any interdepartmental conflicts. The Program, however, now provides two sources of guidance in resolving such conflicts; these are (1) the goals, objectives and policies of the Progran, which the Governor formally recognized in Executive Order 01.01.1978.05, and (2) the Memorada of Understanding in which procedures each department will follow are enumerated. 71 D. State-Federal Conflicts State-federal conflicts can be minimized through continuing active partici- pation of federal agencies in the program, through membership in the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, and through participation in project evaluation and program review. Disagreements which arise over the conduct of federal activities or the exercise of federal authorities in Maryland's coastal zone will be resolved through mediation by the Secretary of Commerce as spelled out in NOAA regulations 15 CFR 930 subpart G (43 FR 10510 et seq., March 13, 1978). In situations where Federal Interagency conflicts are perceived as obstacles to achieving CZY, goals and objectives, or contributing to inconsistencies with CZM policies, the CZU will work with DSP, and other State agencies as appropriate to gain the assistance of the Federal Regional Council or the Fedoral agencies directly to resolve any problems. Additional discussion of this issue is contained in the section of the Federal Consistency. 72 MARYLAND'S COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY II. MARYLAND'S COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY Legislative Requirements The federal Coastal Zone Management Act (P.L. 92-583) requires that each state program include 'an identification of the boundaries of the coastal zone subject to the management program" (Sec. 305(b)(11)). The Act's definition of "coastal zone" includes: I... the coastal waters (including the lands therein and thereunder), strongly influenced by each other and in proximity to the shorelines of the several coastal states, and includes transitional and intertidal areas, salt marshes, wetlands, and beaches. The zone extends ... seaward to the outer limit of the United States territorial sea. The zone extends inland from the shorelands only to the extent necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. Excluded from the coastal zone are lands, the use of which is by law subject solely to the discretion of or which is held in trust by the Federal Government, its officers or agents" (Sec. 304(a)). Coastal waters are defined as "... those waters, adjacent to the shorelines, which contain a measurable quantity or per- centage of sea water, including, but not limited to, sounds, bays, lagoons, bayous, ponds, and estuaries" (Sec. 304(b)). Based on the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and the regulations pro- mulgated under the Act, the federal Office of Coastal Zone Management has stated that the following areas, at a minimum, must be included within the coastal boundary: 1. All the coastal waters of a state extending from the State's three- mile jurisdictional limit inland to include the waters of the State containing a reasonable quantity or percentage of seawater. & 2. Areas which are subject to periodic inundation by the tides, as well as adjacent areas where ecological systems are neither intertidal nor upland in nature, but which are distinctly affected by the pressure of tidal waters. These areas are termed transitional and intertidal areas. 3. Salt marshes and wetlands where the vegetation and wildlife are dependent upon the periodic inundation of tidal saltwater. 4. Beaches at least up to the line of vegetation, where identifiable. 73 5. Upland areas to the extent necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters. Of these five areas, the State exercises direct control over three. The tidal waters of the State and the lands lying beneath are held in trust and I managed by the State. This authority, provided by the Wetlands Act, extends to the sproing or seasonal high tide line in the case of vegetated wetlands, and therefore includes all the State's tidal wetlands. Beaches up to the Mean High Water (MHW) line also fall under the Wetlands Act. In addition, Atlantic Coast beaches are regulated directly by the State, in cooperation with Worcester County, through the Beach Erosion Control District. The remaining areas, beaches above the MHW line and upland areas, are regulated by county compre- hensive zoning, with state reviews and possible intervention. Activities in these areas are also subject to the numerous state performance standards implemented by State and local government programs. The areas which must be excluded from the coastal zone are those lands owned, leased, held in trust or whose use is otherwise by law subject solely to the discretion of the Federal Government, its officers or agents, and the ocean waters of the United States beyond the State's three-mile jurisdictional limit. However, the Act provides that activities in such areas which may have an impact on the State's coastal zone must be consistent with the Program to the maximum extent practible. Thus, the State maintains an interest in some activities in these areas. Excluded federal lands are identified on the maps following this chapter. Finally, the regulations advise that "The area (included in the coastal zone boundary) must not be so extensive that a fair application of the management program becomes difficult or capricious, nor so limited that lands strongly in- fluenced by coastal waters and over which the management program should reasonably apply, are excluded " (Sec. 923.11(b)(1)). The procedure developed for identifying I the coastal zone management boundary is fully described in Appendix A. The Maryland Coastal Zone Boundary Maryland is defining the management boundary of the Coastal Zone -Program as the inland boundary of the counties bordering the Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River, as far as the municipal limits of Washington, D.C. This includes each of the following local jurisdictions: Anne Arundel, Baltimore City, Baltimore, Calvert, Caroline, Cecil, Charles, Dorchester, Harford, Kent, Prince George's, Queen Anne's, Somerset, St. Mary's, Talbot, Wicomico and Worcester (see Map 1). This boundary encompasses all the areas whose inclusion is required by the federal Office of Coastal Zone Management. Seward in the Atlantic Ocean, the coastal zone boundary extends to the limit of Maryland's three-mile juris- diction. In addition, within each of these 17 local jurisdictions an "Area of Focus" is identified as a geographic guideline for program implementation. The "Area of Focus" is generally based on: the 100-year flood plain bordering the tidal waters of the State. This two-level boundary reflects the fact that activities taking place on the shorelands bordering Maryland's coastal waters (the lands included with- in the Area of Focus) have a greater likelihood of having a direct and significant impact on these water than activities taking place elsewhere. This concept has already been established in Maryland law. Activities occurring in or adjacent to the waters of the state are more often subject to regulation than activities 74 occurring further inland. Two examples of this regulation are the Wetlands Act of 1970 and the Watershed Management Act of 1976. The Area of Focus represents the way the CZU has administratively incorporated this concept into the CZM Program. The overriding factor in using tha 100-year fl�od r.!ai, was hydrologic. The 100-year flood plain contains all areas which drain directly into the tidal waters of the state, all tidal wetlands, all beaches, and with the addition of bluff areas, the Area of Focus also encompasses all significant coastal hazard- prone areas. In addition, the local governments are required to develop water- shed management plans for the 100-year flood plain area to address flood control and water quality issues. The Area of Focus in each jurisdiction has been defined in cooperation with each of the local governments. The Area of Focus proposed for each of the Counties and municipalities in the coastal zone is described in Table 11-1 and is shown on the maps concluding this chapter. Differences between the delineation of Areas of Focus in each county are due to differences in physiography or development pressures among the counties. The suburban counties of the metropolitan Baltimore region, for example, requested a wider Area of Focus because of the intense growth pressures in that area. In southern Maryland, where there are high bluffs along the Bay and Potomac River and the flood plain is extremely narrow, an additional setback is included. In counties where a county planning or zoning district corresponds to or slightly exceeds the flood plain, the boundary of such a district is used at the request of the county government. Where contour lines or set distances from the shoreline are cited, these distances generally correspond to the 100-year flood plain. The Area of Fodus extends seaward to the extent of the State's jurisdiction in tidal water. Thus, it includes the Maryland portion of the Chesapeake Bay, and the ocean coastal waters as far as the three-mile limit. It also includes the Potomac River to the mean low water line on the Virginia Shore. The significance of the Area of Focus designation is the relationship to the project evaluation procedures described in Chapter I. The Area of Focus repre- sents the geographic threshold beyond which only major facilities will be subject to full project evaluation, unless special circumstances warrant this consideration (See Chapter 11 for delineation of major facilities). Within the Area of Focus, the Coastal Zone Unit will be notified of all projects which may have a potential for significant impact on the State's coastal waters or which may be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. This notification requirement will apply to any projects that require state and/or local approval, as described in Chapter I. Local governments, with the aid of technical assistants funded by the Coastal Zone Management Program, are expected to have primary responsibility for identifying those projects within the Area of Focus which will need impact evaluations. 75 The other aspects of the Coastal Zone Management Program that will receive special consideration in the Area of Focus are Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (Chapter Iv), the Coastal Zone Unit's role in intervention proceedings (Chapters I, VI and VIII), and technical assistance provided to counties (Chapter V). In an Area of Focus, all sites designated by the Department of State Planning as State Critical Areas will also be termed Geographic Areas of Particular Con- cern (GAPC). Each State Critical Area outside an Area of Focus will be considered separately for GAPC designation. As the Coastal Zone Unit considers which areas to recommend as State Critical Areas, the Unit will Generally limit its considerations to sites within the Area of Focus. However, the Unit will consider all sites where rmajor facilities (as defined in chapterIII) are concerned, whether or not they are in an Area of Focus. The first priority for Coastal Zone Unit participation in intervention pro- ceedings will be given to cases within the Area of Focus. However, the Coastal Zone Unit will consider involvement in any intervention proceeding occurring in the coastal counties, if there is a conflict with the Coastal Zone Management Pro- gram's goals and objectives. This will also apply to any tz,.hnical assistance to counties (over and above the staff position to be funded in each county). Also, projects within the Area of Focus will receive first consideration for provision of funds. If a proposed project is located outside the boundary of the coastal counties but may have a significant impact on the waters within the coastal zone, then the Coastal Zone Unit will be involved in evaluation of that project as it relates to impacts on coastal resources. In addition, the Coastal Zone Unit will review all state programs as described in Chapter I that may have an impact on coastal resources, to ensure that they are consistent with the Coastal Zone Management Program's goals and objectives, even though the programs may cover an area broader than the official boundaries of the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Zone Management Program's two-level boundary has several practical advantages. Through the inclusion of the entire area of each coastal county in the coastal zone, implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program can be adapted to existing administrative and legislative bodies, and consistency can ne maintained with the boundary of the State's Coastal Facilities Review Act. Additionally, the federal consistency provision of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (Chapter VI)' can be applied uniformly throughout a county, and all areas such as tidal wetlands, transitional areas, and intertidal areas, which are required to be included in the coastal zone, will be contained in the coastal zone boundary. The primary reason for designating Areas of Focus is to allow state and local governments to focus their efforts on the areas where they are most needed to solve coastal problems, since it is in these areas their projects and activities are most likely to have a significant impact on the State's coastal resources. The Area of Focus designation facilitates application of the management program by defining the geographical area where the majority of issues related to the coastal zone arise. The criteria used to delineate Areas of Focus for Anne Arundel County, Baltimore County, the City of Baltimore, and Harford County, are somewhat different from those used in more rural counties c' tb- State. Because these :-ounties are more urban than other coastal counties and face many unique problems, additional criteria have been used. In addition to the lc-ation of the 100-year 76 flood plain,, other factors considered in these jurisdictions were the 20-foot contour interval, a 1,000 yard setback, shoreline industrial and * ~residential sections, and areas where coastal site-specific issues have been identified.' The actual Area of Focus for each of these counties and the City of Baltimore reflects the unique problems faced by each jurisdiction (see attached maps). The coastal zone planning process for determining the boundaries in these counties described in more detail in Chapter V. The.Area of Focus designation presented with this application for each of the coastal counties is considered preliminary until final flood hazard areas have been mapped for each county and all the Coastal Zone Management Program processes are operating. Before final Area of Focus designations are made, they will be reviewed by local governments and presented to the public and to the Coastal Resources Advisory Commuittee to ensure that each area included is adequate to meet the goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' 7 TABLE 11-1 Coastal Zone Management Boundary Areas of Focus Anne Arundel County The Planning Study Area as developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study. Baltimore CityI The Planning Study Area as developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study. 1 Baltimore County The Planning Study Area as developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study. Calvert County 100-year flood plain; bluff areas; and areas of critical state concern adjacent to the county's tidal waters. Caroline County 100-year flood plain. Cecil County Final determination still in progress. Area of focus will be defined as a fixed distance from Mean High Water. This distance is tentatively set at 250 feet, but is subject to change until the county zoning ordinance is adopted. Charles County The 100-year flood plain plus a setback of 1,000 feet in bluff areas. 1See Chapter V. 78 Dorchester County No preliminary boundary established due to insufficient information. A final line will be established at a later date based on the 100 year flood plain delineation now in progress. For the interim, project evaluation will only be considered for projects which are special exceptions to the approved Dorchester County zoning ordinance. Harford County1 The Planning Study Area as developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study. Kent County The 100-year flood plain. Prince George's County The 100-year flood plain plus an additional extension of 1,000 feet inland in locations with high bluffs. Queen Anne's County The 100-year flood plain or 1,000 feet from Mean High Water, whichever is less. St. Mary's County Corresponds to the Waterfront Protection District as shown in the Comprehensive Plan for St. Mary's County. Somerset County The 100-year flood plain or the 20-foot contour interval, whichever is narrower Talbot County The area within 1,000 feet of the Mean High Water line or the 100-year flood plain, whichever is less. 79 Wicomico County The 100-year flood plain, upstream on the Wicomico River to Salisbury city limits. I~~~~~ Worcester County The 100-year flood plain for St. Martin's River, the ocean bays, the ocean shoreline and the Pocomoke River to Pocomoke City. On the Pocomoke River above Pocomoke City, flood prone areas as indicated by muck and alluvial soils and areas with slopes greater than 10% which border tidal waters. TABLE II-2 Federal Lands Owning Code Used on Following Maps. 50 Federal Government (General) 61 Coast Guard 51 Department of Agriculture 62 Nuclear Regulatory Commission 52 Department of Air Force 63 Federal Comunnications Commission 53 Department of Army 64 General Services Administration 54 Corps of Engineers 65 National Aeronautics and Space 55 Department of Navy Administration 56 Department of Commerce 66 Department of Interior 57 Department of Health, Education 67 Fish and Wildlife Bureau and Welfare 68 Postal Service 58 National Institute of Health 69 Veteran's Administration 59 Social Security Administration 70 Department of Justice 60 Department of Transportation 71 Department of Treasury NOTE: All federal holdings less 10 acres in size are considered excluded even though not specifically identified. 80 MAP I MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM BOUNDARY ~~~ **~~~~~~~~.. ~~~~~LEGEND ~~ ~ ~ '4 . SEC ~~~~~~I L ~~~~~~~U...dkin ~~~~~~~~~~JI 0 . b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4 a -'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~- MAP 2 MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM EXCLUDED FEDERAL LANDS LEGEND .-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0. A- o" C oo -~~~~~~'I d e S mOnOam* Lw- wA d.. no ~~~~~~~~~~gu" ov~QuliAmmgy a~~~~t I@ PgeIAb f~~~~~~~~~~~~~ew~ mIg~q S~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9V s- oak.. PI ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AMEA OF FOCUS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS 0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i MAP 4 BALTIMORE COUNTY AND CITY P E N N S Y L V A N I A COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY / ~~~~~~~~~~AREA OF FOCUS - ~~~~~TIDALULMITS ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~AREA OF FOCUS X ~~~~~~~FEDERAL LANDS I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~WP MAP 5 BALTIMORE CITY INSET COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL LIMITS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INN a ~ D dl O R I ,',''I'NTY CALVERT COUNTY, MARYLAND '-dW, _ I COASTAL ZONE Z~ t I BOUNDARY .....,,n ..f AREA OF FOCUS �>: ~� i ~4L J~ ,/-~' ,TIDAL UM TS '_:� I ./.;) . * .AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS _ -00 -e i: \ if Pr.~~~~~IN(E fi_ MAP 7 -. ~~~~~~~CAROLINE COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL UIMITS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS 't.~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYL.VANIA .TY LN( .s, .TER (.......Y .C14Ef C * .,T 1._,<~~~~~~~~~~ CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND - /~ i > ; t ./! \ ,e COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL LI MITS AREA OF FOCUS I FEDERAL LANDS SEE TABLE 11-1 : 0 . 2 3 ,,, i . I MAP 9 CHARLE. MUNT, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY ________ r~AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL LIMITS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS ~~~~~~~~Avg '0 4 zt V.I C~~~ ~ ~~ - 'Ij N3 V / r iII i,.~~~.7 I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I I 0/ Q- ,r /i'~~~~~~~~~~ i �i~~~~~~~~~~~ I, B �,~~~~~~1 N ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~'PA MAP 10 '~ DORCHESTER COUNTY. MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS scale TIDALULMITS AMUA OF Focus T ~~B(' ~ I FEDERAL LANDS JIMJ SEE TABLE 114 PENNSN 1,AN, ~ .r~ ... YOK CUNT co N C% ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~IN~ 4,~~~~~~~~~~ r~~~~~~~.,, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m. AIN MAP �1 HANFORD COUNTY AREA, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL LIMITS c AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS '. CETRTOWN ETCUTMRLN COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL UIMITS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS ~ of; - MAP 13 PRINCE lEORUEn COUNTY, MARYLANO COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS s TIDAL LIMITS AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS0 0~~~~~~~~~~~~ MAP 14Il OUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS ~C.n, TIDAL UIMITS EJli AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS .1 ~~~~~~~il I MAP is ST. MARYS COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS / ~~~~~~~~~~~TIDAL UIMITS AREA OF FOCUS k..rh~~~~~~~r. ~~~FEDERAL LANDS *J I~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~ I 3 aI', 01%~~ ~~~~~~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o y~~~~~~~~~~Pi y K so/. * 23U * ) .~~~~~~~~~~~~~.. ( . Q j~~~~~~~~~~~u 1*~~IRIA COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY MAP If SOMERSET CCU NTY. MARYLAND AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL U&ITS AREA OFFOCUS FEDERAL LANDS 90.080RJV dck/ (.~~~~~~~~~~M .w,go' Pu~~~~eri~~ so~~ - - -- 45 OMC MAP 17 TALBOT COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS TIDAL LIMITS E: AREA OF FOCUS j FEDERAL LANDS ~ ma-b~~~~~~~ Pt~~~~-Wnd.. ~- H~~~~~nhb~~~~~~~~to.. * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 3 ~ ~ m Q2I ,D/~ Tdxh / K~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l6 /~~~~~~~~~~~~,' e"o MAP 18 WICOMICO COUNTY. MAAYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS -9 ~~~~~~~, ~~TIDAL LMiS [] AREA OF FOCUS FEDERAL LANDS NEE)]. em-' I DEIAWARE 0~~~~ '1IT A: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~O'T --~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M l--,--- ipwli~~~~~~~~~~~~�i..r' w P-1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l COUNK~~TUI MAP 19 WORCESTER COUNTY, MARYLAND COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY AREA OF FOCUS DELAWARE TIDAL LIMITS S t I NTY AREA OF FOCUS -. FEDERAL LANDS ~I I N --A Pt~~~~~~i N. rJ '~ * -L I I I - tI/~~~~N 1111. ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 ,. -. q ~/XY~ C .� C "Cr~~~~~~~c;* /O c' ,~ e ' -- y / A' 'ri0 '-�� " ~ ~ 1. I ~ ~ -j: 9 V. ~ -�.I b r~~~~~; -� *\ � ..-(~ t~i P~~~ - -~~� 71F-A KO - "'Y' \IU,�IITJ CHAPTER III APPROPRIATE USES OF LAND & WATER I N hAl II i C, * **.*.*.*. ,2* j * - - - ,,. __ _ jf; . - N. -7-: N a' -' 10 ' - - N xv) // - * \\ ;Z 1' - ,. - III. APPROPRIATE LAND AND WATER USES Legislative Requirements The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 requires a State's Coastal Zone Management Program to-define permissible uses of land and water within the coastal zone which have direct impact on coastal waters (Section 305(b) (2)). The Act further requires that a state's program include "broad guidelines on priority of uses in particular areas, including specifically those uses of lowest priority". Methods for meeting these requirements are described in detail in Section 306 of the federal regulations. Section 923.12 of the regulations requires that: "States must develop policies and procedures by which uses determined to be subject to the management program willbe permitted, conditioned, modified and/or prohibited". Moreover, policies and procedures must be based on the following types of analyses: 1. Capability and suitability of resources to accommodate existing, projected, or potential uses. 2. Environmental impacts on coastal resources. 3. Compatibility of inland and alternative locations. 4. Evaluation of inland and alternative locations. 5. Coastal dependency of various uses, and other social and economic considerations (Section 923.12(c)). Particular attention must be paid to determining use priorities in Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC's) (Chapter V). in addition, the 1976 Amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act require that the State develop: - A definition of the term "~beach" and a planning process for the protection of, and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural value. - A planning process for energy facilities likely to be located in, or which may significantly affect the coastal zone, including, but not limited to, a process for anticipating and managing the impacts from such facilities. - A planning process for *(a) assessing the effects of shoreline erosion (however caused), and (b) studying and evaluating ways to control, or lessen the impact of such erosion, and to restore areas adversely affected by such erosion. (Section 305(b)) A two-pronged approach has been followed to meet the Act's requirements to identify appropriate land and water uses ;n V.ryland's coastal zone. 81. 1. Policy Base A sound policy base for determining appropriate land and water uses has been established. With input from state agencies, local governments, and the general public, goals and objectives for coastal resources and activities have been developed as a framework for cooperative efforts by state arid local management agencies implementing Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. From these goals and objectives, more detailed policies were developed for each coastal Use of Concern. These policies are based on existing State lawst and citations of statutes have been provided for each policy. 2. Coastal Resources Inventories of significant natural and man-made coastal resources have been taken, the capabilities of coastal resources to support various uses 'have been analyzed, and the impacts of uses on the natural environment have been assessed. These efforts provide the technical base needed to identify appropriate coastal uses and areas that should be designated Geographic Areas of Particular Concern, and are described at appropriate points in thi-s Chapter and Chapter IV. Goals and Objectives of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program The purpose of the Coastal Zone Management Program's goals, objectives, and policies, is to guide program implementation and to maintain the consistency of all projects permitted, funded, or undertaken in the State of Maryland. As described in Chapter II, Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program will be implemented by the coordinated exercise of state and local governmental programs that have management responsibilities in the coastal zone. The Coastal Zone management Program's goals and objectives have been reviewed by state agencies, local governments, and the general public, to ensure that they fully address Maryland's coastal zone management concerns, and to ensure that they provide a basis for coordinated exerc..se of state and local government programs, and federal programs through the federal consistency provisions of the Act. A complete list of these goals and objectives appears in the Executive Sum~mary of this document. Determination of Appropriate Land and Water Uses ih the Coastal Zone Three criteria have been used to determine which uses are of concern to this Program: (1) the use must have an "impact" on coastal resources, (2) the impact must be "direct", and (3) the impact must be "significant". For the purposes of this determination, "impact" has been defined as a docu~mentable change in any factor relevant to the maintenance of a coastal resource. That impact is considered "direct', when there is a documentable causal relationship between the uses or activity generating the impact, and its effect an coastal resources. An impact is considered to be 'significant" if (1) it is broad in geographical scope, (2) it affects a critical coastal resource of concern to the State, or (3) it is of sufficient magnitude to be potentially in conflict with State environmental standards or potentially conflicts with State or State approved local economico, fiscal, land use, transportation, or water quality plans. 82 Consideration has also been given to the likely location of the use within the coastal zone; coastal waters, intertidal areas, shoreline areas, or areas within the inland boundaries of the coastal counties. Most of the Program's attention focuses on activities occurring within the first three areas, since it is here that ac---'%ties are most likely to have a direct and significant impact on coastal waters. Principal exceptions are major facilities, whose size and operation are likely to have an impact on coastal waters no matter where they are located within the coastal zone. While the coastal studies, inventories, and analyses provide the techhnical basis for determining uses of concern and their appropriateness in each area throughout the coastal zone, Program goals, objectives, ~and policies provide the policy basis. General Objectives And Policies Certain of the objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program listed below apply generally to all coastal uses and activities of c~oncern to the Program. Some of the policies set forth are generally applicable to the activities of all State agencies, including those concerned with coastal resources and activities. Aliso noted are policies which apply generally to the actions of the Department of Natural Resources, and thus are relevant to the management of coastal resources and activities. Several of the general objectives listed below are also noted in discussions of particular coastal zone activities to which they are particularly relevant. General Objectives (1) To protect, maintain and where feasible, improve air quality in the State's coastal zone in order to protect public health, safety and welfare and the quality of the State's environmental resources. (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (3) To protect coastal aquatic areas of significant resource value and, where possible, restore presently degraded areas of potentially significant resource value, such as viable oyster bars and clam beds, important migratory pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish and wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. 83 C4) To protect, maintain, and where feasible restore the integrity of the tidal wetlands of the State. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value-areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance, such as non- tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and winterinq and resting areas for migratory birds. (6) To promote the protection and wise management of Productive coastal. agricultural and forested areas through cooperation with programs of the Local Soil Conservation Districts, the Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation, the Maryland Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Forest Service, the Department of State Planning and the Maryland Environmental Trust. (7) To protect coastal cultural, historical, and archeological resources. (9) To assist the people living in the coastal zone improve the quality and productivity of their lives in an environmentally compatible manner. (10) To recognize, protect and promote the economic and social stability of coastal conmmunities and the industries located therein through proper resource management, acknowledging that coastal residents, communities and industries are valuable resources in themseleves. 1ll) To enqure that management decisions concerning coastal resources and activities include consideration of measures to maintain or improve the economic and social stability of coastal coimmunities. (12) To promote, in cases in which existing and proposed coastal Practices and activities must be modified, the identification of alternatives which will both provide protection to coastal resources and assist, to the maximum extent possible, the maintenance, protection, and improvement of the economic and social standards of coastal commnunities and the region of which they are a part. (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater), and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life: which prevents any adverse effect upon human health! and which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. (34) To undertake studies and inventories, where needed, to provide the most complete and accurate information base possible for all levels of government and the public to use in management decisions and activities affecting coastal resources. 84 (35.) To encourage the analysis of possible impacts of energy production and consumption, both natural and r,an-induced, as part of management decisions concerning coastal resources and activities. (36) To ensure the establishment of repositories of coastal zone-related documents, reports, and materials which are easily accessible to the general public in each of the coastal counties. (37) To promote standarization of techniques and compatibility of federal, state and academic research efforts in the State's coastal areas. (38) To ensure coordination and use of existing state and local government programs to achieve the CZMP's objectives. (39) To ensure interstate coordination of plans for the management of resources which are shared with neighboring states, such as migratory aquatic species. (40) To ensure the review of state and local governmental programs, and those of the local Soil Conservation Districts. it-.rder to identi* possible modifications needed to facilitate achievement of coastal zone management goals, objectives, and policies. (41) To promote coordination of state and local governmental programs with those of federal aqencies_and neiqhboring states to further the goals of the _Copstl .Zone Management Program,.and minimize duplication of efforts, conr�icting actions, and regulatory permit processing delays. (42) To provide adequate representation of the interests of the State of Maryland in federal decisions regarding the exploration, development and production of Outer Continental Shelf Resources. (43) To provide full opportunity for participation by relevant federal, state, and local government agencies, concerned organizations, and the general public, in the development and'implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program. General PolicieW Afplicable ' iAI' State Agencies In enacting the Maryland Environmental Policy Act, (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-301 et seq.l, the Maryland Legislature identified the following policies to be followed by all State agencies in all their actions, including those relating to coastal resources and activities: 1. The protection, preservation, and enhancement of the state's diverse environment is necessary for the maintenance of the public health and welfare and for the continued viability of the economy of the state, and is a matter of the highest public priority. 2. All state agencies must conduct their affairs with an awareness that they are stewards of the air, land, water, living and historic resources, and that they have an obligation to protect the environment for the use and enjoyment of this and all future generations. 85 3. Each person has a fundamental and inalienable right to a healthful environment, and each person has a responsibility to contribute to the protection, preservation, and enhancement of the environment; 4. It is the continuing policy of the state to cooperate with the federal government, other state governments, the District of Columbia, the political subdivisions of the state, and other concerned public and private organizations and individuals, in a manner calculated-to protect, preserve, and enhance the environment. S. The determination of an optimum balance between economic development and envir~Dnmental quality requires the most thoughtful consideration of ecological, economic, developmental, recreational, historic, architectural, aesthetic, and other values. 6. SenLeficial environmental effects of proposed actions can be identified and measures can be devised to obtain these benefits, if environmental evaluations are made a part of the decision-making process of the state. 7. Adverse environmental effects of proposed actions -An be anticipated, minimized, and often elimin~ated if environmental evaluations are made a part of the decision-making processes of the state. S. Environmental effects reports can facilitate the fullest practicable provision of timely public information, understanding, and participation in the decision-making processes of the state. 9. The General Assembly has an obligation to the people of Maryland to review and evaluate proposed appropriations, other proposed legislation, and the conduct of the state agencies in carrying out the policy set forthV in this subtitle. All laws, rules and regulations of the State are to be interpreted and administered in accordance with these policies (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302). The Maryland Environmental Policy Act also requires all State agencies to identify, develop,and adopt methods and procedures to assure that: 1. Environmental amenities and values are given appropriate consideration in planning and decision-making along with economic and technical considerations. 2. Studies are undertaken to develop and describe appropriate alternatives to present policies, programs, and procedures that involve significant adverse environmental effects or unresolved conflicts concerning uses of available resources. 3. Planning and decision-making involving environmental effects are under- taken with the fullest practicable provision of timely public information and understanding, and .in coordination with public and private organizations. 86 and individuals with jurisdiction bY law, special expertise, or recognized interest. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-303) Several other general policy statements are set forth by the Natural VResources Article. Although these 6;:atements appear within the enab~ling legislation of the Department of Natural Resources, all state programs must be conducted in a manner consistent with these policies: 1. Because the quality of the waters of this state is vital to the public and private interests of its citizens, and because pollution constitutes a menace to public health and welfare, creates public nuisances, is harmful to wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and impairs domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other legitimate beneficial uses of water, and because the problem of water pollution in this state is closely related to the problem of water pollution in adjoining states, it is state public policy to improve, conserve, and manage the quality of the waters of the state and to protect, maintain, and improve the quality of water for public supplies, propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational, and other legitimate beneficial uses. Also, it is state public policy to provide that no waste is discharged into any waters of this state without first receiving necessary treatment or other corrective action to protect the legitimate beneficial uses of this state's waters, and to provide for prevention, abatement, and control of new or existing water pollution. The department shall cooperate with the agencies of other states and the federal government in carrying out these objectives. (Natural Resources Article, .Section,8-1402) 2. Forests, streams, valleys, wetlands, parks, scenic, historic and recreation areas of the state are basic assets. Their proper use, development, and preservation are necessary to protect and promote the health, safety, economy, and general welfare of the people of the state. it is the policy of the state to encourage the economic development and use of its natural resources for the improvement of local economy, for the preservation of the natural beauty, and for the promotion of the recreational and leisure interest throughout the state., (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-102) 3. Forests, timberlands, woodlands, and soil resources of the state are basic assets, and the proper use, development, and preservation of these resources are necessary to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of the state. it is the policy of the state to encourage economic management and scientific development of its forests and woodlands to maintain, conserve, and improve the soil resources-.of the state, so that an adequate source of forest products is preserved for the people. Floods and soil erosion must be prevented and the natural beauty of the state must be preserved. Wildlife must be protected, while the development of recreational interest is encouraged and the fertility and productivity of the soil is maintained. The impairment of reservoirs and dams must be prevented, the tax rate preserved, and the welfare of the people of the state sustained and promoted. Where these interes~ts can be served through cooperative efforts of private forest landowners, with the assistance of the state, it is the policy of the state to encourage, assist, and guide private ownership in the management and fullest economic development of privately owned forest lands. Where these public 87 interests cannot be served and adequately protected under private ownership, it is the policy of the state to acquire control of, and title to these lands as rapidly as the financial resources of the state permit. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-602) Policies Generally Applicable To The Actions Of The Department of Natural Resources The following policies apply generally to the actions of the Department of Natural Resources and guide its actions with regard to activities in the coastal zone: 1. The Secretary is responsible for the development of coordinated policies for the preservation, enhancement, wise use, and perpetuation of the natural resources of the state. He is responsible for the efficient coordination of all activities regarding the natural resources of the state, including the settlement of conflicts that may arise among units within the Department of Natural Resources. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-104) 2. The Department of Natural Resources shall be responsible for planning, development, management, and conservation of the Chesapeake Bay and any other tidal waters, including their shore line and bottom, and any resources associated with these waters. Also, the Department may: a. Plan and develop public recreational facilities in or on the waters of the Chesapeake Bay and other tidal waters. b. Assist other state units to plan public recreational facilities for the Chesapeake Bay and other tidal waters.9 C. Cooperate with other units to carry out measures to protect tidal waterfront and waterways of the state against erosion and deposit. d. Act for the state to develop further navigation aids and improvement of waterways in the Chesapeake Bay and other tidal water areas of the state. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-203(c)) 3. The Secretary shall take every necessary step to enact appropriate intergovernmental agreements with other states to preserve the optimal state of the Chesapeake Bay, through organization of an interstate body to plan, manage, coordinate, and enforce the proper use of the Chesapeake Bay, so that every user of the bay area can obtain maximum advantage of the bay. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-204) 4. The Department of Naturai. Resources shall exercise to the fullest extent possible the state's responsibility for its water resources, by planning and supervising multiple development and conservation of the waters of the state for the state's best interests and benefit. It shall develop a general water resources program which contemplates proper conservation and developmient of the waters of the state, in a manner compatible with multiple purpose management of each watershed or aquifer, or any other appropriate geographical unit. The program shall recognize and be consistent with func- tions of other state units. The department shall- be guided by the program in the performance of its duties. (Natural Resources ?Article, Section 8-203(b)) Public Investmets Public investments in Maryland are guided by the statutes, regulations, and policies which rule other governmental activities described in the program document. Thus, since the Coastal Zone Management Program represents a ccom, it- ment to proper management of the State's coastal resources, an4 since Maryland~s Coastal Zone management Program fulfills the mandate of the 'Federal Act, public investments will be subject to review with respect to thd goals, objectives, and policies of this program the same as any other activity. The public investment authorities will be especially useful in carrying out the coastal objectives and policies related to development patterns, particularly objectives number 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, and 25. Many of the policies articulated in the section on major facilities are also policies which strongly affect development; the public investment authorities will also be used to insure that these policies are enforced. While these public investment authorities have existed at the state level * for some time, the coastal Zone Management Program represents a unique attempt to exercise these authorities in a coordinated manner to implement a set of comprehensive state coastal policies. The Executive Order issued by the Governor provides the basis for such a comprehensive effort by recognizing the objectives and policies of the program as State policy and by requiring all State governmental agencies to conduct their activities in a manner consistent with the program. DNR will review proposed public investment expenditures to determine their consistency with the coastal goals and objectives; if inconsistencies are discovered, DNR will inform the appropriate agency and if necessary rely on the conflict resolution process described on page 47 to resolve differences. There are four major categories of public investment: transportation systems, sewer and water facilities, housing and industrial development, and all other publicly funded capital facilities such as prisons, hospitals, srhools, recreation facilities, office buildings, and so forth. All of these are subject -to review through State and County comprehensive and functional planning programs, through State and local regulatory and permitting requirements, through Memoranda of understanding being developed between the Coastal Zone Management Program and' other State agencies, and finally, through the administrative and legislative process which all authorizations for State Bond monies must pass. All of these local and. State planning, management and regulatory programs and their relationship to this- Coastal Zone Management Program'are described elsewhere in this document. For the purpose of focusing on public investments as a special category, however, a few examples are described below. 89 1) Transportation - Major transportation improvements Or changes are part of the State and local comprehensive planning process and are contained as an element in most local comprehensive plans. The State Transportation Planning Process and the description of how it relates to air quality planning is described on pages 285-296 of this document. A Memorandum of Understanding between the State Department of Transportation and the Coastal Zone Unit is being developed. This Memorandum of Understanding will contain a commnitment to assure a thorough review of the State's Transportation Plans for program consistency. Consistency findings must be made on any Federally funded transportation projects and similar findings will be made fcr projects which are State and local funded. The State's Critical Areas and Intervention Programs are additionally available tools that may be used with respect to the development of transportation services. 2) Sewer, Water, and Solid'Waste Facilities - State law mandates that the Department of Natural Resources and the Department of'State Planning review County Water, Sewer, and Solid Waste Plans prior to Health Department action on these plans. As described elsewhere, these are legally binding plans which designate areas which are to receive sewer servi.ce, the staging of that service, and the details of the facilities that will provide the services, including sizing, cost, and location. In addition, the State of Maryland provides, through its own grant program, half of the local share for sewer facilities which receive Federal grants. The funds for the State share come from bond authori zation which must be passed by the General Assembly and approved by the Governor. All Federal grants relating to sewer, water, and solid waste programs and facilities must be reviewed by Clearinghouse and be certified as consistent with the Coastal Zone Management program. The Federal grant cannot be awarded without a final letter from the State Clearinghouse containing findings of consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Program. In addition, the Board of Public Works requires that the Clearinghouse letter be submitted to it along with the request by the Environmental Health Ad- ministration for the State share of funding before the Board will ap- prove the State grant. 3) Housing and industrial Assistance Programs - State funding for these programs is provided through bond authorizations which must be approved by the General Assembly and the governor. State assisted projects are usually private projects and therefore they must meet all the local and State regulations and requirements to which any development is subject, including the program and project review procedures described in this document. 4) Most other State public investments are contained in two major bond bills submitted annually to the Legislature by the Governor. These are the General Construction Loan and the-Public School Construction Loan. All State facilities are subject to State regulations and permitting requirements. For example, a new State office building will require � sediment control permit from the Water Resources Administration, � sewer and water construction permit from the Health Department, a discharge permit if new sewage treatment operations are involved from the Department of Natural Resources, and waterway construction permit if the project involves alteration of tV-n c-oss section of 100-Year Floodplain, and so forth. 90 In addition to the fact that all projects funded, or partially funded, in *he State Capital Program are subject to the planning, permitting and management * ~ograms discussed throughout this document, it is important to note that all State Capital authorizations must be enacted by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. Each project is subject to the Maryland Environmental Policy Act (Article NR, Title I, Subtitle 3), the Flood Control Measures in the State Projects Act which requires that all State projects be reviewed by the Department of Natural Resources for their impact on stromwater or susceptibility to flooding (Article NR, Title 8, Subtitle 9), the State's Sediment Control Law (Article NR, Title 8, Subtitle 11), and Health Department review for adequacy of water and sewerage systems. In addition to these provisions, the Coastal Zone Unit can comment on the consistency of projects with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program during the development of the Governor's Annual Capital Budget. After the Bond Bills for the Capital Budget are introduced to the Legislature, there is also an opportunity for the public or any State agency including the Coastal Zone Unit to the provisions in the Bond Bills. The Bills are subject to amendment and additions or deletions by the Legislatur, prior to enactment. Once Bond funds for projects or programs are authorized, project approval must follow established procedures. By this time, projects have been determined to be consistent with Departmental programs and environmental, utility, and stormwater reviews have been made. Each project then proceeds through detailed planning, design, and construction. The Board of Public Works has final authority to implement the State Capital Programs and Projects. They generally meet every two weeks to consider Agenda items submitted by the responsible agencies requesting approval of the various implementation stages, contracts, change order, et cetera. The Board of Pbulic Works meetings are open to the public and the Secreatries of-State Planning, General Services, Natural Resouces, and others, as appropriate, attend the Board of Public Works' meetings in an advisory capacity. Since all the projects which are funded through this mechanism are subject to the project and program review strategies discussed elsewhere in this report, these actions will be carried out consistent with the policies of the State Coastal Zone Management Program. Because of the Governor's Executive Order on Coastal Zone Management and these other State program and project review activities which relate to the State Capital Program, there is assurance that comments relevant to implementation of CZMP will be considered and resolved through the Capital Budget review and approval process. Implications Of Each Activity Or Use Of Concern The remainder of this chapter discusses the uses and activities in the coastal zone that are of concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program. The uses or activities of concern for each area of the coastal zone are listed in Table III-1, in order of their discussion in this chapter. Each discussion consists of the following components: 1. Situation - The nature of the Use or Activity of Concern is described, the extent of its occurrence in the coastal zone is indicated, and the implications of the Use to coastal resources are discussed. 2. Issues - The Coastal Zone Management Program's objectives applicable to the situation created by the Use or Activity of Concern under discussion are listed, and the issues which must be addressed by investigations and decisions are delineated. 3. Policies - State policies regarding the Use or Activity of Concern are articulated, consistent with the identified Coasal Zone Management Program's objectives. 91 4. Implementation - Government agencies principally responsible for coastal management and/or regulations of the Use of Concern are listed as "Lead Agencies". 5. Management Procedures - The means through which the Coastal Zone Management Program's objectives will be met, and through which the relevant policies will be applied to the Use or Activity of Concern, are explained. Partici- pating government agencies are cited and their role is explained. 6. The Coastal Zone Unit's Role - The role of the Coastal Zone Unit applying the "networking" concept is specified, particularly as it related to Project Evaluation and Program Review. 7. Authorities - Finally, all relevant statutory authorities, management techniques, and responsible agencies are listed. Thus, each section on a particular Use of Concern is a brief, self- contained, complete discussion of the present situation and issues which need attention in Maryland's coastal :.one, and the means through which that situation and those issues will be-addresse-Iby the Coastal Zone M'a1Lagement Program through the networking of existing governmental programs and the statutes on which they are based. In addition, the requirements of the 1976 amendments concerning planning for shorefront access and preservation, shore erosion, and energy facilities are addressed by the policies, management procedures and Coastal Zone Unit actions discussed in the sections on Use of Beach Areas, Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recreational, Open Space and Natural Areas, and Activities Affecting Historical, Cultural and Archeological Resources; on Activities in Areas with Significant Shore Erosion; and on Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities and Electric Generating Facilities. 92 TABLE III-1 ACTIVITIES/USES OF CONCERN IN THE COASTAL ZONE A. Activities Occurring in Coastal Waters 1. Recreational Boating 2. Commnercial Shipping (Oil Spill Containment and Prevention) 3. Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material 4. Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources 5. Ocean Dumping 6. OCS Exploration, Production and Development B. Activities Occurring in Intertidal Areas 1. Use of Beach Areas 2. Activities in Tidal Wetlands C. Activities Occurring in Shoreland Areas 1. Activities in Areas with Significant Shore Erosion 2. Activities in Coastal Tidal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains 3. Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands 4. Use of Agricultural Lands 5. Use of Forested Lands 6. Channelization (and Small Watershed Projects) 7. Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recreational, Open Space and Natural Areas 8. Activities Affecting Coastal Historical, Cultural and Archeological Resources 9. Shoreland Activities in General D. Major Facilities In The Coastal Zone 1. Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities 2. Electric Generating Facilities 3. Ports 4. Industrial Parks 5. Mineral Extraction Facilities 6. Large-Scale Residential Facilities 7. Sewage Treatment Facilities 8. Land Transportation Facilities 93 .7 ~~~~~~~~Li[A ACTIVITIES OCCURRINGia IN COASTAL WATERS~~~~~~~~~~c A. COASTAL WATERS The Coastal Zone Management Program focuses on the following activities occurring in the state's coastal waters, which are of concern because of their economic importance to the State and their impact on water quality and aquatic resources: 1. Recreational Boating 2. Commercial Shipping (Oil Spill Containmeznt and Prevention) 3. Dredging and Disposal of Dredged Material 4. Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources 5. Ocean Dumping 6. OCS Oil and Gas Exploration, Production and Transportation 94 RECREATIONAL BOATING Situation Recreational boating in Marylaiid is not only a popular pastime for the state's citizens, it is also a bay-related economic factor second in impact only to the Port of Baltimore itself. In 1970, approximately $220 million was spent in Maryland on recreational boating. At present, over 127,000 registered boats cruise the state's waters, and this number is climbing at a annual rate of 9%. The rapidly increasing popularity of recreational boating has given rise to an inter-related sequence of problems, which necessitate strengthened management efforts, thorough technical analyses, and creative solutions. Demand for marine facilities already exceeds the capacity of existing facilities. Thus, increasing numbers of Maryland's registered boats are trailered boats, which in turn have heightened pressures on existing launch facilities. This shortage of boating facilities is further exacerbated by a lack of sites for new facilities due to the high cost of waterfront land, intense competition for the available land, and *increasing state and local restrictions on marine development. Another problem res-alting from increased recreational boating is the adverse effect upon the environment. Boating can increase shoreline erosion and turbidity levels. Discharge of human wastes and other pollutants can degrade water quali.ty. Further investigations are necessary to assess thoroughly the significance of these adverse impacts and the best means to minimize them. In addition, safety and congestion problems have developed on some rivers heavily used for recreational boating. O ~Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency, to meet objectives identified in the Coastal Zone Management Program: (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (8) To promote increased recreational opportunities in shoreland areas, to promote increased public access to. tidal waters, and *to assure that these occur in a manner which protects the quality of coastal resources and which maintains public health and safety. Investigations and regulatory procedures must consider whether or not a proposed action will: - Provide new areas of access to recreational boating which are environmentally and socio-economically acceptable. - Create adverse impacts on state or private tidal wetlands or other aquatic resources. - Cause water quality problems, such as turbidity. - Create or aggravate shore erosion. - Decrease safety, increase congestion, or interfere unnecessarily with existing boating or other recreation activities. - Would change the character of the water body on which they are proposed to be located. - Cause inappropriate placement of mooring buoys. - Create a need for adequate navigation aids and maintenance of navigational channels. - Require changes in speed limits or the establishment of restricted and prohibited areas. Policies 1. To foster the development, use, and enjoyment of the waters of Maryland,9 the Department of Natural Resources, in cooperation with other government agencies, will develop plans; will conduct educational programs, will improve waterways by deepening channels, acquiring and developing access areas, and clearing waterways of debris; will adopt regulations to promote safety,' and will designate and mark channels. (Natural Resources Article, Sections'8-702, 8-703) 2. State funds will not be awarded for the siting of boating facilities in locations which would cause congestion, jeopardize safety, necessitate excessive dredging, interfere with other types of recreational activities, or entail any adverse impact on water quality or aquatic resources. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 8-703, 8-707; DNR Regulations Section 08.05.04.02) 3. Location of a boating facility in the lower portions of a tidal tributary, where there is better flushing and access to open water and less need for dredging, is preferable and encouraged over a location in the headwater areas. similarly, the development of boating facilities within the upper reaches of existing artificial (canal) systems is discouraged. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-703, 9-102, DNR Regulations Section 08.05.04.02) 969 4. The following criteria will oe used (in addition to impacts on State and private wetlands: aquatic resources, and navigation) in establishing regulations (including revised regulations on wetlands, boating use, boat waste discharge, and mooring buoys) and in making State and federal permit decisions on recreational boating activities. The potential for creating or aggravating: (1) congestion and safety problems, (2) turbidity or other adverse water quality impacts, (3) shore erosion probles, (4) other adverse environmental impacts, (5) interference with recreational and commercial fishing, (6) interference with other types of recreational activities, and (?) impacts on the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. (National Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 4-202, 8-703, 9-102, 9-501; federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 Sections 402, 404) 5. Regarding projects undertaken to obtain riparian access, the public policy of the State is to preserve wetlands and protect water quality while providing for the riparian land owners right of access to navigable waters. Thus: a. Where reasonable access for a riparian property owner can be provided directly from fast land, creation of a channel through vegetated wetlands, filling for access, or extension of a channel inland shall be prohibited. b. Where access is to be provided to a subdivision or other multi-home development of community, a centralized boating access channel is preferable to multiple piers or channels. For isolated single family dwellings, a pier from fast land to open water shall normally fulfill the right of responsible riparian access. c. The ownership of land bordering upon tidal waters does not carry with it the automatic right to create channels to extend boat access. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306; pending revised DNR wetlands regulations) 6. All wa~ters of the State shall be protected for use as water contact recreation, for fish, other aquatic life and wildlife. Additional protection shall be given for shellfish harvesting and recreational trout waters and waters worthy of protection because of their unspoiled character. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 8-1402, 8-1405; pending revised DNR water quality registration and titling) 7. Boats shall be operated: a. In observance of State regulations regarding boating registration and titling. b. In observance of the Inland Rules of the Road set forth in Coast Guard pamphlet USCG-169 dated May 1, 1977. c. In observance of speed limits and restricted skiing areas, as set forth in DNR Regulations 08.04.04.03 and 08.04.04.04. d. In avoidance of any fishing net lawfully placed and marked. e. With engines muffled in accordance with State noise standards. f. Witbout motors in State wildlands (unless allowed because of traditional use). g. In accordance with other rules and regulations that may be established by the State to protect public safety and welfare, water quality or aquatic resources. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-704(b), pending DNR mooring buoy regulations) 8. The location of buoys for the mooring of boats will be consistent with State policy if the mooring location is not: a. In designated private or public shellfish areas. b. In cable-crossing areas. c. In navigational channels or in other places in which general navigation would be impeded or obstructed. d. In any public ship anchorage. e. Interfering with the operation of or access through any bridge. f. Within 200 yards of a public or private commercial bathing beach. g. Impeding or obstructing the riparian access of adjacent property owners. h. Hindering the orderly access to or use of the waterways by the general public. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-704(b) pending DNR mooring buoy regulations) 9. Moorings are to be marked and maintained in accordance with federal regulations and such additional requirements as may be imposed by state regulations. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-704(b); pending DNR mooring buoy regulations) 10. It shall be consistent with State policy for local governments to establish additional ordinances and regulations to address problems associated with recreational boating facilities and activities, providing they are consistent with State rules and regulations. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-703, 8-707; Article 25, Section 5; Article 66B) Implementation Lead Agencies 1) provision of recreational access - Waterway Improvements Section of Capital Programs Administration 2) Regulations of recreational boating activities - Marine Division of Natural Resources Police 3) Regulation of the location of recreational boating facilities 98 Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (participating agencies: EPA, U.S Fish & Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service) State: Water Resources Administration (participating agencies: Md. Fisheries Administration, Md. Wildlife Administration, Department of State Planning, other State and local agencies as relevant) Local: County Planning and Zoning Offices 4) Regulation of boat discharges Federal: EPA (participating agencies: U.S. Coast Guard) State- water Resources Administration, Environmental Health Administration Management Procedures 1. Provision of recreational access. The Waterways Improvement Fund administered by the Capital Programs Administration may be used to construct water- Sways (clear debris, dredge channels, establish navigation aids, etc.), evaluate wiater-oriented recreation needs, and develop comprehensive plans for waterways improvements. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) may enter into agreements with the federal government, any municipality, or other political subdivision of the State, or any private agency, to share the cost of any development, construction, or improvement of waterways or facilities determined to have beneficial value to the boating public. 2. Regulation of recreational boating activities. The Marine Division of the Natural Resources Police enforces recreational boating regulations established under the provisions of the Boating Act by the Department of Natural Resources in conjunction with the Boating Advisory Committee. 3. Regulation of the location of recreational boating facilities. The location of recreational boating facilities is regulated by the Section 10 Permit Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Wetlands Permit/License/ Water Quality Certification programs of the Water Resources Administration. These regulatory programs are described in more detail in the section Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands. In addition, the location of recreational boating facilities is regulated at the local level by Maritime zoning regulations and building permits. 4. Regulation of boat discharges. The water Resources Administration is in the pro- rcestr of identifying sensitive areas of the State's tidal waters where no discharge of human wastes from recreational boats will be allowed, in accordance with the provisions of the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments. Regulations requiring pump-out facilities at marinas are presently under review by the Environmental Health Administration cf the Department of Health and Mentail Hygiene. 99 Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit will be involved in the regulatory process for recreational boating facilities of 50 or more slips in accordance with project evaluation procedures. Proposed projects will be reviewed for possible conflicts with the Coastal Zone Management Program. Projects involving less than 50 slips are considered not likely to have significant impacts unless they involve alteration of vegetated wetlands or other special consequences, in-which case they would be considered for project evaluation in accordance with relevant criteria. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will participate in efforts to address the following cumulative problems associated with recreational boating activities: 1. Recreational boating access: In conjunction with the Waterway Improvements Program, the Coastal Zone Unit will use the results of the study Recreational Boating on the Tidal Waters of Maryland and other relevant sources of information to identify areas in which day-use boating facilities can be located in an environmentally acceptable manner. The Coastal Zone Unit will also cooperate with the Waterway Improvements Program to provide needed navigational aids and channel maintenance. 2. Boat discharges: The Coastal Zone Unit will assist the Water Resources Administration and the Environmental Health Administration to develop programs relating to waste discharges from recreational boats. 3. Safety and congestion factors: In conjunction with the Water Resources Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and local units of governments, the Coastal Zone Unit will refine the .results of the Study entitled Recreational Boating on the Tidal Waters of Maryland to identify specific areas in which safety and congestion factors are of major concern, and to develop measures to address these problems. initial attention will be focused on the Magothy and Middle Rivers, on which large new marinas are proposed. 4. Shore erosion: In response to House Joint Resolution 40, the 'Coastal Zone Unit will initiate an analysis of the impacts of boat wakes on shore erosion in smnall creeks and coves. if boat wakes are proven to have a significant effect, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Marine Division of the Natural Resources Police in the establishment of speed limitations and other measures to minimize such effects. Ina3 5. Mooring buoys: Witi; the participation of relevant units of government and the Ccastal Resources Advisory Committee, the Coastal Zone Unit will deve lop regulations concerning the registration of mooring buoys, taking into account such problems as infringement on navigational channels, trespass on the property of riparian property owners, and interference with recreational use of waterways. cumulative Impacts As noted in the Section Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands, the Coastal Zone Unit will cooperate with the WRA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the establishment of an information base on all projects requiring Wetlands Permits and Water Quality Certification to make cumulative impact evaluations possible. In addition, the Coastal Zone Unit, in conjunction with other government agencies, will undertake studies of the cumulative impacts of such projects on water quality, wetlands, aquatic resources, shore erosion, recreation, and the character of the water body. Local Governmental Efforts The Coastal Zone Unit will assist local governmental efforts in developing revised comprehensive plans, ordinances, and regulations to address effectively problems with location of recreational boating facilities, and to ensure consistency with State regulatory programs and the objectives and policies of the.Coastal Zone Management Program. 101 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO RECREATIONAL BOATING a. Congestion/Shore Erosion/Water Quality Statutory Authority Controlling Mechanism Agency Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Natural Resources Article Regulation (Art. NR), Title 9 State Boat Act Direct State Planning and DNR (BOAC-Boating Art. NR, Section 8-701 Regulation Advisory Committee) et seq. (Marine Policy) Rivers and Harbors Act State Water Quality Certifi- Federal: U.S. Army Section 10 cation and Federal Corps of Engineers Federal Water Pollution Consistency State: DNR (WRA) Control Act Amendments of 1972, Section 404 County Comprehensive Zoning Local Planning and Regulatory/ Local: Planning and Authority with State State Intervention Zoning Offices Intervention Authority, State: DSP Art. 66B and Art. 25 Sec. 5 (x); Art. 88C Sec. 2(q) b. Access Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Waterways Improvement Fund Direct State Planning, State DNR (CAP - Capital Art. NRSections 8-707, and/or Local Acquisition Programs 8-708, 8-709, 8-716, 8-723 and Development Administration) Program Open Space Direct State Planning, State DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 5-901 and/or Local Acquisition et seq. and Development 102 CONZIMERCIAL SHIPPING (OIL SPILL- CONTAINMENT AND PREVENTION) Situation The Port of Baltimore, a vital economic asset to the State oi Maryland and to the nation, is the major center of commercial shipping in Maryland. Each year the port generates more than $1.5 billion, 11.7 percent of the Gross State Product. In addition to the money injected into the State's economy by the industrial, commercial and transportation complex which constitutes the Port, jobs are provided for approximately 249,000 Marylanders. Several aspects of commercial shipping are of concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program: (1) the maintenance of adequate navigational channels, (2) the disposal of dredged material, (3) shore erosion aggravated by boat wakes, (4) the maintenance of the overall viability of the Port of Baltimore, (5) the establishment of a navigational safety system, and (6) the possibility of oil spills. The first and second concerns are discussed in the Section Dredging and Filling Activities. The fourth concern is discussed in the Section Ports. Shore erosion conditions are addressed by federal agencies having navigational authority over and, at least in part, by the proposed Boat Wake Impact Study. The remainder of this subsection discusses the State's approach on the remaining concerns. Oil pollution control is of significant concern to the State, since 1,148 reported oil spills from all sources including commercial shipping occurred in 1974, 2,115 in 1975, and 2,133 in 1976. While many spills were in the 5-10 gallon range, at least 11 of these spills were in excess of 1,000 gallons, and the largest was 135,000 gallons. Additionally, in the annual report of the Oil Disaster, Containment, Cleanup and Contingency Program of WRA, it is conservatively estimated that 10 million gallons of waste oil and 3.5 million gallons of oil bilge and ballast waters are disposed of annually within the borders of Maryland. . 6 Within the Chesapeake Bay, large oil spills have potentially serious impact on waterfowl, wetlands, benthic communities, and shoreline property within a few hours of the spill. Similarly, the discharge of toxic materials or other hazardous materials (e.g., sulfuric acid) transported on the Chesapeake Bay can have adverse impacts on aquatic resources. The establishment of a navigational traffic sgstem to monitor vessel traffic on the Bay is needed to reduce the possibility of collisions in the Bay, and thus aid in the prevention of oil spills and the release of toxic materials or other hazardous materials. In addition, the feasibility of alternative methods of transporting oil, such as pipelines, should be investigated as means to reduce the potential of oil pollution in the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Issues This situation requires that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions,, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: 103 (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (20) To ensure the viability of Maryland's port are"s, and t__ ensure that- their development is carri~ed out in an environmentally sound manner. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. Management actions and regulatory procedures must: a. Establish procedures and methods for the safe handling, transfer and storage of oil to minimize damage from oil spills, and to reduce the possibility of spills. b. Establish the best possible oil spill contingency plans to minimize the impacts of oil spills when they do occur. C. The establishment of procedures and methods for the handling, transfer, storage, and disposal of toxic materials. d. Ensure the conservation and effective utilization of oil resources to meet state energy needs. e. Examine ways to reduce the traffic of vessels containing oil and other toxic materials by encouraging less dangerous methods of transportation. Policies 1. The Department of Natural Resources shall act. for the State to develop needed navigational aids and improvements on waterways on the Chesapeake Bay and other tidal waters of the State. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-203) 2. The Maryland Port Administration may: a. Provide for the preservation of navigation and the protection of public health within its territorial jurisdiction, by such means As the establishment of lines beyond which piers, bulkheads, wharves, pilings, structures, obstructions, or extentions may not be made or extended and by the construction, maintenance and repair of such structures. b. Establish regulations covering the handling of dangerous materials, the anchoring and moving of watercraft, and the discharge of refuse or similar material into navigable waters, in order to foster and facilitate navigation and prevent injury to persons or property. 'c. make surveys or charts of navigable waters within its territorial jurisdiction and ascertain the depth and course of the channels of these waters. (Transportation Artic-'- S~ction 6-206) 104 3. No person may discharge. or cause to be deposited into the waters of the State, oil or other matter containing oil or bilge or ballast water which will pollute these waters, or which will violate the water quality standards of the State. 4. Any person discharging or permitting the discharge of oil into the waters of the State from a land-based installation, from vehicle in transit, or from a vessel, ship or boat of any kind, must report the incident immediately to the appropriate Federal authority and to the Administration, and must remain available until clearance to leave is given by the appropriate officials. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1410(b), Water Resources Administration Rules and Regulations, Section 08.05.04.07) S. No one may engage in any commercial or industrial operation involving methods, facilities, standards, and devices for transfer, handling, transport storage, separation, removal, treatment, or disposal of oil or other unctuous substances, unless he has obtained a permit from the Department of Natural Resources indicating that the activities are in conformity with the prescribed rules and regulations to prevent pollution of the State's waters. (Natural Resources Article 8-1405, 8-1413, DNR Regulation 08.05.04.07) 6. The Department of Natural Resources and the Maryland Port Administration, in conjunction with the U.S. Coast Guard, shall develop and implement a program to prevent or respond to emergency oil spill. including requiring bonds for vessels transporting oil products and requiring persons responsible for oil spills to provide adequate compensation. (Natural Resources Article 8-1405, 8-1406, 8-1408, 8-1410, 8-1411, 8-1415, 8-1417; DNR Regulation 08.05.04.07) 7. All new facilities involved with the handling, storage, transfer, or processing of petroleum or natural gas products must be located where the potential for adverse impacts on aquatic resources is minimized, and must be built in a manner which assures compliance with state water quality standards. (Natural Resources Article, Section 6-508) S. Generally, the use of pipelines will be encouraged for the transporting ashore of any petrochemicals produced in the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf Area. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 6-502, and 6-508) Implementation Lead Agencies State: Water Resources Administration - Oil Disaster, Containment, Cleanup, and Contingency Program. 105 Energy Policy office: Energy and Coastal Zone Administration -development of State energy policy relating to energy needs, use, distribution and conservation. II Federal: U.S. Coast Guard - navigational safety, oil spill containment and cleanup in U.S. waters. Management Procedures oil Handling Permits - The prevention of oil spills is a continuing effort of WRA, and is carried out in accordance with the requirements of WRA Regulation 08.05.04.07. To ensure that all users of oil are capable of preventing oil pollution, state law requires WRA permits for use, handling and storage, disposal, and transfer of oil. The requirements for a permit include meeting specific standards in the regulations and contingency plans for coping with an accidental spill. Thus, the State's approach to the problem of oil spills is to regulate the handling, storage and use of oil products, to minimize the possibility of oil spills, and to insure that contingency plans are made (at the facility level and at the state level) to respond effectively to o~~l spills if they should occur. oil Disaster, Containment, Cleanup, and Contingency Program - The Department of Natural Resources (WRA) is responsible for cleanup of discharges and spills. However, the Department can collect compensation fees for the cost incurred. Private individuals may not receive compensation for cleanup costs. Persons responsible for oil spills are liable to "any person" for damages to property caused by the spill. A Maryland oil Disaster Containment Cleanup and Contingency Fund of up to $1 million is maintained from license fees for terminal facilities (the fee varies with the size of the facility). Compensation fees paid by dischargers 9 Investigation of all oil spills in state waters is the responsibility of the Enforcement Division of WRA. The Maryland Port Administration is responsible for development of a program to respond to emergency oil spills in the Baltimore Harbor. WRA is responsible for development of a similar program in other waters of the State. The objectives of the oil Disaster, Containment, Cleanup and Contingency Program are: 1. To institute prompt measures to stop the discharge and to restrict and contain the spread of spilled oil. 2. To make equipment and supplies readily available for the containment and cleanup of oil spills. 3. To apply techniques and procedures to cleanup and dispose of spilled oil. 1069 State Response to Open Water Spills - Since the U.S. Coast Guard requires eight to twelve hours to respond from its Elizabeth, N.C. base to an open water * ~spill in Maryland, WRA has been developing the ability to respond immediately (within the hour) to any opeN water spill on the Chesapeake Bay or other state waters. An Ad Hoc Committee representing the Maryland Port Administration, the Maryland Environmental Service, WRA, the MarylandWildlife Administration, the Maryland Fisheries Administration, the Maryland Petroleum Association (representing the State's oil industry), the Baltimore County Fire-Department, the Baltimore City Bureau of Operations and Fire Department, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, was formed to address the problem of quick deployment for open water spills. As a result, the Oil Permits Section of WRA has acquired equipment, and has developed a contingency plan for open water spills. A report documenting the plan is near publication., In late 1976, WRA and the U.S. Coast Guard conducted separate, successful demonstrations of their ability to respond to open-water oil spills. Oil Transport Policy - Although to date there is no formal state policy on oil tanker traffic in the coastal zone, Maryland did join with the other 'states of the Mid-Atlantic Governors' Coastal Resources Council to seek a condition on the lease- sale (No. 40) of outer Continental Shelf (OCS) tracts, requiring that, wherever feasible and preferable, pipelines will be used to transport ashore an; petrochemicals produced from those tracts. Pipelines have a considerably better record than tankers for transporting petrochemicals without spill. Where oil tankers are being used, the State is considering the range of possible actions to protect the coast from tanker-related oil disasters. Navigational improvements (such as maintaining a safe channel depth, improving the piloting system, and establishing a vessel traffic system) may reduce the potential for oil spills and the discharge of toxic materials. The recent incorporation of the Energy Policy Office into the Energy and Coastal Zone Administration will help the State to develop a policy on energy, its transport and distribution within the State. Hazardous Substances Transport - In addition to its general responsibilities relating to oil pollution and navigation, the U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for regulating the transport of dangerous materials (including toxic materials) on the Chesapeake Bay. As described in the Section shoreland Activities in General, the Department of Natural Resources is responsible for regulating the storage and disposal of hazardous substances, including toxic materials. Coastal Zone Unit Role project Evaluation Proposals for the construction or expansion of all facilities involved with offlanding, transfer, or intermediate processing of oil1 and natural gas products will be subjected to a full project evaluation in accordance with the provisions of the Coastal Facilities Review Act for which the Coastal Zone Unit has responsibility. 107 Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will: 1. Work with WRA to refine oil spill contingency measures, including use of oil-spill trajectory models, and to determine likely dispersion patterns of oil spills. 2. Work with the Energy Policy Office to develop policies on the wise use and conservation of oil resources. 3. Work with the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the State of Virginia to establish vessel traffic systems in the Chesapeake Bay as a measure to reduce the probability of oil spills or discharges of toxic materials from vessels. 4. Work with appropriate government agencies to investigate the feasibility of alternatives to commercial shipping for transporting oil. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO COMMERCIAL SHIPPING (OIL SPILLS) Statutory Authority Management Techniques Agency General powers relating to Direct State Planning and DNR Chesapeake Bay & Shorelines Regulation Art. NR, Section 8-203 Oil Pollution laws Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1405 Regulation 1406, 1410, 1411, 1417 Regulation 08.05.04.07 (1974) Federal Water Pollution Federal Consistency Federal: U.S. Control Act Amendments Coast Guard, EPA of 1972, Section 311 State: DNR (E&CZA) Coastal Facilities Review Act Direct State Planning and DNR (E&CZA) Art. NR, Section 6-501 Regulation et seq. Dangerous Cargoes Transport Federal Consistency Federal: U.S. Coast Guard State: DNR (E&CZA) Hazardous Substances Disposal Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Act, Art. NR, Section 1413.2 'Regulation 108 DREDGING AND DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL Situation In the past, dredged material resulting from the maintenance and improvement of federally maintained harbor channels has been disposed of in open water sites. The Maryland Board of Public Works, whose responsibility it is to designate such sites, is the only state organization authorized to acquire and dispose of submerged State lands. Adverse impacts on shellfish beds from disposed dredged material were officially recognized by the Baltimore District Corps of Engineers in 1902. Through- out the years, watermen and environmentalists have objected to open water disposal, and the last deepening of the C&D Canal (1966-1968) brought complaints from watermen that mounds of sediment were interfering with drift netters working near the area of disposal. As a result of opposition to open water disposal, the Commission on Submerged Lands of the State Board of Public Works, in 1968, made the following recommendations to the Governor and the Board: 1. That in 1969, the State make available funds for the study, planning, and construction of a spoil containment area in the vicinity of Baltimore Harbor. 2. That, pending completion of the spoil containment area, dredging in Baltimore Harbor be severely limited, and that spoil from those projects approved be deposited at Pooles Island Deep. 3. That a westward extension of the Kent Island Dum site be approved, as proposed by the Baltimore District Engineer, to receive non- contaminated spoil dredged outside Baltimore Harbor. This action was recommended by an ad hoc committee of estuarine experts only after consideration of the best available environmental information. This information indicated that the probable environmental effects of disposing in the designated expansion area would be insignificant. These recommendations resulted in the limitation % dredging in Baltimore Harbor to critically needed projects, and led to the selection of Hart-Miller Islands as a diked containment facility for the dredged material from the proposed deepening of the southern approach navigational channel to Baltimore Harbor to 50 feet. Dredging operations will potentially generate 155 million cubic yards (mcy) of dredged material over the next 20 years, 140 mcy of which will result from Federal, State, and private dredging activities in Baltimore Harbor and the Chesapeake and Delaware (C&D) Canal and approaches. That total includes a federal program for deepening the Harbor approaches from 42' to 50'. Existing containment sites along the C&D approach channel in Maryland currently have a total of 8.9 million cubic yards of acceptable capacity. The current maintenance dredging backlog associated with the C&D channel is 10 million cubic yards (cmy). Baltimore Harbor containment sites (privately owned) have a potential capacity of 2 to 4 mcy. Eight potential containment sites have been evaluated for development by the State. In 1977, three of these sites were recommended for development by the State Department of Transportation in a report to the Maryland House of Delegates Subcommittee on Law Enforcement and Transportation. Together these sites will provide approximate', 3' mcy capacity. 109 The proposed Hart-Miller Islands Diked Containment Area is designed to accommodate 52 Mcy, including 42 mcy produced by dredging the Congressionally authorized 50' channel for Baltimore Harbor. In summary, existing containment capacity is insufficient to meet spoil disposal needs for the next 20 years. Issues In order to meet the needs of the next 20 years and beyond, a dredging management plan must be developed which uses an acceptable combination of alternative methods to dispose of dredged material, in a manner con6istent with the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (3) To protect 'coastal aquatic areas of significant resource value, and where possible, restore presently degraded areas of potentially significant resource value, such as viable oyster bars and clam beds, important migratory pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish, wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (4, To protect, maintain, and where feasible restore the integrity of tidal wetlands of the State. (20) To ensure the viability of Maryland's port areas and to ensure that their development is carried out in an environmentally sound manner. (28) To identify and encourage the use of environmentally suitable methods of dredging and dredged material spoils disposal (including beneficial use of dredged material), to meet long-term needs resulting from navigational projects, state and local governmental projects, and major private projects, and to oppose the use of methods found to be environmentally unsuitable. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. To develop a management plan for dredged material disposal the following requirements must be met: - Economic and environmental effects of deepening the southern approach channel to Baltimore Harbor must be investigated. - Acceptable sites for the disposal of dredged material from projects associated with the maintenance of navigation channels and Baltimore Harbor must be provided. 110 - Beneficial alternatives for the disposal of dredged material must be investigated. - Procedures among State and federal agencies for the scheduling and implementation of maintenance and improvement of navigational channels must be coordinated. - Biological, chemical and physical impacts of dredging and disposal operations must be ascertained. - Methods for the selection of alternative disposal sites must be developed. Policies 1. Dredging or filling will not be permitted in state or private wetlands without state approval. (See Section Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands for conditions under which dredging and filling will be allowed). (Natural Resources Article, Sections 9-202 and 9-306) 2. No dredged material containing designated hazardous substances shall be disposed of in any manner that would lethally or sublethally affect terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1413.2, Department of Natural Resources Rules and Regulations, Section 08.05.05) 3. A system must be devised to minimize undesirable cumulative impacts of dredging, disposal, and related activities in the coastal zone. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 8-1413.1 and 8-1601) 4. Continued intensive monitoring of large dredging projects, particularly those involving disposal of material in open water, is required. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1413.1) 5. The development of a method for choosing spoil disposal sites which is acceptable to state and federal regulatory agencies, is necessary for use by counties, municipalities, and other local dredging interests. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-1413.1 and 8-1601) 6. No material dredged from Baltimore Harbor shall be disposed of in an unconfined manner in the open water portion of Chesapeake Bay, or the tidal portions of its tributaries outside of Baltimore Harbor. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1602) 7. The proposed Hart and Miller Island diked disposal facility for material dredged from the federal channels in Baltimore Harbor and its approaches is required. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, and 8-1601) 8. Further selection and development of the most feasible of the potential containment sites identified irf Baltimore Harbor is required. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, and 8-1601) 11! 9. The economic and environmental feasibility of alternative uses of dredged material, such as transport to an inland reclamation site or production of lightweight aggregates,must be determined as part of the development of a long-term dredged material disposal plan. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, and 8-1601) 10. Adequate notification of proposals for navigational channel maintenance and improvement must be provided to the State by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the responsibility of the various State agencies involved in such projects must be clearly defined. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-101, 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-1402, 8-1405, 8-1413.1, 8-1601, 9-102, 9-202; Transportation Article 2-103, 6-102, 6-204, 6-206) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers State: Department of Natural Resources (WRA); Department of Transportation (MPA); Department of General Services, Board of Public Works Management Procedures The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has the responsibility for improving and maintaining navigation channels. The Philadelphia District has responsibility for the C&D Canal and its approach channel down to the Tolchester Point,' and the Baltimore District has responsibility for channels in the remainder of the State's waters. While the Philadelphia District's responsibilities include provision of disposal sites, the Baltimore District's do not. The Department of Transportation, the Department of Natural Resources and the State Board of Public Works have responsibilities to develop the State's position on proposed Corps' operations, and to carry out activities relating to such projects. The State has recently taken action to clarify the responsibilities of state agencies involved in such projects. In a letter from Acting Governor Blair Lee to the Baltimore District, the Maryland Department of Transportation was designated as the lead agency to carry out the State's responsibility for the Federal Baltimore Harbor Channel Project. The Department of Natural Resources will be responsible for evaluating disposal alternatives, monitoring dredging operations and initiating research efforts. In addition, the Water Resources Administration and the Baltimore Ditrict of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have initiated discussions on the need for a process in which the Corps would notify the State early of schedules for channel maintenance and improvement, so that the State has adequate time to choose the best disposal alternatives. 112 Such discussions are taking place under the aegis of the newly formed Chesapeake Bay Dredged Material Disposal Committee. Agreements reached with the . ~Baltimore District should provide a model for implementation with the other districts. As described in more detail in the Section Activities Coccuring in Tidal Wetlands and in Appendix G, the State Wetlands Permit/License/Water Quality Certification Program and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section IO/Section 404 Permit Program are the principal programs regulating dredging and filling activities in the State's waters. Policies and procedures addressing potential impacts of dredging and filling activities in tidal wetlands, aquatic resources, etc., are described in the Section Activities Occurring in Tidal wetlands, Living Aquatic Resources, etc. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit will assist the Water Resources Administration to establish program coordination and review procedures. With regard to specific projects,.the Coastal Zone unit will be involved in project evaluations associated with major facilities, and will assist the Water Resources Administration in investigation of potential secondary impacts of dredging projects such as hydrologic changes offsite degradation of aquatic resources, etc. Program Review with financial support of the Coastal Zone Management Program, the Water Resources Administration has conducted a study of dredging and disposal of dredged material. The results of the study, which addresses short and long-term disposal options, regulatory mechanisms, administrative procedures, and monitoring activities are documented in the report, "Management Alternatives for Dredging and Disposal Activities in Maryland's Waters". The recommendations of the study are providing the basis for action by the Department of Natural Resources, particularly in clarifying the roles of the-various governmental agencies to effect more coordinated solutions to dredging and dredged material disposal problems. The'Coastal Zone Unit will assist the water Resources Administration in carrying out the recommendations of the report, including further study of unresolved aspects of the problem, such as identifying acceptable dredged material disposal sites. The Coastal Zone Unit will also assist the Water Resources Administration in ensuring the input of all interested parties in decisions regarding disposal options for specific projects, particularly those involving open water disposal. 113 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO DREDGING AND THE DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) BPW Art. NR, Section 9-306 Regulation Monitoring of Chesapeake Direct State Planning and DNR/DHMH Bay Dumping Regulation Art. NR, Section 8-1413 Baltimore Harbor Dredged Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Spoil Overboard Dumping Regulation Prohibition Section 8-1601-16105 Rivers and Harbors Act of Federal Consistency/State Federal: U.S. Army 1899, Section 10 Water Quality Certification Corps of Engineers State: DNR (WRA) Federal Water Pollution Federal Consistency/State Federal: U.S. Army Control Act Amendments Water Quality Certification Corps of Engineers of 1972, Section 404 State: DNR (WRA) 114 ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH LIVING AQUATIC RESOURCES . ~Situation Living aquatic resources in the coastal environment are a major part of Maryland's recreational and conmircial life and livelihood. The tremendous tonnage of fish and shellfish conmmercially harvested from Maryland waters has been known for many years, and recently there has been evidence to suggest that the size of recreational harvest of finfish is double that of the commercial catch. in addition, many of the migratory species found in the Bay, such as the highly desired striped bass, are only parts of much larger populations which may span the entire east coast. The extent of harvest pressure, in the Bay and offshore, exerts severe stresses on the resources of fisheries in Maryland's coastal zone. Additionally, agricultural run-off, excess sewage# storm water run-off, and industrial discharges have had measureably adverse effects upon fisheries in the Chesap~ake Bay and its tributaries. The extent' of stress on the living resources in Maryland's aquatic coastal environment is not fully known for several reasons. First., there has often been inadequate basic data of the aquatic biota. Second, there is currently no method which adequately detects changes in the health and integrity of the biota in Maryland's coastal zone. Issues This situation requires a coordinated effort of state and federal agencies with academic and research institutions, actively working to eliminate present information and management deficiencies in accordance with objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (2) To protect,- maintain, and improve, the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (3) To protect coastal aquatic areas of significant resource value, and where possible, restore presently degraded areas of potentially significant resource value, such as viable oyster bare and clam beds, important migratory pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish, and wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (4) To protect, maintain, and where feasible restore the integrity of the tidal wetlands of the State. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of in a manner which Prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. (37) To promote standardization of techniques and compatibility of federal, state and academic research efforts in the State's coastal areas. (39) To ensure interstate coordination of plans for the management of resources which are shared with neighboring states, such as migratory aquatic species. In the development of a comprehensive fisheries management plan for the biota of the Chesapeake Say and the seaside bays, the following issues must be addressed. - Recognition of the concept that the various parts of the Cheapeake Bay, such as river tributaries and em~bayments, interact to form an integrated environmerntal system, and that usc of any part of the system affects the entire system. - The standardization of data collection procedures in order to ensure that sufficient information is obtained to evaluate resource abundance and the effect of various harvest practices. - Determination of the magnitude of the recreational harvest of finfish and shellfish, in order to assess the total impact of harvesting practices on living aquatic resources. - The development of physical, chemical and/or biological sampling procedures that adequately measure changes in the quantity and -health of living aquatic resources in the Chesapeake Bay. - The'development of procedures to resolve conflicts between the m-any uses of the coastal environment, procedures which are based upon evaluation of all aspects of the ecosystem--hydrological, biological, ecological, social, and economic. - The development of programs that naturally and/or artificially enhance finfish and shellfish populations. - The development of a better understanding of the relationship between living aquatic resources and their biological environment. - The development of interstate mechanisms for the management of aquatic resources that cross state boundaries. 116 Policies 1. Management plans for the conservation and preservation of the living aquatic resources of Maryland's coastal areas will be developed and implemented. (Natural Resources Article, Section 4-202, Section 4-602, Section 8-203) 2. Programs for conservation and restoration of (state and federally recognized) endangered or threatened species of fish, including the acquisition of land or aquatic habitat or interests therein, will be developed and implemented to insure their continued existence. (Natural Resources Article, Section 4-2A01 et. seq.) 3. The Department of Natural Resources shall acquire title to or control of areas of water or land in the state, as necessary to protect, propagate, or manage fish as state fish refuges. (Natural Resources Article, Section 4-401) 4. The commercial and recreational harvest of hard shell clams, soft shell clams, crabs, oysters, finfish, and lobsters shall be regulated so that the size of the population of the particular species involved will not fall below the level necessary to provide the optimum sustained yield. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 4-401 et seq., 4-601 et seq., 4-701 et seq., 4-801 et seq., 4-901 et seq., 4-1008 et seq., 4-1021 et seq., 4-1032 et seq.) 5. Measures will be taken to increase the productivity and utility of the state's natural oyster bars. (Natural Resources Article, Section 4-207, 4-i103) 6. No activity will be permitted that impedes or prevents the free passage of any finfish, migratory or resident, up or down stream. (Natural Resources Article, Section 4-501) 7. Dredging through an oyster bar or clam bed which causes adverse impacts to the aquatic resource located on the bar or bed will not be permitted. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 8-802, 9-102, 9-202) 8. No activity to appropriate or use state waters in a manner which will. adversely affect living aquatic resources will be permitted. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-802) 9. Improvement. conservation, and management of living aquatic resources shall be carried out cooperatively by state and federal agencies. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402) 10. No substance classified as a designated hazardous substance (DNR Reg. 08.05.05) shall be disposed of in any manner that would cause lethal or sublethal alterations to the aquatic ecosystem. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1413.2) 11. It is State policy to improve, conserve and manage the quality of the State's waters for the propagation of wildlife, fish and wildlife resources. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402) 12. No material dredged from Baltimore Harbor shall be disposed of in an unconfined manner in the open water portion of Chesapeake Bay or the tidal portions of its tributaries outside of Baltimore Harbor. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1602) 117 Implementation Lead Agencies Maryland Fisheries Administration (aquatic resources generally) Maryland Wildlife Administration (migratory birds) Management Procedures Tho Fisheries Administration for the State of Maryland has primary responsibility for development and administration of rules, regulations and management practices for fish and shellfish communities within Maryland's coastal zone. By legislative mandate, Maryland has a "public fishery'. This has been interpreted to mean public access to any available resource. Because the finfish community has been naturally plentiful, management practices have been directed at providing spawning opportunities. Because of the significant fluctuation in abundance of shellfish over the years, management practices have attempted to provide an adequate harvestable population, primarily by intensive seeding efforts. Other shellfish management practices have included seasonal harvesting restrictions and limits on the size and sexual maturity of shellfish allowed to be harvested. The Fisheries Administration also provides information on possible impacts of proposed projects permitted by the State on fish and shellfish resources. Particular attention is given to projects requiring wetlands permits. The Maryland Wildlife Administration has responsibility for protecting wintering and resting areas of migratory birds, through review and comment on relevant projects or activities through the establishment of regulations on hunting and other activities, and through the cooperative programs with federal agencies concerned with protecting migratory bird species. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit's role in evaluating projects affecting aquatic resources is described in detail in Chapters on specific activities. Program Review Maryland's Coastal Zone Unit will cooperate with the Coastal Resources Commission of Virginia, the agencies of both states, and the National Marine Fisheries Service, to develop cooprehensive fishery management plans. These management plans will cover the general fishery biota of the Chesapeake Bay and the seaside bays as well as certain specific species. Negotiations are underway with the State of Virginia on the establishment of baywide aquatic resource management system in accordance with the provisions of Section 309 of the Coastal Zone Management Act. 118 The Coastal Zone Unit is also interfacing with'interstate groups concerned with management of the aquatic resources, such as the Northeast States Federal management Board, the Atlantic States marine Fisheries Commission, the National Shellfish Sanitation Program, the Oyster Institute of North America, and the two River Basin Commissions mentioned above. within the State, the Coastal Zone Unit is working closely with the Maryland Fisheries Administration, the Shellfish Advisory Board, the Maryland Water Resources Administration, and other intrastate agencies to develop and implement aquatic resource management programs. The Fisheries Administration has the major authority and responsibility for management of aquatic resources, and is the primary agency working with the Coastal Zone Unit to develop and implement management plans for finfish and Shellfish populations. In order for effective aquatic resource management plans to be developed, implemented and maintained, better information is needed on the abundance and harvest of finfish and shellfish. The Coastal zone Unit will work with state and federal agencies, as well as with research institutions, to standardize data collection, procedures, and sampling methods which realistically reflect the living aquatic resources of the coastal environment. Because the Chesapeake Bay is a unified system, decisions on particular activities should be based on assessments of the possible effects on the entire system. Through its project evaluation and technical assistance, the Coastal Zone Unit will promote the concept of the Bay as an integrated system, and will demonstrate a rational, integrated method of analysis based on evaluations of the hydrological, geological, ecological, social, and economic factors relating to each situation. 0 ~~~A handbook has been prepared by the Coastal Zone Management Unit in which various resource areas of finfish and shellfish have been mapped. The intent of this handbook is to focus the attention of local decision-makers on the dependency that finfish and shellfish have on Maryland's aquatic environment. It is also intended to serve as a reference book for these decision-makers in determining if further review of a proposed activity is-warranted because of potential adverse affects on living resources. 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~119 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO LIVING AQUATIC RESOURCES Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency State Critical Areas Program State Standards for State and DSP Art. 88C, Section 2(b) (3) Local Implementation Regulation 16.00.02 State Boat Act Direct State Planning and DNR (QAC, Art. NR, Section 8-701, Regulation Marine Police) 8-703, 8-704 Water Qualily Program Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1401 Regulation DHMH (EHA) et seq. Regulations 08.05.04.01 et seq. Art. 43, Section 394(a) Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Title 9 Regulation Chesapeake Bay Dumping Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section Regulation DHMH 8-1413.1, 8-1601 et seq. Sediment Control Law State Standards for Local DNR Art. NR, Section 8-1101 et seq. Implementation Regulation 08.05.03.01 56 Attorney General Op.'s 478 (1971) Commercial and Sport Harvesting Direct State Planning and DNR (Maryland Art. NR, Title 4, Subtitles Regulation Fisheries 7, 8, 9, 10 Administration) MFA Endangered Species of Fish Con- Direct State Planning and DNR (MFA) servation Act, Art. NR, Section Regulation 42A01 et seq. Fish Refuges Direct State Planning and DNR (MFA) Art. NR, Section 4-401 et seq. Regulation Oyster and Clam Culture Direct State Planning and DNR (MFA) Art. NR, Section 4-1101 et seq. Regulation Federal Water Pollution Control Federal Consistency Federal: U.S. Act Amendments of 1972 Environmental Section 312(f)(3) Protection Agency State: DNR (WRA) Hazardous Substances Disposal Act Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1413.2 Regulation Construction In Or Obstruction Of Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Free-Flowing Rivers or Non-tidal Regulation Waters Including the 100-year Floodplain 120 OCEAN DUMPING Situation The State of Maryland is concerned about the environmental and economic impacts of the ocean dumping of municipal and industrial wastes at the Cape May dumpsite, located approximately 35 miles off the Maryland/Delaware line. EPA studies have shown that heavy metals contained in these wastes have accumulated on the ocean bottom, and in the muscle and viscera of bottom-dwelling organisms. Living fecal coliform bacteria, indicators of the presence of disease causing agents, have been detected in shellfish collected in and near the sewage sludge dumpsite. Changes in the composition of the bottom-dwelling community have been observed in a 100-square-mile area covered with sewage sludge. Large numbers of rock crabs from the dumpsite area have been observed with a blackened gill condition caused by sludge particles. The federal Food and Drug Administration has already prohibited shellfishing along 142 square miles of ocean bottom around the Cape May site, and is considering expanding the area of closure. The Maryland Fisheries Administration estimates the dockside value of' the shellfish within the existing area of closure at $2 million. The fact that the prevailing currents carry the ocean dumped wastes towards the Maryland coastline may result in an additional economic impact on the Ocean City tourist industry. It is even possible that the publicity associated with ocean dumping off the coast of Maryland may cause tourists to vacation elsewhere. This impact could have potentially serious consequences to the economy of Maryland's coast. No industry or municipality in Maryland uses ocean dumping as a waste disposal technique. The Cape May dumpsite has been used since 1973, mainly by the cities of Camden, N.J., and Philadelphia, PA., and by E.I. Du Pont de Nemours titanium dioxide plant in Edgemoor, Delware. Prior to 1973, a site located 12 miles off the mouth of Delaware Bay was used by these dumpers. Presently, the only user of the Cape May dumpsite is the City of Philadelphia. As a result of testimony by the State of Maryland and other parties at ocean dumping hearings, Du Pont and the City of Camden have moved to a dumpsite located 90 miles offshore, off the edge of the continental shelf (referred to as DWD 106). Maryland does not support ocean dumping at DWD 106, but prefers its use to the Cape May site if ocean dumping is necessarv at all. Ocean dumping of industrial and municipal wastes is regulated by the federal Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Title I, Section 102 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (also referred to as the Ocean Dumping Act). EPA Region III is directly responsible for ocean dumping off the Coast of Maryland. Progress toward achieving the goals of the Ocean Dumping Act was minimal in the Mid-Atlantic region until the summer of 1975, when the Maryland Attorney General's Office became actively involved. Since Maryland became involved, the following progress has been achieved with regard to the three major dumpers using the Cape May site: 121 -Under the court order, the City of Camden must discontinue ocean disposal of sewage sludge by December, 1977; and is presently using site DWD 106. -Du Pont must phase out the ocean disposal by the end of 1978, and is presently using DWD 106. -The City of Philadelphia is under an implementation schedule leading to a phase out by 1981, but continues to dump at the Cape May site. Issues There is a basic conflict between the industries and municipalities who have used ocean dumping to their economic advantage, and those who are concerned with the public health, the health of the continental shelf's ecosystem, and the economic loss to offshore fisheries and to tourist industries of coastal resorts. This situation requires that State and local governments coordinate their activity and regulatory actions, with Federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objective of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (30) To oppose the dumping into ocean waters off the State of Maryland of any material which would adversely affect human, health, welfare or amenities, the marine environment, ecological systems, or resources of economic value. Investigations and regulatory procedures must address the following concerns: - Availability of alternative disposal or recycling techniques that are environmentally ond socially acceptable. - Timing of the implementation of alternative methods. - Severity of the ecological impacts of ocean dumping. - Desirability of the locations of the existing ocean dumpsites. Policies 1. it shall be inconsistent to dump material which may adversely affect Maryland waters or coastal resources in the Atlantic Ocean within three miles of Maryland's coastline. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-101, 1-104, 8-1402, 9-202) 2. The state shall actively participate in federal proceedings on ocean dumping in order to obtain early phase out of ocean dumping activities. (Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act: 33 USC Section 1401 et seq.; federal rules and regulations pertaining to Ocean Dumping: 40 CFR 222-227; Federal Administrative Procedures Act 5 USC Section 560; Natural Resources Article Sections 1-101, 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-208, 8-1402) 122 It is the policy of the State of Maryland that the Ocean Dumping of materials which may adversely affect Maryland waters shall be consistent with the following: a. The process for selecting alternative disposal methods for wast( materiala should include a consideration of recycling techniques that will yield useful end products. For example, Du Pont has developed a process to recycle their acid wastes (from titanium dioxide production) to produce a product that they will sell at a profit by 1980. Sewage sludge can also be treated in several ways to create soil conditioners. b. When potentially harmful contaminants (e.g., heavy metals, disease causing organisms) cannot be removed from waste or recycled materials, then disposal or application techniques must provide for control over the fate of those contaminants. c. The applicant for an ocean dumping permit must demonstrate that his proposed actions are in compliance with the Ocean Dumping Act and the rules and regulations promulgated by EPA pursuant to the Act (40 CFR 220-227, 330 SC 1401 et seq.). d. Where ocean dumping-is the only feasible alternative, dumping should be permitted only at previously used sites and at the site where the least environmental impact, threat to the public health, and loss of fishery resources is anticipated. e. Where an ocean dumping permit must be granted, it must contain, as a condition of compliance, a detailed schedule of deadlines leading to the implementation of an alternative disposal method and the total phase-out of ocean dumping by the earliest date feasible. f. Both research and monitoring must be conducted at each ocean disposal site, and must be coordinated with all other scientific programs in the Mid-Atlantic Bight. Both studies shall continue until all disposal activities are terminated, and until adverse impacts are dissipated or stabilized. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-101, 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-208, 8-1402) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: EPA (general regulation of ocean dumping) U.S. Corps of Engineers (regulation of ocean disposal of dredged material) U.S. Coast Guard (enforcement) 123 State: Attorney General's office (participating agencies - Coastal Zone Unit, Water Resources Administration, Fisheries Administration) Local: Ocean City Management Procedures Federal Agencies: EPA regulates ocean dumping pursuant to Title I Section 102 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. EPA staff promulgate rules and regulations, conduct permit hearings, develop criteria for evaluating permit applications, issue dumping permits, assess permit violations, conduct research and monitoring activities, and make annual status reports to Congress. The Department'of Commerce conducts .research on long-range and short-term ecological effects of ocean dumping; pursuant to Title II of the Marine Protection, Research and Santuaries Act. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for surveillance and enforcement, and provides platforms at sea for research activities. The Army Corps of Engiiieers regulates the octtan disposal of dredged materials pursuant to Title I, Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. State Agencies: The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act requires EPA to consult with interested states in considering permit applications for ocean dumping. The Federal Administrative Procedures Act also gives Maryland standing to participate in these proceedings.9 The Maryland Attorney General's office is the lead agency for representing the State's interest in ocean dumping and provides legal counsel. The Coastal Zlone unit provides technical support on the environmental impacts of ocean dumping, and assists in the development of other types of technical information. The Water Resources Administration and Maryland'Environmental Service provide expertise in alternative disposal methods. The Fisheries Administration provides information on offshore fisheries. Testimony given by the .State at ocean dumping hearings has urged the adoption by EPA of the above policies in the administration of the ocean dumping provisions of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act. Local Goverrment: Mayor Hlarry Kelly of Ocean City, Maryland, had long represented the interests of beach resort communities threatened by pollution of ocean waters, and is well known as an opponent of ocean dumping. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Coastal Zone Unit staff assist in research and monitoring activities, develop technical evidence showing the degree of impact at and near the dumpsites, assist in demonstrating the feasibility of alternati've ia ste disposal and utilization techniques, and provide information and testimony at the request of the Attorney 9 General's Office. 124 Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit and Attorney General's Office will pursue all available alternatives to effect a timely phase-out of all ocean dumping off Maryland's coast. Such actions may stimulate EPA to focus additional effort toward the task of clearly defining a national policy on ocean dumping. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO OCEAN DUMPING Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act 330SC �1401 et seq. Title I. Section 102: Federal Planning and EPA Regulation Title I. Section 103: Federal Planning and Corps of Regulation Engineers Title I. Section 107: Federal Enforcment and U.S. Coast Surveillance Guard Title II Federal Research Dept. of Commerce (NOAA) Ocean Dumping Rules and Public Hearings, Adjudicatory State Agencies Regulations (40 CFR 222-227): Hearings, Appeal to Administrator of EPA Administrative Procedure Act Public Hearings, Adjudicatory State Agencies (5 USC Section 560 et seq.) Hearings, Appeals to Administrator of EPA General Responsibilities of the Direct State Control DNR Department of Natural Resources Natural Resources Article, Sections, 1-101, 1-404 Granting of Wetlands Licenses Direct State Control DNR/BPW Natural Resources Article, Section 9-202 125 OCS OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, PRODUCTION ~ND TRANSPORTATION Situation Faced with a steadily increasing demand for petroleum products and a diminishing store of domestic oil and gas resources, the federal government initiated, in December of 1974, an ambitious oil and gas leasing program for submerged lands on the entire continental shelf of the United States. Previously, offshore oil and gas development had evolved as an extention of exploration and production activities occurring in adjacent onshore areas. In contrast, the new federal program calls for the leasing of large expanses of submerged lands in frontier areas -- areas where no previous leases have been sold -- including the North Atlantic, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, and areas off Alaska. Concern has arisen because existing federal laws, rules and regulations, and management techniques, simplify the process of moving offshore from existing onshore production areas, and fail to address the unique problems associated with the new development of frontier areas. The frontier area of principal concern to Maryland is called the Baltimore Canyon Trough. It is located due east of New Jersey and the Delmarva Peninsula. The Baltimore Canyon Trough is a submerged geological depression extending 300 miles parallel to the coastline from Long Island to the vicinity of Cape Hatteras. Geophysical data indicates significant potential for the discovery of oil and gas. In the Trough there are geological features that could provide a hydrocarbon reservoir and trap; the actual presence of a hydrocarbon source, however, is not certain. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that as much as 0.4 to 2.6 billion barrels (bbl) of crude petroleum and from 2.6 to 12.8 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of natural gas may be discovered ultimately and produced over a 25-year period. The possibility remains, however, that there are no recoverable hyrdocarbons in the Mid-Atlantic OCS at all. Coastal states in frontier areas share the need for: 1) state participation in the OCS development process, 2) availability of information to the states for planning, and 3) adequate scientific research. Early in 1974, the State of Florida persuaded the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI, responsible for leasing offshore lands) to establish an OCS Advisory Board (OCSAB) composed of representatives appointed by the governors of coastal states. The purpose of the Board was to provide state input and information exchange. Later, a second advisory board - Environmental Studies Advisory Committee (OCSESAC) - was created to provide 001 with technical advice. The original OCSAB retained responsibility for policy issues. The OCSESAC is presently being restructured. Mid-Atlantic coastal states (New York, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia) have coordinated policy development with each other, through the Mid-Atlantic Governor' s Coastal Resources Council (MAGCRC). To date, one lease sale (sale *40) has taken place in the Mid-Atlantic region -- 529,466 acres were leased under the bonus bid system for $1.1 billien. Additional sales (49 and 59) are scheduled for February 1979 and August 1981. Sale #40 had been invalidated by the U.S. District Court for failure to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act, but the District Court decision was reversed on August 25, 1977 by the U.S. Court of Appeals. In February, 1978, the Supreme Court decided not to consider an appeal of the Court of Appeals decision. It is estimated that exploratory drilling on tracts leased in Sale 040 will begin in the Spring of 1978. I 2c,~ The goal of tlie Mid-Atlantic states' cooperation has been to insure that offshore exploration proceeds in an orderly fashion in accord with a national energy policy, with provision for state involvement, with sufficient concern and safeguards for the environment, and for the economic and social structure of the affected coastal states. Issues This situation requires that the State work with other coastal states and federal agencies to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (31) To ensure the use of thorough assessments of probable energy costs and benefits, positive and negative economic effects, probable social and environmental impacts, and the value of the public resources involved, as the basis for decisions on the development and production of Outer Continental Shelf resources. (42) To provide adequate representation of the interests of the State of Maryland in federal decisions regarding the exploration, development, and production of Outer Continental Shelf resources. Investigations and regulatory actions must address the following issues: - Level of involvement and degree of influence of the states in policy and management decisions concerning OCS development activities. - Availability of essential information from federal agencies and from industry for state and local government planning for onshore and near- shore impacts. - Timing of the availability of the data generated by the DOI Environmental Studies Program relative to the rest of the OCS development process, and the mechanisms by which information generated by the Environmental Studies Program enters the decision-making process of the Secretary of DOI. - Design of environmental studies to meet state and local governments' needs in planning for onshore and nearshore impacts, and the needs of industry in planning for safety and environmental protection. Policies 1. The State of Maryland will actively participate in federal governmental proceedings concerning OCS developments to ensure that the State's interests are adequately considered. (Natural Resources Article 1-101, 1-104) 2. Maryland supports the federal leasing initiative, while seeking safeguards to ensure that pollution of its coast is prevented, and that onshore support operations neither disrupt local communities nor disregard State plans, policies and programs. Maryland seeks involvement in the administration of OCS lands to ensure that the safest, cleanest technologies are always employed on the Atlantic OCS. (Natural Resources Artic-le, sections 1-302, 1-303, 6-501 et seq.) 127 3. Maryland will review OCS exploration plans, development plans, and associated environmental reports to determine if federal license or permit activities associated with such plans are consistent with the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program. In the case of development plans and their associated environmental reports, the State may, within 60 days of receipt of a development plan, recommend to the Mid-Atlantic District Supervisor that a development EIS be prepared in order to supplement data and information the State needs to make a consistency determination. The criteria that Maryland will use in determining the need for an EIS include: a. Location of structures near high seismic risk areas; b. Location of structures near marine sanctuaries, wildlife refuges or areas of high ecological sensitivity; C. Location of bottom-founded structures in areas of potentially hazardous natural bottom conditions; d. Use of new and or unusual technology; e. onshore impacts from planned and or existing processing storage, treatment, or transportation facilities that were not adequately considered in a previous development EIS or differ significantly in magnitude, duration and nature of impact; and f. Information contained in Summary Reports for the Mid and North Atlantic resource province do not provide sufficient detail by which Maryland may make a judgement concerning impacts. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-203 and 8-1402; Final Regulation 30 CFR Parts 251 and 252, 15 CFR Part 930 Sub-part E under the OCS Lands Act of 1953, the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 respectively.) 4. Since exploration and exploitation of the mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf will have significant impacts on Maryland as well as on other affected States, and in recognition of both the State and national interest in the effective management of the marine, coastal, and human environ- ments, it is the policy of the state of Maryland that the following factors be recognized in federal decisions regarding OCS exploration and development: a. The State of Maryland may require assistance in protecting its coastal zones and other affected areas from any temporary or permanent adverse effects of such impacts; and, b. The State of Maryland is entitled to participate, in order to protect its interests, in federal policy and planning decisions relating to explora- tion for, and development and production of, mineral resources of the Outer Continental Shelf. (Natural Resources Article, sections 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-203, 8-1402; Proposed Amendments to the Federal OCS Lands Act of 1953) 128 5. It is the policy of the State of Maryland that the right and responsibility of the State of Maryland to preserve and protect its human, marine, and coastal environments through such means as regulation of land, air, and water uses, through safety regulations, and through regulation of related development and activity, be recognized in federal decisions regarding OCS developments. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 6-501 et seq., 8-203, 8-1402; Proposed Amendments to the Federal OCS Lands Act of 1953 6. Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf must be conducted in a safe manner by well-trained personnel using technology, precautions, and techniques sufficient to prevent or minimize the likelihood of blowouts, loss of well control, fires, spillages, physical obstruction to other users of the waters or subsoil and seabed, or other occurrences which may cause damage to the environment or property, or which may endanger life or health. (Federal OCS Lands Act of 1953; Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-104, 1-302, 1-303, 8-203, 8-1402) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: Department of the Interior Department of Energy State: Governor's Office (Participating Agencies Maryland Geological Survey, Coastal Zone Unit) Management Procedures Federal Agencies: Under the OCS Lands Act of 1953, the Department of Interior is'charged with administering the mineral development of the Outer Continental Shelf., With-regard to hydrocarbons DOI: 1) selects areas for leasing; 2) supervises geological and geophysical exploration; 3) meets environmental protection requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act; 4) evaluates resources to determine the resource sale price; 5) conducts competitive bidding for the resources; 6) supervises exploratory drilling and production activities on awarded leases to assure environmental protection; 7) supervises resource conservation and safety measures; and monitors environmental conditions. These activities are carried on primarily by two agencies of the Department: the Bureau of Land Management and the Geological Survey. The Department of Energy also has management and regulatory authority over certain specific aspects of OCS exploration and development. This authority involves: 1) fostering competition, 2) devising alternative bidding procedures, 3) establishing diligence requirements for operators, 4) establishing production rates, and 5) specifying the procedures, terms, and conditions for acquisition and disposition of federal royalty interests in kind. Under Section 4(f) of the OCS Lands Act of 1953, the Secretary of the Army reviews and evaluates proposed construction of fixed structures and artificial Islands on the OCS for impact on navigation and natio..,al security. 129 State Agencies: The leadership for OCS-related issues is provided by the Governor's Office. A member of the Governor's staff represents the Governor on the DOI-OCS Advisory Board, and on the Mid-AtlanticGovernor'sCoastal Resources Council. The Director of the Maryland Geological Survey represents the Governor on the DOI-OCS Environmental Studies Committee, and works closely with the U.S. Geological Survey. Staff support to the Governor's Office is provided by the MGS, CZU and DSP. Staff capabilities include technical expertise in oceanography, economics, and petroleum engineering. Special consultation is provided by Frank Clark, the originial Chairman of the DOI-OCS Advisory Board. The passage of the proposed Amendments to the OCS Lands Act of 1953 will allow the State to ensure that its interests are adequately represented in decisions regarding the exploration and development of OCS resources. The State presently has authority over pipelines from OCS developments once they enter State waters. As discussed in the Section on Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities, the siting of pipelines in State waters is regulated under the provisions of the Coastal' Facilities Review Act administered by the Coastal Zone Unit. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation CZU staff attend DOI-OCS Advisory Board meetings, DOI-OCS Environmental Studies Committee meetings, and MAGCRC meetings. CZU staff represent Maryland at OCSESAC subcommittees to design baseline studies and to assess modeling capabilities. CZU has participated in the design of the Mid-Atlantic OCS baseline studies conducted by the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences (VIMS), and represents Maryland at progress report meetings held at the VIMS lab. CZU staff provides economic and oceanographic technical support to the Governor's Office. Pre-leasing and post- leasing decision points in which states may participate include: -- pre-leasinq: geology-geophysics exploration permit, area selection and schedule preparation, call for nominations, tract selection, preparation of stipulations, notices to lessee, final'decisioh on sale; -- post leasing: exploratory permit plan, operating orders, notices to lessees, stipulations, EPA effluent guidelines, USGS regulations, development plan, development phase EIS, special stipulations, pipeline right-of-way request, DOT stipulations and regulations on pipleines. Program Review CZU, in cooperation with the Governor's Office, will ensure that OCS oil and gas exploration, production, and transportation in the Mid-Atlantic proceeds in an orderly manner with sufficient safeguards to provide protection from adverse economic, social and environmental impacts. 130 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO OCS OIL AND GAS EXPLORATION, PRODUCTION AND TRANSPORTATION Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency OCS Lands Act of 1953 Federal Consistency DOI (43 USC 1331) (Planning & Regulation) OCS Lands Act of 1953 Federal Consistency U.S. Coast Guard (43 USC 1331) (Planning & Regulation) OCS Lands Act of 1953 Federal Consistency State Agencies (43 USC 1331) and CZM Act (State Involvement) (particularly of 1972 DNR & DSP) Maryland Environmental Policy Act State involvement in Federal State Agencies (Art. NR, Section 1-301 et seq.) Proceedings; Direct State (particularly Planning and Regulation DNR & DSP) Coastal Facilities Review Act Direct State Planning and VNR (E&CZA) (Art. NR, Section 8-501 et seq.) Regulation Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Title 9 Regulation ~~~~~~~~~~~~~131~~~~~~A. 131 111B. ACTIVITIES OCCURRING IN INTERTIDAL AREAS I I ____ -2 > -i / B. INTERTIDAL AREAS Intertidal areas are transition areas between tidal waters and coas shorelands. PITwo types of use of these areas are of concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program: th Coastal one 1. Use of Beach Areas 2. Activities in Tidal Wetlands 132 USE OF BEACH AREAS Situation Because of concern about the provision of adequate public access to and protection of public shore areas, there was included in the 1976 Amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act the requirement that a State's coastal zone management program must include "a definition of the term "beach" and a planning process of the protection of and access to, public beaches and other public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, esthetic, ecological, or cultural value." The regulations issued pursuant to the Amendments further state that the planning process must include the following elements: (1) A procedure for assessing public areas requiring access or protection; (2) A definition of the term "beach" and an identification of public areas meeting that definition; (3) Articulation of enforceable State policies pertaining to shorefront access and protection; (4) A method for designating shorefront areas (either as a class or site specifically) as areas of particular concern or-areas for preservation or restoration, if appropriate; and (5) An identification of legal authorities, funding programs and other techniques that can be used to meet management needs. To meet the requirements of 1976 Amendments, a beach has been defined as a gently sloping shore area cf the Atlantic Ocean, Chesapeake Bay or other tidal waters covered by sand or similar material, and the lower portion of which is washed by waves or tides. Public beach areas meeting this definition are noted in Table 111-2. The only extensive beach areas in Maryland lie along its Atlantic coastline on Fenwick and Assateague Islands. There are also a number of less extensive beach areas on Chesapeake Bay. The process and legal authorities by which public access'to these areas is ensured is described below.. In addition, the Maryland Department of Transportation gives considerable attention in its system planning efforts (see the section of this Chapter on Land Transportation Facilities) to identifying ways in which an adequate transportation network can be maintained between the Atlantic Coast Beach areas and the heavily populated Baltimore-Washington area where the majority of the beach users live. In the mid-1970's a second bridge across the Chesapeake Bay was built to reduce traffic delays and studies are underway on ways to eliminate potential bottlenecks at Kent Narrows, Vienna and Cambridge. The possible alternatives for the eliminat':u. c- reduction of such bottlenecks needs careful examination since the removal of wetlands and/or existing development may be involved. 133 TABLE III-2 Public Beaches In Maryland's Coastal Zone COUNTY NAME OWNERSHIP Anne Arundel Sandy Point State Park State Mayo Beach County Baltimore County Gunpowder State Park State Cox's Point County Miami Beach County Turkey Point Park County Rocky Point Park County Calvert Calvert Cliffs State Park State Cecil Elk Neck State Park State Harford Flying Point Park County Kent Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge Federal Betterton Public Beach County St. Mary's Point Lookout State Park State Somerset Jane's Island State Park State, Worcester Assateague Island National Seashore Federal Assateague Island State Park State Ocean City Beach Quasi - Public (Open to the public) 134 Due to the characteristics of the Chesapeake Bay shoreline (isolated, non- extensive, generally narrow beaches) there are no beach areas where only the wetland sand areas alone can be used for intensive recreational purposes even if access were provided. Therefore the provision of public access generally must include the acquisition of upland areas to provide adequate recreational areas. In addition, the sea nettles that invade the Bay and the Bay's warm temperature in the sumrmer reduce its attractiveness for water-contact recreation purposes in comparison to the State's Atlatnic Coast Beach Areas. However, the Bay is heavily used for recreational boating purposes and the State is committed to providing adequate boating access through its Waterway Improvement Program. Moreover, the State does have a commitment to providing recreational opportunities on the shorelines of Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. The State addresses this commitment and the shorefront access and protection planning requirements of the 1976 Amendments largely through the acquisition and management of public lands in accordance with the State Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCOEP). The State is in the process of reassessing its recreation needs, including those relating to shorefront access and protection needs, through updating its SCORP which guides its acquisition of recreation and open space areas. Based on the information provided by the SCORP, the State will make appropriate modifications to address such needs in its acquisition programs which are briefly described below and described in more detail in the section of this Chapter on "Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient-Recreational, Open Space and Natural Areas". As noted in Table 111-4 on p. 205, the State has acquired or is acquiring 57 areas in the coastal counties, most of which provide shorefront access to the Atlantic Ocean or Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. The State is committed to fuller recreational development of these areas. It also should be noted that, as described in more detail in the portion of Chapter V on the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study, the local governments in the Baltimore region in conjunction with the Coastal Zone Unit have developed a series of recommendations regarding the provision of shorefront access And recreational opportunities in their jurisdictions which are presently being reviewed as to the action that should be taken on them in each jurisdiction. In addition, as described in Chapter iV, the State's Critical Areas Program provides a mechanism for designating shorefront areas as Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. Finally, the protection aspects of the 305B(7) requirement of the 1976 Amendments have been satisfied by the State's approach to the fulfillment of the requirements for Areas of Particular Concern and Areas for Preservation and Restoration described in Chapter IV. Such mechanisms as the State Critical Areas Program and the State Wetland Permit Program are utilized to ensure protection of public coastal areas of environmental, recreational, historical, aesthetic, ecological, or cultural value. In addition, the Program policies, as enumerated in this and other rele-rant sections of this Chapter, address protection needs. 135 Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value--areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as non-tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, =R''wlntering and resting areas for migratory birds. (8) To promote increased recreational opportunities in shoreland areas, to promote increased public access to tidal waters. and to assure that these occur in a manneX which nroetthe' quality of coastal resources and which maintains public health and safety. (15) To promote the use of shore erosion control techniques, where necessary, in a manner which provides long-term _otection, minimizes adverse effects on natural systems (both bioloqical and physical), and avoids damage to adjacent Property owners. State and local governmental actions relating to beach access and protection must address the following issues: 1. Possible adverse impacts on the stability or integrity of Assateague Island, or on the beaches and dunes of Fenwick Island caused by the burial of sewage outfalls, pipelines, or similar facilities. 2. The effectiveness or potentially adverse impacts of erosion control measures on beach areas and littoral ecosystems. 3. The preemption of beach areas (ocean or bay) for present or future recreational use by other proposed uses. 4. Increase priority to the acquisition of beach areas in State and local outdoor recreation programs. 5. Provision of shorefront access and protection of valuable public coastal areas. 136 Policies '1. The Department of Natural Resources shall, in the name of the State, purchase and manage landE suitable for state parks, scenic preserves, historic monuments, parkways, state recreational areas, forest culture, forest reserves, watershed protection, water conservation, open space, the protection, propagation or management of wildlife resources, and hunting. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 5-207, 5-901 et ses., to 10-208, 10-2A01 et seg., 10-801) 2. It is State policy to make funds available to local governments for the acquisition of outdoor recreation and open space areas and for the development of recreation facilities. The acquisition and development of land for recreation purposes with such funds shall be consistent with local comprehensive plans, and shall meet a need in whole or in part identified in the State Outdoor Recreation Plan. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-904 et seq.) 3. The Department of Natural Resources, upon request, shall assist other state units, counties, towns, corporations, and individuals in preparing plans for acquisition and development of park recreation and natural areas, acquisition of multiple-use areas including protection of watersheds, management, and replacement of trees woodlots, and timber tracts. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-201) 4. It is the State policy to encourage land owners to make their land available to the public for recreational use by limiting their liability towards persons using their land in accordance with Natural Resources Article, Section 5-1101 et seq. 5. The recreational and conservation policies of the State of Maryland shall: a. Encourage low intensity recreation on open tracts such as flood plains, wooded areas, steep slopes, and other significant natural features, provided proper safeguards are established to protect local environment. b. Encourage the use of utility easements as outdoor recreation and open space areas. c- Encourage the use of scenic easements of land as a visual part of open space and outdoor recreation. d. Explore the recreation potential of water bodies, agricultural research centers, and wildlife management areas. e. Acquire title to or control of land with conservation or recreation value, before encroaching development and rising land values preclude this possibility. 137 f. Provide public access to estuaries, the Chesapeake Bay, and every major river in Maryland. g. Analyze surplus state and federal properties to determine whether they can be used for recreation. h. provide corridors for limited recreation uses such as bicycling, hiking, and-others which relate to streams, shorelines and unique resource and historic areas. i. Emphasize county and local development of coummunity parks and school/park complexes to maximize local recreational opportunities. j. Control land use adjacent to parks and major scenic or historic sites to prevent encroachment and to preserve the surrounding aesthetics. k. Protect free-flowing streams and rivers, and carefully evaluate proposed imrpoundments. 1. Encourage the preservation of submerged lands for wildlife and fish habitats. m. Control shoreline development along the Bay and the ocean through state and local legislation. n. Develop and implement a state-wide river and stream preservation program. o. Encourage the recreational use of the Chesapeake Bay by acquiring public access points, particularly at the confluence of stream valleys9 p. Preserve outstanding natural and scenic areas, and irreplaceable historic sites and structures, and incorporate them into an open space system. q. Utilize excessive slopes, flood plains, poorly drained lands and other unique natural resources as major sources of open space. r. Continue to emphasize nature interpretation and nature-oriented facilities. s. Emphasize the acquisition of development rights where feasible in rural areas, along stream valleys, bay and river or ocean shorelines, and discourage develoqunent .~ncompatible with the recreation opportunities associated with these resources. 138 t. continue implementing legislation and protection programs for the Chesapeake Bay and inland wetlands, with emphasis on appropriate land development regulations, conservation zoning land donations and purchase of development rights in lieu of outright acquisition. u. Regulate and preserve all islands in the bay and all rivers wherever feasible for conservation and limited recreation use. v. Create more wildlife sanctuaries and management areas in places that provide areas of unusual flora and fauna. w. Encourage stewardship through the development of State and local policies and guidelines on tax abatements, tax credits, and special assessments for privately held open space. x. utilize scenic or conservation easements, purchase and leaseback agreements and subdivision regulations. y. Preserve the best agricultural lands and geologic resource areas for continued production, or preservation as rural landscape. z. Encourage the use of both public and private lands for outdoor recreation, including the purchase of public recreation rights and scenic easements to expand open space beyond publicly owned land, and the provision by land owners of recreational opportunities for the public under multiple-use income producing arrangements. aa. Establish an interconnecting system of trails for walking, hiking, and bicycling along the ocean beaches, bays, estuaries, rivers and streams, linking activity centers. (Article BBC Natural Resources Article, Section 5-901 at *sea.; Maryland Outdoor Recreation and open Space Plan, Phase 111-A-cti-o-nPlan pp 9-10) 6. With the exception of beach erosion, sediment control, storm control, and maintenance projects approved by both the Department of Natural Resources and the Worcester Soil Conservation District, it is State policy to prohibit the construction or placement of permanent structures east the dune line along Maryland's Atlantic Coast. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1105.1) 7. Activities which will adversely affect the integrity and natural character of Assateague island will be inconsistent with the State's Coastal Zone Management Program, and will be prohibited. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 8-1105.1, 5-201) a. Dredging, filling, and other activities which adversely affect the integrity of breach areas an Chesapeake Day and its tributaries will be inconsistent wiith the State's Coastal Zone Management Program, and will be prohibited. (Natural Resources Article, Section 9-102, 9-202) 139 9. It is state policy to acquire additional beach areas and to provide additional beach access on Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries as part of the State's Outdoor Recreation Program. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-903, Maryland Outdoor Recreation and Open Space Plan - Action Plan III page 9) Implementation Lead Agencies: State: Department of Natural Resources - capital Programs Administration, Water Resources Administration; Department of State Planning (Comprehensive recreation planning acquisition of recreation and natural areas, technical and financial assistance to'local ports) Maryland Environmental Trust (Conservation easement program) Department of Transporation (Highway planning transporation) Local Governments: (Recreational planning and acquisition of recreational and natural areas to meet local needs) Kanagement Procedures Atlantic Coast Maryland's entire 31-mile Atlantic coastline has been preserved for public access and use. Public access to and use of the Ocean City beach area on Fenwick Island has been protected by the Atlantic Coastal-Beach Erosion Control District Act of 1.975 which restricts construction seaward of the dune line. Permits for beach erosion control carried out by Ocean City are subject to annual review by the committee of representatives of the Wetlands Permit Section of WRA, The Maryland Geologial Survrey, and the Shore Erosion Control Program. A few lots in Ocean City adjacent to the dune line have been acquired in order to enforce the ban on construction east of the dune line. Lots are acquired only if the land owner is deprived of all reasonable use of this land and could thus claim that an unconstitutional taking of property without compensation had occurred. 140 As noted above the Department of Transportation has the lead responsibility for planning for and constructing highway access to Ocean City. Through its comprehensive planning process it provides for the involvement of all relevant agencies to insure that all relevant factors are considered in the design or expansion of highways such as Route 50 to Ocean City. Because of the many factors to be considered in determining the most appropriate alternatives to addressing the potential bottlenecks from the Bay Bridge to Ocean City other State agencies, particularly the Department of Natural Resources, will substantially involve to insure full consideration of the tradeoffs involved. Chesapeake Bay and Its Tributaries The State Outdoor Recreation Plan provides the framework for the state's recreation, open space, and natural areas planning and acquisition. It contains an analysis of the supply of existing public facilities and areas, the present and anticipated future demand for such facilities and areas, and the capability and suitability of existing areas and facilities for meeting such demand, anid the capability and suitability of areas not presently under public ownership for meeting such demands. It also contains a priority ranking system for guiding the State's acquisition and development activities. In addition, the State has undertaken several inventories of potential shoreline access, recreation, and open space areas including Chesapeake Bay: Ivnryof Potential Shoreline Access, Recreation, and Open Space Areas Part I - Western Shore and Part II Eastern Shore; an inventory of potential boat access areas as part of the report Recreational Boating in the Tidal Waters-of Maryland; and An Investigation Into Potential Park Sites With A Boating Focus - Southwest quadrant of the Bay. As described in more detail in 7the ~section of this Chapter on Activities Associated with the Provision of sufficient Recreational, open Space * and Natural Areas, the Department of Natural Resources is responsible for administering the State's recreational, natural areas, and open space program and for acquisition and developmnent providing technical and financial assistance to local governments for undertaking such programs at the local level. Funding comes principally from the State Program Openr Space Program and the Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund. As noted in Table 111-4 on p. 205, the State has an active acquisition and development program already underway in Maryland's coastal zone including the acquisition and, where appropriate, development-of shorefront areas. Because of the State's commitment to completing the acquisition and development of existing areas, opportunities are somewhat limited in the near future for the acquisition of entirely new shorefront'areas. Possibilities do exist for modifying the take-lines and development plan of areas already under acquisition to meet shorefront natural areas, recreation, and access needs. In addition, coastal areas of significant aesthetic, natural, scenic and cultural value can be protected through the conservation easement program of the Maryland Environmental Trust. 141 The State's Waterway Improvement Program as described in more detail in the section of this Chapter on Recreational Boating, provides funding for the development of facilities to benefit the boating public, particularly the provision of boating access so that people can take advantage of the recreational boating potential of Chesapeake lay and othor Sti.at, watotr!. Tho Stnal ha.u; constructed a substantial day-use boating facility at Saidy Vtoillt and is louking for other sites for such facilities. The potential exists for combining such a facility into a shorefront park with a boating focus. In addition, through the efforts of the Coastal Zone Unit and other appropriate State agencies as described in the Program Review section that follows, the State will ensure during program implementation that shorefront acess and protection assessment prodcedures will be further developed and used in the State's acquisition and development program and in the disburse- ment of State funds to local governments through Program Open Space for local land acquisition and development for recreation and open space purposes. Part of this assessment processwill include identification of shorefront areas that should be considered for designation as State Critical Areas to meet demonstrated shorefront access, open space and natural areas protection needs through the process described in Chapter IV. As is the case with the State acquisition of recreational land, local recreational land acquisition with State funds has to be made in accordance with the SCORP and the State's Coastal Zone Management Program. In the disbursement of Program Open Space funds, particular attention will be given as to whether local goverments have given adequate provision to meeting shorefront access, open space, and natural area protection needs. Finally, the State, in the longer term will use the assessment information developed to give adequate attention to acquiring appropriate new shorefront areas. Island Protection The State of Maryland has made significant progress in the protection and sensitive development of islands. In 1967, the State Board of Natural Resources adopted a resolution which requested that the Board of Public Works direct the Hall of Records to issue no patents to vacant islands in the State of Maryland and that all such islands be retained in State ownership and adminstered by the agency or agencies designated by the Board of Public Works. The Board of Public Works subsequently adopted this resolution, thereby providing a mean of protecting vacant islands for the public use. The State has also identified certain islands with natural scenic and aesthetic characteristics, valuable plant and animal habit, and historic and archeological resources which merit acquisition. The State has determined that these islands should be acquired and managed to conserve and preserve them for low density outdoor recreation activities and open space. Wye Island in Queen Anne's County has been acquired by the State as a result of these findings. This approximately 3,500 acre island will be maintained in its natural state as open space for the benefit and enjoyment of Maryland's present and future residents. Low intensity outdoor recreation activities will also be permitted. In addition, Assateague Island is jointly owned by the national and State governments and Janes Island, which the State owns and manages is a State Park. Hart and Miller Islands, located near the Baltimore Metropolitan Area will be filled with dredge material from the Baltimore Harbor. After this occurs, the islands are to be used for recreational activities. 142 The State's Critical Area Program provides an additional mechanism for ensuring the proper management and use of islands. Designation of islands as State Critical Areas will include appropriate management techniques to ensure that they are appropriately-utilized or protected. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit will participate along with other units of the Department of Natural Resources in the review of the alternatives for the elimination or reduction of bottlenecks along Route 50 through the Comprehensive Planning Process undertaken by the Department of Transportation to ensure that Coastal Zone Management concerns are adquately addressed. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit in corporation with the Capital Programs Administration will work with the Department of State Planning in accordance with the Governor Executive Order and the Department of Natural Resources Memorandum of Understanding with that Department to ensure that shorefront access and protection needs are given adequate priority in the SCORP planning process. As part of this effort the Coastal Zone Unit will analyze existing sources of information and in conjunction with relevant State and local agencies undertake supplementary studies if necessary to ensure a complete and detailed assessment of shorefront natural areas, open space, and access needs and opportunities. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Capital Programs Administration and the Department of State Planning on utilizing the results of the SCORP and other relevant studies to identify ways in which the State's acquisition and development plans can be modified to ensure that adequate consideration is given to the provision of shorefront access and the protection of public coastal areas of recreational, historic, easthetic, ecological or cultural value. As noted above, in the near future, attention will be focused on providing additional shorefront access and providing adequate protection to athex public coastal areas through adding to or providing appropriate develoymnts in areas already owned or under acquisition by the State and acquisition of shorefront areas that provide boat access opportunities. However, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Capital Programs Administration to identify shorefront areas appropriate for inclusion in the State's acquisition program in the longer term. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with the local governments in the Baltimore Metropolitan area on implementing the recommendations of the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study concerning provision of park land and public access to the shoreline including alternatives not involving land acquisition. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local governments in general on ways they can provide increased shorefront access and protect appropriate coastal areas including designation of such areas as State Critical Areas and thus as Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. 143 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO USE OF BEACH AREAS Statutory Authority Controllingc Mchanism Aency Beach Erosion Control District Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Act Regulation Art. NR, Section 8-1105.1 State Comprehensive Outdoor Direct State Planning DSP Recreation Plan DNR (CAP) Program Open Space Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 5-906 State and/or Local Acquisition and Development 1 Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Nat. Res. Art. Regulation Title 9 Rivers and Harbors Act State Water Quality Federal, U.S. Section 10 Certification and Federal Army Corps of Federal Water Pollution Consistency Engineers Control Act Amendments of DNR (WRA) 1972, Section 402 Sanitation Standards for Direct State Regulation DHMH (EHA) Bathing Beaches Art. 43, Section 2-228 DHMH Regulation 10.17.24 State Critical Areas Program State Standards for Local DSP Art. 88C, Section 2(b) (3) Implementation 144 ACTIVITIES OCCURRING IN TIDAL WETLANDS Situation Wetlands play a key role in Maryland's estuarine environment, providing basic nutrients in the food chain and habitat for many fish and wildlife species, helping to protect water quality, inhibit flooding and control shore erosion. Prior to 1970, protection of Maryland's tidal wetlands was limited, and controls over dredging and filling of wetlands were primarily based on con- sideration of the effects of navigation rights rather than on ecological impact. Inadequate protection resulted in the loss of an estimated 23,777 acres of wetland area between 1942 and 1967. There is still considerable pressure to alter tidal wetlands. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and con- sistency, toward the objective identified in the Coastal Zone Management Program: (4) To protect, maintain, and where feasible, restore the integrity of the State's tioal wetlands. Investigations and regulatory procedures must consider whether or not a proposed action: - Actually necessitates wetlands alteration. - Can be met through alternatives that do not involve wetlands alteration. - Will have adverse impacts on the productivity of the wetlands; wildlife habitat, fisheries, and shellfisheries. -Is water-dependent. - Creates a public benefit. - Involves upland activities which will directly affect the productivity and integrity of adjacent wetlands. - Contributes to adverse cumulative effects of minor wetlands alterations. 145 Policies General 1. All vegetated tidal wetlands are Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. (Natural Resources Article, Section 9-102). 2. in granting, denying or limiting any wetlands permit or license, the State shall consider the effect of the proposed work on the public health and welfare, marine fisheries, shellfisheries, wildlife, economic benefits, the protection of life and property from flood, hurricane and other natural disasters, and the public policy set forth in Section 9-102 of the Natural Resources Article to protect wetlands and prevent their despoliation and destruction. (Natural Resources Article, Section 9-202, 9-306) 3. Dredging and filling of tidal wetlands, either state or private, is allowed only to the extent necessary to provide reasonable riparian access, to provide necessary shore erosion control, or to carry out necessary water-dependent activities, the public benefit of which clearly outweighs any harm done. All activities allowed on State or Private wetlands shall be undertaken in such a mariner as to minimize adver.se environmental effects. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-102, 9-201, 9-306) Hunting, Fishing, Trapping, Etc. 1. The dredging of seafood products by any licensed operator, harvesting of seaweed, mosquito control and abatement as approved by the Department of Agriculture, improvement of wildlife habitat approved by the Department of Natural Resources, and maintenance of drainage ditches approved by the appropriate Sail Conservation District do not require a state wetlands license. (Natural Resources Article, section 9-202) 2. The following are lawful uses of private wetlands: a. Conservation of soil, vegetation, water, fish, shellfish and wildlife. b. Trapping, fishing, and catching shellfish if otherwise legally permitted. (Natural Resources Article Section 9-303) 146 Riparian Access The public policy of the State is to preserve wetlands and protect water quality while providing for the riparian land owner's right of access to navigable waters. Thus, 1. Whenever reasonable access can be provided directly from fast land, creation of a channel through vegetated wetlands, filling for access, or extending access inland with artifical channels shall be prohibited. 2. In those cases where access is to be provided to a subdivision or other multi-home development or community, a centralized boating access channel or pier is preferable to multiple piers or channels. in the case of isolated single family dwellings, a pier from fast land to open water shall normally fulfill the right of reasonable riparian access. 3. The ownership of land bordering upon tidal waters does not carry with it the automatic right to create channels to extend boat access. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306; pending revised DNR wetlands regulations) Shore Erosion Control The policy of the State is to preserve wetlands while allowing the riparian owner to exercise his right to protect his shore against documented erosion. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 9-102, 9-201, 9-303(4)) (See also the Section on Activities occurring in Areas Undergoing Significant Shore Erosion) Water Dependent Activities Dredging and filling is allowed only for water-dependent activities on State or Private wetlands, and the filling of State or private wetlands for the purpose of creating fast land is generally considered contrary to the public interest. Water-dependent facilities, such as boat facilities, are those which cannot function in an area away from the shoreline. Non-water dependent facilities include (but are not limited to) restaurants and businesses, residences, apartments, motels, hotels, trailer parks, parking lots, officies, spoil and dump sites, lagoons for sewage or industrial waste, industries and factories, storage areas for small boats, recreational areas requiring filling above tidal level such as athletic fields, parking areas and picnic areas. In those cases where the public interest justifies approval 147 of projects involving the filling of Private or State wetlands, including those involving the creation of fast land, approval may be considered if the following conditions are satisfied (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306; pending revised DNR wetlands regulations): - The project cannot feasibly be undertaken on an adjacent or nearby fast land location. - It is not feasible to provide the project's intended service by an alternative means not involving the filling of wetlands. - The creation of fast land shall occur only in those areas aajoining existing fast lands. - No ecologically productive submerged wetlands, such as finfish and shellfish spawning and habitat areas, shall be destroyed. - No areas important for the feeding, nesting, or resting of waterfowl or other valuable wildlife habitat shall be destroyed. - Fill utilized for the creation of fast land shall be obtained from an appropriate land-based source and not dredged from adjacent Private or State wetlands. - The creation of fast land shall not obstruct navigational channels, adversely affect the public's use of the waters of the state, including the public's right to navigation and fisheries, significantly affect major current patterns, or significantly alter the existing contour of the shoreline. - In all projects involving the filling of State wetlands, compensation for fast land created in the public domain shall generally be provided to the State in an amount determined by the State Board of Public Works. (See Board of Public Works v. Larmar Corp. 262 Md. 64, 277A2Q.427 (1971)) Construction and Maintenance of Drainage Ditches Drainage ditches for mosquito control or agricultural drainage are generally allowed if they conform to the drainage standards and specifications of the Soil Conservation Service, if they are approved by the Department of Agriculture, and if they are constructed to minimize adverse environmental impacts. Construction of ditches and seeps on Private wetlands for the purpose of allowing irrigation water to flow to fast land are permitted if they are constructed in a minimally disruptive manner-. !Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-202(d), 9-303) 148 Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers State: Water Resources Administration and Board of Public Works Participating Agencies Federal: U.S. Fish and Wildlife National Marine Fisheries Service Environmental Protection Agency State: Maryland Fisheries Administration Maryland Wildlife Administration Department of State Planning Other state and local agencies as relevant Management Procedures All activities occuring on tidal wetlands except trapping, hunting, fishing, shellfishing, the cultivating and harvesting agricultural or horticultural products, and minor agricultural and drainage maintenance projects, are regulated by the state wetland permits and licenses and Water Quality Certification programs. Each proposed activity is evaluated by the Water Resources Administration with the assistance of relevant state agencies, for its impacts on the wetlands, water quality, wildlife habitat, fisheries, and shellfisheries. Larger projects are given a comprehensive review through participation of any federal, state and local agency with a special expertise or concern. The policies noted above are the criteria utilized by the Wetlands Section of the Water Resources Administration in permit decisions, and the Watezi Resources Administration is in the process of formalizing them into regulations. The final State authority on making decisions on proposed wetland projects varies somewhat depending on whether St~ate wetlands or private wetlands are involved. (The term tidal wetlands is used in this document to include both State and private wetlands.) State wetlands are defined as "all land under the navigable waters of the State below the mean high tide, which is affected by regular rise and fall of the tide". Private wetlands are "all lands not considered State wetlands bordering on or lying beneath tidal watersi, which are subject to regular or periodic tidal action and which support aquatic growth". in the case of projects affecting State wetlands, the final decision is made by the Board of Public Works which is composed of the Governor, the Comptroller, and the Treasurer. In the case of private wetlands the Department of Natural Resources makes the final decision. In both cases, the decision is based an the recommendation of the Wetlands Permit Section of the Department of Natural Resources. Whenever possible, the State's wetlands programs are coordinated with the Corps of Engineers, Section 10 and Section 404 permit programs. To further coordination, the Department of'Natural Resources has established an agreement with the U.S. Corps of Engineers to undertake, to the maximum extent feasible, joint site reviews and hearings on projects falling under the jurisdiction of both agencies. The Corps has also established general permit procedures for the use of riprap for shore protection, the replacement of bulkheads, and the installation of piers and mooring piles. Under these procedures, their approval will automatically be granted if specified criteria are met and the State approves the project, except in special circumstances. 149 These permit procedures greatly reduce delays in Corps approval of routine projects, and allow special attention to be given to projects with special circumstances. Since the State participated in developing the criteria, most projects that meet the criteria will also receive prompt state approval, although I the State reserves the authority to disapprove projects wherever necessary. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The existing permit program generally gives adequate protection to tidal wetlands. In FY 1976 only 1.5 acres of vegetated wetlands and 45 acres (36 acres dredging, 9 acres filling) of open waters were altered by projects permitted by WRA. The Coastal Zone'Unit will participate in the review of projects requiring the dredging or filling of a 1/4 acre or more of wetland because of the signi- ficance of their potential impacts. (See also sections on Dredainq and Filiinq, Recreational Boatina, Marinas and Activities Occurrina in Areas Undergoing Sianificant Shore Erosion.) Program Review As described in Chapter IV, all tidal wetlands will be designated Geographic Areas of Particular Concern, and will be protected by existing programs. In the case of wetland areas which, due to their particular value, warrant special pro- tection, designation as State Critical Areas for preservation will be sought. These efforts will be aided by the Tidal Wetlands Study undertaken by the Coastal Zone Unit, which provides detailed information on wetland vegetation types, their location, extent and value. In addition, the Coastal Zone Unit will: 1. Cooperate with other State and federal agencies involved with review of wetland permits to establish mutually acceptable evaluation criteria and expeditious permit procedures. 2. Cooperate with WRA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the establishment of an information base for all projects undertaken in wetlands areas, so that cumulative impact evaluations can be undertaken. 3. Cooperate with WRA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to incorporate consideration of cumulative and long-term impacts into the existing permit processes. 4. Cooperate with local governments to modify, where necessary, local planning, zoning and regulatory programs to insure consistency with State policies. 5. Encourage, in cooperation with appropriate governmental agencies, the use of buffer zones between upland developments and wetlands. 6. Encourage the preservation of wetlands through the use of easements (and acquisition where appropriate). 7. Cooperate with WRA and appropriate fed.ral agencies on the development of measures to restore presently degraded wetlands habitats and to ensure the monies received as compensation for L.he filling of State wetlands is used to preserve, restore, or improve wetland areas. 150 8. Cooperate with the State Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to evaluate the effectiveness of the Open Marsh Water Management method of mosquito control in the marshes of the lower Eastern Shore of Maryland. AUTHORITIES RELATED TO TIDAL WETLANDS Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Title 9 Regulation Federal Water Pollution Federal Consistency Federal U.S. Control Act Amendments State Water Quality Army Corps of of 1972, Section 404 Certification Engineers Rivers and Harbors Act State: DNR (WRA) of 1899, Section 10 151 .l 'ihc. ACTIVITIES OCCURRING IN SHORELAND AREAS ~' ..... . :*.Ao.. fl.taa,. C. SHORELAND AREAS The land areas of greatest concern to the Coastal Zone Manaqement Proqram are the shoreland areas adjacent to tidal waters, :iuct, use ot these dreas entail the greatest probability for direct and significant impacts on tidal waters. Uses of these areas have been separated into the following categories: / 1. Activities in Areas Undergoing Significant Shore Erosion 2. Activities in Coastal Tidal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains < 3. Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands 4. Use of Agricultural Lands 5. Use of Forested Lands 6. Channelization (and Small Watershed Projects) 7. Activities Associated with Provision of Sufficient Recreational, open Space and Natural Areas %, 8. Activities Affecting Coastal Historical, Cultural, or Archaeological Resources 9. Shoreland Activities Generally ACTIVITIES IN AREAS UNDERGOING SIGNIFICANT SHORE EROSION . ~Situation Areas undergoing significant shore erosion make up a sizeable portion of Maryland's Coastal Zone. Approximately 140 miles of Maryland's Chesapeake Bay shoreline lose four feet or more every year. Shore erosion is a natural process which contributes to littoral transport of material necessary to maintain beach aresas. However, use of waterfront property may be hindered by high erosion rates, and conversely, activities on the Bay and its shoreline often aggravate shore erosion. Sediments from shore erosion ray cover valuable oyster lands and fill tidal creeks nad inlets. Inappropriate use of shoreline areas may upset natural processes and may even endanger human life and property. On the Atlantic Coast, storm-induced shore erosion has adversely affected the beaches in front of Ocean City and may create a situation that poses a threat to property and human safety in Ocean City. Because of the importance of shore erosion conc'0rn in Maryland and other Coastal states, the 1976 Amendments to the Coastal Zone Management Act included a specific requirement that States, as part of their Coastal Zone Management program, develop "a planning process for (a) assessing the effects of shoreline erosion (however caused) and (b) studying and evaluating ways to control or lessen the imact of such erosion, and to restore areas adversely affected by such erosion. The regulations issued in accordance with the Amendments state that "such a process must include the following elements: (1) A method for assessing the effects of shoreline erosion; (2) Articulation of State policies pertaining to erosion, including policies regarding perferences for non-structural, structural and/or no controls; (3), A method for designating areas for erosion control, mitigation and/or res~toration as areas of particular concern or areas for preservation and restoration if appropriate; (4) Procedures for managing the effects of erobion, including non-structural procedures; and (5) An identification of legal authorities, funding programs and other techniques that can be used to meet management needs." 153 Issues This situation requires that State and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (14) To promote the use of shoreline setbacks and the restriction of development in high risk erosion areas in order to reduce erosion- caused danger to life and Property and to minimize the cost to the public and private sectors. (15) To promote the use of shore erosion control techniques, where necessary, in a manner which provides long-term protection, minimizes adverse effects on natural systems (both biological and physical), and avoids damage to adjacent property owners. The planning, scientific investigations and regulatory actions undertaken to meet shore erosion problems as part of program implementation will address the following issues: - Identification of high-risk erosion areas and development of appropriate management measures for those areas. - Effect of individual structures on wetlands, water quality, and aquatic resources. - Possible aggravation of shore erosion by placement of shore erosion structures on only a portion of a beach. - Cumulative effects of shore erosion control structures and methods on wetlands, water quality, and aquatic resources. - Cumulative impact of shore erosion on the sediment budget of the entire Bay and of localized areas. - Adequacy of shore erosion structures both cumulatively and individually. - Possible aggravation of natural shore erosion by land-based agricultural and conservation practices. - Identification of the role non-structural measures can play in addressing shore erosion problems. Policies 1. The Department of Natural Resources shall: a. Develop and implement a public education program on shore and bank erosion, its causes and effects, the locations where it is a problem, and steps to control it. b. Provide technical assistance to individual property owners, municipalities; and counties having specific shore and bank erosion problems. (Natural Resources Articl- Se tion 8-1002) 154 2. In general, financial assistance for the installation of shore eronion control measures from the Shore Erosion Construction will be available only in cases where existing structures are endangered by severe erosion problems. The distribution of financial assistance from the Shore Erosion Control Construction Loan Fund will be based on the following factors: (1) the cost of the project, (2) the threat to existing structures from shore erosion, (3) the severity of the erosion, (4) the number of property owners affected by the erosion, (5) and the length of the eroding shoreline. The Department of Natural Resources. shall supervise the design and erection on shore erosion protective devices financed by the State Erosion Control Construction Loan Fund and design, or cause to be designed, shore erosion control structures, including vegetative cover, in shore erosion control districts, and on state- owned lands. (Natural Resources Article Sections 8-1002 - 8-1004) 3. In undeveloped shorefront areas that have been identified as high- risk erosion areas the State will not provide funding for the provision of public services (water and sewer services, etc.) unless such provision would result in a significant public benefit. However the State, will provide technical assistance to local governments for the development of programs to reduce the danger to life and property through non-structural measures rather than measures which interfere with on-going natural process'. (Natural Resources Artocle Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-1002, 8-9A02; Governor's Executive Order-0!.01.1978.05 (dated March 8, 1978); President's Executive Order 11988 (dated May 24, 1977); Water Resources Council Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988 (dated February, 1978); HUD Flood Insurance Program Regulations, Section 1910.5) 4. In the development of comprehensive plans and regulations regarding shoreline areas, future development should be directed away from high risk erosion areas, and consideration should be given to reserving such areas for open space purposes through acquisition and other measures. In addition, a setback consisting of a natural buffer shall be required in such areas. The width of these buffers shall be based upon the erosion rate, the anticipated useful life of shoreline buildings, and the geologic, hydrologic, topographic and climatic characteristics of the areas in which they are located. (Natural Resources ARticle, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-1002, 8-9A02, HUD Flood Insurance Program Regulations, Section 1910.5) 5. For the purposes of maintaining the Atlantic Coast beaches of the State and Beach Erosion Control District, the integrity and continuity of the dunal system and assuring adequate maintenance thereof, to provide for shore erosion and sediment control and strom protection, and to minimize structural interference with the littoral dirft of sand and any anchoring vegetation, any land clearing, construction activity, or the construction or placement of permenent structures within the Beach Erosion Control District is prohibited. This prohibition does not apply to any project or activity approved by:the Department and the appropriate soil conserva- tion district specifically for storm control, beach erosion and sediment control, and maintenance projects dcsigned to benefit the Beach Erosion. Control District (Natural Resources Article Section 1105.1) (Please refer to subsection 2, Atlantic Coast Beach Protection and Restoration Measures under Management Procedures for the definition of the Beach Erosion Control District). 155 Because of their possible detrimental effect, shoreline protective structures shall not be approved or recoimnended for approval in the following cases, unless there is no alternative means to achieve a necessary public benefit, the need for which significantly outweighs the potential harm of the proposed project: a. Where marshland will be filled or otherwise destroyed. b. Where surface drainage channels will be filled or occluded. c. Where navigation will be adversely affected. d. Where unique or rare and endangered flora or fauna will be affected. e. Where important historical or archeological sites will be adversely affected. f. Where oyster bars or clam beds in adjacent open waters will be affected. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-102, and 9-306, pending revised wetlands regulations) 7. Shore erosion control measures shall be undertaken in a manner that has the minimum adverse effect upon the ecological, economic, hydrological, aesthetic, historical, and recreational values in the area. (Natural ReSources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-102, 9-202, and 9-306) 8. -Where site conditions permit, the use of a sloping bank stabilized with vegetation, with or without riprap, is encouraged as an economical solution which preserves the natural conditions. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 8-1002 and 9-306) 9. The construction of bulkheads or other shore protection measures shall include only filling necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the structure, and shall be located at the mean high water line, or not further channelward than needed fqr proper tie-back emplacement, or in cases of a steep bank or cliff, no further channelward than needed to obtain a stable slope. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 9-202 and 9-306) 10. Where shore protection is needed and marsh exists in front of an applicant's land, it shall be provided by a structure placed behind the marsh or by a low-level riprap or similar structure placed at the seaward edge of the marsh, so that normal tidal flow into the marsh will be maintained. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-120, and 9-306; pending revised Wetlands regulations) 11. Permits or licenses shall not be granted for protective structures or filling unless adequate provision is made for drainage from inland areas. The construction of bulkheads and other protective structures shall involve only such filling as is necessary for the effective operation of the shore protection work, and shall not be used for the creation of fast land from wetlands unless: 1) the proposed activity is water-dependent, and 2) the filling complies with other wetland policies (see Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands). (Natural Resources Article, Sections 9-102, 9-202, and 9-306) 156 12. Dredging for fill for the efficient operation of shore erosion control work shall be allowed only where 1) access to deposit land source material is not feasible or costs are excessive, and 2) the project is determined not to have an extended or permanently adverse environmental impact. Dredging seaward of an existing bulkhead will alter the graduated bottom depth that helps dissipate wave energy. If dredging is used for fill, adequate compensation may be required by the state for this material. Examples of cases where dredging to obtain backfill material may be permitted are: a. Where a steep bank or cliff exists and the nearshore water depths are shallow, so that trucking-in or barging-in fill material is not feasible. b. Where large trees or buildings prevent trucking-in fill material. In both situations, however, if grading is to be done, trucking-in fill material usually becomes feasible. The fact that dedged material may be less expensive than trucked-in fill is not a justification for dredging. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 9-202, and 9-306; pending revised Wetlands regulations; Board of Public Works vs. Lamar Corp., 277A2d427, 202 Md. (1971)) 13. Shore protection measures must satisfy the following criteria regarding quality and performance: a. No material that contains or will create pollutants shall be used in shore erosion control. b. Junk metal, tires, tree stumps or other such material that is not part of an approved interlocking structure shall not be used in any shore protection measures. c. If jetties or groins are used, they must be designed at a minimum length and height to serve the purpose intended; and must be placed only in locations not harmful to navigation or to nearby land. Such work shall be approved only if it does not interfere with public access, create adverse sand transport patterns or adversely disturb the aquatic ecosystem. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-303, 8-1402, 9-102, and 9-103 pending revised Wetland regulations) Impementation Lead Agencies 1. Technical and Fina.cial Assistance Federal: U.S. Awns Corps of Engineerr State: Shore Erosion Control Section - Capital Programs Administration (Participating agencies; Maryland Geological Survey, Water Resources Administration) L-cal: clanning Offices may be involved in Large projects or projects involvi.lg public land. Also, Shore Erosion Cortrol Districts may be formed within a is1~~~~ ~county by adjacent land owners with county consent. L57 2. Regulation of Shore Erosion Control Measures Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Participating agencies: Fish and Wildlife'Service, National Marine Fishery Service, Environmental Protection Agency); HUD Flood Insurance Program State: Water Resources Administration (Participating agencies: Shore Erosion Control Section, Maryland Geological Survey) Local: Local government must adopt regulations concerning high- risk erosion areas consistent with HUD Flood Insurance Regulations and State Flood Control Watershed Management Act of 1976. In addition they may nominate areas with Shore erosion problems to be designated State Critical Areas) Manaiament Procedures As described in more detail below, the State of Maryland follows the following general approach to shore erosion problems: (1) providing technical assistance to shorefront property owners regarding the best approach to cope with. shore erosion problems throughout the coastal zone; (2) giving no-interest loans to property owners whose developments are threatened by shore erosion for the construction of shore erosion measures to the extent allowed by the financial limits of the Shore Erosion Loan Fund; (3) working with local governmental officials and the Corps of Engineers to undertake measures to protect Ocean City and its valuable recreational beach areas from shore erosion; (4) working with local governments to restrict development in undeveloped areas identified as high-risk shore erosion areas; (5) regulating proposed shore eroqion measures to minimize potential adverse impacts; (6) undertaking research on shore erosion problems in order to.be able to more effectively administer its program concerned with shore erosion problems. 1. Technical and Financial Assistance - The Shore Erosion Loan Fund, administered by the Shore Erosion Control Section of the Capital Programs Administration (Department of Natural Resources) provides no-interest loans to community or private property owners in need of shore protection. The fund is maintained by annual appropriations of approximately one million dollars by the General Assembly, and by repayment of loans through a special real estate tax levied by the State on private property-benefitting from shore erosion control projects. The fund establishes priorities based on the rate of erosion, proximity of a structure to the eroding shoreline, the length of the eroding shoreline, and the number of property owners affected by the erosion. At the present level of funding, loans are generally given only in cases in which existingbuildings are threatened by shore erosion. The fund designs and oversees construction and maintenance of the projects it finances. Perhaps more important, the Shore Erosion Control Section provides, upon request, technical assistance to any property owner the most appropriate method of protecting his property from shore erosion. 158 2. Atlantic Coast Beach Protection and Restoration Measures - In order to maintain the State's Atlantic Coast Beaches, the State legislature in 1975 passed legislation creating an Atlantic Coast Beach Erosion Control District consisting of that land along the State's Atlantic Coastline between the State's borders with Dclaware and Virginia and bordered inland by a line which coincides, more or less, with the west cr-st of the c'xisting natural dune on Assateaque Island, and in Ocean City, is a mutually approved line to be known as the State-Ocean City building limit line, the exact location of which was defined through regulations by the Department of Natural Resources and surveying, plotting, and recording it. East of the line all construction is prohibited except for storm control, beach erosion, and sediment control projects and activities approved by the Department of Natural Resources and the local goil conservation district. in cases where the prohibition of building east of the line would constitute an unconstitutional take of property, the State purchases the property rights involved. Because of the value of Ocean City beaches as a recreational resource and as protection to life and property in Ocean City, the State has had a continuing interest in i.aintaining their integrity. After the March 1l'62 storm that hit Ocean City over five successive tides and removed much of the beach area, the State work-d with the Corps of Engineers and Ocean City to rebuild the beach on_ restore a line at Ocean City. Over the past few years, the State has supplied funds to Ocean City to install groins in an attempt to maintain the beach. Since the beach area has still been damaged by storms the State in conjunction with Ocean City and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers is seeking a longer-term solution to the problem of maintaining Ocean City's beach. it is actively pursuing a beach replacement project to be undertaken by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in accordance with PL 84-826 and related laws. included as part of the project will be analysis of its potential impacts on Assateague Is land and the development of measures to mitigate such impacts, including possible alternatives to the jetties for the Ocean City inlet. 3. Regulation of Activities Occurring in Areas Undergoing Significant Shore Erosion - The Water Resources Administration is responsible for state assistance and oversight of local government efforts to meet the requirements of the HUD Flood insurance Program. In addition, the Water Resources Administration is responsible for administering the Flood Control '- Watershed Management Act of 1976 which requires local governments to develop watershed management prog--ams which are consistent with the States watershed permit program and HUD Flood Insurance regulations. The regulation adopted by local government to meettthe requirement of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1976 will thus include shoreline setbacks and buffer area requirements for areas designated as high risk erosion areas. Full implementation of these regulations is dependent upon completion of the detailed delineation of the- boundary of the 100-year flood plain. Table 111-3 gives the completion dates for such delineation in each coastal county. Section 1910.5 of the HUD Regulations requires future developmient be directed away from high risk erosion areas and that shoreline setbacks be established in such areas. 159 4. Designation of Shore Erosion Hazard Areas as State Critical Areas - As described in more detail in Chapter IV on Geographical Areas of Particular Concern, the State Land Use Act of 1974 provides that shore erosion hazard areas can be designated as State Critical Areas. Such designation will include the develoiment of nmnaniomemnt plilns to .1ihetr': I:ll, :;]lcl,. ,',,,: i,,, problem in the area. Once designated, such areas will also become Geoqraplhic Areas of Particular Concern. If the analysis of shore erosion problems undertaken as part of the Coastal Zone Management Program's implementation efforts indicates the need for additional attention to shore erosion problems in certain high-risk erosion areas, the Coastal Zone Unit will nominate such areas for designation as State Critical Areas. 5. Regulation of Shore Erosion Control Measures - All shore erosion structures are regulated by Corps of Engineers Section 10 permits and State Wetlands licenses or permits. These agencies review the proposed structures for effects on wetlands, water quality, and aquatic life, adjacent property, and navigation. Under State law, property owners may undertake measures to protect their land from shore erosion and to reclaim fastland that they can prove has been lost because of shore erosion since 1972. This right will be recognized in the administration of the above policies regarding the location and construction of shore erosion control measures. Those policies are the criteria presently utilized by the Wetlands Section of the Water Resources Administration in permit decisions on applications for shore erosion control measures. The Water Resources Administration is formalizing them into regulations. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit reviews all state wetlands permits and license applications, including those for shore erosion structures, for consistency with Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. The Coastal Zone Unit will review all developments proposed for shoreline areas which have an erosion rate of 4 ft/yr or greater,, to insure that the erosion hazard has been met adequately by use of a setback or other shore erosion control method. Program Review Technical Assistance: The Coastal Zone Unit will assist ongoing efforts to provide technical assistance to communities and private property owners. One such effort has been the development of a manual on shore erosion measures, produced cooperatively by the Coastal Zone Unit, other units of the Department of Natural Resources, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.So Army Corps of Engineers, and the Chesapeake Research Consortium. 160 Regulation of Activities Occurring in Areas undergoing Significant Shore Erosion: The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Flood Insurance regulations require coastal conmmunities to initiate shoreline setback regulations or to undertake other appropriate shore erosion measures to minimize the danger to human life and property from shore erosion. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local coimmunities and with the Water Resources Administration (the State agency responsible for administration of the flood insurance program) to develop management programs that will meet the HUD requirements. The CZX unit will also assist local governments who wish to strengthen management efforts in areas suffering from severe erosion, by requesting they be designated State Critical Areas and Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. Atlantic Coast Beach Protection and Restoration: The Coastal Zone Unit has been assigned the lead role within the Department rnf Natural Resources for working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and ocean City to develop a long-range solution to the problem of maintaining the integrity of Ocean City's beach. Research on Shore Erosinn Problems: Research has been and will continue to be conducted assessing the effects of shore erosion of Maryland's coastline in order to improve the State's approach to shore erosion problems. The following projects have been undertaken as part of the Coastal Zone Management Program to provide baseline information needed to address shore erosion concerns. The Coastal Zone Unit, in conjunction with the Maryland Geological Survey and the Water Resources Administration has mapped historic shore erosion data and the location of shore erosion structures on U.S.C.S. 7'." quad scale ma~ps, and has tabulated such information by county and water body, in order to provide a regional perspective of the problems of shore erosion protection. Also, the Maryland.-Geological Survey, with Coastal Zone Management support, is undertaking the Chesapeake Bay Earth Science Study which includes a major survey-.of the bottom and near-shore areas of Chesapeake Bay and the developmen't of a sediment budget of the Bay. The results of this study should indicate those areas of the Bay where shore erosion causes major sedimentation problems and shoul1d provide basic information needed to better undea-stand shore erosion processes in the Bay. In addition, the Maryland Geological Survey has for a number of years taken detailed shore erosion measurements at points whithin the Chesapeake Bay and along the Atlantic Coast to obtain information on yearly variations of shore erosion correlated with storms and other events that may contribute to shore erosion. This information can be used to identify areas having significant shore erosion problems. Additional infc--mation on such areas can be obtained from the U.S. Army corps of Engineers (Chesapeake Bay Study - Future Conditions Report). These sources of information can serve as a base for research projects to determine accurately the effectiveness and impact of shore erosion protection (structural and non-structural) in different areas along Maryland's coastline. Funding is presently being sought from the Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Bay Research Proqram to undertake furtl ,'t t,'.mS '(t-h, ['.1 I it�1.sl Iy regarding the effectiveness and environmental impacts of shore erosion structures. both inAiviA,,l .-. ,_ . As part of the State's first year program implementation effort, the Coastal Zone Unit will ensure the funding of and actively participate in further assessment of shore erosion problems in Maryland and in the development of management procedures to address them. This assessment will include the identification of high-risk erosion areas, And the determination of appropriate management techniques including setbacks and buffer areas. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO ACTIVITIES IN AREAS UNDERGOING SIGNIFICANT SHORE EROSION Statutory Authority Controlling Mechanism Agency Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Title 9 Regulation Rivers and Harbors Act Federal Consistency/State Federal: U.S. of 1899, Section 10 Water Quality Certification Corps of Engineers State: DNR (WRA) Shore Erosion Control Program Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Sections 8-1101 Funding et seq. HUD Flood Insurance Local Implementation with DNR (WRA) Program State Overview State Critical Areas Program State Standards for Local DSP Art. 88C, Section 2(b)(3) Implementation Flood Control and Watershed State Standards for Local DNR (NRA) Management Aet of 1976 Implementation Att. MR, Section 8-9AQ1 et seq. '_(,2 ACTIVITIES IN COASTAL TIDAL AND NON-TIDAL FLOOD PLAINS Situation The danger to life and property associated with flooding in Maryland's coastal counties is a major concern to Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. Millions of dollars of damage to public and private property was caused on Maryland's oceanfront by a major storm on Easter 1962. Tropical storm Agnes in 1972 killed 17 people, and inflicted more than $110 million worth of damage on land and $134 million damage to fishing and related industries on Chesapeake Bay. Hurricane Hazel in 1954 and a similar but more severe storm in 1933 inflicted major damage on Maryland's coastal areas including- tidal flood plains on the Eastern Shore. The impact of such storms is magnified by building on and development of floodplains, which may increase the magnitude and freauencv of serious flooding problems. Such development may also adversely affect valuable biological resources found in flood plain areas. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (13) To give priority to non-structural management techniques for controllin tidal and riverine flood hazards, includigthe use of flood Plains for o~n space uses such as agriculture, forestry, wildlife habitat and recreain in order to lessen the danger to life and property, and to minimize adverse effects on biological resources and water crualitv. Planning and regulatory procedures, including necessary inventories and analyses, must determine whether a proposed project will: - 'ake place in a tidal or non-tidal flood plain. - Cause i.ncreased flooding upstream or downstream. - Create or aggravate danger to life or property. - Cause aiverse impacts on water quality. -Cause adverse imoacts on the biological resources of coastal tidal and non-:idal flood plains. 163 Policies 1. Projects in coastal tidal and non-tidal flood plains which would create additional flooding upstream or downstream, or which would have an adverse impact upon water quality or other environmental factors, are contrary to state policy. (Natural Resources Article, Sctions 1-302:, ]1-{0, 8-')AO.!; pending revised watershed permit regulations) 2. The alteration of the cross-section of any non-tidal stream or body of water, including the 100-year flood plain, is, in general, contrary to state policy. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-801, 8-803; pending revised watershed permit regulations) 3. In general, construction of residential, industrial, comercial buildings or other structures will not be permitted within the 100-year flood plain of any non-tidal stream of body of water. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-801, 8-803; pending revised watershed permit regulations) 4. Before construction of any project planned or financed by the State, the Department of Natural Resources shall determine whether the project creates surface water runoff which may cause or add to flooding hazards on-site or downstream. Department of Natural Resources will take into consideration natural conditions, existing storm drainage, future development of the watershed and flood control-structures. If the Department determines that any flooding hazard will be created by a project, and that the hazard cannot be eliminated by natural features, the Department shall require storm water management and/or retention measures to be included in the project. Such projects shall also meet the requirements of the Flood Control Watershed Management Act. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-9H01 et seq. 8-905, 8-9A06) 5. Dredging channels is generally the least preferable means of accomplishing stormwater management and Vood control.. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-303, 8-1101; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy Nov. 1977) 6. In the development and implementation of flood plain management programs, including the adoption of rules and regulations by local governments to meet the requirements of HMUD flood insurance regulations and the Flood Control Watershed Management Act of 1976 (Section 8-9AOl et seq.): all new or expanded developments (residential, commercial, and industrial) in a 100-year tidal flood plain shall be restricted to minimize danger to life and property, to prevent increased flooding, and to insure against adverse effects on water quality biological resources, or other environmental factors. Decisions regarding whether an activity will be allowed in the 100-year tidal flood plain will be based on the following factors: 164 a. The availability of alternate locations for the activity. b. The permanence of the activity. c. The effect of the activity on planned development of the area adjacent to it. d. Whether good husbandry practices common to normal and efficient agricultural production will be followed. e. Whether adequate drainage will be provided f. Whether support systems for the activity, such as water and sewerage facilities, road, and other utilities, will be adequately flood-proofed. g. Whether the activity will increase the surface water elevation of the 100-year flood event. h. Whether all permanent structures associated with the activity will bL flood-proofed to withstand a 100-year flood. i. Other relevant factors. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 8-9A02, 8-9A05) 6. The Department of Natural Resources and local units of government shall coordinate activities undertaken to meet the provisions of Flood Control/ Watershed Management Act (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-9A01 et seq.) with those undertaken to meet the requirements of all related programs including the national flood insurance program, the sediment control program, and the State water pollution control and abatement programs. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-9A05) 7. The Department of Natural Resources shall provide technical assistance to subdivisions in the interpretation of flood information and the drafting of local regulatory measures for flood control and watershed management. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-9A04) Implementation Lead Agencies: Water Resources Administration-and Local Governments Management Procedures There are four programs in the State that delineate coastal tidal and non-tidal flood plains and regulate activities occurring in themL the Federal HUD Flood Insurance Program; the State Watershed Permit Program (construction or objection of the 100-year riverine flood plain), Flood Control Measures in the State Construction Projects Act, and the Flood Control and Watershed Management Act of 1976. 165 The Water Resources Administration of the Department of Natural Resources helps local governments meet the requirements of the federal HUD Flood insurance Program, which requires local governments to enforce regulations on flood plain development in exchange for guaranteeing flood insurance to communities meeting the program's requirements. The Water Resources Administration also administers a permit program for all projects proposed in the 100-year riverine flood plain. No project is alli ed which would create additional flooding upstream or downstream, or which would have an adverse impact on water quality. Moreover, it is stated in the program'Is regulations that the filling or reduction of flood plains or cross sections of non-tidal streams and surface water is considered to be generally against the State's interest. -The regulations require that all permit applications for such operations must be accom~panied by a hydraulic calculation of the effects of such a reduction or filling, as well as the expected benefits. The regulations for this permit program, called the watershed permits program, have been revised to document explicitly the criteria for permit decisions. These criteria are reflected in the policies noted above. in addition, in accordance with the Flood Control Measures in State Construction Projec~ts Act of 197o, the Water Resources Administration reviews all1 projects constructed or financed by the State, to insure that they create no surface water run-off which may cause or add to on-site or downstream flooding hazards. Finally, the Flood Control watershed management Act of 1976 establishes a program of comprehensive management of 100-year tidal and non-tidal plains, for the purposes of "preventing and alleviating flood threats to life and health, reducing private and public economic losses, and to the extent possible, pre- serving of the biological values associated with their land and water resources". Areas of flood-hazard concern will be defined by the Department of Natural Resources. Rules and regulations on activities within such areas are to be adopted by local governments, based on the recommendation of the Department and subject to its approval in the case of interjurisdictional watersheds. Implementation of this Act will be coordinated with implementation of the HUD Flood Insurance Act and other related programs to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure compatability between the two programs.. in delineation of the 100-year flood plains, priority has been given to riverine flood plains where the danger from flooding is greater than in other areas. increased attention is now being given to coastal flood plains and the development of management plans that address the concerns associated with such areas which may differ from those associa~ted with riverinie floodplains. Table 111-3 gives the completion dates for the detailed delineation of the boundaries of the 100-year flood plain both riverine and tidal in each coastal county in conjunction with the HUD flood insurance program. These boundaries will provide the basis for full implementation of flood control- watershed management programs by local governments as well as more effective administration of State floodplain management efforts. in addition, the Water Resources Administration is in the process of developing watershed models for selected tributaries which will provide additional information on the impacts of future development on flooding and other watershed characteristics. 166 Table III-3 Completion Dates for the Delineation of 100-Year Flood Plains in Coastal Counties County Completion Date Anne Arundel July 1979 Baltimore Completed Baltimore City Completed Calvert Dec. 1980 Caroline Completed Cecil Oct. 1980 Charles Dec. 1980 Dorchester July 1979 Harford Oct. 1980 Kent Dec. 1980 Prince George's Completed Queen Anne's Dec. 1980 St. Mary's Sept. 1978 Somerset Oct. 1980 Talbot Dec. 1980 Wicomico Dec. 1980 Worcester Completed 167 coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The existing procedure for permit reviews adequately addresses the firsta four issues. Thus, the Coastal Zone Unit's involvement in review of projectsW applying for watershed permits will be directed to ensuring that sufficient consideration is given to protection of the biological values of flood plains. The Coastal Zone Unit will be notified of all projects requiring watershed management permits which involve lan~dscaping or filling of more than 1 acre, or which require any construction in the flood plain. Program -Review Procedure The Coastal Zone Unit will assist the Water Resources Administration and local governments in carrying out the provisions of the Flood Control and Watershed Management Act of 1976, by providing assistance in the delineation of coastal flood plains, the identification of biological values in coastal flood plains, and the development of rules and regulations to meet the Act's requirements. Part of their effort will involve the development of a model control floodplain ordinance to be used by local governmnents in meeting the requirements of the Flood Control-Watershed Management Act. Two pilot projects are underway which can be models for similar projects in other coastal areas. A cooperative effort is underway among the Coastal Zone Unit, the Water Resources Administration, Dorchester County and' the HUD Flood Insurance Program to delineate Dorchester County's coastal flood plain and to develop regulations for activities in`.it. This cooperative method and its results should be applicable to other counties,. particularly low-lying Eastern Shore Counties. A second pilot project is a cooperative effort among the Coastal Zone Unit, the Water Resources Administration, and Wicomico County, to develop a watershed management program on Wicomico River tributaries which meet the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Flood Control- Watershed Management Act of 1976, and the 208 Water Quality Program. it is expected that the technical approach and management methods developed will be applicable to other low-lying watersheds on the Eastern Shore, where watershed management concerns other than flooding per se are dominant. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO COASTAL TIDAL AND NON-TIDAL FLOOD PLAINS . - Statutory Authority Management Techniques Agency Construction in or obstruction Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) of free flowing rivers and Regulation non-tidal waters including the 100-year flood plain Art. NR, Section 8-803 Flood Control and Watershed State Standards for Local DNR (WRA) Management Act of 1976 Implementation Art. NR, Section 8-9A01 et seg. Flood Control Measures in State Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Construction Projects Regulation Art. NR, Section 8-905 Federal Flood Insurance Program Federal Consistency Federal: U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Develop- ment State: DNR (WRA) Federal Water Pollution Control Federal Consistency Federal: U.S. Act Amendments of 1972, Section State Water Quality Army Corps of 404 Rivers and Harbors Act of Certification Engineers 1899, Section 10 State: DNR (WRA) 169 ACTIVITIES IN NON-TIDAL WETLANDS Situation Non-tidal wetlands play an integral role in coastal ecosystems, providing valuable wildlife habitat and food, particularly to waterfowl and fur-bearing animals. Many types of rare or unique plant species are found in these wetlands. They also play an important hydrologic role as buffers, by moderating the effects of storm water run-off, by providing aquifer recharge areas, and by filtering out sediments and pollutants contained irn these waters. Because of their natural value, non-tidal wetlands are of significant concern to coastal zone management. Drainage projects for increased agricultural production, filling for creation of construction sites for residences and other urban projects, filling for road, bridge, or utility crossings, and upland projects which modify the volume, velocity and quality of runoff, are all examples of alterations which may destroy the natural value of non-tidal wetlands. All non-tidal wetlands are presently under federal (Army Corps of Engineers) or State (Water Resources Adm~inistration) jurisdiction. Regulations alone, however, fall short of a comprehensive management program preserving the integrity of these areas, and more information is needed to establish this more comprehensive program. Wetland areas that are within the 100-year flood plains of rivers are regulated both by the state watershed permit and by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10/404 permit systems. General permits have been issued by the Corps of Engineers for use of wetlands above the "headwaters" of a stream (the point where the median flow is less than five cubic feet/sec). Projects9 involving the filling of the uphill fringe of the flood plains of streams that drain less than 400 acres are exempt from state watershed permits. Wetlands associated with water bodies of less than ten acres, which are not part of a tributary system, are also subject only to the requirements of the Corps of Engineers' general permits. it is not known whether these areas not subject to individual-.permit requirements constitute a significant portion of the state's non-tidal wetlands, and thus it is not known whether they play an important ecosystem role. An inventory of information, on location, size, vegetation types, and wildlife habitat values is not generally available to permit administrators in areas that are subject to individual permit requirements. Similarly, this information is not av ailable for use by local governments in their programs of watershed management aid'-f-lo-od control planning. Lack of inventories and maps may lead to confusion among ldkhd owners, administrators, and enforcement of ficers regarding where permits are actually required. However, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is initiating an effort to delineate the areas under their authority beginning on the Eastern Shore. Il 170 Issues This situation necessitates that state and local quvernments coo'rdinati. their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperdtion and consistency, toward the following goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of signifficant resource value-areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance -.such as non- tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas of migratory birds. (13) Togive priority to non-structural managment techniques for controlling tidal and riverine flood hazards, including the use of flood plains for open space uses such as agriculture, forestry, wildlife habitat and recreation, in order to lessen the danger to life and property, and to minimize adverse effects on. biological resources and water quality. (27) To promote the maintenance of natural buffers along, and natural drainage ways feeding to, coastal tributaries and estuarine waters, to minimize adverse environmental effects of coastal developments and activities. Investigations and regulatory procedures must consider whether or not a proposed action: - Involves an area that is of significant value for general wildlife habitat, food chain production, nesting, spawning, rearing, or resting sites for aquatic and land species (particularly for migratory birds, anadromous fish, and endangered species). - Adversely affects such an area in any way. Destroys or degrades the hydrologic role of a wetland area mitigating flood and storm water impacts, maintaining the integrity of other wetlands in the watershed, or serving as a recharge area. - Can feasibly and practically be undertaken elsewhere, in a non-wetland area. - Is designed to prevent avoidable destruction of wetlands and to minimize unavoidable destruction. - Involves hazardous or toxic wastes or fill material. - Contributes significantly to a public benefit (such as maintenance of a strong agricultural community, or provision o-f necessary pipeline and public utility corridors) 171 Policies 1. The alteration of the cross section of any non-tidal stream or body of water, including the 100-year flood plain is, in general, contrary to state policy. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-801, 8-803; pending revised DNR watershed permit regulations) 2. It is in the public interest to preserve the biological values of the land and water resources of the 100-year flood plain. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-801, 8-9A02) 3. As part of the State flood management ptogram, the Department of Natural Resources and local governments shall undertake cooperative efforts to provide for comprehensive watershed management and for the biological and environmental quality of the watersheds of the State. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 8-801 and 8-9A02) 4. The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for the conservation and management of the state's wildlife, wildlife resources, fish, fish resources, and aquatic life including (1) the acquisition of areas as wildlife management areas, wildlife refuges, and fish refuges that are necessary to protect, propagate or manage fish or wildlife, (2) the aquisition of non-tidal wetland areas which warrant preservation, (3) the undertaking of fish restoration projects in accordance with PL81-681 (The Dingell-Johnson Act) and wildlife restoration projects in accordance with PL75-415 (The Pittman- Robertson Act); and (4) the undertaking, in conjunction with other state agencies, of programs necessary for the conservation and protection of non- game threatened or endangered wildlife, plants, and fish, including the acquisition of land or aquatic habitat or interests therein. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 4-202, 4-405, 4-406, 4-2A06, 5-207, 5-801, 5-805, 5-902, 10-202, 10-208 10-209, 10-801, 10-805, 10-2A06) 5. The filling and dredging of non-tidal wetland areas of biological and/or hydrological value within the 100-year flood plain will not be permitted, unless no feasible alternative for accomplishing a necessary public good exists and measures are taken to minimize adverse environmental impacts. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303 8-801. and 8-803; pending revised watershed permit regulations) 6. All biologically and hydrologically significant non-tidal wetland areas should be given high priority for designation as Areas of Critical State Concern for conservation or preservation. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302 and 1-303; Article BBC Section 2(b)(3Y) 7. Dredging channels is generally the least preferable means of accomplishing storm water and flood control management. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-803, and 8-1101; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy, Nov. 1977) 172 8. Agricitural drainage shall be permitted only to the extent it provides substantial agricultural benefits, and shall be carried out in ways which minimize environmental damage. Each project must meet the following requirements: - There must be a demonstrated need for the project. - The lower end of the system must be as far upstream as possible. - Good conservation practices must be used during construction. -Sediment transport must be minimized through sound conservation practices. - Construction must not occur during spawning time when such restriction is deemed inappropriate. - Provisions must be made for continued maintenance. - Environmental impacts must be considered. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-304, 8-801, 8-803, 8-1402, 8-1405; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy, Nov. 1977) The following policies guide the administration of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10/404 permit program and further define what activities are appropriate for non-tidal wetland areas in Maryland. 9. Proposed activities and development involving the discharge of dredged or fill material in or affecting the nation's waters and wetlands shall: a. Involve the minimum possible amount of discharge into wetlands or the waters of the United States with any amount of discharge avoided wherever possible. b.- Avoid preventable significant damage to fish, ~iildlife and/or other environmental resources. c. Avoid jeopardizing the continued existence of threatened or endangered species, or destroying or modifying the habitat of those species determined to be critical in accordance with the federal Endangered Species Act. d. Avoid disruptions of fish spawning and nursery areas. Dredging and disposal operations should be scheduled to avoid interference with fish spawning cycles and. tq minimize interference with migration patterns and routes. 173 e. Avoid restricting or impeding the movement of aquatic species indigenous to the waters, hampering the passage of normal or expected high flows, or causing the relocation of the waters (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to impound waters). If the discharge creates an impoundment water, adverse impacts on the aquatic system caused by the accelerated passage of water and/or the restriction of its flow must be minimized. Discharges into breeding and nesting areas for migratory waterfowl must be avoided. f. Avoid (individually or cumulatively with other developments on a water- way or group of related waterways) unnecessarily destroying, damaging, or degrading fish, wildlife, naturally functioning aquatic and wetland ecosystems and/or the dependent human satisfaction. ((40 CFR 230.5(b)) 40 FR 41295-6 September 5, 1975; 40 FR 55813-17 December 1, 1975; (33 CFR 323.4(b)) 42 FR 37146 July 14, 1977) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Participating Agencies: EPA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service) State: WRA (Participating Agencies: Wildlife and Fisheries Administrations) Management Procedures Regulation of construction within non-tidal wetlands fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Water Resources Administration. Non-tidal wetlands in Maryland are under the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers' federal permit systems governing the discharge of dredged and fill material pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. From a national perspective, the degradation or destruction of aquatic resources by filling operations is considered the most severe adverse environmental impact of activities subject to permit by Section 404. The Corps of Engineers and the federal agencies involved in review of 404 permits have developed complete regulations in the issuance and review of permits (40 FR 55810, December 1, 1975; 40 CFR 231, 40 FR 41292, September 5, 1975; 33 CFR 323, 42 FR 37144, July 19, 1977). While all wetlands fall within the Section 404 permit system, the Corps of Engineers has issued a nationwide permit for projects in wetlands that are associated with streams above the headwaters (i.e., above that point where the average flow is less than five cubic feet per second), and for those projects associated with bodies of water of ten acres surface area or less. In Maryland, the point where the average flow is less than five cubic feet per second has been determined to be equivalent to the point at which the stream's drainage area is less than 5 sq. miles. Under this nationwide permit, projects must meet the following criteria: 174 1. No discharge of dredged or fill' material will destroy a threatened or endangered species as identified under the Endange~red Species Act, or endanger the critical habitat of such species. 2. All discharge will consist of suitable material free from. toxic pollutants in other than trace quantities. 3. The fill created by the discharge will be properly maintained to prevent erosion and other non-point sources of pollution. 4. The discharge will not occur in a component of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, or in a component of the Maryland Scenic Rivers System. Individual permits can be required in these areas presently subject to general permit, upon the request of the Administrator of EPA. The Corps may also issue general permits for minor and temporary work including the following activities: Dredged or fill material placed as backfill or bedding for utility line crossings (provided there is no change in construction bottom contours). The repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable fill, or of any currently serviceable fill discharged prior to the requirement for authorization. Such work must not be located near a public water' supply intake or occur in a shellfish area, or disrupt the movement of indigenous species * ~~~of aquatic life. All other activities involving fill will be subject to individual permit from the Corps of Engineers with review by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Environmental Protection Agency. A water quality certification from the state will also be necessary, whose review procedure will be essentially the same as that associated with Corps permits for tidal wetlands (see the Section Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands) Permits are required from the State Water Resources Administration for any work which alters the cross section of any non-tidal stream or other body of water. One purpose for this permit is to prevent alterations of flood plains from increasing flood hazards .;pstream or downstream. The permit process does, in addition, provide the opportunity to review proposed projects for impacts in water quality, wildlife habitat, and other biological resources. Non-tidal wetlands not associated with riverine flood plains are not covered by this permit system. Activities not requiring permits include the following. 1. Agricultural drainage systems with limited drainage areas. 2. Placement of land fill along the uphill fringe of flood plains of small non-tidal streams with drainage areas of less than 400 acres, provided that adequate measures are taken to avoid adverse impacts on water quality. 3. Storm drainage systems draining less than 400 acres, built by or under permit from a county or city which drain small areas. other agencies of DNR and of other departments may participate in the review of these permits. The Wildlife Adminstration, and the Fisheries Administration are routinely involved. As noted in the section on Activities in 'idal and Non-Tidal Flood Plains, the regulations for this permit program are being revised to document explicitly the criteria used to make permit decisions. These criteria are reflected in the policies noted above. .Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit will be involved in the regulatory process for activities involving alteration of non-tidal wetlands (in accordance with the project evaluation procedures described in Chapter I in the case of all projects in areas of value identified in the Upland Natural Areas Study, or projects in which more than � acre of land is proposed for alteration. Proposed projects will be reviewed for possible conflicts with the Coastal Zone management Program? particularly for possible adverse impacts on areas of high biological values. CZU will provide data on the impact to biological resources of proposed activities, and will place the value of particular non-tidal wetlands in a statewide perspective. Whenever it appears that substantial impact to any significant non-tidal wetlands area may occur, a full project evaluation will be undertaken to make recommendations to the Secretary of Natural Resources on appropriate State action and on the federal consistency decision on Section 404 permits involved. Projects involving less than 1/4 acre are considered not likely to have significant impacts by themselves unless they involve substantial permanent alteration or other special consequences. Program Review Cumulative Impact: CZU, in conjunction with the corps of Engineers and the Water Resources Administration, will ensure that all permit data is entered into appropriate data systems (such as the RAMS data base and the WRA Query system) and made available to Czu. CZU will initiate studies to determine the rate at which non-tidal wetlands are lost, and the impact of various developmental activities on the viability of these areas. The results of such studies will iridicate whether modifications are needed for existing regulation programs to adequately pr~otect non-tidal wetlands 176 State Critical Areas: Areas of significant resource value will be identified and suggested to counties as state critical areas for conservation or preservation. Data Base: CZU will assemble all information presently available on non-tidal wetlands in Maryland's coastal zone and provide it to all permit administrators. In addition, CZU will work with other governmental agencies to acquire additional information needed on the nature, location, and extent of non-tidal wetlands in Maryland. Permit Coordination: In cooperation with the Water Resources Administration, State regulatory mechanisms will be examined and revised where necessary to enable the state to accept delegation of the Corps of Engineers permit responsibility, if apprnpriate changes are made in federal law and regulations. In lieu of delegation, refinement of existing Memoranda of Agreement with the U,S. Army Corps of Engineers will be undertaken to insure close coordination of State and Federal efforts regarding non-tidal wetlands. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO NON-TIDAL WETLANDS Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency State Critical Areas Program State Standards for Local DSP Art. 88C, Section 2(b) (3) Implementation Construction in or obstruction Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) of free-flowing rivers on non- Regulation tidal waters including the 100- year flood plain Art. NR, Section 8-803 Flood Control and Watershed State Standards for Local DNR (WRA) Management Act of 1976 Implementation Art. NR, Sections 8-9A04 et seq. Non-Game and Endangered Species Direct State. Planning and DNR (MWA, CAP) Conservation Act Regulation/Habitat Art. NR, Section 10-2A05 et seg. Acq uisition Federal Water Pollution Control Federal Consistency/State Federal: U.S. Act Amendments of 1972 Water Quality Army Corps of Section 404 Certification Engineers State: DNR (WRA) _77 USE OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS Situation Much of Maryland's coastal zone is rural. In Maryland's coastal counties, over one million acres of land, divided among more than 10,000 farms, are committed to agricultural uses. Agriculture is a major contributor to the coastal economy, as well as to the coastal character and scenic beauty. Increasing suburbanization and demand for second home development, however, is consuming much of Maryland's productive agricultural land. Conflicts have arisen between agricultural activities and coastal activities dependent on the aquatic environment. Farming has been identified as a potential contributor to non-point source pollution in several studies, including the River Basin Plans developed by WRA in accordance with 1972 Water Pollution Control Act Amendments. Conflicts also arise between farmers wishing to maintain or increase the drainage of agricultural land through stream channelization, and groups representing fish and wildlife interests. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to fully implement existing agricultural preservation programs, to develop accurate and adequate information on environmental impacts of agricultural activities, and to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. (6) To promote the protection and wise management of productive coastal agricultural and forested areas through cooperation with programs of the local Soil Conservation Districts, the Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation the Maryland Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Forest Service, the Demartment of State Planning and the Maryland Environmental Trust. (22) T6 promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (34) To undertake studies and inventories, where needed, to provide the most complete and accurate information base possible for all levels of government and the public to use in management decisions and activities affecting coastal resources. (40) To ensure the review of state and ocal and those of the local Soil Conservation Districts, in order to identify possible modifications needed to facilitate achievement o--c-astal zone management goals, objectives, and policies. Investigations and regulatory proc=3ures must consider: - Whether or not a proposed facility or development will affect agricultural land in production. - What impact, if any, agricultural practics such as erosion control measures and the use of agricultural chemicals, will have on water quality and aquatic life. 178 -The impact of land use plans and regulations on the viability of existing farms. . olicies 1. It is State policy to preserve agricultural land and forest land in order to provide sources of agricultural products for the citizens of the state, to control the urban expansion which is consuming agricultural land and woodland of the State, to curb the spread of urban blight and deterioration, and to protect agricultural land and woodland as open space land. A principal preservation mechanism shall be the establishment of agricultural districts and the acquisition of agricultural land preservation easements. (Agriculture Article, Section 2-501 et seq.) 2. It is State Policy to provide for the conservation of the soil, water and related resources, and for the control and prevention of soil erosion, in order to preserve natural resources, control floods, to prevent impairment of dams and reservoirs, to assist in maintaining the navigability of rivers. and harbors, to preserve wildlife, to protect the tax base, the public lands, and the health, safety and general welfare of the pezople of the State, and to enhance their living environment. (Agriculture Article, Section 8-102(d))' 3. it is State policy that to conserve soil resources and to control and prevent soil erosion, it is necessary that land-use practices contributing to soil waste and soil erosion be discouraged and discontinued. Appropriate, scil- conserving, land-use practices should be adopted and carried out. (Agriculture, Article, Section 8-102(c)) . 4. it is State policy that a soil conservation district constitutes a political subdivision of the State and that it exercises public powers. In carrying out the responsibilities of a district, district supervisors are authorized to: a. Conduct surveys, investigations, and research relating to the character of soil erosion, the preventive and control measures needed; disseminate information concerning preventive and control measures; conduct soil conservation and soil erosion control demonstration projects within the district, and provide financial and other assistance to land owners for erosion control and prevention operations. b. Carry out preventive and control measures within the district, including engineering operations, cultivation methods, and growing of vegetation, changes in land use, and similar measures on State owned or controlled land, with the cooperation of the agency administering and having jurisdiction over them, or any other land within the district, with'the cooperation of the owner. C. Develop comprehensive plans for conserving soil resources and controlling and preventing soil erosi-on within the district, including the specification of engineering operations, cultivation methods, the growing of vegetation, cropping programs, tillage practices, and changes in land use; and encourage their adoption by land owners within the district. 179 d. Approve or d'sapprove plans for clearing, grading, transportaticn, or otherwise distributing soil pursuant to Section 8-1104(a) of the Natural Resources Article, and to adopt general criteria and specific written recommendations concerning the control of erosion and siltation of pollution assocated with these activities. e. Adopt rules and regulations governing land use in the district in order to conserve soil and prevent and control soil erosion. Such regulations may require necessary engineering operations, including the construction of terraces and other necessary structures; observance of particular methods of cultivation such as contour cultivating and planting, planting, of water-conserving and erosion-preventing plants, trees, and grasses; forestation and reforestation; observation of specific cropping programs and tillage practices; and retirement from cultivation of any highly erosive area on which erosion may not be controlled adequately if it is cultivated. f. Provide for other means, measures, operations, and programs that may assist conservation of soil resources and prevent or control soil erosion in the district, with due regard to the legislative findings set forth in Section 8-102. (Agriculture Article, Sections 8-306 and 8-307) It is State policy that no one may discharge any liquid, gaseous or solid substances in such concentration which. when applied, discharged, or deposited in the waters of the state may exert a poisonous effect detrimental to man or to the propagation, cultivation or conservation of animals, fish or other aquatic life. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1405, Department of Natural Resources Rules and Regulations, Section 08.05.04.01 and .06) 6. It is State policy to set rules and regulations regarding the sale, offer, use, or storage of pesticides (including herbicides) and other articles which constitute a water quality problem, in order to protect public health, safety and welfare and to protect present and future use of the waters for public'water supply, the propagation of fish and other aquatic life and wildlife, recreational purposes, and agricultural, industrial, and other legitimate uses. The Department of Natural Resources shall defer this responsibility to the Department of Agriculture, as long as it regulates these uses adequately. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1405, Department of Natural Resources Rules and Regulations, Section 08.05.04.08; Agriculture Article 5-204 amd5-209) 7. It is State policy that the Water Resources Administration regulate agricul- tural waste discharge in order to prevent the waters of the State from falling below water quality standardsw- (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1413) 1S0 Implementation Lead Agencies State: Department of Agriculture (control of pesticides, agricultural lands preservation) Water Resources Administration (non-designated area 208 efforts, control of toxic substances) Department of State Planning (review of projects for consistency with State policies and programs) Department of Taxation and Assessment (regulation of agricultural land assessment); Maryland Envirohnental Trust (conservation easement 1rogram.) Regional: Regional Planning Council - 208 efforts in Baltimore region Council of Governments - 208 efforts in Washington region Local: Soil conservation districts (development of form conservation plans, regulation of farming practices) Management Procedures Preservation of Agricultural Land: The Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Fou-n-ation of the Department of Agriculture has the authtority to establish agricultural districts :_nd to acquire easements in order to pieserve agricultural land. Through its conservation easement program, the Maryland Environmental Trust has obtained easements on 5,730 acres of which approximately 3,000 acres is agricultural land. In addition, Maryland State Law requires that the assessment of lands (including timberlands) actively devoted to agricultural. use shall be based on that use and not on its value if subdivided. The Department of State Planning takes into consideration the State policy to preserve agricultural land when reviewing residential and other devel- opments for consistency with state plans, programs and policies. In addition the State Department of Agriculture reviews County Water and Sewer Plans for impacts to Agricultural Lands. Conservation of Soil Resources: The District Soil Conservation Supervisors provide overall guidance and support to local groups and individuals for the'purpose of conserving soil and related resources. One of their major responsibilities is to work with individual farmers to develop conservation plans to minimize soil erosion and other adverse impacts on water quality and other environmental factors. Pesticides: All pesticides used within Maryland must be registered with the Maryland Department of Agriculture. In. addition, the Department regulates the use of pesticides by requiring that all businesses engaged in pest control be licensed with the Department before they can use any pesticide. Businesses must employ one or more persons who are certified as to competence by the Department to qualify for licensing and all employees of the business are registered with the Department. Private applicators who use restricted use pesticides muft also be certified by the Department. Point and Non-Point Sources: Water Resources Administration reguires discharge permits for those agricultural activities that result in a definable discharge of waste or waste water to the waters of the state. A definable discharge may be from either a point or non-point source, and must be of such quantity and frequency that it can be identified and related to the source ?.y flow, constituents or other 181 means. Agricultural waste management plans must be submitted to the Water Resources Administration for approval after review by the appropriate District Conservationist. The Water Resources Adminli:stration, Baltimore. R'ktijn.il I'lannino i ('iunt i 1nl the Washington Council of Governments are currently engaged in water quality planning efforts to determine what agricultural activities may be non-point sources of pollution, and to determine the magnitude of that pollution. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Project Evaluation and Program Review - Agriculture in general is considered compatible with the CZMP. Project evaluations will not be dQne on specific agricultural operations or practices, with exception of channelization projects and small watershed projects pursuant to P.L. 566. All project evaluations involving shoreland uses (see Sections Other Shordland Activities, Industrial, Parks, Sewaae Treatment Plants. Activities Occurrina in Tial and Non-TiAl Flood Plains etc.) will consider the impacts of these uses on the viability of existing farms. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will provide technical data and other resources to the 208 planning agencies. CZU will maintain close contact with the Water Resources Administration's Planning Section, the Soil Conservation Districts, and the designated Metropolitan 208 agencies, to prevent duplication of effort. The 208 Water Ouality Management Program. wfien completed will be incorporated as an integral part of the CZMP. The CZU will also continue its involvement in the Delmarva River Basins Study in order to develop a long range plan for agricultural needs on the peninsula. 182 LEGAL AUTHORITY Statutory Authority' Management Technique Agency Ag. Land - Md. Ag. Land State & Local planning and Md. Land Prcsev. Presev. Found. acquisition Found. Ag. Art. Sec. 2-501 to 515 Soil Conservation State Soil Con- Ag. Art. Sec. 8-101 to 310 servation Commit. & local Soil Conserv. Dist. Conservation Easement Program Easement Acquisition DNR (MET) Art. N.R., Sec. 3-203 Ag. Land Assessment Direct State Regulation Dept. of A.sess- Art. 81, Sec. 19 ments & Taxation Md. Pesticide Reg. & Labeling Direct State Regulation Dept. of Ag. Ag. Art., Sec. 5-101 to 211 Water Poll. Control & Abatement Direct State Regulation DNR (WRA) N.R. Art. 8-1413 Water Poll. Cont. Act State, regional & local DNR (WRA), RPC Amends. of 1972, Sec. 208 planning COG, Soil Conserm District State Land Use Act State & Local Planning and DSP review of projects for consistency with State policy & programs Poll. Control & Abatement Direct State Regulation DNR (WRA) Nat. Res. Art., Sec. 8-1405 and 8-1413 187 USE OF FORESTED LANDS Situation The importance of timber products, and the value Of Private avid public forests as natural buffers, wildlife habitat, and recreational areas, necessitate sound management of woodlands. Most of Maryland's 1,535,000 acre coastal forest area is privately owned, and is under the owner's care and management. However, others also influence the uses of private forest lands, such as the forest product industry, recreationists, public agencies, as well as the public interest at large. There are four state forests totalling approximately 20,000 acres in the state's coastal zone: Doncaster State Forest in Charles County, Elk Neck State Forest in Cecil County, Wicomico State Forest in Wicomico County, and Pocomoke State Forest in Worcester County. These forest areas must serve a variety of purposes: timber products, wildlife habitat, watershed protection, and recreational activities such as hiking, camping, hunting, and fishing. Issues State and local agencies must coordinate their activities and regulatory actions with federal government cooperation and consistency to meet the following objective of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (6) To promote the protection and wise manajement oproduct~ive coastal aEricultural and forested areas through cooperation with programs of the local SoilConservationDistricts, the Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation, the Mrland Departmnent of Agricutre, the Maryland Forest Service, the Department of State Planning and the Maryland Environmental Trust. State and local programs and regulatory actions must consider whether or not a proposed forestry practice or proposed non-forestry activity on forested land will: - Have adverse effects on water quality. - Adversely alter the value of the area in providing wildlife habitat, watershed protection, or natural beauty to coastal areas. - Be consistent with comprehensive management practices in the case of State forests. -Be consistent with forestry board guidelines in the case of privately owned forests. 184 O Policies 1. Forests, timberlands, woodlands and soil resources of the state are basic assets and the preservation of these resources is essential. It is the policy of the state to encourage economic management and scientific development of its forests and to conserve and improve soil resources to preserve an adequate source of forest products. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-602, Agricultural Article, Section 2-501) 2. Where the objectives of the state can be achieved through cooperative efforts of private landowners, with the assistance cf the state, it is the policy of the state to encourage and assist the private owernship and management of forest lands. Where private ownership cannot achieve the objectives of the State, it is the state's policy to acquire forested lands as rapidly as the financial resources of the state permit. (NaturalResources Article, Section 5-602) 3. It is state policy to protect woodland areas through the conservation easement program of the Maryland Environmental Trust and State agricultural land preservation efforts which include the establishment of agricultural districts and acquisition of agricultural easemetts. (Natural Resources Article, Section 3-301 et seq., Agricultural Article, Section 2-501, et seq.) 4. It is the state's policy to comprehensively manage state forests in order to provide for the following activities: watershed protection, wildlife protection, hiking and general recreation, natural beauty appreciation, wilderness protection, protection of significant natural, historical or archeological features, and timber harvesting. In undertaking such comprehensive management, the following practices shall be followed: "All timber harvesting activities shall be thoroughly reviewed to minimize adverse environmental effects. Selective cutting shall be practiced in designated natural beauty and recreational areas. Clearcutting, where necessary, shall be modified to protect and improve watershed and wildlife habitat values." b. Practices shall be undertaken to insure the maintenance of healthy populations of animal life. c. carrying capacity limits on recreational uses will be established when needed to protect resources or to maintain the quality of recreational experience. d. All activities are to be undertaken in a-manner which minimizes the potential for water, air or noise pollution, including the use of alternative areas if necessary. e. Protection shall be given priority over development where proposed activities would not adequately protect remaining resources. Natural methods shall'-be favored over artifical protection methods for forests, watersheds, or floodplains. f. Aesthetics will be given full consideration in the planning and implementing of all forest operations. g. Forest management goals and policies will be applied to resolve potential conflicts in the various forest zones. Resolution will entail an examination of the conflicts between alternative uses of a forest area. Consideration will be given to all potential locations of each conflicting use in the forest, and to the possibility of meeting the needs of the conflicting uses in other forests. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-102, 5-207, 5-602; Maryland Forest Service Handbook) 5. The Department of Natural Resources shall establish Forestry Districts to guide the use of private woodlands and forests. The powers and duties of the district board shall include (but not be limited to) efforts to: a. Promote private forestry by assisting landowners in forest management, tree planting, conservation and development of tree crops, and protection'of forests from fires, linsects, and diseases. b. Assist private owners of forest land with advice on construction of flood control measures, seeding and planning of waste slopes, abandoned or eroded lands, and development of wildlife by planting trees, bushes, and shrubs which produce food or cover. c. Enter into agreements with landowners within its county or district for a specific period of years. d. Cooperate with other government agencies to achieve forest conservation, better forest growth and public education on forest conservation and management measures. e. Develop comprehensive forest management plans for conservation of soil resources and for control and prevention of soil erosion within the county or district. f. Promulgate safeguards for proper forest land use, such as those intended to: (i Provide for adequate restocking, after cutting, of trees of desirable species and condition. (ii) Provide for reserving, for growth and subsequent cutting, a sufficient growing stock of thrifty trees-of desirable species to keep the land reasonably productive. (iii) Prevent' clear-cutting, or limit the size of a tract to be clear-cut in areas where clear-cutting will seriously interfere with protection of a watershed, or in order to maintain a suitable growing stock to insure natural reproduction. However, any rule dealing with clear-cutting shall establish a procedure by which 186 any operator of forest land may secure a permit to clear-cut particular lands upon proof that he has a bona fide intention to devote the land to use other than forest use; that the lands are appropriate for the proposed use; and that devoting the lands to the new use will not seriously interfere with the protection of the watershed. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-606) 6. The Department of Natural Resources, upon request, shall assist other state units, counties towns, corporations, and individuals preparing plans for park, recreation and natural area acquisition and development, acquisition of multiple-use areas, including protection of watersheds, and the management and replacement of trees. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-201) 7. In order to promote conservation of forest resources, it is State policy to allow land owners with five or more acres to place their land under the forest conservation and management program. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-302). 8. The Department of Natural Resources, shall promote a program of roadside tree planting, maintenance, and control to obtain beneficial road stabilization, visual aesthetics, and buffers for agricultural and open areas. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-402, 5-602) implementation Lead Agencies state: Maryland Forest Service Local: Forest District Boards Management~ Procedures The Maryland Forest Service has the primary responsibility for managing activities in State Forests. The Maryland Forest Service is also responsible for providing technical assistance and guidance to the privately owned forest land throughout the Coastal zone. General forest resource management assistance includes the preparation of forest management plans, reforestation plans, timber stand improvement and harvesting plans as well as assistance to the primary wood using industries. In addition, the State has been divided into forest districts. Each district has a forestry board with members appointed from the area by Maryland Forest S'ervice. The purpose of the districts is to make forestry expertise available to landowners, promote good foresrry practices, and assist in watershed management practices. To that end, forestry boards develop comprehensive forest management plans, and may enforce Marylanid Forest Service rules and regulations, recommend new rules and regulations, and nromw~l- . ~gate "safeguards' for proper forest land use. Through a Memorandum of Understanding with the Soil Conservation Di-l-ri~t, woodland con~ser'vation practices are incorporated into the conservation farm plans of those cooperating in the district, along with erosion control and sediment reCaiction measures. 187 The Maryland Forest Service also operates the following programs relevant to coastal woodlandS: 1. Forest Conservation and Management Program The purpose of this program is to encourage people "to keep or develop and the wasting of soil (and) to provide open and wooded areas for the use and enjoyment of residents and sojourners". The Program enables any owner of five or more acres of forest to enter into a contract with the Department of Natural Resources. The owner agrees to use his land in a manner consistent with the purposes of the program for a specified time. In return, the owner is granted an exemption from an increase in assessed valuation of the land during the contract period. A full Warket valuation of the tract is made at the termination of the coritact, at the time of harvest or at the time of conveyance to a new owner who does not assume the obligations of the contract. If the new valuation is greater than the old, a new tax bill is computed by allocating the increased value in approximately equal annual increments from the date of the contract to its termination, mutliplying by the tax rate for the respective year. This additional tax then becomes immediately due and payable. 2. The Seed Tree Law This program is in response to a dwindling supply of loblolly pine and requires woodland owners who have harvested pine timber to assure a regrowth of loblolly pine by either (a) replanting the area satisfactorily or (b) leave seed trees to adequately restock the area harvested through natural regeneration of loblolly pine. 3. Roadside Tree Program The Department of Natural Resources is authorized to plant trees along roadsides, to regulate the care of roadside trees, and to establish nurseries for the propagation of roadside trees. A permit from the Department is required before any person may cut down or trim a roadside tree. 4. Forest Protection The Forest Service is responsible for the control and suppression of wild fires, insects, and disease and for the enforcement of forest laws, rules, and regulations. Forest harvest operations come under a blanket permit of the Water Resources Administration which is granted to licensed forest product operators in the state. Operations carried out must comply with the criteria and procedures aimed at controlling erosion and abating sedimentation. 188 5. Water Quality Impact Studies The Forest Service is working with the Water Resources Adminir.stration and the regional governments responsible for determining the effects of forestry practices or water quality through the 208 Program. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Project evaluation on forestry practices is not anticipated. However, the values of forested areas will be considered in all project evaluations on developmental activities (see the Sections Shore Erosion Control, Activities in Flood Plains, Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands, Onshore OCS/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities, Electric Generating Facilties, Industrial Parks, Mineral Extraction Facilties, Large-Scale Residential Developments, and Transportation Networks). Program Review 1. The Coastal Zone Unit will maintain close contact with agencies responsible for non-point source pollution planning under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, to insure that all relevant factors concerning forestry management practices are considered. 7. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with the counties and the Maryland Department of State Planning and other relevant State agencies to consider significant coastal forested areas, particularly those identified in its Upland Natural Areas Study, for designation as State Critical Areas. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO THE USE OF FORESTED LANDS Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency State Forest Direct State Planning and DNR, Maryland Natural Resources Article, Regulation Forest Service Section 5-201 (MF) Forest Conservation and Direct State Planning and DNR (MFS) Management Regulation Natural Resources Article, Section 5-301 et seq. Forest Cor.3nervancy Districts State Assistance Proqram DXR (MFS Natural Resources Article, State Guidelines for Section 5-601 et seq. Local Implementation Forest Protection Direct State Planning and DNR tMFS) Natural Resources Article, Regulation Section 5-608 to 5-610: 5-701 et se. Road-side Tree Program Direct State Planning and DNR (MFS) Natural Resources Article, Regulation Section 5-401 et see. State Critical Areas Proram State Standards for Local DSP Article 88C, Section 2(b)(3) Implementation Conservation Easement Program Easement cqs:on DNR (MET) CHANNELIZATION (AND SMALL WATERSHED PROJECTS) Situation Channelization, the modification of natural stream cha ,-e-o d which is used in Maryland to'pro uctvity of agricultural land, and , - t reduce the frequency of damaging floods. Channelization includes the following alterations of natural stream courses: 1) riprapping or lining of channel, 2) clearing of obstructions and accumulated bedload material, 3) widening, 4) deepening, and 5) realignment of existing channels. The effect of these modifications is to move water off the land at an increased rate and volume, thus reducing the potential for damage by flooding. Channelization can also lower the existing water table adjacent to the modified channels, increasing the permeability and, in turn, the productivity of the soil. Channel modifications have been an integral part of agricultural drainage in Maryland. Frequently, channel modifications are part of small watershed projects which also may include impoundments or reservoirs for flood control, sediment control, and recreation. Several environmental problems are often associated with the use of channelization. Deterioration of water quality is one such problem, and the protection of water quality is of primary concern. After channelization, water which formerly remained on the land or in the soil is transported into aquatic systems. Agricultural chemicals (i.e., fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides) are transported along with surface and ground waters into aquatic systems, where they may pose a hazard to the health of the aquatic ecosystem. Construction of channel modifications creates suspended sediment, and removal of stream bank vegetation durirg construction can result in increased sedimentation as well as increased water temperatures. Improper channel bank stabilization and channel maintenance can also cause sedimentation in aquatic systems. The resulting impairment of water quality can interfere with the spawning of fish and the growth of beneficial aquatic vegetation. The location of channel modifications and impoundments often involves non-tidal wetlands, particularly on the Eastern Shore. Activities in these wetlands can reduce or destroy the valuable functions of wildlife habitat, sediment entrapment, and groundwater recharge. Issues Careful project planning and the development of alternatives to channelization and impoundments are needed to avoid the associated environmental problems. Planning and regulatory efforts by federal, state, and local governments should be consistent with the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value-areas having scenic,- scientific .geologic, hydrologic, bioloic~al or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as non- tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas of migratory birds. 190 (6) To promote the protection and wise management of_3roductive coastal agricultural and forested areas through cooperation with programs of the local Soil Conservation Districts, the Agricultural Lands Preservation Foundation, the Maryland Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Forest Service, the Department of State Planning and the Maryland Environmental Trust. (13) To qive priority to non-structural management techniques for controlling tidal and riverine flood hazards, including the use of flood plains for open space uses such as agriculture, forestryj wildlife habitat and recreation, in order to lessen the danager to life and property, and to minimize adverse effects on biological resources and water quality. (27) To promote the maintenance of natural buffers along, and natural drainage ways feeding to, coastal tributaries and estuarine waters,to minimize adverse environmental effects of coastal developments and activities. Project planning and review and regulatory procedures need to take into consideration whether or not a proposed project will: - Degrade existing water quality of streams and associated water bodies. - Create detrimental sedimentation during or after proposed channel alterations. - Interfere with the spawning of anadromous fish. - Create adverse impacts on non-tidal wetlands, forests, and associated aquatic systems. - Create adverse impacts on water quality in the watershed due to increased agricultural activity. Policies 1. The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for conservation and management of wildlife, wildlife resources, fish, fish resources and aquatic life within the State. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 4-202, 10-202) 2. The Department of Natural Resources will cooperate with federal, state,and local agencies in water resources projects and projects affecting the waters of the state, including approved projects under PL 566 (the federal Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act). (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-903) 3. It is the public policy of the State (taking into account varying ecological, economic, developmental, recreational, and aesthetic values) to preserve tidal wetlands, including tidal waters to the seaward limit of the State's jurisdiction, and to prevent their despoliation and destruction. (Natural Resources Article, Section 9-102, 9-202) 4. It is in the public interest to preserve the biological values associated with the land arid water resources of the 100-hundred year flood plain. (Natural Resources Article, S-ctioans -801 and 8-9A`', 5. The filling and dredging of non-tidal wetland areas of biological and/or hydrological value within the 100-year riverine flood plain will not be permitted, unless no feasible alternative for accomplishing a necessary public good exists and measures are taken to minimize adverse environmental imp0acts. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, and 8-803; pendin g revised wat ershed permit regulations) 6. Wherever possible} non-structural measures to reduce flood hazard will be utilized. Similarly, non-structural practices will be utilized to increase agricultural drainage wherever feasible. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-803 and 8-9A02; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy, November 1977) 7. Channelization in areas where adverse impacts would be created upon water quality, aquatic resources, non-tidal wetlands, and wildlife habitat is generally not consisthent with State policy. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, ,j-202, 8-801, 8-803, and 8-9A02; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy', November, 1977) 8. Dredging channels is generally the least preferable means of accomplishing storm water and flood control management. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-803, and 8-1101; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy, November, 1977) 9. Agricultural drainage shall be permitted only to the extent it provides substantial agricultural benefits, and shall be carried out in ways which minimize environmental damage. Each project must meet the following guidelines: - There must be a demonstrated need for the project. - The lower end of the system must be as far upstream as possible. - Good conservation practices must be used during construction. - Sediment transport must be minimized through sound conservation practices. -Construction must not occur during spawning time when such restriction is deemed appropriate. - Provisions must be made for continued maintenance. - Environmental impacts must be considered. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-803, 8-1402, 8-1405; Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy, November, 1977) 10. The natural values of affected floodplain forests and non-tidal wetlands will be considered in the siting of impoundments and these areas will be avoided if possible. Such impoundments shall provide a minimum flow release for downstream users. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-801, 8-803, and 8-9A02) 192 Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, SCS (Pt. 566 Projects) State: Water Resources Administration Management Procedures Agricultural Drainage The President's Executive Orders on Environmental Protection issued May 24, 1977 address wetlands and federal activities affecting them: "Each agency shall provide leadership and shall take action to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out the agency's responsibilities..." '.Each agency, to the extent permitted by law, shall avoid undertaking or providing assistance for new construction located in wetlands unless the head of the agency finds (1) that there is no practicable measures to minimize harm to wetlands which may result from such use." The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates by permit, dredge and fill activities .occurring in the floodplains of streams below the headwaters (i.e., below that point where the average flow is less than five cubic feet per second) (Section 404, Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments, 1972). This program is described in the Section on Activities occurring in Non-Tidal Wetlands. The Soil Conservation Service is presently operating under Conservation Planning-~Memorandum 15, issued on May 5, 1975, by the Soil Conservation Service Of fice, USDA, Washington, D.C., which states that the SCS would avoid construction, including channelization, in wetlands of Type 3 through 20 as described in the U.S. Fish and Wildllife publication, Circular 39. The Water Resources Administration coordinates all review and comment between the agencies within the Department of Natural Resources both on Federally sponsored projects and projects submitted to them and federal agencies for approval. Project proposals which are evaluated include small watershed projects under PL 566, which are sponsored by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) and the lcoal organizations. Routinely involved DNR agencies are the wildlife Administration, the Fisheries Administration, and the Coastal Zone Unit. The U.S. Fish arnd Wildlife Service is also involved in review and comment of project proposals, and more recently, in the initial planning of the project. With PL 566 watershed projects, DNR involvement begins with the issuance of a Preliminary investigation by the SCS and the local district organization, and continues through the completion of an environmental impact statement on the project. 193 The Water Resources Administration also administers several permit programs which may affect channelization proposals. These include: 1. Regulation, by permit, of any construction or repairs to dams or obstructions to the 100-year flood plain or rivers. All permit applications for such operations must be accompanied by a hydraulic calculation of the effects of any reduction or filling, as well as summary of the expected benefits. (See Section on Activities Occurring in Tidal ahd Non-Tidal Floodplains) 2. Wetlands permits - regulatory procedures are described in the Section on Activities Occurring in Tidal Wetlands. 3. Water Quality Certification - Under Section 401 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (P.L. 92-500; 86 Stat. 816, 33 USC 1411), any applicant for a federal permit to conduct an activity which may result in a dischlarge into navigable waters is required to obtain a certification from the State that the discharge will comply with the application water quality standards. The certification also pertains to the subsequent operation of the facility. Other agencies of DNR and other departments may participate in the review of these permits. Channelization for Stormwater and Flood Control Management Purposes Because of associated adverse impacts, the State is discouraging channelization for stormwater and flood control management purposes. The Department of Natural Resources is administratering its planning and regulatory programs accordingly. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit will be involved in the regulatory process for activities involving channelization, in accordance with the project evaluation procedures described in Chapter I. CZU will be involved with all projects in areas identified to be of value in the Upland Natural Areas Study, and projects in which more than 1/4 acre of land area is proposed for alteration. Proposed projects will be reviewed for possible adverse impacts on areas of high biological value. CZU will provide data on the impact to biological resources of proposed activities and will place the value of particular natural areas in a state-wide perspective. Whenever it appears that substantial impact to any significant natural areas may occur, a full project evaluation will be initiated to make recommendations to the Secretary of Natural Resources on appropriate State action and on federal consistency decisions on Section 404 permits. Projects involv.ng less than 1/4 acre are considered not likely to have significant impacts by themselves unless they involve substantial permanent alterations or other special consequences. 194 Program Review Cumulative Impact: CZU, in conjunction with the Corps of Engineers and the Water Resources Administration, will ensure that all permit data is entered into appropriate data systems (such as the RAMS data base and the WRA Query system) and made available to CZU. CZU will continue to participate in the development and completion of the Delmarva River Basins Study (Type IV) along with the Soil Conservation Service, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and other DNR agencies. The Study will identify priority areas which should not be affected and will coordinate SCS planning efforts and state agency review and comment. State Critical Areas: Significant areas will be identified and suggested to counties as state critical areas for conservation or preservation. Data Base: CZU will assemble all information presently available on non-tidal wetlands in Maryland's coastal zone aid will make this information available to all permit administrators. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO CHANNELIZATION Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency State Critical Areas Program State Standards for Local DSP Art 88C, Section 2(b)(3) Implementation Construction in or obstruction of Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) the 100-year flood plain of free- Regulation flowing rivers and non-tidal waters Art. NR, Section 8-803 Non-Game and Endangered Species Direct State Planning and DNR (MWA, CAP} Conservation Act Regulation Art. NR, Section 10-2A05 Wildlife Management Direct State Planning and DNR (Wildlife Art. NR, Section 10-202 Regulation Administration) Fishery Management Direct. State Planning and DNR (MFA) Art. NR, Section 4-202 Regulation Wild & Scenic Rivers Act Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Sections 8-401 $ 8-410 Regulation Wetlands Law Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Title 9 Regulation Federal Water Pollution Control Act Federal Consistency/State Federals U.S Ame-dments of 1971 2ection 404 Water Quality Certification Army Corps of Engineers 195 ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROVISION OF SUFFICIENT RECREATIONAL, OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL AREAS Situation The population in Maryland's coastal zone has increased greatly within the last decade. Increased leisure time, purchasing power, and the desire to escape congested living for outdoor relaxation and recreation has had a significant impact on the coastal zone. Many people have chosen to live in or very near shoreland areas and find employment in these areas. Many more have chosen to live on or very near shoreland areas, conmmuting distances of an hour or more to and from work in order to enjoy evenings of recreation in coastal areas. Still others, employed and residing in metropolitan areas such as Baltimore, Washington, York, and Wilmington seek recreation in Maryland's coastal zone on weekends and holidays. Accompanying the rapid rise in population has been an increasing need to protect open space and natural areas, in order to provide sufficient wildlife habitat, to maintain wildlife populations, and to meet the increasing demands for active and passive recreation opportunities and "wilderness" experiences. However, the state parks, forests, natural environmental areas and wild- life management areas in Maryland's coastal counties adjacent to the State's tidal waters comprise only a small fraction of Maryland's shoreline. To meet the demands noted above, additional recreational and natural areas adjacent to or near the Maryland's shoreline are needed. The State is in the process of acquiring one such area, the 2,700 acre Wye Island, to ensure that it is maintained as one of Maryland's last undeveloped islands. Issues This situation requires that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value-areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologicL biological or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as non- tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas of migratory birds. (8) To promote increased recreational ortunities in shoreland areas, to promote increased public access to tidal waters, and to assure that these occur in a manner which protects the quality o_f coastal resources and which maintains public health and safety. State and local government action relating to the provision of coastal recreational, open-space, and natural areas must address the following issues: - The identification of areas worthy of protection as coastal recreational areas, open space, or natural areas (including wildlife management areas and wildlife refuges). 196 - The type of coastal recreational and natural areas most needed. - The identification of areas that could meet those needs. - The level of activity consistent with the carrying capacity of areas acquired as coastal recreational and natural areas. - The protection of areas identified as valuable for coastal recreational, environmental or open space until acquisition -can take place. Policies 1. The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for conservation and management of wildlife and wildlife resources of the State. (Natural Resources Article, Section 10-202) 2. It is state policy a) to conserve species of wildlife for human enjoyment, for scientific purposes, and to insure their perpetuation as viable components of their ecosystems, b) to protect threatened and endangered plant and wildl-ife species by prohibiting the taking, possession, trans- portation, exportation, processing, sale, offer for sale, or shipment within this State of endangered species, and by carefully regulating these activities with regard to the threatened species, and c) to establish programs, including the acquisition of land or aquatic habitat or interests therein, necessary for the conservation of non-game threatened or endangered species of wildlife or plants. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 10-2A02 and 10-2A06) 3. The Department of Natural Resources shall, in the name of the State, purchase and manage lands suitable for state parks, scenic preserves, historic monuments, parkways, state recreational areas, forest culture, forest reserves, watershed protection, water conservation, open space, the protection, propagation or management of wildlife resources, and hunting. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 5-207, 5--901 et seq., to 10-208, 10-2A01 et seq., 10-801) 4. The Department of Natural Resources shall establish a state wildlands system on state-owned lands which shall be administered for the use and enjoyment of the people of Maryland, in a manner that will leave them unimpaired for the future use and enjoyment as wildlands, will provide for their protection and preservation of their wildland character, and will promote the gathering and dissemination of information regarding their use and enjoyment as wildlands. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-1203) 197 5. It is State policy to protect, though a scenic and wild rivers program, those rivers of Maryland (or portions of them) and related adjacent land areas that possess outstanding resources of scenery, fish, wildlife, and other valuable recreation resources of existing and potential benefit to the citizens of the State. The Program, to be administered by the Department of Natural Resources, shall provide for wise management of resources on the land and preservation of their scenic, agricultural, and wild qualities. Development will be limited to fishing, hunting, hiking, horseback riding, natural and geological interpretation, scenic appreciation, and other activities in which the general public can appreciate and enjoy the value of these areas as scenic and wild rivers in a setting of natural solitude. Before specific plans for use and development of water and related land resources are' approved, including construction of improvements, diversions, roadways, crossings, channelizations, locks, canals or other features which change the character of a river or waterway or destroy its scenic value, full consideration and evaluation of the river as a scenic and wild resource shall be given. A dam or other structure impeding the natural flow of a scenic and wild river may not be constructed, operated, or maintained, and channelization may not be undertaken without the specific approval of the Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources. Every State unit shall recognize the intent of the Scenic and Wild Rivers Program and take whatever action is necessary to protect and enhance the scenic and wild qualities of the designated rivers. The Department shall utilize the scenic and wild rivers system and all related information to assist and cooperate with any other State and local unit which exercises jurisdiction and authority over land use planning and management. (Natural ResourcesW Article, Section 8-401 et se.) 6. it is State policy to make funds available to local governments for the acquisition of outdoor recreation and open space areas and for the development of recreatior~al facilities. The acquisition and development of land for recreation purposes with such funds shall be consistent with local comprehensive plans, and shall meet a need in whole or part identified in the State outdoor Recreation Plan. (Natural Resources Article, section 5-904 et seq.) 7. The Department of Natural Resources, upon request, shall assist other state units, counties, towns, corporations, and individuals in preparing plans for acquisition and development of park recreation and natural areas, acquaisition of multiple-use areas including protection of watersheds, management, and replacement of trees woodlots, and timber tracts. (Natural Resources Article, Section 5-201) 8.It is the State policy to encourage land owners to make their land available to the public for recreational use by limiting their liability towards persons using their land in accordance with Natural Resources Article, Section 5-1101 et seq. 9. it is the State policy to: a. Sponsor, assist, conduct, or otherwise cause to be undertaken, comprehensive programs of research and education pertaining to the aesthetic, natural, health and welfare, scenic, or cultural qualities of the state environment, inc-luding the provision of financial grants to public and private agencies, organizations, and persons engaged in consulting and other special participation in these programs; and to b. Acquire property or any interest therein which is natural, environmental, aesthetic, scenic, or cultural significance, or of significance to the health and welfare of the public. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 3-201 and 3-203) 10. The recreational and conservation policies of the State of Maryland shall. a. Encourage low intensity recreation on open tracts such as flood plains, wooded areas, steep slopes, and other significant natural features, provided proper safeguards are established to protect local environment. b. Encourage the use of utility easements as outdoor recreation and open space areas. c. Encourage the use of scenic easements of land as a visual part of open space and outdoor recreation.. d. Explore the recreation potential of water bodies, agricultural research centers, and wildlife management areas. e. Acquire title to or control of land with conservation or recreation value, before encroaching development and rising land values preclude this Possibility. f. Provide public access to estuaries, the Chesapeake Bay, and every major river in Maryland. g. Analyze surplus state and federal properties to determine whether they can be used for recreation. h. Provide corridors for limited recreation uses such as bicycling, hiking, and others which relate to streams, shorelines and unique resource and historic areas. 199 i. Emphasize county and local development of community parks and school/park complexes to maximize local recreational opportunities. j. Control land use adjacent to parks and major scenic or historic sites to prevent encroachment and to preserve the surrounding aesthetics. k. Protect free-flowing streams and rivers, and carefully evaluate proposed impoundments. 1. Encourage the preservation of submerged lands for wildlife and fish habitats. m. Control shoreline development along the Bay and the ocean through state and local legislation. n. Develop and implement a state-wide river and stream preservation program. o. Encourage the recreational use of the Chesapeake Bay by acquiring public access points, particularly at the confluence of stream valleys and the bay. p. Preserve outstanding natural and scenic areas, and irreplaceable historic sites and structures, and incorporate them into an open space system. q. Utilize excessive slopes, flood plains, poorly drained lands and other unique natural resources as major sources of open space. r. Continue to emphasize nature interpretation and nature-oriented facilities. s. Emphasize the acquisition of development rights where feasible in rural areas, *along stream valleys, bay and river or ocean shorelines, and discourage'development imicompatible with the recreation opportunities associated with these resources. .t. Continue implementing legislation ard protection programs for the Chesapeake Say and inland wetlands, with emphasis on appropriate land development regulations, conservation zoning, land donations and purchase of development rights in lieu of outright acquisition. u. Regulate and preserve all isla~nds in the bay and all rivers wherever feasible for conservation and limited recreation use. v. Create more wildlife sanctuaries and management areas in places that provide areas of unusual flora and fauna. w. Encourage stewardship through the .levelopment of State and local policies and guidelines on tax abatements, tax credits, and special assessments for privately held open space. 200 x. utilize scenic or conservation easements, purchase and leaseback agreements and subdivision regulations. is ~~y. Preserve the best agricultural lands and geologic resource areas for continued production, or preservation as rural landscape. z. Encourage the use of both public and private lands for outdoor recreation, including the purchase of public recreation rights and scenic easements to expand open space beyond publicly owned land, and the provision by land owners of recreational opportunities for the public under multiple-use incomte-producing arrangements. aa. Establish an interconnecting system of trails for walking, hiking, and bicycling along the ocean beaches, bays, estuaries, rivers and streams, linking activity centers. (Article BBC Natural Resources Article, Section 5-901 et 22. Maryland Outdoor Recreation and Open Space Plan, Phase III-Action Plan pp 9-10) Imp lemen tat ion Lead Agencies State: Capital Program Administration - Administration of Program open Space, Land Planning Services Other Agencies: Department of State Planning - Development of State outdoor Recreation Plan in conjunction with Capital Programs Administration and other units of government; Maryland Environmental Trust - conservation easement program Management Procedures Maryland's approach to providing sufficient public access for recreational boating purposes and protection for agricultural and forested lands has been described in previous sections. The State receives some money from federal funding programs available to all States - the Land and Water Conservation Fund, (for general open space acquisition) Dingell-Johnlson Fisheries Restoration Fund, (for fish restoration and management projects) and the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Fund, (for wildlife restoration projects). In addition, the State has funding available from its Program Open Space '(POS), administered by the Capital Program Administration of the Department of Nataral Resources. Funding for the program is derive'5 from a 0.5 percent state title transfer tax and the scale of State bonds. Pos appropriations for FY 1970 - 1978 have totalled $173,600,000. To the extent that federal funds are available, Program open Space funds are used to match acquisition grants from the Land and Water Conservation Fund. This money can also be used with Waterway improvement funds when development includes facilities of benefit to the boating public on the State's navigable waters. 2011 One half of the total funds available under Program Open Space are to be used by the Department of Natural Resources and the St. Mary's City Commission. This money is to be used for land acquisition projects only Matching money from the Land and Water Conservation Fund can be used either for acquisition or for development. All proposed state acquisition projects must be submitted in advance to the General Assembly. A portion of the state share of the fund is to be used for making grants to the City of Baltimore for city park acquisition or development. All'Baltimore City projects are to be reviewed by DNR. Project costs are to be reviewed by the State Board of Public Works. The other half of the funds available under Program Open Space will be appropriated by the General Assembly to assist local governing bodies in acquisition and development projects. A committee appointed by the Governor will determine the annual apportionment formula based primarily on current and 10-year projected population figures, as well as transfer tax revenues. Local projects must be evaluated by DNR and sent to the Department of State Planning for Clearinghouse review and comment. If DNR approves the project, and if it falls within annual apportionment limits, it will be sent to the State Board of Public works for commitment of funds. All local projects for a given year must be submitted to DNR and DSP in advance as part of an annual program. of the money available under Program Open Space for local governmental units, one half must be used for land acquisition (except in Baltimore, where local funding is available in addition to money provided directly from the State share). Local acquisition projects may be funded up to 100% by State funds, or by a combination of State and federal funds. The other half of the local share can be used for acquisition and/or development. The State will supplement federal money so that 75 percent of the total project cost is funded. In order to qualify for funding under Program Open Space, all local projects must be part of a comprehensive, local recreation plan. In addition, all state and local projects must be consistent with the recommendations in the Maryland Outdoor Recreation and Open Space Plan develope~d by the Department of Ft-ate Planning in conjunction with the Capital Programs Administration and other relevant government agencies. In the past, local governments have concentrated their efforts on the acquisition and development of intensive recreational areas such as tennis courts, ball fields, basketball courts, and neighborhood parks, rather than larger passive recreation and natural areas. Recently, a few counties have begun to acquire the latter as part of recreation and open space efforts. Program Open Space also includes an advance option n ucaefns that options on critical land can be obtained in advance of purchase. This fund is part of the State portion of POS funds. The process of selecting sites to be considered for state acquisition with both Land and Water'Conservation and Program Open Space funds is conducted by the Capital Programs Administration (Land Planning Services Division). The same process is used for selecting and acquiring areas as state parks, forests, natural environmental areas, and wildlife management areas. The process is not 202 rigidly defined, but essentially consists of staff review of potential sites recommended by other DNR agencies, state legislators, local governments, and the general public. The staff of the Land Planning. Services Division also identifies sites for consideration on the basis of its review of resource inventories such as the Chesapeake Bay: Inventory of Potential Shoreline Access, Recreation and Open Space Areas, Upland Natural Areas Study, Wetlands Vegetation Study, and Maryland outdoor Recreation and Open Space Plan, and its state-wide analysis of land acquisition needs. other programs and processes relating to land acquisition in Maryland include those involving the State Scenic and Wild Rivers Program, the claiming of federal surplus lands, and those associated with the Nature Conservancy, Wetlands Acquisition Fund, and the Maryland Environmental Trust. The purpose of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Program, administered by the Land Planning Services Division, is to protect those rivers in Maryland (or portiohs of them) and adjacent land areas possessing outstanding scenery, fish, wildlife, and other valuable recreational attributes. Nine rivers, including five in the Coastal Zone (the Anacostia, the Patuxent, the Pokomoke, the Severn, and the Wicomico in Charles County), are presently included in the system. in addition to preparing management plans for each of these rivers with the assistance of an advisory board, the Land Planning Services Division is responsible for (1) taking inventory of all other rivers in the state, to identify additional rivers for possible inclusion in the system, (3) reviewing permit applications relating to the use and development of the water and land resources of scenic rivers. Local governments have the principal direct responsibility for implementing the management programs for the rivers included in the system., and state agencies carrying out their management responsibilities, are required to take whatever action is necessary to protect the qualities of the rivers. The availability of federal surplus lands is announced through the A-95 Clearinghouse process. The Maryland Department of State Planning reviews the positions of'state and local government agencies regarding the claiming of the available surplus lands and makes recommendations to the U.S. General Services Administration, which is responsible for disbursing surplus lands. The Nature Conservancy, a private conservation organization i~hich makes funds available for land acquisition, works in close cooperation with Program open Space. The Wetlands Acquisition Fund is derived from the transfer of license to state-owned wetlands, and is used for the purchase of privately owned wetlands. The Maryland Environmental Trust is a semi-autonomous unit, administratively located in DNR. The purpose-.of the trust is to conserve and improve the State's environment, including its land, water, air, wildlife, scenic, and open space resources. Through educational and other media, the Trust encourages anC. motivates the populace of the State, and promotes continuing interest, in perpetuating the aesthetic, natural, scenic, and cultural qualities of the State' s environment. 203 In addition, the Trust: (1) acquires and maintains properties of aesthetic, scenic, cultural value or of value to the public health and welfare, by gift, purchase, or bequest, (2) receives appropriations, gifts, or bequests to carry out its purpose, (3) cooperates with and assists state, federal, and local governmental agencies, private or public foundations, and individuals, to further the purposes of the Trust, and (4) promotes the establishment of local commnittees to work with the Trust to further its objectives at the local level. The Trust presently has an extensive program to acquire conservation easements on areas with significant environmental value. This conservation easement program helps to conserve farmland, woodlands, stream cor-ridors,'unique or rare natural areas, or other kinds of open space, by arranging non-development agreements with private landowners. The Trust is responsible for easements on 5,730 acres in 13 counties and Baltimore City, most of its in the Coastal Zone. Most notable are three miles and 1,680 acres of Potomac River frontage in Charles County, 1,182 acres on the Chesapeake Bay in Kent and Queen Anne's Counties, and 300 acres along tributaries of the Little Choptank River in Dorctester County. The majority of M.E.T.'s acreage has been acquired in the past year. Even with the variety of land acquisition programs in the State, acquisition of new shor.eland areas is likely to be limited under present sources of funding. The State has a backlog of funding n'eeds associated with completing the acquisition of already authorized parks, wildlife management areas, etc. Table 111-4 shows the State's land acqui.sition and developm~ent activities relating to Coastal Zone recreation open space and natural areas. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation All projects proposed for areas within the takelines of proposed state recreational, parkland, and natural areas, and all zoning, rezoning, and special exceptions for such areas will be subject to the project evaluation process, to determine how that value for parkland purposes can be maintained until acquisition can take place. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Land Planning Services section of Capital Programs Administration to identify suitable shoreland areas for acquisition as recreational open space and natural areas. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with Capital Programs Administration and local governments to insure that greater priority is given to acquisition of coastal recreational, open space, and natural areas with Program Open Space funds. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local governments and the Department of State Planning to insure that appropriate zoning is maintained or enacted for areas proposed for acquisition in coastal recreational and open space areas. 204 Table III-4 Existing and Proposed Acquisition Relating to Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Areas in Maryland's Coastal Zone State Parks TOTAL ACREAGE ACQUIRED BALANCE TO BE NAME COUNTY LOCATION ACREAGE (As of July 1978) ACQUIRED Assateague Worcester Atlantic Ocean 756 756 0 Calvert Cliffs Calvert Chesapeake Bay 1,402 1,117 225 Chapel Point Charles Potomac River 828 828 0 Elk Neck Cecil Chesapeake Bay 2,268 1,764 504 Creenwell Saint Mary's Chesapeake Bay Tributary (Patuxent R.) 605 605 0 Gunpowder Baltimore, Harford Chesapeake Bay 15,096 11,199 3,897 I, X Jane's Island Somerset Chesapeake Bay 3,150 2,940 210 An Jonas Green Anne Arundel Chesapeake Bay 6 6 0 Martinak Caroline Chesapeake Bay Tributary (Choptank R.) 99 99 0 Matapeake Queen Anne's Chesapeake Bay 35 25 10 Palmer Harford Inland 463 463 0 Patapsco Valley Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Howard Inland 11,171 9,949 1,222 Pocomoke River Worcester Chesapeake Bay a. Kilburn Landing Tributary 370 370 0 b. Shad Landing (Pocomoke R.) 545 545 0 Point Lookout Saint Mary's Chesapeake Bay 705 518 187 TOTAL ACREAGE ACQUIRED BALANCE TO BE NAME COUNTY LOCATION ACREAGE (As of July 1978) ACQUIRED Purse Charles Potomac River 148 146 0 St. Clement's Saint Mary's Potomac River 3 1 2 Sandy Point Anne Axundel Chesapeake Bay 813 813 0 Samllwood Charles Potomac River 473 399 74 Susquehanna Harford, Cecil Susquehanna R. 2,846 2,248 598 Tuckahoe Queen Anne's, Inland 3,880 3,408 472 Caroline wye Oak Talbot Inland 29 29 0 TOTAL 20 Parks 45,691 38,290 7,401 State Forests Buckingham Anne Arundel Inland 137 137 0 Doncaster Charles Inland 1,600 1,485 115 Elk Neck Cecil Chesapeake Bay 2,996 2,996 0 Pocomok: Worcester Inland 17,285 11,800 5,485 Seth Demonstration Talbot Inland 125 125 0 Wicomico Wicomico Inland 1,215 1,119 105 TOTAL 6 Forests 23,358 17,653 5,705 Natural Environmental Areas TOTAL ACREAGE ACQUIRED BALANCE TO BE NAME COUNTY LOCATION ACREAGE (As of July 1978) ACQUIRED Mattawoman Charles Potomac River 9,435 176 9,259 Tributary (Mattawoman Ck.) Severn Run Anne Arundel Chesapeake Bay 1,618 1,171 447 Tributary (Severn R.) Soldiers Delight Baltimore Inland 2,076 1,440 636 Zekiah Charles Potomac River 5,000 14 4,986 Tributary (Wicomico R.) TOTAL 4 Natural Environmental Areas 18,129 2,801 15,328 Natural Resources Management Areas Bay Access Areas Chesapeake Bay 350 0 350 Bush Declaration Harford Chesapeake Bay 500 97 403 Cedarville a. Park Prince George's Inland 340 340 0 b. Forest Charles 3,290 3,158 132 c. Fish Hatchery 200 200 0 Fair Hill Cecil Inland 5,551 5,551 0 Hart-Miller Pleasure Island Baltimore County Chesapeake Bay 244 244 0 Patuxent River Park Prince George*'s Chesapeake Bay 1,200 0 1,200 Tributary (Patuxent) Patuxent River Wildlife Anne Arundel Chesapeake Bay 500 0 500 Sanctuary Tributary (Patuxent) TOTAL ACREAGE ACQUIRED BALANCE TO BE NAME COUNTY LOCATION ACREAGE (As of July 1978) ACQUIRED Wye Island Queen Anne's Chesapeake Bay 3,500 2,379 1,121 TOTAL 8 Natural Resources Management Areas 15,675 11,969 3,706 Wildlife Management Areas Bowen Prince George's Chesapeake Bay 400 313 87 Tributary (Patuxent R.) Cedar Island Somerset Chesapeake Bay 2,880 2,880 0 Cheltenham Prince George's Inland 10 10 0 Deal Island Somerset Chesapeake Bay 15,200 11,733 3,467 E. A. Vaughn Worcester Atlantic Ocean Bay 4,045 1,750 2,295 Chincoteague Ellis Bay Wicomico Chesapeake Bay 1,924 1,924 0 Tributary (Wicomico R.) 'iirmont Somerset Chesapeake Bay 3,846 2,446 1,400 Fishing Bay Dorchester Chesapeake Bay 17,570 14,548 3,022 idylwi'd Caroline Inland 3,180 2,816 364 Merkle Prince George's Chesapeake Bay 2,420 1,342 1,078 Charles Tributary (Patuxent R.) Millington Kent Inland 4,341 3,266 1.075 Myrtle Grove Charles Potomac River 2,314 831 1,483 Tributary (Mattawoman Creek) TOTAL ACREAGE ACQUIRED BALANCE TO BE NAME COUNTY LOCATION ACREAGE (As of July 1978) ACQUIRED Pocomoke River Worcester Chesapeake Bay 505 505 o Tributary (Pocomoke R.) Pocomoke Sound Somerset Chesapeake Bay 1,122 1,122 0 St. Clements Saint Mary's Potomac River 61 61 0 Sinepuxent Bay Worcester Atlantic Ocean Bay 25 25 0 (Sinepuxent) South Marsh Island Somerset Chesapeake Bay 3,000 2,973 27 Taylor's Island Dorchester Chesapeake Bay 4,973 973 4,000 Wellington Somerset Inland 389 389 0 TOTAL 19 Wildlife Management Areas 68,205 49,907 18,298 TOTAL 57 Areas 171,058 120,620 50,438 The coastal Zone Unit will work with the Department of Sta.te Planning, local governments, the Maryland Environmental Trust, Capital Programs Adminstration: the Maryland Forest Service, the Maryland Wildlife Administration, and other relevant government units and private organizations to identify coastal areas of significant natural resource value and to develop programs to protect them which may involve less than full fee acquisition. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO PROVISION OF SUFFICIENT RECREATIONAL ACCESS Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency State Outdoor Recreation Plan Direct State Planning DNR (CAP) DSP Art. NR, Section 5-906, Art. 88C Program Open Space Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Sections 5-901 to Acquisition 5-906 State and/or Local Acquisi- tion and Development Conservation Easement Program Easement Acq.isition DNR (MET) Art. NR, Section 3-203 Public Recreation on Private Land State Assistance to Aid DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Sections 5-110 et se. Private Activity Acquisition of Wildlife Areas State Acquisition DNR (CAP) Art NR, Sections 10-208, 10-2A01, et i., 10-801 Acquisition of Forest Park Areas State Acquisition DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 10-208, 10-2A01 et fse., 10-801 State Wildlands Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 5-1203 Management Endangered Species Direct State Planning and DNR (CAP and Art. MR, Section l0-2A01 et se. Management Md. Wildlife Administration) Scenic and wild Rivers Program State Planning with State DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 8-401, et seq. and Local Implementation 210m ACTIVITIES AFFECT1ING COASTAL HISTORICAL, CULTURAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES O ~Situation The coastal zone of Maryland, particularly that of Cheapeake Bay and its tributaries, is especially rich in archeological and historical resources. Archeological findings, thus far, indicate that Paleo-Indians lived in the area around 10,000 B.C., when what is now Chesapeake Bay was an extension of the Susquehanna River. With glaciers an the wane climate and food supplies changed, and the cultural and racial characteristics of these early occupants developed and diversified. Although their living areas changed in response to a multitude of factors, these early residents were hunters and gatherers, and spent much time along the water. Much remains to be learned in this field of prehistory, since little effort has been expended to date in archeological study. Recorded history indicates that the shores of Maryland may have been visited by European explorers as early as 1498, when John Cabot sailed along the eastern shore of what is now Worcester County. Between then and 1634, when the first permanent settlement was established at what is now St. Mary's City, explorations were made throughout the shoreline by various Europeans. It is known that the Virginia Company established trading posts, as well as food- producing fields and orchards on Kent island, and at the mouth of the Susquehanna River, prior to settlement of St. Mary's City. The first structures used by the Europeans were provided by the Indians, and were used for dwelling and worship. The structural materials used at the time have not withstood the rigors of climate and time, and much of this early history remains to be learned. water transportation and seafood production have shaped the development of Maryland. Settlements spread over the Eastern Shore, and on the Western Shore as far as the mountains, largely by way of water, which afforded the easiest mode of transportation. Water transportation continued to be a critical factor in the development of the new land and it was not until after 1950 that the population spread out of the tidewater' region. Although tangible reminders of our past can still be found in villages, isolated remanents of plantations, mill commsunities,, centers of religous activity, educational institutions, and urban centers# our historic resources have been increasingly obliterated by the rigors of climate, fires, and urban development. 211 Issues In order to preserve the remaining elements of Maryland's cultural and aesthetic heritage, both-for enjoyment by the citizens of Maryland and for the benefits that their scientific study will yield, State and government agencies must coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, in cooperation with those of federal governmental agencies, to meet the following objective of the Coastal Zone Management Program:. (7) To protect coastal cultural, historical, and archeological resources. in planning public projects, and in reviewing private projects in coastal areas, the following elements must be considered so that historical, cultural, and archeological resources can be protected adequately: - The existence of known cultural? historical, and archeological resources in the proposed development site. - The likelihood of yet undiscovered cultural, historical, and archeological resources in the proposed development site. - Determination of the value of cultural, historical and archeological resources likely to be affected by the proposed project, and the development of mitigating measures to minimize such impacts. - The establishment of procedures for salvage, and for archeologic and historic analysis of resources before development occurs, in cases where unavoidable impacts would occur in the absence of viable alteratives to the proposed development. - Determination of whether the value of -,he cultural and archeological resources in question warrants full fee requisition on purchase of easements in order to assure adequate protection. Policies 1. State agencies are required to conduct their affairs with an awareness that they are stewards of air, land, water, living and historic resources. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302) 2. The Division of Archaeology of the Maryland Geological Survey in the Department of Na-aural Resources shall, in cooperation with other government agencies both in state and ou.t-of-state, preserve and protect the State's archaeological resources and further archaeological knowledge through research, education, excavation projects, and the retrieval and preservation of significant objects, both generally and in conjunction with public construction projects, and through regulation of archaeological activities on state owned or controlled lands (Natural Resources Article, Section 2-703) 212 3. It is State policy to protect and preserve historical, archaeological, and scientific information, and to protect objects found on privately owned lands in the state. Archaeological excavations on privately owned lands are discouraged except when approvod by thlo Stath arrhoolotlist. (Natural Resources Article., Sect ioni 2-.�1) 4 Historic areas of the State are considered basic assets, and their proper use and preservation through State action, including acquisition, promotion of action by others, and educational activities, are necessary to protect and promote the health, safety, economy, and general welfare of the people of the State. (Natural Resources Article 5-102, 5-207; Article 41, Section 181E) 5. Local governments may establish historic districts in accordance with the provisions of Article 66B Section 8.01 et seq. to preserve structures of historic and architectural value. (Article 66B; Section 8.01 et seq.) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (consideration of archeological, historical and cultural values in Section 1.1404 permit decision) Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service (HCRS) National Register of Historic Places Interagency Archeological Services Advisory Council on Historic Preservation State: Division of Archaeology. Maryland Geological Survey (promotion of archeological knowledge, review of state projects, conduct of archeological research) Maryland Historical Trust (review ofFederal and State funded and permitted projects; acquisition of properties of historical (including archeological), cultural, and aesthetic value; maintenance of State Register, nomination of properties, to Federal Register) State Planning (critical areas programs) Local: Establishment of historic district nomination of areas for state critical areas designation 0 4�~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3 Management Procedures The State Archeologist of the Maryland Geological Survey cooperates with professional and amateur archeologists in Maryland, promotes archeological knowledge and interest, maintains artifacts, records and maps site surveys (conducted in-house or reported by amateurs, collectors, or other interested citizens). He acts as technical advisor in contracts for archeological investigations, and reviews field work, reports, and final recommendat ions. in addition, the State Archeologist reviews state-initiated projects for their archeological resources, conducts archeological preservation and restoration projects associated with State projects, and promotes archeological knowledge in Maryland. He also furnishes from his records generalized information to the Corps of Engineers, the Department of Natural Resources, the Maryland Historic Trustand the Department of State Planning, for use in reviewing the potential impact of proposed projects on archeological resources. The Maryland Historical Trust conducts a contirnuing survey and inventory of the state's historic sites, for usc in nominating sites for the Maryland Historic Sites Inventory, an-d for the Vational Register of Historic Places, maintained by the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, U.S.. Department of the Interior. This survey work plays a critical role in the Trust's historic preservation efforts. Four types of historic survey's are carried out by Maryland Historical Trust: 1) comprehensive county and city surveys; 2) thematic surveys, 3) National Historic District surveys and 4) Building Analysis Reports. All sites included in these surveys are done in the detail necessary for their inclusion on the Maryland Historic Register and the National Historic Register. Through these surveys, sites are currently being added to the Trust's inventory at a rate of 2000-3000 sites per year. in order to keep the State's inventory historic sites up to date, a computerized filing system has been implemented and the results of all new survey work must be compatible with this file system. The Maryland Historical Trust also reviews all construction and development projects which require federal or state permits or funding, for their impact on historic and archeological resources. It protects sites of historical, cultural, and archeological importance,by suggesting mitigation procedures, by undertaking full fee acquisition or purchase of easements, by funding preservation and restoration projects, and by carrying out an extensive educational program. The Baltimore District,U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has a staff archeologist, and considers impacts on known historical and archeological resources in its Environmental Impact Statements, and in its permit decisions. The U.S. Army Corps of Elngineers has a staff archeologist, and considers impacts on known historical and archeological resources in its Environmental impact Statements# and in its permit decisions. The Department of State Planning administers the State Critical Areas Program, in which historical and archeological sites may be designated. Local governments participate by nominating areas for designation as State Critical Areas, and by establishing historical districts. There are twenty five local commnittees in the Maryland Historical Trust program that broaden the Trust's influence and assist in projects affecting their areas. Each county of the State has a commiittee, i-, adCition to those of Baltimore and Annapolis, that undertake their own projects in addition to their advisory role to the Trust. 214 Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit has funded and participated in a study to expand existing data on archeological resources in Maryland's coastal zone. In addition to identifying a large number of archeological sites, this study provides basic information for estimating the likelihood of additional significant archaeological resources in shoreline areas. The unit will give full consideration to the protection of historical, cultural, and archeological resources in project evaluations of proposed-shoreline development, and in regulation of coastal activities. The Unit will work with the Maryland Historical Trust and the State Archeologist to insure that known archeological sites, or sites that have a potential of singificant resources, as identified in the Archeological Resources Management Study, are given consideration in Federal, State and local govern~mental decisions. Program Review The Unit will work with other government agencies to expand information on the state's historical, cultural and archeological resources, so that these resources can be fully appreciated by government and private interests in their activities. AUTHORITIES RELATED TO CULTURAL, HISTORIC ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Statutory Authority Management Technique Alency Maryland Historical Trust Easement Acquisition DECD (.MT) Art. 41 Sections 181A et seg. Historic Zoning State Standards for Local DECD (MHT) Art. 66B, Sections 8.01 to 8.13 Implementation DSP Archeological Resources Law Direct State-Planning and DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Sections 2-301 et seq. Regulation Purchase of Lands DNR (CAP) Art. NR, Section 5-207 215 SHORELAND ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL Situation In previous sections of this chapter, shoreland activities have been discussed that are of Coastal Zone Management concern because of their particular characteristics, or because of the characteristics of their geographic location. In addition, shoreland activities in general may be of concern of their significant contributions to the cumulative impact of similar activities in the same area, because of their consistency with the carrying capacity of the aXea in which they are proposed to be located, because of lack of adequate water, sewer, and Lransportation services, or because of offsite impacts such as air pollution emissions, noise emissions, point discharge into coastal waters, sedimentation, stormwater runoff and other non-point pollution. Issues To respond to these concerns, State and local governments must coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the coastal zone management program: (1) To protect, maintain, and where feasible improve air quality in the State's coastal zone in order to protect public health, safety, and welfare, and the quality of the State's environmental resources. (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value- areas having scenic, scientific, geciogic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as non-tidal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (22' To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater), and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for providing adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developmentg are approved by state and local governmental agencies. %(25) To ensure that adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decisions concerning the siting of public facilities in coastal areas, particularly those involving transportation and waste treatement facilities. (26) To ensure the incorporation of storm water management measures in state and local regulatory programs that would require runoff from a development site to maintain, to the maximum extent possible, the water quality and quantity conditions that -;:evailed prior to development. 21t (27) To promote the maintenance of natural buffers along,and natural drainage ways feeding to, coastal tributaries and esutuarine waters to minimize adverse environmental effects of coastal developments and activities. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and diposed of in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and. which prevents disposal of the substances into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. Planning and regulatory activities concerning shoreland developments first must consider whether a proposed development: - would have adverse impacts upon water quality, aquatic areas of significant resource value, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, significant wildlife habitat areas, archeological sites, or historic sites; - would occur on productive agricultural or forest land, or affect agricultural production on neighboring farms; - would have adverse impacts on a State Critical Area designated for preservation or conservation, or its buffer area; -would be located where it would create danger to life and property or where it wOuld create or aggravate off-site hazards due to flooding, shore erosion or other natural hazards. If the proposed activity involves any of these effects, then policies and procedures described previously will be applied. In addition, shoreland developments must be reviewed in consideration of the following factors, which relate to minimizing off-site impacts, and which ensure that the carrying capacity of areas are not exceeded: - Strict application of air and water quality, waste water disposal, sediment and stormwater, and other standards in development plans; -Consistency with State development plans, State water quality river basin plans, and local comprehensive plans, water and sewer plans, and zoning; -Service by adequate facilities -- including water supply, waste, treat- ment and transportation; -Adequacy of sediment and stormwater measures, both structural and non-structural, to minimize off-site impacts. Policies 1. It is state policy to maintain that degree of purity of air resources which will protect the health, general welfare, and property of the people of the State. (Article 4%, Section 690) 217 2. it is State policy that the people of the State have the right to an environment free from noise which may jeopardize their health, general welfare, and property, or which degrades the quality of life. Therefore, environmental noise standards should be established to protec~t public health0 and the general welfare with an adequate margin of safety based on knowledge of the adverse effects of excessive noise, including temporary or permanent hearing loss, interference with sleep, oral communication, work, or other activities, adverse physiological responses or psychological distress, adverse effects on animal life, devaluation or damage of property, and unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of life or property. (Article 43, Section 822, and 828) 3. it is State policy that no construction of any plant, building or structure, and no appropriation or use of any water of the State can begin unless an appropriate permit has been issued by the Water Resources Administration, based upon submittal of satisfactory proof by the applicant that the granting of the permit will not violate water quality or jeopardize its natural resources, by overdrawing water supplies, or by other unacceptable configurations. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-802) 4. it is State policy to improve, conserve, and manage the quality of the waters of the state and to protect, maintain, and improve the quality of water for public supplies, for propagation of wildlife, for fish and aquatic life, and for domestic agricultural. industrial, recreational, and other legitimate beneficial uses. it is also State policy to provide that no waste is discharged inxtp any waters of this State without first receiving necessary treatment or other corrective action to protect the legitimate beneficial uses of this State's waters, and to provide for prevention, abatement and control __ of new or existing water pollution. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402) All domestic sewage shall be disposed of by an approved method of collection, treatment, and effluent discharge that meets the requirement that it does not .cause pollution of the ground surface, ground water, bathing area, lake, pond, watercourse, or tidewater, or create a nuisance. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402; Article 43, Section 387C, Department of Health and Mental Hygien'e'Rules and Regulations, Section 10.03.27.47) 5. County water and se~e-r plians shall provide for the orderly expansion and extension of communi'ty and multi-use water supply systems, community and multi-use sewerage systems and solid waste disposal systems, in a manner consistent with all applicable county and local comprehensive land use plans. Sizing and staging of facilities construction shall also be consistent with these plans. Adequate facilities shall be provided for to prevent the dis- charge of untreated or inadequately treated sewage or other liquid waste and to ensure that treatment, recovery, or disposal of solid wastes complies with state laws relating to air pollution water pollution, and land use. (Article 43, Section 387C) 6. No building permit, subdivision plan, map or plat, providing for individual or community water supply or sewerage system, or for solid waste acceptable facilities, shall be allowed if it is not in conformance with a county water or sewer plan. Thus: 218 a. No building permit shall be approved (i) where existing facilities are inadequate to serve the proposed development, taking into consideration all other existing and approved developments in the service area, or (ii) which will cause facilities for conveyance, pumping, storage or treatment of water, sewage or solid waste to be overloaded. b. No subdivision plat shall be approved in areas where facilities for conveyance, pumping, storage, or treatment of water, sewage, and solid waste to serve the proposed development, (i) would not be completed in time to serve the development, or (ii) if completed, would not be adequate to serve the development without overloading of the facilities. (Article 43, Section 387C) 7. In order to prevent soil erosion and sediment transport from polluting and despoiling state waters to such a degree that fish, marine life, and recreational use of the waters are affected adversely, the Department of Natural Resources shall establish criteria and procedures for the counties and the local soil conservation districts to implement soil and shore erosion control programs. These procedures may provide for departmental review and approval of major grading, sediment, and erosion control plans. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1101) 8. it is the policy of the Water Resources Administration (a) to minimize loss of life and property from flood damage by promoting State and local programs which prevent the development of new damageable property, (b) to assist in the development and construction of sound, cost-effective flood control structures, (c) to implement a storm water management program which will effectively prevent an increase in the magnitude and frequency of flood flows, thus preventing and increase in flood hazard, (d) to maintain the integrity of the natural stream channel geometry, and (e) to encourage the design and implementation of storm water management systems which minimize the entrainment of pollutants and/or provide a reasonable degree of control of storm water before runoff reaches the stream system. Flood control structures are considered the least desirable of the available management methods of handling runoff- related problems. (Natural Resources Article, Title 8, Subtitles 8, 9, 9A, 11, and 14, 56 Attorney General Opinions 478 (1971); Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy (November, 1977)) 9. Storm water runoff collection, storage and/or conveyance systems should simulate as closely as possible the features and functions of the natural drainage system which are largely free of capital, energy, and maintenance cost. The system selected should strike a balance among capital costs, operations and maintenance costs, public convenience, risk of significant water-related damage, pollution prevention, fish and wildlife habitat preservation, environmental protection or enhancement and other community objectives. When engineering a site for a storm water management, two overall concepts must be considered: (a) perviousness of the system should be maintained or enhanced, and (b) the rate of runoff should be slowed. Methods 219 which tend to reduce the volume of runoff are preferred over methods which tend to increase the volume of runoff. When considering possible solutions, preference should be given to vegetation and porous systems over non-vegetative or impervious choices. (Natural Resources Article, Title 8, Subtitles 8, 9, 9A, 11 and 14, 56 Attorney General Opinions 478 (1971); Maryland Interim Watershed Management Policy (November, 1977)) Implementation Lead Agencies State: Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (Air Quality, Noise Control, Sewage Plant Contruction, Review of Water or Sewer Plans) Water Resources Administration (Water appropriation, water quality, sediment and stormwater control, non-point pollution control, hazardous substances control) Department of State Planning (review of local plans and regulations; development of General Development Plan) Regional: Council of Governments Regional Planning Council (non-point pollution planning) Local- Soil Conservation District's (sediment control) Local Planning and Zoning Offices (development of comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and other regulations) Management Procedures The principal focus of coastal zone management efforts with regard to shoreland activities, in addition to the concerns discussed in previous sections, is to ensure that they have minimal adverse offsite impacts, and that they do not overwhelm (singly or cumulatively) the 'carrying capacity of the area in which they are located. The management procedures used by State and local governments to address such concerns are summarized below. The legal authorities on which such procedures are based at both the state and local level are described in detail in Chapter VIII "Legal Authority"'. Local Governments: Most factors related to shoreland activities are only of local interest, and are addressed by local governments through comprehensive plans, zoning, and regulation of activities, and developments within their boundaries. All of Maryland's counties have, in fact, developed comprehensive plans, zoned all the land within their boundaries, and established regulations to address particular problems. They are Iso required to deelol water- and sewer plans to direct services to developments within their jurisdict. 6ns'' Thus, local governments in Maryland have a substantial planning and regulatory infrastructure for addressing 'problems associated with coastal resources and activities. The State becomes involved in 220 local land use decisions where such decisions would produce an'adverse impact on the State's natural resources, unduly tax the State fiscal resources or public services, would interfere with the orderly operation of state-wide programs and furtherance of state policies, or would have implications to land and water uses in other jurisdictions. Department of State Planning: The Department of State Planning has the responsibility to review local developmental plans, zoning ordinances, variances, and special exceptions for consistency with state policies and interests. It may intervene in local decisions to represent State interests, on its own initiative or upon the request of another State agency, local government or interested person, in accordance with the intervention procedures authorized by Article BBC, Section 2(j). The Department of State Planning is also responsible for State plans to coordinate development in the State. included in these plans will be recommendations for the most desirable patterns of land use within the State. These plans are to be developed with the cooperation and advise of appropriate federal, state, regional, and local government agencies. Environmental Health Administration (Department of Health and Mental Hygiene: The Environmental Health Administration administers sewage treatment facility construction grants authorized by P.L. 92-500 (federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972) and the State's sewage treatment construction funds, in conjunction with DNR and DSP. it is responsible for overseeing the county water and sewerage planning process, establishing standards for individual water and sewerage facilities, and permitting the construction of water and sewage treatment facilities, and individual additions to water and sewerage systems. The activities of EHA with respect to the regulation of water and sewerage facilities is further described in the Section on Sewage Treatment Facilities. The Environmental Health Administration is also responsible for the State's air quality and noise .control, and solid waste disposal regulatory programs. .The State's Air Quality and Noise Control Programs are administered by the Bureau of Air Quality and Noise Control (BAQNC) of the Environmental Health Administration of the Department of Health and Mental. Hygiene. BAQNC is organized into four divisions: Air Monitoring and Surveillance, Program Planning and Evaluation, Compliance, and Engineering. The Planning Division inventories and computerizes registered sources of air pollution, and uses this information in air quality planning and impact assessment. The Engineering Division regulates point sources of air pollution and provides technical assistance to applicants attempting to meet emission standards. The Compliance Division reinforces regulatory actions by inspecting and evaluating industrial sources of pollution, and by coordinating legal actions with the Attorney General and county health departments. The Monitoring Division operates an automated monitoring system to determine air quality, and to establish a Pollutant index for the Baltimore Region and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. 221 All existing air pollution sources in the State must be registered wi--h the Bureau. major sources require annual operations permits, and new sources must obtain a permit prior to the onset of construction. There is little room for discretion in the administration of air qua ity permits. After regional standards have been determined, applicants must demonstrate that they can comply with the standard. Because the sole ground for permit denial is noncompliance with the emission standards, the flexibility in the program lies in the planning process by which standards are determined. Presently, Maryland's standards are more stringent than the minimum Federal standards promulgated by EPA. visual emissions, for example, are strictly prohibited. Emissions standards have been established for the entire State, segmented into seven air quality regions. The State presently has the following non-attainment air quality areas. The Baltimore metropolitan area is a non-attainment area for photo-chemical oxidants. A few high traffic areas in Baltimore City are non-attainment areas for carbon monoxide. A few areas of Baltimore City, Baltimore County and Anne Arundel County are non-attainment areas for total suspended particulate matter. Prince George's County as part of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area is a non-attainment area for photo-chemical oxidants. In the Baltimore and Washington metropolitan areas, the Regional Planning Council and the Metropolitan Washington Council of Government have been designated the lead agenices in their respective areas for developing transportation control plans to address the photo-chemical oxidant problems since automobiles are the primary source of the photo-chemical oxidant problems. These plans are likely to include strategies for encouraging the use of public transportation over single-occupancy automobiles and improved inspection-maintenance proqrams for automobile emissions. The State is in the process of developing additional regulations regarding stationary sources which emit hydrocarbons and thus contribute to the photo-chemical oxidant-problems. The State is also developing regulations concerning suspended particulate matter to control fugitive dust and fugitive emissions. The efforts noted above to address photo-chemical oxidant problems are expected to control the carbon monoxide problem. All prevention of significant deteriorating areas in the State are Class 1I areas. The State will promulgate prevention of significant deterioration regulations in Spring of 1979 in accordance with EPA regulations. Noise emission standards, first issued in August, 1975, vary with time of day and with type of land use zone (residential, commercial, industrial). County and municipal governments are required to identify the State's sound level limits on all zoning maps, comprehensive plans, and other appropriate documents. To the maximum extent possible, local agencies will enforce noise standards. The State's Noise Regulation Program responds to complaints from individuals or units of local government about noisy conditions. Compliance is encouraged by stiff fines and flexible ~rariance allowed by the regulations. When violations are detected, a schedule of compliance is negotiated. 222 The siting of sanitary landfills and refuse disposal sites, the handling and transfer of solid waste, and the disposal of sludge, are regulated by the Bureau of Community Health Protection of the Environmental Health Administra ion. Solid waste disposal sites must be consistent with county solid waste plans. State evaluation does not begin until local approval has been secured. The State approval process for sanitary landfills involves the Water Resources Administration, the Maryland Geological Survey, and any other interested agencies. The State conducts an environmental suitability analysis to determine whether the use of the site and the mode of operation poses any threat to public health and safety of water resources. Land-use questions such as the effect of the landfill on neighboring land values are resolved at the local level. Usuelly, only one out of four sites are acceptable to the State. The Department of Natural Resources: The Department of Natural Resources is responsible for a variety of programs to minimize the offsite impacts of shoreland development and to ensure that the carrying capacity of coastal resources is not exceeded by shoreland developments. These programs are described below. Water Quality: Control of direct discharges to tidal waters is basic to Maryland's approach to minimizing offaite impacts of shoreland activities. Under Maryland law, it is illegal for any person to discharge pollutants into Maryland's waters without a permit from the Water Resources Administration (WRA) of the Department of Natural Resources. A permit is also required from WRA before anyone can "construct, in.stall, modify, extend, alter, or operate any industrial, commercial. or recreational facility or disposal system, or any state-owned treatment facility, or any other outlet or establishment, the operation of which would result in or be capable of causing a discharge of pollutants into the waters of the state". (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1413) A permit issued under Maryland's water quality permit program also qualifies a federal National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. To ensure the effective administration of this program, WRA has established a computer system in which information concerning water quality conditions (obtained from an extensive sampling program) and the status of permits are stored for read] access, so that permit decisions on the proposed discharge area can be made based on as much information as possible. The Water Resources Administration is also undertaking a water quality modeling system to determine cumulative impacts of discharges into tidal waters, and the relative contribution of point and non-point discharges to water quality problems. The Water Resources Administration is also responsible for issuing water quality certifications in conjunction with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10- 404 permits. Non-Point Pollution: Detailed examination of sources and the control of non-point pollution in Maryland's waters is proceeding with grants provided under Section 208 of the Water Quality Amendments of 1972. Two regional agencies, the Baltimore Regional Planning Council and the Washington Council of Governments have been designated to develop 208 plans for their regions. These two regions include the coastal counties of Harford, Baltimore, Anne Arundel, prince George's and Baltimore City. The remainder of the state is non-designated, and the 208 plan for it is being developed by the Water Resources Administration. This project consists of the following tasks: 223 1. setting of priorities for inves-Eigation of water quality problem areas; 2. inventory and projections for population, land use, environmental parameters, etc.; 3. assessment of pollution loads from point and non-point sources; 4. development of alternatives management strategies; 5. development of alternative segment analyses 'and impact assessment tools; 6. selection of appropriate segment analysis and impact assessment tools; and 7. final plan preparation. The final 208 Water Quality Management Plans must integrate and build upon the work done in local comprehensive sewer and water plans, the 303(e) water quality management plans, the 201lfacilities plans, Md. Environm'ental Service regional plans (where available) and other state planning efforts that affect water quality. The State Steering Commuittee for Water Quality M4nagement, which is composed of respresentives of state and federal agencies, local governments, and citizen representatives, coordinates these water quality efforts. Water Appropriations: A permit is required from WRA before anyone may use or appropriate any surface or underground waters within the State. Before it approves a permit, WRA must receive satisfactory proof that the proposed use will not violate Maryland water quality standards, overdraw the water supply, or have other adverse impact on the State's natural resources. In accordance with a legis- lative mandate, WRA has developed a statewide water supply program to evaluate and implement projects to satisfy projected water supply needs. The program's information base is used to review not only individual projects but also county and water supply plans, to identify deficiencies, and to evaluate alternatives to correct such deficiencies. Hazardous Substances The Department of Natural Resources was given the responsibility by the Hazardous Substances Disposal Act for designating and regulating the disposal of hazardous substances. Anyone operating a facility for the disposal of a designated hazardous substance must receive a permit from DNR. if the facility operator must also obtain a permit for refuse disposal from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, he need not get two permits. DN4R conditions are simply incorporated into the Department of Healih and Mental Hygiene permit conditions. Anyone who transfers hazardous substances to a disposal facility must receive a certification and have his vehicle certified by DN4R. 224 The Water Resources Administration sets fees for permits, based on the potential threat that hazardous substances may present to the environment, th4 costs of monitoring the disposal operation, and the costs of developing the programs. Fees for permits, certification, or permit renewal are retained in a Hazardous Substance Control Fund, which is used for emergency removal and mitigation of hazardous substances, and for monitoring and control of hazardous substances. Sedimentation/Stormwater Management: Sedimentation, the most pervasive type of non-point source of pollution, has been a focus of Maryland's attention for several years. The Water Resources Administration and the County Soil Conservation Districts have developed criteria to determine appropriate methods to control soil erosion and sedimentation. According to state law, these methods must be adopted and implemented by county and municipal governments, with the assistance of Soil Conservation Districts. Before someone may begin any land clearing, construction, or development, he must obtain a permit from the appropriate county, based on approval of his sediment control plans by the soil conservation district. Projects undertaken by a state or federal agency, or projects undertaken on state-owned land, must be approved directly by WRA. The Water Resources Administration also has a continuing responsibility for admini~strative review of local programs, to assure their effective implementation. According to the Attorney General's interpretation in 1971 of the Sediment Control Act, State and local governments have the authority to include stormwiater management measures into sediment control ordinances. The Water Resources Administration is now in the process of developing policy and criteria for storm- water management, to be incorporated into the sediment conmtrol regulatory process at both state and local levels. In addition, several counties have recently passed stormwater management ordinances. Local Soil Conservat ion Districts may also include stormwater management requirements in their policies and procedures for review and approval of sediment control. Increased attention to this effort has been spurred by passage of the Flood Control Measures for State Projects Act of 1976, which requires incorporation of stormwater management or retention measures into any project, constructed or funded by the state, which has the potential of causing additional flooding. Increased emphasis on maintaining natural features of a development site (such as natural buffers and natural drainageways) as a valuable supplement to man-made measures for sediment control and stormwater management, has become part of the State's efforts to refine state and local sediment control programs and to incorporate stormawater management concerns into such programs. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Shoreland activities will be subjected to the project evaluation process in accordance with referral mechanisms established with other state agencies, local governments, and the Department of State Planning regional personnel (as discussed in Chapter I and in previous sections). Developments will be analyzed to determine if the relevant concerns have been addressed adequately. To complement the efforts described in previous sections, the Coastal Zone unit will work with local governments and the Department of State Planning to resolve any outstanding issues, utilizing intervention procedures only after other alternatives have been tried. Issues subject to State or federal regulato'ry authority will be brought to thIe attention of appropriate authorities for ac.tion. 225 Program Review 1. As described in more detail in the chapter on Local Government Involvement, the Coastal Zone Unit will provide technical and financial assistance to local governments, to enable them to address problems associated with coastal resources and activities, and to incorporate coastal zone policies into their comprehensive plans, regulations, and zoning ordinances. The Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study undertaken by the Coastal Zone Unit, local governments in the area, the Regional Planning Council, the Department of State Planning, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Economic and Community Development, has been a prototype effort to ensure coastal zone management concerns are integrated into on-going local planning and regulatory efforts. 2. As information becomes available on measures to control non-point pollution and on mechanisms to ensure that the carrying capacity of areas are not exceeded, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Water Resources Administration, the Department of State Planning and local units of government, to incorporat- such information into local planning and regulatory activities. 3. Coastal Zone Unit will initiate the development of a data system recording the location, size, and other factors of all subdivisions and other developments in the area of focus, in order to determine the pattern, rate and cumulative impacts of shoreline developments occurring within them. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO SHORELAND ACTIVITIES IN GENERAL Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Water Quality Permits Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1413 Regulation Air Quality Program Direct State Planning and DHMH (EHA) Art. 43, Section 690 et se. Regulation Noise Control Direct State Planning and DHMH (EHA) Art. 43, Section 824 Regulation Water Appropriation Permit Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-801 8-802 Regulation Hazardous Substances Disposal Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Act Regulation Art. NR, Section 8-1413.2 Sediment Control Law State Standards for Local DNR (WRAX Art. NR, Section 8-1101, et seq. Implementation interpreted by 56 Att'y Gen. Op's 478 (Ap. 6, 1971) DSP General Authority/ Review of Local Plans and DSP Intervention Procedures Decisions with State Article 88C Interv,.,tin 226 d111D MAJO FACLIIE IN THE CO~~~~ASTAL3ZON D. MAJOR FACILITIES The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program will give particular attention to the siting and operation of major facilities such as sewage treatment facilities, energy facilities, and transportation facilities. In the non-shoreland portions of the coastal zone, they will be the primary concern of the Program. Specific Legislative Requirements Several o~f the requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act and the regulations issues pursuant to it, pertain specifically to such facilities: -National'Interest: -Section 306(c) (8) of the federal Coastal Zone Management A~ct requires that the States'sCoastal Zone .Management Program give "adequate consideration of the national interest involved in planning for, and in the siting of, facilities (including energy facilities in, or which significantly affect, such state's coastal zone) which are necessary to meet requirements which are other than local in nature". With regard to such facilities, the State must give consideration to any applicable interstate energy plan or program. "Adequate consideration of the national interest" means that Maryland must consider such facilities in a national context, and must not arbitrarily exclude or unreasonably restrict them without good and sufficient reasons. The Coastal Zone Management Program Administrative Rules and Regulations (Section 923.15) list a number of facilities which are other than local in nature, the siting of which may therefore be national interest. These include (but are not limited to): energy production and transmission facilities, mineral resource lands and facilities, interstate transportation networks, and sewage treatment plants. Considerations of national interest have been integrated into Maryland's procedure for taking inventory of coastal resources *and identifying existing or potential uses based upon analyses of resource suitability and impact. -Energy Facilities Planning: Section 305(b) (8) of the Act requires that a State's Coastal Zone Management Program include: "A planning process for energy facilities likely to be located in or which may significantly affect, the coastal zone, including, but not limited to, a process for anticipating and managing the impacts from such facilities." 227 The regulations issued pursuant to that section require t.aat the planning process include the following elements: (1) Identification of energy facilities which are likely to locate in, or vshich may significantly affect, a State's coastal zone; (2) Procedures for assessing the suitability of sites for such facilities; (3) Articulation of State policies for managing energy facilities and their impacts, including a clear articulation of policies regarding conditions that may be imposed on site location and facility development; (4) Identification of how interested and affected public and private parties may be involved in the planning pro- cess, and a discussion of the means for continued con- sideration of the national interest, in the planning for and siting of energy facilities that are necessary to meet more than local requirements, after program approval; and (5) Identification of legal authorities and management tech- niques that will be used to implement State policies and Procedures. - Uses of Regional Benefit: Section 306(c) (2) requires that a state's Coastal Zone Management Program include a method for ensuring that local land and water use regulations within the coastal zone do not unreasonably restrict or exclude uses of regional benefit. To meet these requirements, Maryland's Coastal Zene Management Program's approach has been to ensure that state and local goverments: 1. Make decisions on the location and operation of major facilities based on best available information and methods concerning land and- water resource capability and economic suitability. 2. Use the project evaluation process (see Chapter, I) to ensure that decisions regarding major facilities are made in the most objective manner possible, taking into account existing economic, social and natural conditions. For the purposes of the Program, the term "major facilities" includes any development meeting one or more of the following criteria: 1. A facility which may be needed to meet the national or state interest (as defined by law). 2. A facility that is required to service or support another facility which may be needed to meet the national or state interest. 3. A public facility which represents a major investnmt-nt of punliL funds, and whose effectiveness may be -eri'usly afra.ted by Its location. 228 4. A facility which may have or create direct and significant economic,environmental, social, and fiscal impacts upon the citizens of Maryland. The following types of facilities meet the criteria described above and are subject to various state authorities. All have been identified by the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and the regulations issued pursuant to it as having implications which are larger than local in scope. The siting of these facilities may entail issues of national interest. 1. OCS-Related/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities a. pipelines b. intermediate production terminals c. processing plants (for liquid natural gas) d. refineries e. storage facilities f. operation bases g. fabrication yards 2. Electric Generating Facilities a. fossil-fuel plants b. nuclear-fuel plants c. transmission lines 3. Ports 4. Industrial Parks, particularly those used by: a. primary metal production industries b. chemical and allied prx/uct industries c. food and kindred product industries d. stone, clay, glass product industries 5. Mineral Extraction Facilities 6. Large-scale Residential Facilities 7. Sewage Treatment Facilities 8. Land Transportation Facilities The Major Facilities Study was undertaken by the Coastal Zone Unit to develop an information base to enable state agencies and local governments to make better decisions regarding the siting and operation of the first six types of such facilities. The latter two types are the subject of study by state agencies, as described in the last two sections of this chapter. .The purpose of the Major Facilities Study is to identify: 1. Areas within Maryland's coastal counties in which the natural and socio-economic environments are suitable for major facilities. 2. Areas where expansion or increased use of existing sites can take place without significant' adverse impacts. 3. A method for evaluating the potential impacts of proposed major facilities and alternati~, development strategies. 229 Identification of such areas will enable state and local units of government to evaluate development proposals for compatibility with their long-range objectives, alternatives to the proposed development, and potential economic, fiscal, social, and environmental impacts. The process of identifying such areas has involved the following steps: (1) development of an inventory of the relevant operating characteristics of each major facility, (2) regional screening to identify areas with high potential (from a natural, social, economic, and environmental standpoint) for suitable sites for such facilities, and (3) development of a method for resolving conflicts associated with the siting and operation of major facilities. The results of the Major Facilities Study have been recently published in four Volumes: Volume 1 - Regional Screening and Conflict Resolution; Volume 2 - Power Plant Siting - Eastern Shore; Volume 3 - Economic. Fisca and Social Assessment Handbook: and Volume 4 - Environmental Assessment Handbook. An Executive Summary has been widely distributed to interested federal, state, and local agencies; organizations; int~erest groups; and persons. Distribution of the Study itself is based on ensuring that agencies and organizations likely to utilize study results in carrying out their responsibilities receive copies and then distribute the remaining copies for several informational purposes to persons and organizations requesting copies. The results of the study will be used as a valuable information base by the Energy and Coastal Zone Administration in making Coastal Facilities Review Act permit decisions on energy facilities as well as evaluating po- tential power plant sites on the Eastern Shore. In addition, workshops will be held for local governmental officials to ensure that they can fully utilize the results of the study in evaluating proposed energy facilities. In addition, the results of the study will be used: 1. -By local governments tc identify areas for designation as State Critical Areas. 2. By the Power Plant Siting Program to identify potential power plant sites. 3. By the Department of Economic and Community Development to identify priority development areas to receive funding under the Maryland Industrial Land Act. 4. By the Maryland Port Administration in its port development pro- grams. 5. By State and local regulatory agencies in making permit decisions on projects other than major facilities where the methodologies developed in the Study provide a useful evaluation approach. 230 The subsections that follow describe, for each type of facility, the factors of concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program. Relevant program objectives and policies are specified, appropriate authorities are listed, and the Coastal Zone Unit's role in project evaluation and program review is described. The regulatory authorities and management procedures described in the previous sections, particularly the Section Shoreland Activities in General, also apply to decisions on the siting and operation of major facilities. The facilities covered by the Coastal Facilities Review Act and the Power Plant Siting Act are the specific energy facilities in Maryland that would be covered by Section 305(b)(8), namely, those energy facilities likely to locate or significantly affect the coastal zone. These facilities are listed above under categories 1 and 2. - OCS Related/Oil/Natural Gas Facilities and Electric Generating Facilities." The procedures, policies, and implementation mechanisms described in the subsections on these two types of facilities will be used in conjunction with the Major Facilities Study to meet the requirements of Section 305(b)(8). As is the case with almost all of the facilities listed above, public hearings are required as part of the process for certifying oil related facilities under the Coastal Facilities Review Act and for licensing power plant sites under the Power Plant Siting Act. In addition, public involve- ment in siting decisions for all major facilities including energy facilities, will be undertaken through the procedures detailed in Chapter VII, The Public Role in Coastal Zone Management. Specifically, the public -.ill be provided opportunities to review and comment on the siting proces;~ and evaluations of projects through the CRAC participation, public information newsletters and media efforts, and public at-large meetings and review sessions. 231 ONSHORE OCS/OIL/NATURAL GAS FACILITIES Situation The United States Department of interior is leasing tracts of the nation's outer Continental Shelf (OCS) to increase domestic Production of oil and gas. The resulting increase in exploration, development and production of offshore petroleumi resources is likely to affect a number of communities along the Atlantic Coast. Lea se sales affecting Maryland are lease sale 40, held in 1976, lease sale 49, scheduled for February 1979, and lease sale 59, scheduled for August 1981. The location, types, numbers, characteristics, and timing of onshore support and processing operations for Atlantic OCS energy activities are triggered by offshore events and activities related to OCS exploration, development, and production. Significant (economically viable) discoveries of oil and gas reserves may create the need for several types of onshore facilities -- including fabrication yards, service bases, pipeline facilities, various types of production terminals, refineries, auxiliary industrial facilities, gas treatment plants, and marine terminals. Each type of facility is associated with a different, sometimes overlapping, phase of the OCS development process, and each has varying economic (e.g., labor, income), environmental, and social effects on existing community conditions. At present, it is not known how much oil and gas exists off Maryland's coast. There have been only a few deep exploratory wells in the Baltimore Canyon Region (the OCS Resource Province off the coast of Maryland, Delaware, and New Jersey) . The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that as much as 0.4 to 2.6 billion barrels (bbl) of crude petroleum and from 2.6 to 12.8 trillion cubic feet (tcf) of natural gas may be discovered and produced over a 25-year period. The possibility also remains, on the other hand, that there are no recoverable hydrocarbons in the Mid-Atlantic OCS. Both the search for and production of offshore oil and gas is fraught with uncertainty. Many factors not clearly understood include; 1. The mix of oil and gas present. 2. Where and when it will be found. 3. 'Its quantity. 4. its means of extraction and transport to shore. 5. Where and how it will be processed. 232 * ~~~All of these factors are initially unpredictable, except within broad limits. They become clear only gradually, as each oil and gas field is proven to be economically viable and is actually brought into production. In the lease sale #40 area, exploratory drilling, the first step in ocs development, will begin by the end of 1977. Estimates for offshore activities must be made to anticipate onshore consequences, and strategies must be developed to prepare to deal with them. most recent studies indicate that the need for expanded or additional refinery capacity is minimal. Studies conducted by the American Petroleum Institute, the Bureau of Land Management, and the office of Technology Assessment see no need for increasing refinery capacity as a result of new discoveries of oil and gas in the Atlantic region. Any demand for new or expanded refineries will result from increases in demand (energy consumption) rather than as a consequence of identifying new sources of supply. In the short term, Atlantic petroleum resources would simply substitute for more expensive foreign sources of oil and gas. However, the demand for oil and related products is projected to exceed refinery capacity over the next quarter century. Therefore, in the long run, new or additional refinery capacity will probably be needed in the Atlantic Coast region. Maryland has been preparing for potential development of oil and gas resources on the OCS for over two years. The Coastal Facilities Review Act was passed by the Maryland General Assembly in 1975. Rules and Regulations for that Act were promulgated by Maryland in 1976. Technical studies have also been undertaken. Studies completed or underway include: 1. Maryland Outer Continental Shelf Development of State and Local Powers to Manage Onshore impacts of offshore Development; August. 1976. 2. identification and Analysis of Mid-Atlantic Onshore OCS Impacts; January, 1976. 3. The Maryland Major Facilities Study; October, 1977. Maryland is also cooperating with federal agencies in the review and analysis of multi-state and national OCS studies including: 1. onshore Facilities Related to offshore Development New England River Basin Commission - RALI Project 2. Development and Testing of a Set of Methodologies to Assess Selected onshore Impacts of offshore Petroleum and Gas Development National Science Foundation, office of Coastal Zone Management# Bureau of Land management 233 The Maryland Major Facilities Study (see pp. 229,230 is of particular importance. it provides means whereby Maryland may interact with oil and gas organizations on siting and site evaluation. Areas displaying least negative environmental constraints and maximum economic opportunities for OCS onshore facilities have been identified, and will be published as part of the Major Facilities reports. Non-WCS related oil and gas facilities are also of concern to the State of Maryland including liquid natural gas facilities, refineries and related facilities. of particular interest is the Cove Point Liquified Natural Gas facility located in Calvert County on Maryland's lower western shore on a 1,022 acre tract situated on the Chesapeake Bay. This facility was built by the Columbia LNG Corporation in coordination with the Consolidated Natural Gas Company in response to the increased demand for natural gas in the United States and the diminshed supplies of domestic sources. It handles imported natural gas that has been liquified to convert it into a form that is practical for water transportation. The construction of the facility was completed early in 1978 with the first L.NG tanker arriving in March, 1978. The CoverPoint facility consists of a land facility and a Bay--docking and offshore terminal. The land facility is comprised of a storage section with four tanks each holding 62,000 cubic meters (375O0O)barrels) of LNG, a re- .gasification (vaporizer) facility, administrative and control buildings, fire water tanks, send out pumps and service buildings. The Bay-docking and offshore terminal is located approximately 5,300 feet offshore. 'It has two tanker berths along a 2,500 foot pier which is connected to shore by an underground tunnel containing both LNG pipes and vapor return lines. Present operating plans for the facility call for two ships to arrive every week. Columbia has submitted an application to DOE to increase this rate to three ships per week, which can be acccxmmodated by the existing facilities. Maryland is closely following the progress of this application. Issues State and local governments must coordinate their activities and regulatory actions concerning the siting and operation of major facilities, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shore line dependent, and to encourage the location of necessary shoreline-dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts can be minimized. (18) To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities whether industrial, coxmmercial or residential, in already developed areas capable of accommodating additional development, in areas suitable and planned for redevelopment, or in areas determined by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for development. 234 (19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (31) Toensu~re the use of thorough assessments of probable energy costs and benefits, positive and negative economic effects, probable social and environmental impacts, and the value of the public resources involved, as the basis for decisions on the development and production of Outer Continental Shelf resources. (32) TO ensure that the coastal counties, if affected by development related to energy facilities, obtain sufficient financial and technical assistance to adequately plan for and cope with the social, economic or environmental impacts of such development. (42) To provide adequate representation of the interests of the State of Maryland in federal decisions regarding the exploration development and production of outer Continental Shelf resources Investigations and decisions must consider wnether or not- - Studies utilize sound, state-of-the-art methodology. - Adequate environmental, socio-economic data, and data regarding OCS exploration, production and development are available. - Lack of data delays decisions. - Recommendations conform with all applicable State and Federal environmental statutes and regulations. - Recommendations would mitigate significant environmental and socio-economic impact. - Recommendations resolving conflicts, where attainment of State and Federal standards or prevention of significant impact is not in question, are developed with an appropriate balance between economic cost and environmental benefit. - Adequate coordination is maintained with agencies and organizations affected by siting decisions, in order that their concerns may be factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. - The public has ready access to information and the opportunity to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. 235 Policies 1. Facilities covered by the provisions of the Coastal Facilities Review Act (CFRA. are subject to comprehensive state review prior to permit decisions on their siting, construction, and operation within Maryland. CFRA facilities are defined as: - Pipelines carrying crude oil or natural gas ashore from offshore sources. - Intermediate production terminals or refineries. - Crude oil storage facilities; natural gas transmission, processing or storage facilities; operation bases; or fabrication yards. 2. No CFRA facility certification will be granted in a coastal county unless: a. The facility meets all applicable air, water, noise, and solid was-:e laws of the State. b. The facility conforms with county or local land use planning, and with the official county or local comprehensive zoning map, the State Development Plan, and the State Coastal Zone Management Program. c. The facility would have no significant adverse effect upon the natural environment of the area, its scenic or natural beauty, its rare or irreplaceable natural resources, or its unique historic sites. d. The facility would not be located or constructed so that adverse effect upon the public health, safety, or welfare would result. e. The facility would not pose an undue burden on the water supply of the site or region. f. The facility would not contribute to undue environmental degradation or resource exhaustion. g. The facility would have no adverse affect upon areas identified and designated as State Critical Areas. h. The facility would not impose a burden on existing State regional or county public facilities'beyond their respective capacities. i. New public facilities, if required as a result of the construction and operation of the facility: 1. Would be completed in time to serve the facility., or 2. Would be adequate to serve the facility witnout causing over-loading or the public facilities. j. There are fewer undesirable environmental, economic, fiscal, and cultural consequences in its proposed location than in other locations. (Natural Resources Article 6-508) 236 Imnplemenltationl Lead Agency: Energy and Coastal Zone Administration Management Procedures The location of oil, natural gas, and OCS-related facilities in the State's coastal counties is regulated by the Coastal Facilities Review Act (CFRA), and is administered by the E&CZA in conjunction with other state agencies and local units of government. Facilities covered under this Act include natural gas facilities, pipelines, intermediate oil production terminals or xrefineries~, oil and gas storage facilities, operation bases, and fabrication yards. These facilities must receive certification from the Department of Natural Resources before construction may begin. The Secretary of Natural Resources is required to designate someone to draft an environmental, economic, and fiscal statement on the proposed facility, to be used to determine whether to issue the permit. The Secretary also receives advisory comments from the Secretaries of State Planning, Health and Mental Hygiene, Economic and Community Development, and Transportation. The CFRA specifies that, before the State can process a permit application including the impact statement, the county where the facility is to be located (or where the pipeline is to terminate) must certify that all appropriate local approvals will be granted or that it wishes to stay its decision. if there is no local government action within 60 days after notice of-application appears in the Maryland Register, the Department of Natural Resources may assume that the local government has stayed its decision and may proceed. However, the Secretary of Natural Resources may not issue a CFRA permit until the local government certifies its approval of the project. The review of pipelines presents a special case, since in many cases pipelines may be able to cross Resource Protection Areas', such as tidal wetlands, with minimal adverse impacts, if proper installation procedures are followed. objective #14 may not-be applicable in-the case of certain pipeline proposals. In addition, it should be noted that Baltimore City is presently exempted from the provision of the Coastal Facilities Review Act. However, any CFRA-type facility proposed to be located in Baltimore City must comply with the regulatory authorities listed in the previous sections of Chapter III, particularly those noted as relating to Shoreland Activities in General (water quality permits, air quality permits, water appropriation permits, etc.). Public Hearings will be required as part of the permit reviews undertaken under thise regulatory authorities. Since Baltimore City is an air quality region classified as a tenon-attainment area", the location of oil refineries or similar processing facilities in Baltimore City is questionable. Moreover, the Major Facility Study referred to previously covers the entire coastal zone, including Baltimore City, and thus provides procedures for assessing the suitability of sites for such facilities in Baltimore City. Also, a full project evaluation will be undertaken on any CFRA-type facility proposed for Baltimore City to ensure that all relevant factors are considered in permit decisions made regarding it. 0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~237 Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation The Coastal Zone Unit has been designated as the state agency to carry out the comprehensive review of on shore OCS/oil natural gas facilities required by CFRA. Such reviews will constitute full project evaluations. Project evaluations for CFRA-type facilities inside Baltimore City will be undertaken at the time an applicant seeks zoning amendments, requests state funding assistance, or applies for a specific state permit, whichever occurs first. As noted in the Section III of Chapter VI, "Consideration of the National Interest in State and Local Coastal Zone Management Decisions", the Coastal Zone Unit will invite federal agency representatives to participate in such evaluations to present their national interest concerns in a particular facility. If necessary, the Unit will also request the Department of State Planning to intervene in local land use decisions in support of the findings and recommendations of such evaluations including those involving national interest considerations. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will help local governments plan for and cope with the consequences. of coastal petroleum and natural gas facilities., with technical information from such sources as the Major Facilities Study, and with funds from the Coastal Energy Impact Pirogram. The Coastal Zone Unit will also work with those federal agencies which have responsibility for review and approval of the siting, construction, and operation of onshore OCS/oil/natural gas facilities, to insure that the State's interest is represented and considered in their actions. AUTHORITIES RELATED TO ONSHORE OCS/OIL/NATURAL GAS FACILITIES Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Direct State Planning and DNR (E&CZA) Coastal Facilities Review Act adRglto (Natural Resources Article, and Regulation Section 6-501 et seq.) 138 ELECTRIC GENERATI14G FACILITIES . Situation Additional fossil fuel and nuclear power plants will be needed in the future, in spite of the successful implementation of energy conservation programs by individuals, and by comercial and industrial establishments. Realistic projections of demand growth, approximately St per year, indicate that Maryland will require an additional 11,000 megawatts of generating capacity by 1992. Assuming that the size of future power plants is equivalent to 2,400 megawatts for nuclear plants and 1,600 megawatts for fossil plants, as many as S nuclear power plants or 7 fossil fuel plants (or a combination of both) will be needed by 1992. Because the production and transmission of energy are potentially major contributors to environmental degradation, decisions regarding energy policy alternatives require comprehensive environmental analysis. in the production and distribution of electricity, conflicts between environmental constraints, citizen preferences, and socio-economic issues relating to power plant siting have been widely publicized. Recognizing the understandable controversy surrounding efforts to increase the production of electric power, the State of Maryland established a Power Plant Siting Program (PPSP) in 1971. The enabling legislation, which specifies that the surcharge which funds PPSP will expire in 1985, was structured to ensure that future demands for electric power would be met at reasonable cost, while stimultaneously ensuring that the natural and socio-economic environments would be protected. The law provides for the development of a sound public policy framework for resolving conflicts among various interest . groups, by providing scientifically sound information for decision-makers. In addition to predicting the impact of proposed new generating units, assessing the impact of existing generating facilities, and acquiring alternate sites for needed generation, scientific information gaps'are being filled by a long-range, stably- funded, and well-designed research program. Utility plans for constructing and operating new power pl~ants determine the number and location of utility-owned sites to be studied by the Site Evaluation segment and the Impact Assessment segment of the program. For the past several years, utility plans have Seen subject to fluctuation, due in part to changes in energy demand patterns, utility financing problems, and regulatory uncertainty. These fluctuations are continuing. Applications have been submitted to NRC for Douglas Point (construction permit) and Perryman (early site review). The .Brandon Shores plant will come on-line in 1980. Alao requiring evaluations are other utility-owned coastal sites listed in the utilities' 10-year plans: Sollers Point and Northwest (BG&E), Canal Site and Seneca Point (Philadelphia Electric). In addition, Delmarva Power and Light Company is undertaking studies to identify a site on the Eastern Shore. The Power Plant Siting Program# 239 through its Site Acquisition segment, is also in the process of identifying a suitable site on the Eastern Shore. When this site is acquired, it will be banked for utilization by Delmarva Power and Light Company to meet either immediate or long-range needs. Maryland has one significant hydroelectric facility in its coastal zone. The Conowingo Hydroelectric Project located on the Susquehanna River between Harford and Cecil Counties. The reservoir created by this Project extends into Pennsylvania. The Project, consisting of the dam, powerhouse, reservoir and transmission lines, was constructed under a license issued by FERC (formerly FPC) on February 1926 and which expired in February 1976. Since then, FERC has issued an annual operating license. The powerhouse has a total installed capacity of 512,000 kw and is owned and operated by the Susquehanna Power Company and the Philadelphia 'Electric Company. In 1965 four addition turbines went into operation at the Powerhouse. Changes were made at the tailrace and time for water retention behind the damn was increased. Shortly thereafter and up to the present, Maryland has experienced a number of fishkills. Studies conducted by Maryland indicate that these fishkills are due to low disolved oxygen conditions and a constantly changing water column in the lower portion of the Susquehanna River over a 24-hour period as requirements for energy from the Project increase or decrease. At issue are adverse impacts created by damn operation on fishery production, aquatic habitat, water quality, water supply and salinity. Maryland, through its participation on the Susquehanna River Basin Coimmission, is supporting measures that will mitigate such impacts and protect the natural resources and users of downstream areas between the Damn and the Chesapeake Say. During the spawning season, a 5000 CPS release is required by agreement between Maryland and the utilities. Maryland is supporting implementation of fish passage facilities at Conowi~ngo and the other hydroelectric projects on the Susquehanna. These fish passage facilities will allow the restoration of the river's migratory fishery. The Susquehanna Basin Commission has established a regulation that consumptive use be compensated for when the flow at any point of intake is' less than the 7 day 10 year low flow frequency. New federally licensed projects and existing federally licensed projects that wish to increase consumption of water are subject to this regulation. Studies now underway will determine specific minimum flows necessary to protect aquatic habitat, assimilate wastes and maintain water quality standards below the Conowingo, Dam. A major external influence on State power plant site evaluation and monitoring activities is exerted by the evolution of State and Federal laws and regulations. State air quality standards have been revised. State water quality regulations are being revised, requiring studies to determine if cooling towers must be retrofitted. New EPA regulations for Prevention of Significant Deterioration require new techniques for predicting and measuring long-range air pollutant dispersion. NRC regulations have established a new procedure, Early Site Review, which allows site suitability to be determined prior to a construction permit application. Legislation enacted by the 1977 General Assembly requires that PPSP work with local governments to determine transmission line routes from State-owned sites to the existing transmission grid. 240 The effect of State and Federal laws and regulations created a need to expand impact prediction and assessment from a site perspective to a regional scale. Areas of regional study currently include aquatic impact, hydrologic modeling, long-range transport of air pollutants, socio-economic impact modeling, and regional-based site selection techniques. Issues This situation requires that state and local governments, with federal cooperation and consistency, develop accurate and adequate information for decisions related to the environmental and socio-economic impact of existing and proposed power plants, to ensure adequate electric power on reasonable schedules at reasonable costs with a minimum depreciation of the quality of Maryland's environment, consistent with the foilowing objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shortline dependent, ard to encourage the location of necessary shoreline- dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts can be minimized. (18) To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities whether industrial, commercial or residential, in alrady developed areas aab__leof accomodating additional d oent, in areas suitable and planned for redevelopent, or in areas determined by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for devel2opment. (19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (32) To ensure that the coastal counties, if affected by development related to energy facilities, obtain sufficient financial and technical assistance to adequately plan for and cope with the social, economic or environmental impacts of such development. (41) To promote coordination of state and local governmental programs with those of federal agencies and neighboring states to further the goals of the Coastal Zone Management Program, and to minimize duplication of efforts, conflicting actions, a regulatory permit processing delays. Investigations and decisions must consider whether: - Studies utilize sound, state-of-the-art methodology. - Environmental, socio-economic, and power plant data are adequate. - Need for additional data unnecessarily delays decisions. - - Recommendations conform with all applicable State and Federal environmental statutes and regulations. 241 -Recommendations would mitigate significant environmental and socio- economic impacts. -Recommendations resoving conflicts, where attainment of State and federal standards or prevention of significant impact is not in question, are developed with an appropriate balance between economic cost and environmental benefit. - Adequate coordination is maintained with agencies and organizations affected by siting decisions, in order that their concerns may be factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. - Members of the public have ready access to current information and the opportunity to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. - Procedures for improving the siting process, such as joint State- federal hearings, early site review, and delegation of environmental decision-making from federal to state agencies, have been investigated. Policies 1. It is the State's policy to ensure that adequate electric power is provided on reasonable schedule, at reasonable costs and with the least possible depreciation of the quality of Maryland's environment. (Natural Resources Article, Section 3-304). 2. In reviews of applications for certificates of public convenience and necessity, the following criteria will be considered in evaluating power plant sites and transmission lines. (Natural Resources Article, Section 3-304): a. The recommendations of local governments and state agencies; b. Present and future power demands; c. Impact upon system stability and reliability; d. Economic impact (including fiscal and employment impacts and impacts on public services); irretrievable commitments of resources; e. Environmental impact on air and water quality; f. Impact upon wetland areas; g. Impact upon fish and wildlife resources and habitats; h. Radiological impacts; i. Noise impacts; j. Aviation safety; k. potential impacts on aesthetics and on historic and archeological sites; 1. Potential impacts on public open space, Recreational, and natural areas; and m. Potential impacts on state critical areas. 242 3. Power plants shall be sited, constructed, and operated in a manner which minimizes their impacts on tidal wetaInds, aquatic resources, terrestrial resources, significant wildlife habitat, public open space, recreational, and natural areas, air and water quality, and the public health, safety, and welfare. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 3-301 et seq., 8-1402, 8-1405, 8-1413, 9-102, 9-202, and 9-306) 4. A certificate of public convenience and necessity will not be granted to any facility which would violate federal or state air or water quality standards. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-103, 3-304, 8-1413, Article 78, Section 54A, 54B, 57 Attorney General Opinions 439 (1972)) 5. The State will utilize its power plant monitoring and research programs to determine how power plants affect human health and welfare and the vitality of the State's natural resources. (Natural Resources Article, Section 3-303, 3-304} 6. The State will identify, evaluate and acquire 4 to 8 power plant site. (Natural Resources Articl.e, Section 3-305) Implementation Lead Agencies: Power Plant Siting Program Public Service Commission Management Procedures State Agencies The Maryland Power Plant Siting Program (PPSP) is an interdepartmental program involving six State Departments - Agriculture, Economic and Community Development, Health and Mental Hygiene, Natural Resources, Planning, and Transportation - with DNR as lead agency. The five Departments are represented on all advisory committees. PPSP staff coordinate studies with other Departments. Special arrangements are made as needed. For example: PPSP and DSP jointly administer a study forecasting long-term electric energy demand. A PPSP staff member is responsible for liaison with Bureau of Air Quality and Noise Control (BAQNC) location at BAQNC offices, to facilitate comunication. A PPSP staff member works in DHMH's Environmental Laboratory, where radiological data analysis equipment purchased by PPSP and DHMF, is centrally housed. PPSP coordinates the official recommendations from all six state Departments, which are provided to the Public Service Commission at its public hearings on certificates of public convenience and necessity for power plants. Communication (primarily regarding technical information) is also maintained with'the Energy Policy Office (EPO). Statewide energy policy programs being developed by EPO and the Coastal Zone Management Program will provide useful frameworks for the results of PPSP studies. As noted above, Maryland's participation in the Susquehanna River Basin Commission provides a mechanism for ensuring that the Conowingo Hydroelectric Project is operated in an environmentally acceptable manner. 243 Local Government Local governments are represented on the Power Plant Siting Advisory Committee (PPSAC). Public meetings on PPSP studies are arranged in cooperation with local governments. PPSP provides information from its studies to local governments and solicits input from them, particularly on sites of local interest. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, the PSC considers recommendations from local governing bodies and representatives as part of the formal public hearing process. When a state-owned site is acquired, the county government is requested to establish an Interim Use Advisory Committee, which makes recommendations on interim uses of the site to PPSP. Citizen Groups Citizen groups are represented on PPSAC and the Environmental Research Guidance Committee (ERGC). Public meetings are held on site-specific studies to inform the public and to obtain input from them. All information developed by PPSP is available to the public. Coordination of Government Agencies and Outside Organizations 1. Advisory Committees: a. Power Plant Siting Advisory Committee (PPSAC): This independent committee is composed of representatives of State and local agencies, utilities, citizens group, and other institutions. It periodically reviews PPSP activities and advises the Secretary of DNR on policy matters. b. Environmental Research Guidance Committee (ERGC): This conmmittee is composed of experts familiar with research on environmental and socio-economic impacts. it advises PPSP on technical aspects of the program's research element. c. Major Facilities Study Steering Committee (MFSSC): This ad hoc committee, composed of representatives of state and local agencies, citizens groups, and industry, advises PPSP and the Coastal Zone Unit of E&CZA on their joint study of major facility SitiNg in Maryland's Coastal Zone. PPSP will use this study as a basis for acquiring a power plant site on the Eastern Shore. 2. Federal Agencies a. Specific Licensing Proceedings: PPSP represents Maryland in NRC licensinq proceedings and provides technical support to other state agencies, particularly the Water Resources Administration and the BAQNC, in their dealings with federal agencies such as EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on air and water quality licensing matters. 244 b. General Licensing Considerations: PPSP is actively involved with the Federal/State Siting Coordinating Committee, which seeks to identify and implement means for improving the licensing and permitting process. As a result of this Committee's work, Maryland became the first state to hold a joint hearing with the NRC on a proposed nuclear power plant at Douglas Point. c. Technical Information Exchange: PPSP conducts research projects jointly funded by federal agencies (e.g., the Chalk Point Cooling Tower Project jointly funded by PPSP, ERDA, EPA, and EPRI). Technical consultation prior to and during licensing proceedings is conducted between PPSP technical contractors, federal contractors, and staff, to identify issues of mutual concern, resolve potential conflicts, and exchange data. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Working relationships have been established between Coastal Zone Unit and PPSP (sister units of the E&CZA) regarding the evaluation of power plants. For example, potential power plant sites on the Eastern Shore are being identified as part of the Major Facilities Study. The Power Plant Siting Program will also incorporate certain concerns in its project evaluations to permit comprehensive analysis of the conflicts between economic cost and environmental benefit in the siting, construction, and operation of power plants. These include: 1. Considering inland sites for electric generating facilities as part of the Regional Screening Method for selecting candidate power plant sites. 2. Considering the trade-offs between constructing new facilities or expanding electric generating facilities at existing sites in the evaluation of PSC Ten-Year Plan. 3. Encouraging beneficial, multiple use of new coastal power plant sites. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will assist local governments to plan for power plant siting, construction, and operation, by providing funds for technical assistance to develop programs that mitigate secondary growth impacts of such facilities. Funds earmarked by the Coastal Zone Management Program for local governments will be used. Coastal Energy Impact Program (CEIP) funds may also be requested for financing necessary improvements in public services, and for replacing or restoring environment or recreational areas lost to the power plant. Priorities for funding CEIP requests will be subject to evaluation by the Coastal Zone Unit witl, the assistance of CRAC. 245 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO ELECTRIC GENERATING FACILITIES Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Power Plant Siting Act Direct State Planning and DNR (E&CZA) (Natural Resources Article, Regulation Section 3-301 et seq.) 246 PORTS . Situation The ports of Maryland, including Baltimore, Cambridge, and Salisbury, constitute major economic enterprises that serve the needs of major import, export, and regional waterborne commerce of Maryland and the nation. other ports such as Piney Point and Cove Point are single purpose ports. Directly and indirectly, they provide a substantial number of jobs and income to the State. The port of Baltimore contains a mix activities related to waterborne commerce, such as public marine terminals operated by the Maryland Port Administration, private marine-oriented industries such as Bethlehem Steel and Sea-Land, railroad and road on-off loading centers, and agricultural processing operations such as the Amstar sugar refinery. The port of Cambridge, developed with public funds by the Maryland Port Administration, serves the agricultural industry on the Eastern Shore. Salis):ury Port is a privately developed and operated port area which receives refined oil products, agricultural products and dry bulk goods. Piney Point is a single purpose post, receiving and storing refined oil products for use in Southern *Maryland. Cove Point is a single purpose port for receiving and processing liquid natural gas. Existing port areas in the state, as well as proposed future port areas, are currently being studied to determine what types of new port-related activities might be stimulated by new port facilities. Baltimore Harbor is Maryland's . largest single economic entity as well as the largest, most diversified Port. Project studies on expansion and development of port facilities to meet present and future port needs in Baltimore Harbor are underway. Studies investigating the feasibility of a commercial port at Crisfield are also underway. There are already two existing ports an the Eastern Shore. The potential facility'at Crisfield would have to compete with them for the limited markets for the Eastern Shore imports and exports. However, there is increasing support for the concept of a regional port complex involving Crisfield, Cambridge, and Salisbury. Based on the results of the studies underway, the State of Maryland will determine if development of port facilities at Crisfield is economically advantageous to the local and state interests. The studies will also recommend implementation alternatives. Port development can have major environmental consequences, especially in relatively undisturbed areas. The considerable dredging required to create and maintain navigation channels can modify the hydrology of a harbor, result in salinity variations, degrade existing aquatic resource values, and create a disposal problem. The problems associated with dredging and maintaining navigational channels and the State's approach to resolving them is described in the Section on Dredging and Dredged Material Disposal. in addition, ports that handle oil products involve risks of oil and/or liquid natural gas spills. ports also have landside impacts, since a port generates a large volume Of rail and heavy truck traffic and usually spurs intensive industrial and urban developments.. 247 Other factors of concern to the State of Maryland relating to port development and operation include the following: 1. Factors relating to part technology and environmental conditions that involve complicated port development procedures; 2. corps of Engineers operations, budgets, and inflationary pressures that have reduced the amount of dredging possible at a constant funding level; 3. Mini-landbridge operations which cause diversion of containerized cargo from one port to another, with part of the cost absorbed by the ship operator; 4. Hazardous substances, vessel traffic control systems, and operations of deepwater terminals; 5. The lack 6f a clearly defined, national policy for water resource development and water transportation; 6. Methods of ensuring optimal allocation of the limited capital available to port development; and 7. Corpsof Engineers adoption of regional and programmatic approaches to port dredging projects. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the objectives identified in the Coastal Zone Management Program: (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shoreline dependent, and to encourage the location of necessary shoreline-dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts can be minimized. (18) To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities whether industrial, coimmercial or residential, in already developed areas capable of acconmmodating additional development, in areas suitable and planned for redevelopment, or in areas determined by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for development. 19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (20) To ensure the viability of Maryland's port areas, and to ensure that their development is carried out in an environmentally sound manner. 248 (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for providing adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developents are approved by state and local governmental agencies. (25) To ensure that adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decisions concerning the siting of public facilities in coastal areas, particularly,those involving transpration and waste treatment facilities. (28) To identify and encourage the use of envirornmentally suitable methods of dredging and disposing of dredged material, (including beneficial/ use of dredged material) to meet long-term needs resulting from navigational projects, state and local governmental projects, and major private projects, and to oppose the use of methods found to be environmentally unsuitable. (29) To prevent the filling of the State's tidal waters unless there is no feasible alternative and the proposed Proiect is in accordance with the goals, objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Management Program. (33) To ensure that hazardous substances are utilized and disposed of in a manner which prevents any toxic, lethal, or sublethal effects to plant, aquatic or animal life, which prevents any adverse effect upon human health, and which prevents disposal of the substance into terrestrial or aquatic ecosystems. Investigations and regulatory procedures must consider whether or not a proposed action will: - Provide needed port capacity and improvements in an environmentally suitable and economical manner. - Create adverse impacts on state and private tidal wetlands or aquatic resources. - Involve excessive dredging and disposal of dredged material. - Cause water quality problems such as oil spills. - Create or aggravate shore erosion problems adjacent to navigation channels. - Decrease safety or increase congestion, and interfere with existing ship traffic. - Provide for adequate and safe navigation aids and maintenance of navigation channels. - Necessitate additional data, thus delaying regulatory decisions. Utilize sound, state-of-the-art methods, and to adequate environmental socio-economic data in all studies. 249 - Conform with all applicable State and Federal environmental statutes and regulations. --Mitigate significant environmental and socio-economic impact. - Maintain adequate coordination with agencies and organizations affected by siting decisions, so that their concerns may be factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. - Ensure that the public has ready access to current information, and the opportunity to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. Policies 1. Maryland will plan, develop, maitain, operate, and regulate - in cooperationi with local jurisdictions and as a supplement to the facilities and services provided by private enterprise - a transportation system which adequately meets the need for movement of people and goods while: supporting local, regional, state and national goals; providing for and facilitating a pattern of physical development which z~an be effeciently served by transportation; preserving the unique qualities of Maryland's historical and natural resources; maintaining fiscal integrity, and strengthening the economy of Maryland. In order to develop and operate such a transportation system, Maryland will develop and maintain a continuing comprehensive and integrated transportation planning process, including a State Master Plan for Transportation. (Transportation Article, Section 2-103; Maryland Transportation Action Plan) 2. The development of port facilities in existing port areas by the private sector i~s in the public interest. However, private operators in port areas have a responsibility to provide modern port and harbor facilities suited to the public that they serve. Therefore, if private facilities are inadequate or inadequately operated at any time, the Maryland Port Administration may construct and operate any supplementary public facilities that are required to meet the public interest. (Transportation Article, Section 2-103) 3. in carrying out its duties, the Maryland Port Administration may acquire, construct, reconstruct, rehabilitate, improve, maintain lease, repair, and operate port facilities within its territorial jurisdiction, including the dredging of ship channels and turing basins and the filling and grading of land. it may designate the location and character of all port facilities and improvements and regulate all matters related to the location and character of these facilities and improvements. However, the Maryland Port Administration must comply with all local planning and development regulations, state and federal standards to the same extent as a private commercial or industrial enterprise. (Transportation Article, Section 6-204, 6-501) 250 4.' The expenditure of public funds requested for port construction and operation, including the dredging of ship channels and turning basins, and the filling and grading of land, will be evaluated on the bases of a) existing and projected business conditions, freight rates and port services, b) physical surveys of channel conditions and structures, c) need for port facilities to develop, improve, and more speedily handle commerce, d) economic impact of these funds on existing public facilities, e) beneficial effects of the project on the environment f) measures such as monitoring, maintenance, and replacement that might minimize potential adverse environmental effects and maximize potential beneficial environmental effects; and g) reasonable alternatives to the project that might have fewer adverse environmental effects or greater beneficial environmental effects (including the alternative of no action). Loans to local subdivisions for the acquisition or construction of port facilities shall be based on such considerations. (Transportation Article, Sections 6-204, 6-307; Natural Resources Article Section 1-302, 1-303) 5. Location and regulation of private port facilities necessary to service OCS exploration, development, and production will be evaluated pursuant to the Coastal Facilities Review Act. (Natural Resources Article, Section 6-501) 6. The Governor shall ensure that state interests are adequately represented in federal decisions regarding deep-water port applications. The State's position shall be based upon a comprehensive analysis of the proposed project by the Department of Natural Resources, subject to review by the State Legislature. The following factors shall be considered in the development of the state's position: a. Environmental factors including: the effect on the marine environment; the effect of land-based developments related to deepwater port -development; the effect on human health and welfare; the effect on the state's Coastal Zone Management Program under Sections 3DI(A) and (B) of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 and the effect of other considerations that the Secretary of the federal Department of Transportation may deem appropriate. b. Economic, social and cultural factors. c. Impacts on existing and future state and local publi- facilities and services. d. Evidence presented at public hearings held within the State, either required under the Federal Act or conducted by the State. e. The findings of any statement prepared pursuant to Section 6-506 of the Coastal Facilities Review Act, and the status of any permit action pursuant to that Act. f. Views of all interested state agencies, and county or local qovernments. (Natural Resources Article, Section 3-501 et seg.) 251 7. Baltimore Harbor is the State's primary maritime commercial and inCustrial center. Consequently, new privately operated port facilities designed to open new areas of the coastal zone will be discouraged unless a port- related development is necessary to serve a specific necessary industrial use requiring water access. (Transportation Article Section 2-403, 6-102, 6-204, 6-606; Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 8-203, 8-1402, 8-1405, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306) S. Commercial port facilities must be adequately sited, constructed and operated pursuant to a) local comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, and performance contracts, b) all applicable air, water, noise and solid waste laws of Maryland, c) the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program, d) the State Development Plan, e) the State Critical Areas Program, and f) the Coastal Facilities Review Act. Commercial port facilities which cause congestion problems, safety problems, excessive dredging, adverse impacts on water quality and aquatic resources are not consistent with the public interest. (Transportation ActIcle Section 2-103, 6-102, 6-204, 6-206, 6-304, 6-305, 6-309; Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 6-501 et seq., 8-203, 8-1402, 8-1405, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306) Implementation Lead Agencies: Maryland Port Administration (development and operation of public ports, assistance to provide ports as appropriate) Water Resources Administration (water resources regulations) Coastal Zone Unit (port facilities associated with onshore OCS facilities) Management Procedures Public Ports The Maryland Port Administration of the Maryland Department of Transportation, conducts all public facility planning, acquisitions, construction, and operation. General procedures for conducting Maryland Port Administration activities are outlined in Maryland's Transportation Action Plan. The Action Plan calls for comprehensive master planning, systems planning, and project planning prior to the acquisition or construction of a public port facility. Opportunities for involvement at all stages of the planing process are provided to all other state agencies and affected local subdivisions. After plans are completed, additional public and agency review is afforded at permit review stages. Permits and licenses requiring local approval, and related to water quality, wetlands, and Corps of Engineers Section 10-404 authority will be addressed at this stage. 252 14)cal acd F'iivate Ports 1,3cal q~overnmlenLs may sponsor local 5;'iSfr private poc- develop, nt. I I ptblic funds art, utilized, pablic int ut , d r-vlew di):)redur,~F are irnc s::i 111W 0~kdy implemelitatior). 'If privatec' tv-n . Li 17c. a j:ort projec- i-s ::ul3~joct or revijew int. iit is hrc uqht -, *rward f(_r 10C,1l 7or1 nq, and Krft ai~ ~eieriiPerMits. 1Wca~ I overnments m~r, _!.o djpply 'c,, t hr, 11ivliiad P-t ,'.cniinisttration for funds to acquire or consliuct port facilities When a port project is brought forward, it will be reviewed by-the Department-of State Plauenin'a for consistency with provisions of the State~ Lan~l Use Act. of 19'74. Private port projvcts art, also regulated by local govern-ert- and require -Issuance of w'etl-~~ 1 s;~'/water -quality certification; and C ~;c u,' Engin;cer~ Ge-~:,_:n 10-404 ermit s. if a port facility is associated ith an onshore OCS' facility, )t Is sub~ject to a comprehensive review under th, provision of the Coastal Facilities Review Act. However, it should be t~uted tL.t, Ealtimor,-~ City is presert' ---erte,1 '.outh.- provisions of the Coastal Facilities Roview Act. Fowcwv'r, facilit.3.es constructed within its boundaries are small subject to applicable federal'. state and local regulations. LDeepwater Ports The 1977 State Dec-11,.,:Ler Ports Act requires the Governor to submit to, state's position on proposed deepwater ports applications to the Federal Government within 30 days of the last public hearing held on the application, so that the State's views will be adequately addressed in the federal government's decision on the application. The Governor is to develop the State's position based upon review of the application by the Department of Natural Resources, and action will be taken by the state legislature to confirm or modify his recommendations on the . ~proposed application. Coordination with Federal Agencies Present federal authority ov~portc avid harbrjrs is fragnente(; among more thian 50 federal c~rgaaizat:Lor.,. The Y-,2(. L.-deral. age-niies involved .n port development and operatiuxt a. the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the M~azitilme Administration, and the J.!,. Coast Guard. Of particular importance are the activities of the "3. Army Corps of Engin~eers which involve the approving, constructing, and maintaining of waterway access projects for ports and harbors and the issuing of permits for the dredging and disposal of dredged material &.~LJ-iated withi porr. development and maintenance. Maryland works with these organizations to ensure that state and federal actions are properly coordinated. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation *The procedures outlined in the Maryland Transportation Action Plan proviCe 1-,a comprehen,7;ive c-ooperative review of publicly-funded port developments with I)epartment of Transportation playing the lead role. -he Coastal Zone Unit will. ensure that those issues pertaining to consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Program are fully considered in -e *.Lanning phase of such reviews. 253 I rlvi I IV 'ii I 'd I t itI tp1 jIt' (I!, W I Ia u eti IfI1t i*Vll~dti~L ru'Us; i.- dot-x ibed in ~_hapt, - ~ er;liiri2 that .il 'cavi~ty : c i *tmaqemctofiqrdim (jud I, objectives and policies are arldress(,d at. thC Irl i'St. - t~jqe,- of part developm(21t Conductinql a uni flied review with all i1&t.Pr-ted ci'n,,Aro5- wil I dssi ';t in t iM(Ily anci off icxcitt I rmit. vC".llikdt.iofls. Speiic'I -11"..1it~-wi 11 ho placed )n "'Conoiir- jut;tif icat Ion, sit.- sul Lability, as well :.1 efv i rimlmolital arild 'ixirlowic~ import-t .3 t-hf ple~ rop;)s(,] a~t On toi p~rivat~e ports where there-will 1)e a transfer of oil-related products and~ ,materials will be subject to a full project evaluation as outlined in On shorc OCS,/Oi l/Natuiral Gas Faci lities. _ The Coastal Zone Unit involvement in federal port-related projects, such as dredging of navigation channels and development of vessel traffic system is described in the Section on Dredingand Dredqed Material Di~spoa an teia Program Review in establishing wicrkin arrangeme-its betlyefn the L.,astc%1 Zone Unit.. the Maryland Port Adminis' ration and the Division of Transportation, Planning, and Development of the Department of Transportation, local governments, and private individuals or corporations, the following concerns regarding the siting construction and operation of port facilities will be addressed: 1. The continued development of state and local planning procedures that consider a) the overlapping private, local, state and federal responsibilities associated with harbor and port improvements, b) Maryland's competitive position relative to other ports in the Mid- Atlantic service area and to competitive hinterlands, and c) the scarcity of waterfront land, especially where other types of urban activities compete for the same waterfront localtion. 2. Continued cooperative state and local port planning programs that address the need ficr the long-term Capital investments in channel improvements, !&aod acquisition, landw~ard transportation facilities, terminals, and equipment. i nitiation of studies and inventories to improve the existing information base on port development and management. 4. Use of methods dnd tools developed as part of the Major Facilities study to assist public and private organizations plan for and anticipate the benefits and costs of port development. 254 AUTHORITIES RELATED TO PORTS i Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Transportation Article Direct State Planning and Maryland Port Subtitle 6 MPA Regulation Administration Natural Resources Article Direct State Planning and Maryland Port Subtitle 3 Regulation Administration MEPA Department of Natural Resources Coastal Facilities Review Act Direct State Planning and Department of Natural Resources Article Regulation Natural Resources Section 6-501 et. seq. (E&CZA) Natural Resources Article Direct State Planning Department of Title 9 and Regulation Natural Resources Wetlands Law (WRA) Natural Resources Article Direct State Planning Department of Section 3-501 et. seq. and Regulation Natural Resources D.epwater Ports (E&CZA) Article 41 State Standards and Funding Department of Section 330-346 for Local Acquisition Economic and MILA Community 0_~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~Development (EDD) County Comprehensive Local Planning and Department of State Zoning and Subdivision Regulation/State Inverven- Planning Regulations (Article tion 88C, Section 2(q); Article 66B; Article 25, Section 5(d) and Article 88C(q) Rivers and Harbors Act Federal Consistency/State Federal: U.S. Army (Section 10) WIter Quality Certification Corps of Engineers Federal Water Pollution State: DNR (WRA) Control Act Amendments (Section 404) 0.~~~~~~~~~~255 255 INDUSTRIAL PARKS situation An industrial park is generally defined as an assembly of land under one management which provides facilities useful for several kinds Of industries. The development of a park is generally based on a comprehensive plan containing land use requirements such as: - Street design which facilitates truck and other traffic. - Rail and utility layout. - Proper setbacks, minimum lot size, floor area ratios, and buffer zones. - Architecture and landscape requirements. - off-street parking and loading regulations. The average size of an industrial park in the United States is 312 acres, although projects in excess of 500 acres are becoming increasingly commonplace (Urban Land Institute, 1975). Ultimately, the size of an industrial park is determined by market demand, absorption rate of the development period, the constraints of available sites, and the nature and extent of government regulations. A typical industrial park accommodates a variety of uses, including manufacturing, warehousing and distribution facilities, research and development, and commercial uses. A broad range of manufacturing activities are locating in industrial parks, and in fact, most types of manufacturing industries are suitable for location within an industrial park. The marketability of the industrial park concept is of great importance to the local community, and industrial park locations have proven to be extremely attractive to industry for reasons such as the presence of related or "linked" industries, the availability of utilities and transport services, the compatibility of continguous land uses, and the savings resulting from the absence of traditional start-up costs. The extent of environmental and socio-economic impact on the area around an industrial park largely depends upon the size of the park, its resident industries, and prevailing conditions in the surrounding area. 256 The advantages of Maryland's geographical position are widely recognized by American industry. The State lies at the center of a large multi-state economic region encompassing the northeast, southeast, and mid-west market areas. The diversity of Maryland's industry is evidenced by the fact that of * ~~the 451 types of manufacturing industry classified by Standard Industrial Classification, 363 are located in Maryland, making products as divergent as apple juice and zinc castings. Maryland provides industries with a variety of site choices and locations: industrial park locations include both urban and suburban settings in such locales as Baltimore, Cambridge, Salisbury, and Easton. Baltimore, Cambridge, and Salisbury offer sites for water-oriented industries. Local municipalities and counties have zoned lands for industry or are establishing industrial districts on municipally owned land. The city of Crisfield in Somerset County is currently investigating the feasibility of a port-oriented industrial park to serve the agricultural industry on the Eastern Shore. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program. (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shoreline dependent, and to encourage the location of necessary shoreline-dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economicand environmental impacts can be minimized. (18) To encourage th e location of necessary new coastal facilities whether industrial, commercial or residential, in already developed areas capable of accommodating additional development, in areas suitable and planned for redevelopment: or in areas determined-by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for development. (19) To discourage the location of maior new o~r oxnavdod facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (20) To ensure the viability of Maryland's part areas, and to ensure that their development is carried out in an environmentally sound manner. 2r -i (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for providing adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developments are approved by state and local governmental agencies. (38) To ensure coordination and use of existing state and local government programs to achieve the Program's objectives. Investigations and decisions must take into consideration whether or not: - Studies utilize sound, state of the art methods. - Social, economic and fiscal data are adequate. - All recommendations conform with state and federal environmental statutes and regulation'S. - Adequate public services are available or will be provided. - All recommendations would mitigate singificant economic disfunctions and protect fiscal soundness. -Adequate coordination is maintained with agencies and organizations affected by siting decisions in order that their concerns may be factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. -The public has ready access to current information and the opportunity to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. Policies 1. It is State policy to provide for the economic welfare of the State's residents'through programs and activities that develop properly the State's natural resources and economic opportunities. The State promotes and encourages the location of new industries and buisnesses in Maryland as well as the expansion of existing industries. (Article 41, Section 258) 2. The acquisition and preservation of industrial sites can best be accomplished by cooperative programs between the State and its political subdivisions, including loans to local governments. A decision on a loan to a local government will be based on the following considerations: a. Whether the project may reasonably be expected to attract industry and create new employment opportunities. b. The amount of benefit, in terms of economic development and employment opportunities, which the project may reasonably be expected to generate in relation to similar benefits of other proposed projects, and in the context of the total funds available for lending. 258 c. Whether the project, as planned, will be in compliance with zoning, sanitary, and other laws or regulations applicable to the project. d. Whether and to what extent federal or other funds are available or are likely to become available for the project. e. The positive and negative effects of the proposed project on the environment, including environmental effects that are likely if the proposal is implemented, and effects that are likely if it is not implemented. f. Measures that might be taken to minimize potential adverse environmental effects and maximize potential beneficial environmental effects, including monitoring, maintenance, replacement, operation, and other follow-up activities. g. Reasonable alternatives to the proposed action (including the alternative of no action) that might have fewer adverse environmental effects or more beneficial environmental effects. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 1-304 and Article 41, Section 439, 440, and 441) 4. Industrial parks will be carefully sited and planned to insure compatibility with surrounding land and water uses, constraints imposed due to standards of air, noise and water quality, minimization of other environmental impacts, and provision or availability of adequate water supply, waste water treatment, and transportation facilities. (Natural Resources Article, Section 1-302, 1-303, 8 1405, 9-102; Article 88C) 5. Industrial park areas identified within state critical areas designated for utilization purposes will be given priority for state or federal funds used for acquisition or construction of industrial parks. (Article 88C 2(g); Article 41, Section 440, 441) Implementation Lead Agencies: State: Department of Economic and Co~munity Development; Department of State Planning Local: Planning and Zoning Offices Management Procedures State Agencies: Where state or federal funds are involved in the development of the industrial ~~~~~~~~~itDe elopmhentatsa lead agency, with park, the Department of Economic and Community Deveo pmentnatsC dg , staff-level coordination with the Departments of Natural Resur, State Planning, Health and Mental Hygiene, and Transportation. State funding is available for the following sources all administered by the Department of Economic and Community Development: Maryland Industrial Lands Act - Local governing bodies and counties cal obtain loans up to $500,000 per project to purchase these lands, which can then be sold or leased to industries wishing to utilize the land. In addition, there exists a program to loan local :overniprg bodies funds up to $1,500,000 to finance selected infrastructure costs of industrial parks, including construction of shell buildings. 259 Maryland Industrial Development Financing Authority (MIDFA) - Provides up to 90% guaranteed mortgages for real estate and 70% for machinery and equipment. This program is limited to manufacturing, warehousing, research and development, tourism facilities, corporate headquarters, and regional office buidlings. Interest may be exempt from income tax in accordance with Internal Revenue Service regulations. Industrial Revenue Bonds - 100% financing for real estate, machinery, and equipment, is possible for manufacturing, warehousing, research and development facilities, corporate headquarters, regional office buildings and pollution control facilities. Interest may be exempt from income tax pursuant to Internal Revenue Service regulations. Development Credit Corporation (DCC) - Loans for 100% of costs are possible, although loans are generally made for less than 75%. Any business or industrial enterprise unable to obtain funds from conventional sources is eligible. Interest is charged at a rate not more than 4% in excess of the prevalent prime rate on unsecured commercial loans in the City of Baltimore. Maryland Area Redevelopment Act - In designated areas, the State of Maryland can match the participation of the communities in the financing of EDA projects to a maximum of 5% of the total cost. The interest rate charged by the State is limitied to 4%. Funding assistance for the development of industrial parks is also available from federal agencies such as the Economic Development Administration (EDA); Small Business Administration (SBA & SBIC); and Farmers Home Administration (FmaA). The Department of Economic and Community Development considers the following factors in reviewing applications for state and federal financial assistance for industrial parks, in addition to the policies stated above: 1. project-description - including location, size, slope, geologic characteristics, current land use, title condition, development schedule, financing schedule; 2. service inventory - including rail, truck, air, water transportation needs, utility needs, water, sewerage, and solid waste needs; 3. environmental impact study - including impacts on adjacent properties, air, land, water, noise impacts; 4. general suitability of the project for incorporation into an industrial park - including such factors as local industrial absorption over time analysis of industrial prospects, industrial orientation factors (labor, markets, resources, amenities) and community attitudes; 260 9 5. zoning description - including present and anticipated zoning; 6. other laws and regulations which must be enforced - including air quality, water quality, land use; 7. description of land acquisition plan; 8. appraisal of current market value of land; 9. existing employment coordination; 10. analysis of industrial land supply in the county; 11. analysis of economic impact and feasibility of the proposal; 12. estimated local costs; 13. evidence of a shortage of suitable industrial sites. Applicants for state funds are instructed to contact appropriate state and local agencies for input into all aspects of the application, particularly environmental and economic impacts. Applicants for federal funds must submit a full EIS as stipulated by NEPA. The Water Resources Admizistration and Environmental Health Administration are involved when the industrial park applicant applies for construction-related permits and approvals, such as these related to wetlands, flood plain alteration, water quality, air quality, and water and sewer facilities. The Department of State Planning reviews both the zoning map and individual zoning changes from other uses to industrial uses for compatibility with state plans, programs and policies. Local Government: Industrial parks are zoned for use through the County Comprehensive Planning and Zoning Process. Thus, sites chosen should be compatible with planned uses of surrounding land, and with the county's schedule for provision of public water, utilities, sewerage solid waste, and transportation facilities. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation All applications to the Department of Economic and Community Development for funds to assist a local government or municipality defray costs of industrial land or an industrial park project for these industries will be 261 forwarded to the Coastal Zone Unit. Coastal Zone Unit shall determine if adequate consideration has been given to all economic and environmental issues in accordance with the project evaluation process described in Chapter I. Particular attention will be paid to industrial parks involving industries handling: food and kindred products, chemical and allied products, stone, clay, and glass products, and primary metals products. For parcels of land greater than 100 acres, all rezoning or zoning classification changes allowing any such industries will be subject to project evaluation process. Such project review will enable decision makers to consider environmental as well as economic constraints prior to receiving requests for permits for the project. Project evaluation will also enable local and state agencies to consider fully the merits of zoning changes and the optimal allocation of state funds for industrial development, it should be noted that proposals involving individual industries will be subjected to the project evaluation process if they involve one- of the concerns discussed in previous sections (e.g., proposed location in tidal or non-tidal floodplain etc.). Program Review 1. Coastal Zone Unit will encourage counties desiring industrial growth to make use of the industrial park concept rather than make case-by-case determinations on every industrial rezoning or zoning change. 2. Coastal Zone Unit and the Department of Economic and Conmmunity Development will assist counties to locate and evaluate potential industrial park. sites, through the use of the Major Facilities Study. 262 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO INDUSTRIAL PARKS Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Maryland Industrial Land Act State Standards and Funding DECD (EDD) (Article 41, Section 440 to for Local Land 446) Acquisition Maryland Industrial Development State Standards Bonding and DECD (EDD) Finance Authority and Industrial Funding Local Land Buildings for Counties and Acquisition Municipalities (Alticle 41, Section 266) County Comprehensive Zoning and Local Planning and Regulation/ DSP Subdivision Regulations, DSP State Intervention review/Intervention (Art. 88C, Section 2(q); Art. 66B; Art. 25, Section 5(d) and Art. 88C(2)(q) State Critical Areas Program State Standards for Local DSP (Art. 88C, Section 2(b)(3) Implementation 263 MINERA EXTRACTION FACILITIES (SAM W ADGRAVEL) Si�tuat ion Sand and gravel have been dfined as Ocontinucously graded, ~unconsolidated natural disintegration of rocks.- Estimates of sMAd AM gravel supply have beei mas" tax parts of Nary landes Coastal zone. it has bees estimated, few Instance, that there a.' 3.6 billion tons in Southern Naryland. iNowever. there Is no published estimate of Facesible sand and gravel deposits which might produce economic yield. in sms ageas, notably the metropolitan Saltimore Warea there is not such abundance. ismy deposits have been covered by urban and suburban development, and, in Sams areas. mining conf licts with iother land uses, so that mining is impossible. it Is estiumated that a 10- to 15-year supply for general construction does exist within the State. IHoweve~r, Currently available "ato on sand and gravel resources is insuftfient. In areas Wwere there is sand MAn gravel, the suitability COT mining is dependent an a *moer of factiOrs, and on-site Inspection and core drilling is usually required. TMe Karyland Geological Survey is currently in the process of comiling information an sand and gravel resources. It is based upon literature Feviev, field investigations, aerial pbftograplis at 1:20,000 scale. LUMIDT photographs,* and peirsoin&& cmtcations with operators and mapping geoilogists. The end result of this Prolect will be Publication Of a Rminera resOurCGO map for each county. The eailetion date for this compilation has not been set. The map for AMuM Arwudel Counuty was. however, published in December. 1976. Total combined commrcial consumption was more than 12.5 million short ton (11. 16 metric tons) in 1973. valued at close to $30 million. Over 98% of the sand and gravel used in Naryland in 1973 was transported by truck, and loes than 2% was transported bY rail. There are approximately ISO active sand and gravel operations Involving extraction sites in Naryland. gatraction sites are locations where swan and gravel are removed from the earth. where processing, storage, or loading facilities are continguous to points of extraction, those facilities bar included in the definition of extraction site. HOwever, there are numerous borrWW Pits which are less than one acire to size and are not included LB the above estimate. Extraction operations range widely in size. Large c ompanies have central storage and ancillary facilities of approximately 220 acres served by satellite feeder pits ranging from 10 to 50 acres. There are also numerous smaller * ~independent operations with sites of I to 75 acres. Depending on tire operator and the market, excavation and processing may be continuous, intermittent, or temporary. Three distinct methods of extraction are practiced: dry pit, wet pit, and dredging of rivers, bays, and oceans. In the dry pit method, sand and gravel are removed from above the water table. Fifty percent of production in the United States is from dry pits. The wet pit method is a land operation, accounting for approximately 35% of the nation's production, by which materials are removed by dragline or barge-mounted dredges from above and beneath the water table. Dredging, accounting for 15% of the production in the USA, recovers sand and gravel frbm lakes, bays, rivers and estuaries. In some areas of the country, the depletion of onland supplies of sand and gravel will require the dredging of offshore supplies in the ocean where large deposits are believed to be located. In a typical operation, sand and gravel are processed prior to transport to the user. Excavated materials are dumped into a itapper. After passing * ~through separation,screens, gravel and rock are separated and crushed. The remaining materials are pumped to a hydroseparator and sandscrew separator, where coarse sand is cleaned and removed. Fine sand is then similarly treated. The sized, cleaned products are then stored separately, ready for transportation to the user. Where there is dredging, processing may take place directly on the dredge, or after pumping to a land-based site. A by-product of processing is the waste effluent, which is generally treated . in holding ponds where high concentration of suspended solids are removed. Waste fines may be settled out by detention, or may be treated chemically with flocculating agents. In many cases, operators are able to maintain closed systems whereby the processing water is recycled continuously. Disposal of the sediment, or waste, fines from process waters is a serious problem for many operators. Where available, already disturbed areas such as those previously mined are used. However, space for disposal is not often available, and is expensive when it is available. Approximately 90 million tons of waste fines are generated annually in the United States by sand and gravel operations, and only a small portion of these wastes can be recovered for productive use. Implications of sand and gravel operations to the environment can be significant, and include: 1. Intrusions of operations into floodplains, which may cause an increase in the rate of sedimentation. 265 2. The reduction in aquatic and wildlife habitat by stripping and mining operations. 3. Compatibility of the operations to on-site or adjacent land and water uses, including reuse of mined areas after shutdown. Issues This situation requires state and local governments to develop accurate and adequate information'on the economic supply and demand for sand and gravel resources, and the environmental impacts of extracting these resources, to coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: .(2) To protect, maintain, and improve the aualitv of the State's tidal waters for orooaoation of wildlife, fish and acuatic life, and for human use and eniovment. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of sianificant resource value-areas havina scenic. scientific. aeoloaic. hvdroloaic. biological or ecosystem maintenance importance wetlands. endangered species habitat. significant wildlife habitat. and wintering and restina areas for miaratorv birds. (18) To encouraae the location of necessary new coastal facilities whether industrial. commercial or residential. in already developed areas caDable of accommodating additional development. in areas suitable and planned for redevelopment. or in areas determined bv scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for develomet (19) To discouxaqe the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediatelv adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (21) To encourage the wise use of coastal mineral resources, with due reard for protection of the environment, and to encourage sequential multiple use of mineral lands where mimeral extraction is deemed appropriate. Investigations and decisions must consider whether or not: - Studies utilize sound, state-of-the-art methods. - Environmental data are adequate. 266 - The proposed location and manner of operation conforms with all applicable state and federal environmental statutes and regulations. - The proposed manner of location and operation mitigates significant environmental. impacts. - Adequate coordination is maintained with agencies and organ~izations affected by a mining operation, in order that their concerns are factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. - Members of the public have ready accesG to current information and the opportunity to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. Policies 1. While the extraction of minerals by mining is a basic and essential activity contributing to the economic well-being of Maryland, mining must be conducted in a way which minimizes its effects on the swrrounding environment. Proper reclamation of mined land is necessary to prevent undesirable land and water impacts that are deterimnental to the general welfare, safety, beauty, and property rights of Maryland residents. (Natural Resources Article, Title 7-6A02) 2. Permits for surface mining opertions will not be'granted if: a. The operation will have an unduly adverse effect on wildlife or fresh water, estuarine, or marine fisheries. b. The operator has failed to provide applicable permits from all State and local regulatory agencies responsible for air and water pollution and sediment control. c. The operation will constitute a substantial physical hazard to a neighboring house, school, church, hospital, commercial or industrial building, public road, or other public or private property existing at the time of application for the permit. d. The operation will have a significantly adverse effect on the uses of a publicly owned park, forest, or recreation areas existing at the time of application for the permit. e. The operator does not posses a valid surface mine operator's license or is subject of action brought against by the Department of Natural Resources. 267 f. Inadequate consideration has been given to: 1. The effects of the proposed action on the environment, includinq. adverse and beneficial environmental effects that are reasonably likely V the proposal is implemented or if it is not implemented. 2. Measures that might be taken to minimize potential adverse environmental effects and maximize potential beneficial environmental effects, including monitoring, maintenance, replacement, operation, and other follow-up activities. g. Previous experience with similar operationst =dicat f probability that the operation will result in substantial deposits of sediment in stream beds or lakes, landslides, or will cause other water pollution. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 1-304, 7-6A06, 7-6A07, 7-6A09) 3. No surface mining permit will be issued unless it is conditioned upon compliance with an approved mining and reclamation plan. (Natural Resources Article, Section 7-6A10) Implementation Lead Agency: Water Resources Administration (regulation) Maryland Geological Survey (conduct of mineral resource surveys) Management Procedure State In order to extract minerals other than coal, a surface mining permit must be-obtained from the Water Resources Administration. When a complete application for such a permit is received, it is reviewed, approved, or denied within 60 days in accordance with the above policies. During this review period, the Department of State Planning reviews the application for zoning and land use consistency. The comments of other agencies, that may have concerns about the project, such as the Maryland Fisheries Administration and the Maryland Wildlife Administration are also requested. Depending on the physical nature of the area proposed for mining, permits for wetlands, watersheds, or discharge, may also be required. If more than one permit is necessary, the Water Resources Administration will hold joint hearings. The Maryland Geological Survey is responsible for conducting periodic surveys of the status of mineral extraction sites and for ccmpiling information on sand and gravel resources generally. Local Government Mineral extraction activities require from a county either a special zoning district classification, or a special exception to another type of zoning classification. Department of State Planning reviews county zoning decisions concerning sand and gravel mining regulations when reviewing zoning ordinance' and maps. 268 Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation In order to assist Water Resources Administration in ensuring that Coastal Zone Management concerns are adequately considered, applications for permits for surface mining in the coastal zone's floodplain areas, other environmentally sensitive areas, or other areas in which significant environmental, social or economic impact may occur, will be subjected to the project evaluation process described in Chapter I. Program Review 1. The Coastal Zone Unit will assist the Maryland Geological Survey and other government agencies to identify areas of significant mineral resource value. 2. Where mining is allowed by county zoning regulations, the Coastal Zone Unit will work with other units of the Department of Natural Resources and with units of local government to determine, to the extent possible with available data, whether mineral resources are present in quantities which make mining economically feasible, and to determine whether the minerals can be extracted in a manner which minimizes adverse environmental impacts. 3. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with the Water Resources Administration to develop permit and reclamation guidelines which would deter surface mining in environmentally sensitive or important areas. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO MINERAL EXTRACTION FACILITIES (SAND AND GRAVEL) Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Surface Mining Act (Natural Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Resources Article, Section Regulation 7-6A01 et seq. County Comprehensive Zoning and Local Planning and County Planning Subdivision Regulations/DSP Regulation/State and Zoning Office Intervention Intervention DSP (Art. 88C, Section 2(q); Art. 66B; Art. 25, Section 5(d)) 269 LARGE-SCALE RESIDENTIAL FACILITIES Situation The shorelines of the State are increasingly popular locations for large residential developments, both seasonal and permanent. The construction of such facilities may cause significant adverse impacts by exceeding the carrying capacity of areas to support such facilities, by exceeding the capacity of local communities to provide public services for them, by causing increased sedimientation and non-point pollution problems, and by disturbing areas containing valuable natural resources, including wildlife habitat and productive agricultural land. These residential facilities may also necessitate the construction of public facilities such as sewage treatment plants and highways, which in turn promote more growth. This situation is addressed in the Sections on Sewage Treatment Plants and Land Transportation Facilities. Issues This situation necessitates that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone- Management Program: (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the Statets tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value-areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance -importance - such as awi-tdal wetlands, endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat, and wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (18). To encourage the location of necessary new coastal facilities, whether industrial, commercial or residential, in already'developed areas capable of accommodating additional development, in areas suitable and planned for redevelopment, or in areas determined by scientific study to be environmentally and economically suitable for development. (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater), and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. 270 (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for Droviding adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developments are approved by state and local government . agencies. (25) To ensure that adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decisions concerning the siting of public facilities in coastal areas, Particularly those involving transportation and waste treatment facilities. (26) To ensure the incorporation of storm water management measures in state and local regulatory Programs that would require runoff from a development site, to maintain, to the maximum extent Possible, water quality and .uantity conditions that Prevailed prior to development. (271 To promote the maintenance of natural buffers along, and natural drainage ways feeding to, coastal tributaries and estuarine waters, to minimize adverse environmental effects of coastal developments and activities. In order to meet these objectives, the following issues must be addressed in planning and regulating activities concerning large-scale residential developments in coastal areas: - Strict application of air and water quality, waste water disposal, sediment and stormwater, and other standards in development plans; - Consistency with State development plans, State water quality river basin plans, as well as local comprehensive plans, water and sewer plans, and zoning; - Service by adequate facilities including water supply, waste treutr.ent and transportation; - Adequate sediment and stormwater measures, both structural and non-structural, to minimize off-site impacts; - Provision of adequate recreational and open space areas; - Impact on water quality, aquatic resources, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, significant wildlife habitat areas, archeological sites, or historic sites; - Potential for creating danger to life and property, or for creating or aggravating off-site hazards due to flooding, shore erosion or other natural hazards; - Impact on a State Critical Area designated for preservation or con- servation, or on its buffer area; - Impact on productive agricultural or forest land, or effect on agricultural production on neighboring farms; 271 Policies I.~~~~* L~ sc~ic f"rAl~l * ... l L..... ~ J ~~.W.L... local plans and regulations; 2) minimize impacts on water quality, tidal and non-tidal wetlands, state critical areas, productive agricultural or forested lands, and historical/cultural/archeological resources; 3) avoid creating or aggravating natural hazard conditions; 4) avoid placing undue burdens 6n public services or fiscal, economic, or social conditions. (Article 88C; Article 66B; Article 25; Article 43, Section 387C: Article 45, Section 882 et seq; Natural Resources Article; Section 1-302, 1-303, 8-9A04, 8-1101, 8-1103, 8-1104, 8-1402, and 8-1405, 9-102, 9-202, 9-306) 2. It is State policy to utilize the intervention powers of the Department of State Planning to ensure that large-scale residential developments are sited, constructedandmaintained in a manner which fully considers State interests. (Article 88C, Section 2(q); Natural Resources Article, Section 1-101, 1-104, 1-302, 1-303) Implementation Lead Agencies State: Department of State Planning Water Resources Administration (programs concerning water appropriations from surface and groundwater sources, discharges into state waters, etc., other state and local agencies may participate, depending on the issues involved) Local: Planning and Zoning Offices, Soil Conservation Districts Management Procedures Large-scale residential developments are sited through the planning and zoning mechanisms of local units of government. The local planning office also reviews proposals for zoning changes, amendments, special exceptions, and conditional uses involving residential development, and makes recommendations to the zoning administrator. Many counties have special regulations for new towns and planned unit developments. Local units aiso play a role in managing residential developments through subdivision regulations and building code enforcement. In accordance with the provisions of the State Land Use Act of 1974, the Department of State Planning reviews zoning changes, amendments, special exceptions,variances, and conditional uses, which relate to large-scale residential developments as well as to sub- division approvals. The review is based on consistency with state plans, programs, and policies. 272 The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DIHMH), in consultation with DNR and DSP, has the responsibility for approving the construction of sewage treatment plants and county water and sewer plans. Large-scale residential developments must be included in county water and sewer plans before either public or private water supply or sewage treatment systems can be installed or extended to service them. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has the authority to impose water and sewer moratoria, and to limit development if circinnstances warrant. off-site impacts of such developments, such as water quality and water supply degradation, stormwater runoff, and flood plain and wetland encroachment, can be controlled through the various permit programs described earlier in this chapter. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation Initially, all new town proposals in coastal counties and all HUD's and residential developments involving 100 acres or 1,000 housing units within 2 miles of a floodplain on tidal waters will be reviewed to determine if they are of concern to the Coastal Zone Management Program in accordance with the project evaluation process described in Chapter I. As experience is gained in the implementation of the program, these criteria will be refined an a county by county basis to meet the needs of each specific coastal county. Developments meeting the criteria will be analyzed to determine if the concerns noted in the issues section above are adequately addressed or if further analysis and evaluation is necessary. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local governments and with the Department of State Planning to resolve any outstanding issues, and intervention procedures will be utilized only after other alteratives heave been tried. issues involving concerns subject to State or federal regulatory authority will be brought to the attention of the relevant authority for action. it should be noted that residential development, regardless of size, which involves one of the concerns addressed earlier (proposed location in tidal or non-tidal floodplain etc.) will be subject to the project evaluation process. Program Review As described in more detail in Chapter V1 the Coastal Zone Unit will provide technical and financial assistance to local governments to enable them to address the issues involved with large scale residential developments in their comprehensive plans, water and sewer plans, regulations and zoning ordinances. 273 Statutory Authority Management Technique Agency Water Quality Permits Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1402, Regulation 8-1405, 8-1413 Water Appropriation Permit Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-801, Regulation 8-802 Sediment Control (Stormwater State Standards for Local DNR (WRA) Management Implementation Art. NR, Section 8-1101, et seq. interpreted by 56 Att'y Gen. Op's 478 (Ap. 5, 1971.) Provision of Water, Sewer and State Standards for Local County Health Solid Waste Facilities Implementation with Depts. and Art. 43, Section 387C State Review Planning and Zoning Offices; DHMH, (EHA); DSP, DNR County Planning and Zoning Review of Local Plans and County Planning DSP General Authority/ Decisions with State and Zoning Intervention Procedures Intervention Offices, DSP Art. 88C, Art. 66B, Art. 25, Section 5 274 SEWAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES . ~Situation With increasing frequency, sewage treatment plants are being located with outlets on Maryland's tidal waters. However, the rate of treatment facility construction and expansion has not matched the rate of development in Maryland's coastal. zone, and existing facilities are overtaxed and operating at decreased efficiency. While there is a need to proceed as quickly as possible to meet the need for new and improved treatment facilities, the situation presents several concerns to the Coastal Zone Management Program: 1. Conflicts occur between sewage treatment plants and other uses of tidal waters - particularly the growing and harvesting of shellfish. Shellfish sanitation regulations require an extensive buffer area around the-outlet point, thus closing the area to shellfish harvesting, regardless of the level of treatment. On the other hand, evidence that improperly treated sewage is entering tidal waters can mean closure of an even greater water area to shellfish harvesting. 2. The potential for sewage treatment plants of large capacity to promote development is well known. Locating major new sewage treatment plants in coastal areas may increase high density growth pressures along the shoreline, where only low density development was formerly allowable under the health standards regulating installation of private facilities, particularly septic tanks. 3. Sewage facilities plants have the potential for major water quality impact beyond the health-related considerations mentioned above. Oxygen depleting materials, nutrients, and residual chlorine are the most important components to be considered. The State has formulated regulations and policies regarding removal of these substances and has issued NPDES discharge permits, based On local area and baywide studies. The present policies and discharge permits cannot be considered the final solution to all problems. Only additional research, especially the monitoring of the water quality changes effected by the present policies, will allow clarification of the remaining issues. In addition, more detailed investigation of alternative methods of sewage treatment is needed. 4. The physical location of new treatment facilities and their outfalls often has impacts on coastal resources such as upland natural areas, tidal wetlands, and aquatic resources. Issues This situation requires that state and local governments coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal cooperation and consistency to meet the following groals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: 275 (2) To protect, maintain, and improve the quality of the State's tidal waters for propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life, and for human use and enjoyment. (3) To protect coastal aquatic areas of significant resource value, and where possible, restore presently degraded-areas of potentially significant resource value, such as viable oyster bars and clam beds, important migratory pathways, spawning, nursery and feeding areas for fish, and-wintering and resting areas for migratory birds. (4) To protect, maintain, and where feasible restore the integrity of the tidal wetlands of the State. (5) To protect coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value- areas having scenic, scientific, geologic, hydrologic, biological or ecosystem maintenance importance - such as endangered species habitat, significant wildlife habitat,,and wintering and resting areas of migratory birds. (7) To protect coastal cultural, historical, and archeological resources. (17) To encourage the inland siting of facilities which are not shoreline dependent, and to encourage the location of necessary shoreline- dependent activities in shoreline areas where adverse social, economic, and environmental impacts can be minimized. (19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately eadiacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater), and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. (24) To ensure that sufficient provision has been made for providing adequate water, sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developments are approved by state and local government agencies. (25) To ensure that adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decalnig concerning the siting of Public facilities in coastal-.areas, particularly those involving transportation and waste treatment facilities. Investigations and regulatory procedures relating to sewage treatment plants must consider: - The treatment level and technology needed to meet water quality standards. 276 - The relationship of effluent discharge to overall stream flow. - The capacity of the plant and its influence on growth patterns. - The effect of the sewage treatment plant on availability of shellfish beds for commoercial harvest. - The direct effect of the plant's construction on sensitive natural areas such as wetlands or flood plains. - The cumulative impact of increasing discnarge of treated sewage into tidal water. - The use of alternative solutions, such as disposal on land, individual treatment systems, and water conservation. Policies 1. It is State policy to improve, conserve and manage the quality of the State's waters for public supplies, propagation of wildlife, fish and aquatic life and domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational and other legitimate beneficial uses. (Natural Resources Art. Section 8-1402; Art. 43, Section 388) 2. It is State policy to provide that no waste is discharged into any waters of the state without first receiving adequate treatment to be consistent with effluent limitations and the maintenance of water quality standards. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402, 8-1405, and 8-1413) 3. In the proposed formulation of state water quality management plans,including the designation of scenic areas and sewerage facilities, consideration shall be given to areas of critical state concern. (Natural Resources Art. Section 8-1042, 8-1404, 8-1405, Art. 88C) 4. It is State policy not to fund or authorize the construction of sewage treatment plants which are not consistent with the State's 208 Water Quality Management Plan. (Art. 43, Section 394; Natural Resources Art. 8-1402, 8-1404, 8-1405) 5. Sewage treatment plants must not be located in tidal or non-tidal wetlands, or in Areas of Critical State Concern designated for the purpose of preservation or conservation. (Natural Resources Article, Section 9-101 et seq.; Article 88C, Section 2(b)) 6. In order to minimize shellfish bed closures, sewage treatment plant outfalls must not be located where they impinge upon the commercial harvest of seafood, unless no feasible alternative exists. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 1-302, 1-303, 8-1402, 8-1413) 277 7. Sewage treatment plants must not be located in flood plains unless no feasible alternative exists. When sewage treatment plants are located in flood plains, they must be adequately flood-proofed. (Natural Resources Article, Sections 8-801, 8-803, 8-807) 8. The effects of treated effluent materials on the aquatic resources of the Bay must be determined through research. Results of this research must be used to set water quality and effluent standards and to establish permit limitations. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1405) ~97~T~n f6 ne seagetreatment plants must consider the need for advanced wastewater treatment, nutrient removal, and other alternatives to meet state water quality standards and effluent limitations. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402, 8-1405, and 8-1413) 10. Before construction can begin on installation or extension of any system of water supply, sewerage, or refuse disposal, the project must be approved by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in accordance with the Department's responsibility to protect public health, safety and welfare. in addition, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shall examine all existing public water supplies, sewerage systems and refuse disposal plants, and shall have power to complete tneir operation in a manner which shall protect the public health and comfort, or to order their alteration, extension, or replacement by other structures when deemed necessary. (Article 43, Sections 388 and 394) 11. Each county shall develop water and sewer plans which provide for the orderly expansion and extension of community and multi-use water supply, sewerage and solid waste disposal systems. such plans shall be consistent with applicable county and local land use plans, and shall consider related aspects of land use, zoning, population estimates, engineering an~d economic factors, and all governmental, industrial, and other plans for privately owned facilities for water and sewerage at any level. The construction and operation of water supply systems and sewerage systems shall not be undertaken unless they are included in water and sewer plans approved by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, after consultation with the Department of Natural Resources (on matters pertaining to water allocation, adequacy of industrial waste treatment, and the effect of proposed withdrawals and waste discharges on waters of the State), the Department of State Planning (on the plan's adequacy, including its consistency with the local master plan), and the Department of Agriculture (on the impact of water and sewerage service on productive or potentially productive agricultural land). (Article 43, Section 387C) 12. Sewage treatment plants with significant excess capacity will not be approved unless they are consistent with the 208 Plan for the service area, and with population projections of the Department of State Planning. (Federal Water pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Section 201; Article 43, Sections 387C, 394) 2780 13. It must be deomonstrated that any proposed sewage treatment facility represents the most cost-effective means of meeting established effluent and water quality goals, recognizing social and environmental considerations. (Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendment of 1972, Section 301; Article 43, Sections 387C, 394) 14. In the development of facility plans for new publicly owned treatment works, the utilization of land treatment processes to reclaim and recycle municipal wastewater should be given first consideration. If a method that encourages water conservation, wastewater reclamation and reuse is not recozmmnded, the applicant for construction funds should be required to provide complete justification for the rejection-of land treatment. (EPA Policy Memorandum, October 3, 1977). (The State is currently in the process of adjusting its policies to conform with this document.) 15. It is State policy to ensure that sewage sludge is managed and disposed of in such a way as to protect the public health and the environment from the hazards associated with this material, due to the presence of pathogenic organisms, parasites and heavy metals, or other toxic materials which may have adverse effects on humans or which may contaminate crops, groundwater, or Surface water. No individual corporation, municipality, county, district, or institution may engage in collection, handling, burning, storage or transportation of sewage sludge without first obtaining a permit from the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene (Article 43, Section 394(b); Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Regulation 10.03.48) 16. Both the State and its political subdivisions have the legal authority to restrict access to sewage treatment systems in order to control growth, so that it is phased with the construction of associated public services, including sewage treatment facilities and other capital improvements. (Natural Resources Article, Section 8-1402, 8-1405, 8-1413; Article 43, Section 387, 394; 60 Op Att'y Gen. 508 (1975)) 17. No building permit, subdivision plan, map or plat; providing for individual or community water supply or sewerage system, shall be allowed unless it is in conformance with a county water or sewer plan. Thus: a. No building permit shall be approved (i) where existing facilities are inadequate to serve the proposed development, taking into consideration all other existing and approved developments in the service area, or (ii) which will cause facilities for conveyance, pumping, storage or treatment of water, sewage or solid water to be overloaded. b. No subdivision plat shall be approved in areas where, taking into account all existing and approved subdivision plats and building permits in the service area, facilities for conveyance, pumping, storage, or treatment of water, sewage, and solid waste to serve the proposed development would (i) not be completed in time to serve the development, or (ii) if completed, would not be adequate to serve the development without causing overloading of the facilities. (Article 43, Section 387C) 279 18. In determining the acceptability of individual sewerage systems, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene shall consider present and future population density, lot size, contour of the land, porosity and absorbancy of ' tbt '' iy sewe __ development. (Article 43, Section 387C) 19. State law on the development and approval of county water and sewer plans shall not limit or supercede any State, county, or municipal zoning ordinance, subdivision regulation, building code or the law or regulation which establish standards that provide greater protection to the public health, safety and welfare of the community. (60 Op. Attn'y Gen. 508 (1975)) Implementation Lead Agencies Federal: Environmental Protection Agency State: Environmental Health Administration, Wa-cr Resources Administration, Department of State Planning Local: Planning and Zoning Offices (participating agencies, local public works and health agencies) Management Procedures Sewage treatment facility planning and implementation is a process that involves several agencies at each level. Proposed sewage treatment facilities undergo extensive, comprehensive review, based on their consistency with the State's continuing Water Quality Planning Process, with local water and sewer plans, with local comprehensive plans, and with local facility plans. The facility plan developed for each plant represents alternatives to the planned facilities, and describes the environmental effects of the planned facility. The following are Maryland's main planning and regulatory processes: 1. County Water and Sewerage Plans. Each county (in conjunction with the municipalities within its borders) is required to prepare a document delineating how it intends to develop sewerage facilities within its jurisdiction, in accordance with its general development plan. Each water and sewerage plan contains the designation of recommended discharge points and the delineation of the areas in the various categories of sewer service priority. The Environmental Health Administration (EHA) of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene reviews these plans for technical and legal accuracy and adequacy. The Environmental Health Administration may approve a plan only after it has considered the comments of WRA on the compliance of the water and sewerage plans with water quality plans, and the comments of the Departshent of State Planning on their land use impacts and their relationship to population projections. 280 2. Water Quality Management Plans. The Water Resources Administration is responsible for Phase I Water Quality Management Plans (pursuant to Section 303(e) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments (FWPCA) of 1972) for the entire State, and for the Phase II plans in the non-designated portions of the State (pursuant to Section 208 of the FWPCA). The Baltimore Reqional Planning Council and the Washington Council of Governments are responsible for the Phase II plans in their jurisdictions. Facilities plans, and regulatory efforts �.i11 have to be consistent with the 208 Plans once they have been developed. 3. Facilities Plans. In order for a local jurisdiction to receive federal funding for improvement or construction -nf sewage treatment plants, it must demonstrate to the Environmental Protection Agency that the proposed sewage treatment facilities are to be provided in an environmentally sound and cost- effective manner. To do this, a community prepares a facilities plan pursuant to Section 201 of the FWPCA. The Environmental Health Administration has overall responsibility in the State fox the preparation of 201 Plans. The Maryland Environmental Service, an agency of DNR, may act as a consultant in preparing these plans. Both local governments and the Maryland Environmental Service can acquire, construct and operate sites for treatment plants. Priorities for expenditure of sewage treatment construction funds - both federal and state - are developed cooperatively by WRA, EHA, and DSP. The overall responsibility for assigning priorities and administering the funds, however, lies with the Secretary of Hcalth and Mental Hygiene. As noted in the policies, the location of treatment plants must be in conformance with approved area-wide waste treatment plans (208 plans) and their discharges must meet State effluent standards. Serious consideration has been given to land treatment alternatives for sewage treatment, as the most viable alternative in some areas of the coastal zone, particularly smaller communities. In accordance with the recent EPA Policy Memorandum, land treatment processes will be given first consideration in all cases. 4. Restriction of Access to Sewage Treatment Facilities to Control Growth. According to an Attorney General'sopinion in 1975, the state and its political subdivisions have the legal authority to restrict access to sewage treatment plants -- the state through its authority to review county water and sewer plans and the installation of sewage systems and to issue discharge permits, and the political subdivisions through their water and sewer plans. Such limitations shall apply only to proposed sewer mains. They shall not be used to stop development permanently,..but rather to control growth so that it is phased with the construction of associated public services such as sewage treatment facilities and other capital improvements. Such restrictions are to be imposed pursuant to a territorial, regional, or basin plan, and shall thus not be arbitrary or capricious. 281 5. Sludge Disposal. The disposal of sewage sludge either by land treatment, placement in a sanitary landfill, trenching, or incineration requires prior approval by the Environmental Health Administration. In addition, 208 Plans developed under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, and county water and sewer plans must include provisions for the diposal of sludge generated by proposed publicly owned treatment works. At present, each location for sludge disposal, whether it is placed in a sanitary landfill or used for agricultural purposes, requires a separate approval. The State is now developing guidelines for generalized sludge disposal, based on the type of material that is produced by sludge composting. This is the result of research by Maryland Environmental Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture on the sludge generated by Maryland's Blue Plains treatment plant. 6. Regulation. Individual sewage systems (e.g., septic systems) are regulated by local permits based on minimum state standards. No permits may be issued in areas in which- sewerage already exists, is scheduled for completion within eighteen months or is in the final planning stages. All sewage treatment construction and associated facilities (e.g , new sewer lines, hookups, sludge disposal etc.) are regulated by the EHA. No sewerage construction permi-t applications are accepted for review unless they are in conformance with the county plan. Sewage treatment plants are regulated by both EHA and WRA. The Water Resorces Administration issues discharge permits, and EHA issues construction permits. The criterion for these permits is the capability of the treatment plant to meet the discharge standards. As part of the discharge permit requirements, municipalities are required to adopt and enforce adequate industrial discharge pretreatment ordinances if any significant industrial discharges would be handled by the treatment plant. in addition, the placement of sewage treatment plant outfalls must be in conformance with both county plans and state water quality management plans and regulations. Coastal Zone Unit Role Project Evaluation To ensure that all relevant factors are addressed, the Coastal Zone Unit will participate in the existing review process for the siting and operation of sewage treatment plants in the following cases: 1. Proposed placement of a sewage treatment plant (a) in, or adjacent to, a state critical area designated for preservation or 'conservation, (b) within a flood plain', or tidal, or non-tidal wetland, significant wildife habitat area, or (c) with the outfall discharging into other significant aquatic resources area. 2.. Where there is potential'for direct hydrological impact on tidal waters containing shellfish or other significant aquatic resources. 282 3. Where there is potential for significant induced growth in ~resentl. low density shoreline areas. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will work within the present water quality planning process to assure that the cumulative impact of increased discharge of treated sewage effluent into tidal waters will be analyzed including effects on nutrient levels and shellfish bed closures. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local units of government, the Water Resources Administration, the Environmental Health Administration, and the Department of State Planning, to identify and resolve discrepancies between local water and sewage plans and local comprehensive plans, Water Quality Manacement Plans, and State programs and policies. The Coastal Zone Unit will work with local units of government, the Wauer Resources Administration, the Environmental Health Administration, and Department of State'Planning to analyze the potential growth-inducement impacts of sewage treatment plants, and to develop measures to deal adequately with such potential impacts. The Coastal Zone Unit, in conjunction with the Fisheries Administration, will assist the Water Resources Administration in determining the impacts of chlorine and other residuals of living aquatic resources, and in identifying areas where the aquatic life is particularly sensitive to discharge. 283 AUTHORITIES RELATING TO SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS Statutory Authority Management Techniques Agency Federal Water Pollution State and Regional Planning DNR (WRA) and Control Act Amendments and State Regulation in DHMH (EHA) of 1972 accordance wi~th~ Federal Standards Water Pollution Control and State Planning and DNR (WRA) Abatement Regulation Maryland Ann. Code Nat. Res. Art., Sec. 8-1401 et seq. Regulation of the ocation State Planning and DHMH (EHA) Regulation of the Locatlo euaion and Operation of Water, Sewer Regulation and Solid Waste Facilities Art. 43, Sec. 386A - 399 Regulation of the Collection State Planning and DHMH (EHA) and Disposal of Sewage Sludge Regulation Art. 43, Section 394 EPA Policy Memorandum State, Regional and Local DNR (WRA) and Oct. 3, 1977 Planning, and State DHMH (EHA) Regulation in accordance with Federal Standards Restriction of Access to Sewage State and Local County Planning Treatment Systems Regulation and Zoning, 60 Op. Att'y Gen. 508 (1975) Health and Public Works Departments; (DHMH) (EHA); DNR (WRA) 284 LAND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Situation In the past 20 years, the development of transportation facilities has played a major role in shaping the uses of Maryland's coastal areas. belt- ways, built to aid access to and around central cities, e.g., Washington and Baltimore, have contributed to the movement of populations from citie~ to the suburbs. Service facilities catering to through traffic have often been developed along rural interchanges of limited access highways. Businesses in these locations usually have small local markets and would not be able to support themselves without the highway. Thus the highway provides economic gain to the cosmmunity, and may be a central factor in the community's economy. In suburban areas around cities such as Baltimore, radial highways and beltways have drawn businesses and households away from downtown areas, and have helped create more dispersed housing and employment centers. In general, the bigger and faster the highway, the larger the impact, if the road provides access to desirable living and working areas. If there is easy access to and from the highway - if there are unlimited curb cuts and all intersections are at grade level - development can occur along the sides of the highway in a "strip" of stores, restaurants, motels, gas stations, and apartments. Single-family housing may spread out behind these strips on the many crossing roads. If the highway has limited access (such as an interstate highway) development will occur at interchanges, and cross streets may themselves become major arteries with their own strip development or office parks. The highly visible land along the road may be developed through construction of frontage roads. Highway projects involve engineering activities associated with the construction, operation, and maintenance of the highway, such as land clearing and stripping, the use of herbicides, the application of road salts, and slope stabilization. These and many other activities may influence both the terrestrial and aquatic environments of the immediate project areas, and may have offsite impacts from sedimentation and stormwater runoff. Proposed highway projects in the coastal zone of major concern include the Patuxent Freeway in Anne Arundel County and Route 50 improvements between Kent Island and Easton, and at Vienna, Cambridge, and Salisbury. Other types of transportation facilities besides highways have significant implications for coastal resources and activities. In the Baltimore Metropolitan area, a rapid transit system is under construction in an attempt to alleviate transportation problems, However, construction of such a system involves questions of its fiscal impact due to its costs questions of which areas it should service, and questions of its potential for growth generation. 285 On the Eastern Shore, railroads are a Principal means of transportating industrial, commercial, and agricultural goods to market. However, with the reorganization of railroads in the Northeastern United States, the continuation of some portions of the present railroad system is threatened. The only large airport facility located in Maryland's coastal zone is the Baltimore Washington International Airport in Anne Arundel County. Smaller airport facilities in the coastal zone include Martin Airport in Baltimore County and those at Cambridge, Salisbury, and Ocean City. Aiport facilities are generally of coastal zone management concern only when their construction or expansion may have significant impacts on coastal resources and activities. The development of adjacent land is also of concern if it may conflict with noise impact zones. The Maryland Department of Transportation and local transportation units have responsibility for planning and promoting all transportation projects,' and have been cooperating on programs and projects for several years. State and Federal laws and regulations require impact assessments and regional studies relating to impact on air quality, growth projections, noise levels, and quantitative and qualitative socio-economic impacts, as well as consideration of impacts on water quality and environmental resources. Issues State and local governments must coordinate their activities and regulatory actions, with federal government cooperation and consistency, to meet the following objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program: (19) To discourage the location of major new or expanded facilities on or immediately adjacent to Resource Protection Areas or Hazard Prone Areas. (22) To promote use of the State's coastal resources to meet social and economic needs in an environmentally compatible manner. (23) To ensure consideration of the carrying capacity of air, land and water resources (both surface and groundwater) and the conservation of coastal natural areas in state and local regulatory decisions concerning coastal developments. (24) To ensure that surfficient provision has been made for providing adequate water. sewer, and transportation services before new coastal developments are approved by state and local government agencies. (25) To ensure adequate consideration is given to social, economic, and environmental impacts in government decisions COncernIng the siting of public facilities in coastal areas, particularly those involving transportation and waste treatment facilities. 286 (26) To ensure the incorporation of storm water manaaement iimuro in state and local regulatory programs that would require runoff from a development site, to maintain to th% maximum extent possible, water quality and quantity conditions that prevailed prior to development. (381 To ensure coordination and use of existing state and local government nroarams to achieve the Coastal Zone Management Program's objectives. Investigations and decisions must take into consideration whether or not: - Transportation project plans and system studies utilize sound. state-of-the-art methods. - Environmental, socio-economic and transportation data are adequate. - Inadequate data delays regulatory or planning decisions. - Recommendations conform to all applicable State and Federal environmental statutes and regulations. - Adequate coordination is maintained with agencies and organizations affected by siting decisions so that their concerns may be factored into studies and recommendations in a timely manner. - The public has ready access to current information and the opportunity' to provide input and feedback on issues of concern. . - Procedures for improving transportation planning are investigated. Policies 1. Maryland will plan, develop, maintain, operate, and regulate - in cooperation with local jurisdictions, and as a supplement to facilities and services provided by private enterprise - a transportation system which adequately meets the needs for movement of people and goods while: supporting local, regional, and state goals; facilitating a pattern of physical development which can be served efficiently by transportation; preserving the unique qualities of Maryland's historical and natural resources; maintaining fiscal integrity; and strengthening the economy of Maryland. In order to develop and operate such a transportation system, Maryland will develop and maintain a continuing comprehensive and integrated transportation planning process, including the creation and promulgation of a State Master Plan for Transportation. (Article Transportation Section 2-103; Maryland Transportation Action Plan) 287 2. Maryland will follow and implement procedures contained in Policy Procedure Memorandum 90-4 issued December 20, 1974, by the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, to insure that all relevant factors and interests are considered in any transportation improvement. (Article Transportation 2-103; Maryland Transportation Action Plan) 3. in planning for transportation improvements, Maryland will adhere to the following policies, which are further detailed in the Maryland State Transportation Plan and the Maryland Department of Transportation Executive Plan. a. Transportation 'services supported by the State of Maryland shall be based on a comprehensive assessment of the transportation function they are intended to serve. b. The State shall assess carefully the social, economic and environmental impacts of proposed improvements in transportation service and shall consider the relationships between these impacts, improved, service and the cost of implementation. In developing pl.ans and programs, the state will consider and document the impact of alternative modes, locations-and operations, through each phase of the decision-making process. To improve Maryland's ability to anticipate the effects of proposed actions, a monitoring and evaluation program will be initiated to determine the actual impacts of facilities and programs. c. The State will not commit itself to any specific improvement or location until after completion of detailed evaluations of the 'transportation, economic, and environmental effects of alternate improvements and locations (including the "no-build" alternative, and including the alternative of improving existing facilities in lieu of new construction). d. The State will finance only those transportation service improvements which are consistent with approved comprehensive transportation plans and programs. e. Wherever feasible, the State will meet transportation needs through improvement of existing facilities rather than'through the construction of new ones. f. where needed and appropriate, the Department shall facilitate use of alternatives to the automobile for interregional travel. g.The State shall encourage energy-efficient use of all means of transportation and shall encourage such energy-saving measures as car-pooling, use of public transportation, bikeways, and traffic operations improvements. h. Transportation service improvements shall be planned and designed to allow for early, continuous and two-way communication with all segments of the public prior to selectioA of a course of action. Specific mechanisms for public involvement shall be established for each major project prior to undertaking substantial planning activities. 288 The state shall work with local governments to plan and design transportation facilities such as airports and major highways, to protect against adverse noise and air quality impact and to insure the compatibility of future development. j. The State shall increase and facilitate accessability among the five regions of Maryland and between these regions and other states and countries. k. The State supports continuation of essential commuter and rail freight service in all regions of Maryland. 1. The State shall provide and maintain an efficient, safe Maryland Primary Highway System linking the State's major population and industrial centers, recreation sites, and transportation terminals. m. The State shall promote the development of Baltimore-Washington International Airport as one of the major domestic and international air facilities serving the Mid-Atlantic Region. n. To maintain consistency with State development goals and to enhance the economic development potential of Maryland, the State shall promote an appropriate balance between land development and each component of the interregional transportation system. o. The State supports private enterprise in maintaining and strengthening the system of moving goods in Maryland. (Transportation Article 2-103, Natural Resources Article 1-302, 1-303; Maryland Preliminary Transportation Plan; Maryland Department of Transportation Executive Plan) 4. Decisions to proceed with a transportation project will be based on factors includihg (but not limited to) the following: a. Volume as a precent capacity. b. Construction and operation cost. c. Accident data. d. Socio-economic impact. e. Environmental impact. f. Contribution to state and local development goals and objectives. g. Consistent evaluation of.all alternatives, including the no-build alternative. h. Mitigation measures that can be incorporated into design, construction, and operation of the project. (Transportation Article 2-103, Maryland Transportation Action Plan) 289 Implementation Lead Agency: Department of Transportation Management Procedures All transportation facility planning is now' subject to a comprehensive multi-agency planning process described in the Transportation Action Plan and shown in Figure I11-1. All facilities are subject to comprehensive evaluation both at the systems level and at the project and design levels by. the Department of Transportation. The Consolidated Transportation program (the Department of Transportation's five-year capital improvements-program), which is prepared annually, is the result of the system planning effort. Environmental, social, economic impacts are weighed at all stages. In the systems planning which is conducted at the State-wide, regional and local levels, the following factors are considered in accordance with the above policies: I. Analysis of goals andi constraints f6r local environmental impact and for implications to economic and social programs of Maryland. 2. Inventory and collection of statewide physical transportation data. 3. Analysis and forecasting of demand for modal facilities. 4. identification and forecasting alternative plans based on such criteria as: a. Level of transportation service. b. Regional community growth and development. c. Conservation and preservation. d. Public facilities and services. e. Coimmunity cohesion. f. Displacement of people, businesses, and farms. g. Noise, air and water pollution. h. Aesthetic considerations. The Planning and Design of individual projects involves the following steps: 1. Definition of project goals. 290 2. Assessing and gathering project-related data. 3. Refinement of the criteria developed at the systems planning level. 4. identification and analysis of project alteratives, pursuant to NEPA. 5. Identification and analysis of potential-social, cultural and environmental impacts of proposed projects. 6. Analysis of unresolved issues. Environmental Effects Reports are required on projects using State funds. All projects are reviewed through the State Clearinghouse. In addition, transportation projects will require some permit approvals by the Water Resources Administration, after consideration of impacts on wetlands, stormwater runoff generation, water q~uality and aquatic resources at the project and design planning levels. Coastal Zone Unit Role -Project Eva~luation 1. The Coastal Zone Unit will assist the Department of Transportation (where appropriate) in systems planning activities at the statewide, regional and local levels for the following types of projects: - Interstate highways; - Two-lane to four-lane improvements; - Railroad lines; - Airports; - Public ports (See Ports Section); and - Any roadway serving a peninsula area, or which crosses tidal waters. The Coastal Zone Unit, in conjunction with other units of the Department of Natural Resources, will also assist the Department of.Transportation in the conduct of Project Planning activities for the above types of projects. The purpose of Coastal Zone Unit's involvement during these two phases of transportation planning is to insure that long-tem, off-site, and secondary effects of transportation projects on coastal resources are adequately considered in the siting and design stages of planning. This will be accomplished through the participation of Coastal Zone Unit in conjunction with the other units of the Department of Natural Resources in the Action Plan process. 291 2. The Coastal Zone Unit will also enlist the expertise of the Department of Transportation in the review of other coastal zone projects not directly related affecting transportation programs, for the purpose of determining potential impacts such development may have on existing transportation programs. Program Review The Coastal Zone Unit will review annually the Consolidated Transportation Program for consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Program in accordance witn the Memorandum of Understanding between the Coastal Zone Unit and the Department of Transportation, to ensure integration of coastal concerns into Department of Transportation actions. AUTHORITIES RELATING TO LAND TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES Statutory Authority Management Techniques Agency Article: Transportation Direct State Planning and MDOT Titles 2, 5, 6, 8 Regulation Federal Highway Act 1970 Federal Standards and Rules MDOT Section 109H followed by State Agency Water Quality Permits Direct State Planning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-1402, Regulation 8-1405, 8-1413 Air Quality Program Direct State Planning and DHMH (EHA) Art. 43, Section 690 et seq. Regulation Noise Control Direct State Planning and DHMH (EHA) Art. 43, Section 824 Regulation Water Appropriation Permit Direct State PlAnning and DNR (WRA) Art. NR, Section 8-801, 8-802 Regulation Sediment Control/Stormwater State Standards for Local DNR (WRA) Management Implementation; State Art. NR, Section 8-905, 8-110, Regulation of Projects et seq. interpreted by 56 Att'y funded or undertaken by Gen. Op's 478 (Ap. 6, 1971) the State 292 Figure rn-i TRANSPCRTATION SYSTEMS PLANNING PROCC-SS (STATEWIDE, 16GIONAI. AND LOCAL) L -0 ~. on. cflvu CUIIUA I A~IA bas.66 INVOLVIVA~~~~~~~~~~ AMTON If&. Mwl~'!. M. sim AtTRMNA11VIS 1ANPRT0"Ciple Ftine SLt Uf" oACt' 81CONG"VAUNG ~ ong, *'Ile.4. b*;~ P~g~ evonmed la ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-~ 14 0m I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ro mobi. IWIng#4 Iad9ms"Ho IRN~lsim -0CA U,~~~~~~kvl a OmOi ~~~~~~~~~~Olv 6 I**AW CHAPTER IV GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN i :: ~~F~/172 IJSY TV. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS OF PARTICULAR CONCERN Legislative Requirements Those coastal states developing a program responsive to the federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 must identify geographical areas of special significance within the coastal zone. Section-305(b) (3) of the Act requires the management program to include "an inventory and designation of areas of particular concern within the coastal zone". Section 923.1-'a) of the regulations pursuant to the Act requires that such inventories include the following: (1) Areas of unique, scarce, fragile, or vulnerable natural habitat, physical feature, historical significance, cultural value and scenic importance; (2) Areas of high natural productivity or essential habitat for living resources, including fish, wildlife, and the various trophic levels in the food web critical to their well-beinq; (3) Areas of substantial recreational value and/or opportunity; (4) Areas where developments and facilities are dependent upon the utilization of, or access to, coastal waters; (5) Areas of unique geologic or topographic significance to industrial or coimmercial development; (6) Areas of urban concentration where shoreline utilization and water uses are highly competitive; (7) Areas of significant hazard, if developed, due to storms, slides, floods, erosion, settlement, etc.; and (8) Areas needed to protect, maintain, or replenish coastal lands and resources, including coastal flood plains, aquifer recharge areas, sand dunes, coral and other reefs, beaches, offshore sand deposits, and mangrove stands. An additional requirement of the Act regarding Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC) states that the management program shall include "broad guidelines on priority of uses in particular areas, including specifi- cally those of lowest priority" (Section 305(b)15)). The purpose of identifying a priority of uses is to articulate the State's interest in the preservation, conservation, and orderly development of specific areas in its coastal zone. Lastly, Section 306 (c) (9)' of the Act requires the State to "make provisions whereby specific areas may be designated for the purpose of preserving or restoring them for their conservation, recreational, ecological, or ae-that~ic values." 294 Existing Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: Vegetated Tidal Wetlands The State- of Maryland recognizes tidal wetlands for their generic significance as well as for their site-specific significance. All vegetated tidal wetland areas are considered a generic class of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. The management authority applied in this generic consideration is the State Wetlands Act, which is implemented by Wetlands Permit Section of the Water Resources Administration. In addition, the Coastal Zone Unit will focus efforts on identifying aite-specific vegetated tidal wetland areas which, due to their inherent natural value, warrant preservation. When identified, these areas will be suggested to the local governments and the DSP for recommnendation as State Critical Areas suitable for preservation. (See discussion of State Critical Areas Program which follows.) This approach emphasizes the State's recognition of the values of tidal wetlands as a whole. This recognition is set forth in the State wetland's Act of 1970, which established the State policy to preserve its tidal wetlandbt and to prevent their despoliation and destruction. To carry out this policy, the Act divided the State's wetlands into two types -- State wet~Lands and Private wetlands -- and presented a management program for each. State wetlands are defined as "all land under the navigable waters of the State below the mean high tide, which is affected by regular rise and fall of the tide." Private wetlands are "all lands not considered State wetlands bordering on or lying beneath tidal waters, which are subject to regular or periodic tidal action and which support aquatic growth". Regarding State wetlands, the Act . makes it unlawful to dredge or fill on these lands unless a license to do so has been issued by the State Board of Public Works. The Board bases its decision on recomimendations from the Wetlands Permit Section of the Water Resoruces Administration. Regulation of activities in private wetlands is achieved through a permit system of the Wetlands Permit Section. The full text of the Wetlands Act, as well as the order establishing wetland boundaries and the rules and regulations, is contained in Appendix G. These regulations are presently being revised to make more explicit the criteria that the Wetlands Permit Section uses in making reconmmendations on activities proposed for private wetlands. The policy guidelines on which these regulations will be based have also been included in that appendix. The designation of Priority of Uses for this type of GAPC is discussed in detail in a section on Priority of Uses at the end of this chapter. 295 Continuing Identification of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: The State Critical Areas Program The State Critical Areas Program will be the principal mechanism that the Coastal Zone Management Program will use to meet the requirements of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act Regulations for the future designation of GAPCS, (CFR923.21-23). Through this program, areas of special significance within the coastal zone, as well as in the State as a whole, will be identified and designated State Critical Areas. Carred out by the Department of State Planning (DSP), the Critical Areas Program is mandated by the State Land Use Act of 1974 (Article 88C, Section 2(b)(3)) which gives the Department of State Planning the responsibility to identify "...areas of critical State concern, after consultation with and consideration of recommendations submitted to the Secretary (of the Department of State Planning) by the local subdivisions". The legislation further states that "Every county and the City of Baltimore shall make recommendations to the Department (of State Planning) as to the areas within their respective jurisdictions which sould be designated as being of critical State concern". Guidelines have been established for use by the local subdivisions in making their recommendations (see Appendix D; also included in that appendix is a sample critical area recommendation). The guidelines are also intended for use by citizens, organizations, and units of state and federal government, in making suggestions to the local governments. The role of the Coastal Zone Unit is to assist the local governments and DSP in identifying coastal areas of critical state concern, by providing technical information and analysis of the types of areas discussed in this chapter. The process of designating state critical areas has three stages: (1) preparation of recommendations by the local governments; (2) review and comment on recommendations by appropriate state agencies and other interested parties; and (3) formal designation of areas by DSP. Preparation of Recommendations Local governments solicit suggestions of areas from citizens, organizations, and units of state and federal government. Broad public participation is encouraged through the use of citizen advisory groups. A set of draft recommendations is prepared and presented at public hearings. The final recommendations are adopted by the local governments and submitted to DSP. All suggestions received by the local governments, including those not adopted as recommendations, are to be submitted. Development of a set of recommendations includes the following steps: (1) an inventory of areas by general categories, (2) a determination of which areas are of critical state concern, (3) delineation of the boundaries of each specific area or site, (4) a description of the area in terms of its existing significant feaures, and (5) an identification of compatible uses and suggested management techniques. Each of. these steps is described in detail in Appendix n. .4owever, elaboration on step 5 is appropriate at this point. In identifying compatible uses, the local governments are to classify recom- mended areas into one of the following three types of critical areas: (a) "Critical Areas Suitable for Preservation" are areas where most forms and levels of alteration resulting from human activity may create 296 disturbances which have a high probability of resulting in a significant adverse impact upon the characteristics of the area, and where strict management is necessary to retain the area's inherent characteristics and attributes. Cb) "Critical Areas Suitable for Conservation" are areas where alterations through various forms and levels of human activities can be accommodated without significant adverse impact upon the inherent characteristics and attributes of the area, if appropriate management practices are followed. ()"Critical Areas Suitable for Utilization" are areas where alterations through human activity can be accommodated and encouraged, although there is potential for significant multi-jurisdictional, environmental, or fiscal impacts, which should be given consideration. Areas which are desirable for some predetermined use and should be maintained in their present state to prevent irreversible commitment of the site or its resources are also included in this type of area. The intent of the three critical area types is to delineate the nature of the land use or uses which would be must appropriate in a specific critical area. The recommendation also includes an assessment of the particular types of land uses that might be compatible with a designated critical area and adjacent buffer areas. An important part of the recommendation consists of the proposal of management techniques, to ensure that the future use or development of the area will be consistent with its attributes. Recommended management techniques may be carried . ~out by local, state, or federal government, or by private parties. The sources of authority for managing a designated critical area include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Local planning and land use regulations: including zoning, subd~ivis ion, related health, sanitation, environmental, housing, and other regulations; (b) Local acquisition, local tax incentives, or management of property owned by local government; Cc) State regulatory programs, such as those for the management of state wetlands, floodpldins, t water quality, air quality, and transportation; Cd) State acquisition, state tax incentives, or state management of state- owned land; (e) Federal acquisition or federal management of federally-owned land; and (f) Management by private citizens or organizations. Table IV-1 lists the sources of authority that are available at the state and local level to manage those State Critical Areas that will be considered Geographic Areas of Particular Concern in the Coastal Zone Management Program.' Chapter VIII contains a discussion of the Critical Areas Program, and the relationship of the DSP intervention authority to this Program (see pages 370 through 375). T ble IV-I Geograp.Ali Areas. ,t P.rtit llar oncncern gement Auth~ritir Type_ of Area |.State Management Authcrites ,ocal Management Authorities* Resource Protection Areas Vegetated Tidal Wetlands W o� Netlands Permit Program; State Acquisition Comprehensive county Plans Upland Natural Areas (Includes Watershed Permit Program State Acquisition; Maryland C-r.t! Water and Sewerage Plans Non-tidal Wetlands and Prime environmental Trust Programs; CZM Act Amendments Recreation Areas) implementation (In:reased Fublic Access Grants Cojnty Solid Wastc Disposal Plans Provision) Subdivision Regulations Productive Agricultural land Maryland Agricultural Preservati.-'- .Tindation Plat Maps Archeological and Histori- Sit-' Marv.and Historical Trust Son!.ng Oreinance- Aquatic Resource Areas State Water Quality Program; State Wetlands Permit v'r6gram; State Boating Regulations; State Zoning Maps Sedimentation Control Program istoric onin Historic Zoning Hazard Prone Areas I High-risk Shore Erosion Areas HUD-Floci insurance Program; State Shore Erosion Loan FI ,ld; State Wetlands Permit Program Sediment Cont; :' iia.&cer Flood Hazard Areas 1a0ershed Permit Program; HUD-Flood Insurance Sanitary Codes �';.ai; 'Flood Control-Watershed Management property Taxes ' l l.-: if ;A75 Implementation Land Acquisitions Facility Siting Power '?kant Siting Program; Coastal Facilities Power Plant Sites Review Act Implementation; State Air & Water Specific Local Laws Relating OCS Related Facilities Quality frograms; Coastal Energy Impact Program, to Wetlands, Flood Plains, Heavy Industry Sites Maryland Indust-rial Land Act; State Wetlands Oil Refineries, Recreation Large-scale Residential Projects Peit Program Facilities, etc. Large-scale Marinas Ports Maryland P-t 5dminr.;:ration (rransportation Article, Subtitle 5); State Wetlands Permit Program Mineral Extraction Areas L .LrfaT a o.- - ning Act of 1975 lmplemencation *The management of designated critical 'reas is primarily the responsibility of the local governments. The local governments have various authorities or powers which can e ,-seZr zo carry out a management program for a designated Critical Area. This list of local authorities can be usere in any comnbina.tion to implement a Critical Area designation of any type of area listed. _1 - .... .._...... . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Recommendation Review Upon receiving recommendations of critical areas from the local governments, DSP will distribute them for review and comment to the Coastal Zone Unit, as well as to other units of state and federal government, local governments, and interested citizens and organizations. During the review period, the Coastal Zone Unit or any other agency may recommend additional areas. The local governments will have an opportunity to review all proposed critical areas prior to the final designations by DSP. Formal Designation After consideration of the comments received on the proposed designations, DSP will formally designate Areas of Critical State Concern. Upon formal designation, the local governments will incorporate the critical areas into local plans and implement the designations where local responsibilities are involved. If an activity is proposed that is incompatible with a Critical Area designation, DSP will intervene to ensure compliance with the management plan for the area. The Department of State Planning has adopted standards of intervention (see Appendix E). These standards establish a general policy that DSP will not intervene in critical area proceedings if the local. government has adopted and is implementing a management plan for the area, consistent with the inherent characteristics which supported its designation. The designation of Areas of Critical State Concern is an on-going process. The initial set of designations will be made in the Sunmer of 1978. The process will then take place on an annual basis beginning on July 1, 1979. This is a recurring process, and information on the coastal zone areas discussed in this chapter will be provided to the local governments as it becomes available for future critical area recommendations. Geographic Areas of Particular Concern And State Critical Areas In general, areas designated as State Critical Areas located within. the c~oastal zone will become Geographic Areas of Particular Concern under the Coastal Zone Management Program. The majority of the GAPC desiqnations will be located in the, Area of Focus of the Coastal Zone ManagementProgram, where all designated State Critical Areas will become Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. State Critical Areas located outside the area of focus will be considered for GAPC designation on a case-by-case basis. These would mainly consist of major fac'ility sites and other areas designated as suitable for utilization (see discussion on Developmental Critical Areas). Another example of a State Critical Area located outside the area of focus which may become a GAPC would be a non-tidal marsh area located at the headwaters of a tribuitary to the Chesapeake Bay. The designation of State Critical Areas will be a continuing process rather than a one-time effort. The designation of the initial set of State Critical Areas has not yet been completed. Formal recognition of State Critical Areas as Geographic Areas of Particular concern will, therefore, take place on an annual basis. Begin- ning with the first year after approval of this program, designated State Critical Areas in the area of focus and other selected areas (as discussed above) will be submitted to the Office of Coastal Zone Managetunet as a modification or an amendment to the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Pro-ram. Approval of this modification or amendment will take place in accordance with NOAA regulations (15CFR 923): 299 "In a designated State Critical Area that also becomes a GAPC, the specifics of the mangement plan developed for the area will become part of the Coastal Zone Management Program. This will mean that federal agencies, state agencies and others will have to comply with the management plan, as well as the overall objectives and policies of the Coastal Zone Program, in order to be consistent with the Program. In other wor-ds, the GAPC designation provides additional criteria against which to determine consistency, including federal consistency with the Program." Three types of areas will be considered for designation as Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: (l)-Resource Protection Areas, (2) Hazard Prone Areas, and (3) Developmental Critical Areas. Resource Protection Areas Resource Protection Areas are those coastal "areas of particular concern" containing resources of biological, recreational, aesthetic, scientific, historical or cultural importance. Specific areas within this category will be identified, and will be suggested to the local governments, for their consideration in preparing recommnendations of State Critical Areas suitable for preservation or, in some cases, conservation. Resource Protection Areas include vegetated tidal wetlands, upland natural areas, prime recreational areas, productive agricultural Ian'd, areas of historic and archeological importance, and aquatic resource areas. 1. Vegetated Tidal Wetlands-as noted above, all vegetated tidal wetlands are considered a generic class of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. It is recognized, however, that not all wetlands are of equal value. Some areas, 'due to significant natural value, warrant special attention which can be achieved through State Critical Area designation. To assure protection of these areas, some may be suggested for State or local acquisition. To aid the State in its wetlands management activities, the Coastal Zone Unit has undertaken a study to update, refine, and expand information obtained in a preliminary survey of the State's wetland areas in 1968. Work in progress includes the mapping of vegetation in the tidal wetlands, an ecological value assessment of each vegetation type, a vegetation productivity study, and an information summary that describes the extent in acr~s of vegetation types for each major watershed, county, and the State as a whole. The results of this study will be used by the Wetlands Pemit Section. it will also assist in determining which wetlands have unique, inherent natural value and thus deserve designation as state critical areas. The study? is scheduled for completion in early 1978. 300 2. Upland Natural Areas These areas will be suggested to local governments for recommendation as State Critical Areas suitable for conservation, or in some cases, preservation. To assist the local governments a nd DSP in identifying tho sespland natural areas within the coastal zone that are of critical State concern, the Coastal zone unit inventoried and field-checked approximately 700 sites. The areas investigated included non-tidal wetland areas greater than five acres in size, and forested areas primarily unaffected by human activities. Criteria were developed to characterize these areas, such as size, site type, vegetation cover, presence of unique, rare, or endangered plant and animal species, diversity of wildlife habitat, role as an aquatic buffer, and visual aesthetics. The Eastern Shore counties were field-checked during the smer of 1975 and the' Western Shore counties were field-checked the summer pf 1976. The data obtained has been computerized, and is available for individual sites. The Coastal Zone Unit is presently evaluating the sites based on factors such as inherent natural value, or potential use for wildlife management, recreation, hunting, coercial forestry, scientific research, and education. Eased on this evaluation, the highest priority areas will be those suggested to the local governments for iecommendations as State Critical Areas. 3. Prime Recreation Areas There are existing state and local programs, such as the State Program Open Space, to acquire and maintain areas for recreational purposes. To supplement the efforts of existing programs, the Coastal Zone Unit, through its Upland Natural Areas Stiady, will evaluate a natural area's potential for recreational purposes. Thus, some of the upland 'natural areas may be suggested for recommendation as State Critical Areas to be used for recreational public access to the ChesApeake Bay. In addition, a part of the Marylarid Outdoor Recreation and Open Space Plan identified potential oubdoor recreation sites in the State. Some of these sites may be recommended for designation as State Critical Areas. Those located on tidal waters will become Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. 4. Productive Agricultural Land Because the Maryland General Assembly has declared it state policy to preserve agricultural land, areas of productive agricultural land Roy be recommended by local governments for.designation as State Critical Areas suitable for conservation. Should areas of productive agricultural land in the coastal zone be identified by either the Department of Agriculture or local governments, the Coastal Zone Unit will support the recormmendation of State Critical Area designation for such areas. Any agricultural land within the coastal counties that is designated as a State Critical Area will be considered a Geographic Area of Particular Concern in the Coastal Zone Management Program. 5. Areas of Historical and Archeological Importance These areas will be suggested for recommendation as State Critical Areas suitable for preservation or conservation. The activities of the Maryland Historic Trust fulfill the federal Coastal Zone Management Act requirement that areas of historical significance be identified in the coastal zone. The Coastal Zone Unit will support the recommendation of historic sites in the coastal zone for designation as State Critical Areas. 301 To assist in identifying important archeological sites in the coastal zone, the Coastal Zone Unit has undertaken a study designed (.) -o compile available information of prehistoric occupation and use of Maryland's coastal zone, and (b) to assess the importance of environmental factors in determining areas likely to contain archeological sites. Sites that have been identified during the course of the study will be mapped. Sites identified within the area of focus will be suggested for recommendation as State Critical Areas. If designated, these will become GAPC's. 6. Aquatic Resource Areas The Coastal Zone Unit is identifying areas within the aquatic portions of Maryland's coastal zone which contribute significantly to water dependent wildlife, fish and shellfish. These areas provide suitab!e habitat for these species during some or all phases of the species' life history. Oyster bars, marshes, and the range of rare and endangered species are examples of these areas. Some areas may be used only on a seasonal basis while others are used year-round. Also under consideration are areas which may be suitable for the development of a fishery resource in a particular area. Identification of these areas is made with existing information such as sport surveys, commerical catch statistics, interviews, and environmental reports. Maps are being developed from this review, showing the location of those areas within Maryland's aquatic coastal ecosystem which provide the greatest contribution to the living aquatic resource. The identified aquatic resource areas will be reviewed to determine which areas are most significant. These will then be suggested to the local governments and the DSP for recommendation as State. Critical Areas. As a result of the Aquatic Resource Areas Study, information on certaih finfish and shellfish resource areas has been compiled into an aquatic resource handbook. The handbook has been provided to planning and licensing agencies as a basis for the initial evaluation of proposed activities within the coastal zone. Hazard Prone Areas Hazard Prone Areas, the second category of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern, are defined as areas which are unsuitable for development due to the danger of shore erosion, flooding, or other incompatible physical characteristics. Specific areas identified within this category will be suggested to the local governments, for their conjderation in preparing recommendations of State Critical Areas suitable for preservation or conservation. Examples of Hazard Prone Areas include high risk shore erosion areas, flood plains, steep slopes, and high water table areas. The two major areas of concern to the Coastal Zone.Management Program in this category are areas of severe shoreline erosion, and flood hazard areas. In addition, other areas where there is known to be a danger in development due to incompatible physical characteristics may be suggested to local governments for recommendation as State Critical Areas. 1. High Risk Shore Erosion Areas These areas will be suggested for recommendation as State Critical Areas suitable for conservation or, in some cases, preservation. To assist the local governments and DSP in identifying shore erosion areas of critical state concern, the Coastal Zone Unit has completed a Shore Erosion Mapping Study and an inventory of existing shore erosion control structures. 302 The products of the shore erosion ma~pirnq st,,20y arc- particularly useful in identifying areas of severe shoreline erosion. These consist. of (a) a series of maps depicting the historic shorelines of 1845 and 1942 as well as the shoreline depicted on the particular quadrangle sheet which may vary from 1942 to 1967, ad(b) a second series of quandrangle maps which depict historic shore erosion rates calculated from the historic shorelines shown an the first series of maps. 2. FIILd Hpzard Areas __-- -- Flood Hazard areas will be suggested as State Critical Areas suitable for conservation. The primary responsiblity for identifying flood hazard areas lies with the Water Resources Administration of the Department of Natural Resources. The State Flood Control-Watershed Management Act requires that rules and regulations be developed governing the activities which occur in those areas. The Coastal Zone Unit's efforts will concentrate on determining the environmental characteristics of these areas, to supplement the efforts of the Water Resources Administration. When the 100-year flood plain areas have been identified, the Coastal Zone Unit will concentrate on identifying those which are most critical from a flood hazard standpoint.- These areas will then be suggested for critical area recommnendation by local governments. Derelopmental Critical Areas Developmental Critical Areas, the third category of Geographic Areas of Particular Concern, are definedi as (1) areas within Maryland's coastal zone that are identified as suitable for accepting various types of major facilities, and (2) areas where there is potential for expansion of an existing facility. The types of major facilities under consideration inE:lude Odter Continental Shelf energy-related facilities, power plants, heavy industry facilities, ports, large- scale residential projects, large-scale marinas, and mineral extraction facilities. Local governments will be notified of specific areas identified within this category for consideration for recommnendation as State Critical Areas suitable for utilization. To assist the local governments and DSP in identifying developmental areas of critical state concern, the Coastal Zone Unit, in conjunction with the Maryland Power Plant Siting Program, has undertaken a study (a) to identify and assess major facility sites in Maryland's coastal zone for the types of major facilities mentioned in the preceding paragraph, and (b) to develop methods for evaluating the social, economic, and environmental impacts of site-specific major facility proposals. The areas identified will be suggested for State Critical Area recommendation. Areas for Preservation or Restoration This requirement of the Feaderal Act is also addressed by the State through its Critical Areas Program. As described in this chapter, areas suitable for preservation will be identified and designated State Critical Areas as part of the Critical Areas Program. -Examples of such areas may include specific tidal wetland sites, upland natural areas, or important historic sites. For some areas, such as tidal wetlands, if acquisition of a site is deemed necessary, funds are available for this purpose, e.g., wetlands acquis~ition fund. The Maryland Environmental Trust also has the power to acquire property of aesthetic, scenic, or cultural significan~ce for conservation purposes. its conservation easement program helps to conserve farmland, woodlands, stream corridors, unique or rare natural areas, or othe- kinds of open space by arranging 303 non-development agreements with private landowners. The Trust is responsible for easements on 5,730 acres of land, most of it in the coastal zone. Included are three miles and 1,680 acres of Potomac River frontage in Charles County, 1,182 acres on Chesapeake Bay in Kent and Queen Anne's Counties, and 300 acres along tributaries of the Little Choptank River in Dorchester County. Regarding areas for restoration, the major efforts are directed toward aquatic areas and water quality improvement. Areas will be identified in which water quality conditions should be maintained or improved to protect or restore important aquatic resources habitat. Priority of Uses in GAPC's Because the major implementation mechanisms for GAPC's are the State's wetland program and Critical Areas Program, the following disucssion addressed the priorities of uses as they apply to each of these program. Vegetated Tidal Wetlands All vegetated portions of tidal wetlands are a generic class of GAPC. Because the Wetlands Act established the State's policy to preserve its tidal wetlands and prevent their destruction, the highest priority is to preserve the integrity of the wetland ecosystem. As discussed previously,activities in tidal wetlands are regulated by a permit and licensing program administered by the Water Resources Administration. Prior to any dredging or filling within tidal wetlands, except as noted below, a State wetlands license, Private wetlands permit, or Notification (and subsequent approval) must be obtained from the State. The following activities are uses of highest priority in tidal wetlands and do not require a license, permit, or notification to the State, if otherwise permitted by law: (a) dredging of seafood products by licensed operators; (b) harvesting of seaweed; (c) mosquito control and abatement work, including alterations or modifications for mosquito control purposes, as approved by the Maryland Department of Agriculture, (Such work is regulated by the Department of Agriculture to minimize adverse environmental impacts); (d) improvement of wildlife habitat approved by the Department of Natural Resources; (e) maintenance of agricultural drainage ditches as approved by the appropriate Soil Conservation District, (Construction of.new drainage ditches within State wetlands requires a State wetlands license); (f) trapping, hunting, fishing and shellfishing; (g) cultivation and harvesting of shellfish, including such reasonable excavation in Private wetlands as normally necessary in conducting such activities; (h) cultivation and harvesting of agricultural or horticultural products, including grazing and haying; 304 (i) construction and maintenance of walkways, foot bridges, duckblinds, docks, boathouses, boat shelters, and other similar structures, provided that these structures are built on pilings, so as to permit the unobstructed flow of the tide and preserve the natural contour of the private wetland; (j) construction and maintenance of tide gates designed to prevent the encroachment of salt water into agricultural drainage ditches; and (k) the repair and maintenance of earthen dikes around a single residential dwelling, provided that such work does not involve the extension or increase in dimension of the existing dike. The following activities are high priority uses in Private wetlands. A property owner must notify the Water Resources Administration in writing prior to coemmencing any of these types of activities. A determination is then made as to whether or not a permit is required. (a) Alterations or modifications which are customary and perniitted by existing regulations *for the conservation of soil, vegetation, water, fish, shellfish, a.ad wildlife, including fur-bearing animals; (b) Improvements necessary to preserve access to navigable waters, or to protect Private wetlands against erosion; provided that any improvement authorized involving either the dredging or filling of State wetlands may not proceed unless a licens~e for filling or dredging has been issued by the State Board of Public Works; and (c) installation and maintenance of underground utilities, provided that the surface of the wetland is restored'substantially to its original condition. Except as noted above, it. is unlawful to dredge, f ill, remove, or otherwise alter any tidal wetlands without a State wetlands license or a Private wetlands permit.. Thus, the following types of activities are considered uses of lowest priority, and are prohibited without a license or permit. (a) Filling, placement, dumping, or discharging on tidal wetlands of any loam, peat, sand, gravel, soil, or other similar substance; or any trash, garbage, debris, jufik, or other polluting substance; (b) Draining, excavating or dredging tidal wetlands or the removal of any loam, peat, sand, gravel, soil, or other similar substance; and (c) Performing any act in tidal wetlands in a manner which would destroy the natural vegetation, substantially alter existing patterns of tidal flow, or otherwise alter or permit the alteration of the natural and beneficial character of such wetlands. 305 Except as specifically defined in the law, a riparian owner is not to be deprived of any right or privilege that he had prior to the passage of the Wetlands Act. in this regard the following guidelines are followed. (a) Whenever reasonable access can be provided directly from fast land, creation of a channel through vegetated wetlands, filling for access, or extending access inland with artificial channels shall be prohibitec. (b) In those cases where access is to be provided to a subdivision or other multi-home development or commnunity, a centralized boating access channel or pier is preferable to multiple piers or channels. In the case of isolated single family dwellings, a pier from fast land to~ open water shall normally fulfill the right of reasonable riparian access. (c) The ownership of land bordering upon tidal waters-does not carry with it the automatic right to create channels to extend boat access. it is the general policy of the State to allow dredging and filling on State or Private wetlands only for water-dependent ac~tivities,,auch as boat facilities, which cannot function in an area away from the shoreline. The filling of State or Private wetlands for the purpose of creating fast land is generally considered contrary to the public interest. Examples, of structures, facilities, and activities that generally are not appropriate uses of tidal wetlands include (but are not limited to) commner~ial establishments; residential developments; spoil and dump sites; lagoons for sewage and industrial waste; industries and factories; storage areas for boats; and recreational areas requiring filling above tidal level such as athletic fields, parking, and picnic areas. State Critical Areas For each designated State Critical Area, guidelines for determining priorities of uses will be included in the management program. Particular types of land uses that are compatible with each critical area will be identified. This will ensure that the future use of each area is consistent with the intent of the critical area designation. 306 In r JI so v LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT (XX I / V. LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT Legislative Requirements Section 303(d) of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, as amended, requires states to "encourage the participation of the public, of federal, state, and local governments, and of regional agencies in the development of coastal zone management programs." in order to obtain federal approval, a state must demonstrate that: 1) it has developed and adopted a management program for its coastal zone with the opportunity for full participation by relevant federal agencies, state agencies, local governments, regional organizations, port authorities, and other interested parties, public and private. 2) it has coordinated its program with local, area, and interstate plans applicable io areas within the coastal zone. 3) it has established an effective mechanism for continuing consultation and coordination between the management agency and local governments, and with other agencies within the coastal zone, to provide for their full participation in carrying out the purposes of the Coastal Zone Management Act. 4) it has held public hearings in the development of the management program. Specific procedures for continuing consultation and coordination are also specified in the Act. The management agency is required, before implementing any decision which might conflict with any local zoning ordinance, to consult with the local government whose zoning authority would be affected. The local governments have 30 days to submit comments on a proposed program action. No action is to be taken during that period unless the local government waives its right to comment. if comments are submitted to the management agency (the Coastal Zone Unit) within 30 days by any local government, the management agency. 1) is required to consider the comments; 2) is authorized to hold a public hearing on the commnts; and, 3) may not take any action within the 30-day period to implement the management program decision, even if the action is modified on the basis of comments. Section 308 of the regulation states, "All public hearings required under this title must be announced-at least thirty days prior to the hearing date. At the tire of the announcement# all agency material pertinent to the hearings, including documents, studies, and other data, must be made available to the Public for review and study. As similar materials are subsequently developed, they shall be made available to the public as they become available to the agency." 307 Regarding the financing of research and training which may be necessary, Section 310(b) states, "The Secretary may make grants to coastal states to assist such states in carrying out research, studies, and training required with respec't to coastal1 zone management." Operational Role of Local Governments This chapter describes the operational role of the local governments in the implementation of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. The procedures for involving local government which were implemented during the development of the program are described in Appendix B. Local governments are expected to become a significant part of the Program, by conducting their planning, permitting, and other administrative functions in a manner that supports the~ goals and objectives for coastal zone management. Pass- through fundsare being provided to local governments in order to supplement their present capabilities and to ensure a greater commitment to their coastal management responsibilities. The role of local government in the Coastal Zone Management Program has six components: 1) Coastal Management Structure for Local Governments In each of the 17 coastal jurisdictions, elected officials have selected one or more agencies with planning, administrative, or economic development responsibilities, to act as lead agency for th6 Program. This designated lead agency is the principal contact for coastal management in that jurisdiction, and constitutes a direct link between local government and all sta~te agencies with coastal responsibilities at policy and operation levels. The lead county agency is the recipient of program funding and manpower assistance as it becomes available for the local jurisdiction. The designated lead agencies (or individuals) for each jurisdiction are listed in Appendix B. The pass-through funds have been made available to the local jurisdictions on the basis of contractual understandings negotiated by the lead agencies and the Coastal Zone Unit. The work funded consists of tasks that the local jurisdictions, with the concurrence of the Coastal Zone Unit, have proposed to accomplish in support of the Program's goals and objectives. In negotiating these agreements, priority is given to activities that assure more compatible local, area-wide, and state plans, programs, management policies, and other joint actions relating to the coastal zone. The agreements recognize and maintain the traditional land use responsibility of the local governments. They depend on and support local governme1nts' capability to implement the Program within their jurisdiction. 308 2) Technical Expertise for Local Management of the Coastal Zone Sorne measure of expertise related to coastal matters is present in the local jurisdictions. However, where the level o� exp,.rtise (f existing personnel and government services is insufficint to meet coastal management responsibilities, the pass-through funds may be usud to acquire full-time technical assistants with the requisite knowledge and experience. The hiring of a technical assistant strengthens the capability of local governments to support the goals and objectives of the Coastal Zone Management Program through their planning, permitting, and administrative functions. Responsibilities handled by a technical assistant may include (a) representing or providing staff support to the local jurisdiction in project evaluations or program reviews, (b) aiding the local government in reviewing, analyzing, and drafting management plans for State Critical Area recommendations; and (c) identifying coastal problems which may require additional assistance, and providing documentation of these problems to the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee. The Coastal Zone Unit supports regional coordination and assistance for dealing directly with coastal problems, and area-wide agencies should be considered as sources of technical expertise for local governments. 3) Financial Assistance to Local Coastal Zone Management Problems If it is determined that additional funding assistance is necessary to solve particular coastal problems, financial assistance may be sought from the CZMP, the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee. Committee assist the Coastal Zone Unit in reviewing all requests for assistance from local governments, as well as from other sources, and in ranking them according to priorities for funding. Generally, highest priority for funding will be given to projects addressing problems which are common to several local governments and which are vital to the effective management of the coastal resources. Projects will be funded by the Coastal Zone Unit according to these priorities, and to the extent funds are available. 4) Involvement in Project Evaluation The purpose of the CZMP is to improve the efficiency, timeliness, comprehensive scope, and credibility of local, state, and federal decisions on projects proposed for the coastal zone. The mechanism for achieving this is the project evaluation procedure described in Chapter I. 309 Through its review procedure, the designated lead agency of a local government will identify projects which have potential for serious impacts in the coastal zone, or that come into conflict with Program goals and objectives. Where locally screened projects have the potential for adverse impacts of greater than local concern, the agency may request a project evaluation. This procedure assures a complete and timely consideration of the comprehensive impacts of these pro-jects, by all affected units of government. Local government is nct burdened with additional review, delays, or repetition of effort of the other local or regional agencies. Although the Coastal Zone Unit is not a regulatory agency, it will analyze project proposals for consistency with the Program goals and objectives. When an inconsistency is identified, the Coastal Zone Unit will notify the responsible authority for appropriate action. In addition to assisting local decision makers by providing project -evaluations, the Coastal Zone Unit will continue to provide resource inventories and technical analyses. Some of the current resource studies relevant to local planning and decision making include: A. Maryland Upland Natural Areas Study B. Archeological Resources Management Study C. Coastal Use Capability Study D. Recreational Boating on the Tidal Waters of Maryland E. Management Alternatives for Disposal Activities in Maryland Waters F. Shore Erosion Control: A Guide for Waterfront Property Owners G. Maryland Wetlands Case Maps H. Historical shoreline and Erosion Rates Maps I. Shore Erosion Structures in Maryland: Their Location and Extent J. Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study K. Major Facilities Study 5) Local Participation in State-Wide Coastal Studies The CZMP provides local governments with a stronger role in setting research and study priorities at the state level, because they will have a voice in future studies conducted by Maryland's Program. Their membership on the Coastal Resources Advisory Commnittee and their participation on special project steering ccznmittees guarantee them the opportunity to participate in setting research priorities and levels of funding, and in selecting contractors to undertake studies for the Program. Several local governments have already participated in this way on the Major Faciliti~s Study. 310 6) Local Involvement in State Coastal Policy The mayors of Baltimore and Ocean City, the executives and commissioners of the sixteen coastal counties, or their designees, are members of the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee. The Committee's present function is to advise the Secretary of Natural Resources on policy aspects of the Coastal Zone Management Program for Maryland. After federal approval of the Program, this body will provide a forum for the local government representatives, who will: a. Present local concerns on state-wide actions prior to policy decisions. Such actions will include: i. review of Maryland's program grant applications on a yearly basis before submission to the Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; ii. participation in the setting of priorities for the Coastal Energy Impact Program and other funding programs available to states under the 1976 Amendments to the Act. b. Ensure that the'other participants of the Program fully recognize and consider local management operations, priorities, problems, and plans. The following subjects have been identified by local jurisdictions during program development as candidates for consideration by the Committee: 1. Federal Water Pollution Control Act programs administered in the State; 2. The Maryland Flood Plain Insurance Program; 3. The Federal Air Quality Program; 4. Federal and State dredging and disposal projects; 5. State park planning projects. c. Ensure that changing priorities and programs at the local level are compatible with and reflected by those of other participants in the Program. The Program's structure encourages local governments to initiate new management procedures, to modify existing programs, to update plans, and to monitor or enforce their coastal activities in a manner that supports the Program's goals and objectives. The method for implementing and operating this structure is described in Chapter I. In addition, the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study described below is a prime example of a cooperative effort with local qovernments to enhance State program with additional managment Wachanisms at the level. 311 The Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study - A Local-Regional Response to CZM Program Development Maryland's pilot project for coordinating local government and regional involvement in coastal resource management is the Baltimore metropolitan Coastal Area study. This study was funded by a demonstration grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and is proceeding with support from the Office of Coastal Zone Management (OCZM). The purpose of the demonstration project was to define the relationship between comprehensive land use planning activities carried out by the local jurisdictions and the Regional Planning Ccunscil (RPC), and the concepts of coastal zone management developed by the State under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The Study serves as a means to inte~grate objectives of HUD land use planning and Coastal Zone Manage- ment into local comprehensive planning activities and the Regional General Development Plan, and as a means to implement coastal zone management goals and objectives into local governments day-to-day activities such as planning, permitting, licensing, capital programming, and budgeting. Finally, the study identified coastal zone management roles and responsibilities appropriate to each member of the Regional Pl anning Council and State government. The Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study outlines the process and issues that were addressed during program development for the Baltimore region, as well as issues that must conti'nue to be evaluated as part of program implementa- tion through the networking process. The Study, then, serves as an example of approach that local governments and a regional planning authority (the Baltimore Regional Planning Council) can use in conjunction with State agencies to evaluate, discuss, and resolve coastal issues of local and regional concern. To accomplish the study, the Energy and Coastal Zone Administration drafted a memorandum of understanding with the Regional Planning Council. The memorandum stated that the Energy and Coastal Zone Administration and the RPC agreed to work together, in cooperation with Baltimore City and Anne'Arundel, Baltimore, and Harford Counties, under a Unified Work Program to develop and coordinate all activities as required for HUD land use planning and CZM program development in the coastal area of the Baltimore Metropolitan Region. To carry out the joint work progrm, the following committees were formed to perform, oversee, review, and approve the end products of the Study: Task Force The Task Force is an interagency group of technical personnel, funded with HUD and OCZM monies, and other personnel from various State agencies with a direct and continuing interest'in the information assembled. This committee performs tasks specified in the work program and reports to the Technical Committee. Membership of the Task Force includes representatives from: Anne Arundel County Baltimore County Baltimore City Harford County Regional Planning Council Staff Energy and Coastal 2':nc_ Administration Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Port Administrai-Ioxi 312 Techrlical Committee ' . The Technical Committee is also an interagency group, which prepared the original work program and memorandum of understanding, and continuously commented upon and, when necessary, modified the work program. Members of the committee formally review the results of the Task Force's work, and provide commentary from their own agency's perspective. The Committee is responsible for integrating elements of Coastal Zone Management Program development, HUD 701 Planning, and 208 Water Quality Planning into the Study. The Committee also serves as a forum for State, regional, and local interests to resolve problems regarding use of baseline information in the Work Program, and to communicate information to .government agencies, the Advisory Committee, and the public. At completion of the Study, the Technical Committee will be responsible for overseeing the process of endorsement. Membership of the Technical Committee includes representatives from- Anne Arundel County Baltimore County Baltimore City Harford County Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Maryland Department of Transportation Maryland Port Administration Maryland Department of State Planning Maryland Department of Economic and Community Development Energy and Coastal Zone Administration Regional Planning Council Staff Coastal Zone Advisory Committee to the Regional Planning Council The Coastal Zone Advisory Committee consists of members from local govern- ment, State government, academic institutions, private business, and appointed public participants. Federal agencies participate as observers. The Advisory Committee's role is to reviuw and comment on documents prepared by the Technical Committee, and to provide recommendations to the RPC on coastal policy and related intergovernmental issues. The Advisory Committee wil also make recommendations to the RPC regarding the endorsement of the regional coastal zone Study. In addition to the committees, the local governments in the region have established a coastal management structure in their planning offices. They have hired technical personnel to assist State personnel with program development, identified local coastal problems, and assisted. in development of technical methods for management boundary determination, project evaluation, problem area determination, and public participation. The Study Process The course of action adopted by the Task Force and the supervisory committees for the overall study consists of three steps. First, coastal problems are described, recommended solutions are set forth, and commitments are made to analyze the proposed solutions. Second, the governments and agencies cf the coastal area review the recommendations for endorsement. Third, a follow-up report is prepared on the outcome of the recommendations and the new commitments of the study participants to coastal zone danayement. The first step of this process has been accomplished in the report "Baltimore 313 Metropolitan Coastal Area Study -- An Agenda for Action." It contains a realistic assessment of what should be done within the Baltimore metropolitan coastal area to manage coastal related resources and control the use of land. It is not a 'Plan', but rather a set of recozmmendations on actions to be taken by the participants in coastal decision-making -- citizens, local governments,0 regional groups, and State government. The first element of the Study i's the delineation of the planning boundary. This process included the identification of issues of concern within the coastal area. Both general issues, such as the economic vitality of the Port, and site- specific issues, such as the revitalization of Fells Point, were included. The mapping of natural and economic features relevant to boundary determination and the examination of existing shoreline-related land and water activities led to a determination of a boundary by each jurisdiction. In Anne Arundel County, the study area consists of the tidal rivers in the County and their entire watersheds up to the head of tide. The study area also includes the headwaters of the Severn River. This headwater area was included because it is a fish spawning area and an undeveloped natural area containing rarke plants. In Baltimore and Harford Counties, the study area consists of the coastal plain. It includes the tidal rivers and their entire watersheds up to the head of tide. The study area in Baltimore City contains the shoreline, all land involved in port-related industrial activity, all marine terminals, all land recreation areas with shoreline access, and the adjacent residential communities of Fells Point, Brooklyn, South Baltimore, and Cherry Hill. The study areas in the four jurisdictions form a continuous boundary. The second Study element is a framework for understanding the problems of the coastal area. It consists of a set of management concerns (e.g., the decline in the ability of coastal waters to perform their natural functions) and a list of specific geographic areas where these concerns are evident. with this problem framework as a guide, specific goals and objectives regarding these concerns are applied. The third element is the heart of the Study. It contains a discussion of each problem area in the coastal zone and presents recoimmendations for its management. The first section, "The Quality of our waters", deals with such problem areas as water quality, shellfish and finfish resources, recreational boating, and commercial boating. Water Quality The region's coastal waters have been affected'by impacts from such pollution sources as industrial wastes, failing sewage treatment plants and collection systems, agricultural runoff and sedimentation, urban stormwater runoff, and septic system failures. in addition to identifying specific areas where municipal treatment facilities should be planned and constructed, study recommendations call for the agencies 314 planning I'acilitie's to investigate the feasibility of reducing sewage flows . ~and to exam~ine alternatives to central seweraqL' systems when studying areas containing failing septic systems. Also proposed are improved means of inspection and control of sewerage facility construction and operation, and a series of steps to provide for stricter control of runoff and better manage- ment of sediment control programs. Shellfish and Finfish Resources Findings focus on the variety of techniques and participants involved in shellfish/finfish resource management, the influence of land and water activities on the Bay's ability to support a productive fishery, and the lack of data with which to predict fishery production trends.. Study recommendations call for establishment of a fishery management and monitoring network to be sponsored cooperatively by Maryland and Virginia, and the development of regional guidelines that ensure consideration of fishery management and production in coastal land use decisions. Recreational Boating Increasing demand for recreational boating opportunities has led to the intensified use of many regic-al tributaries, and an increase in shoreline deterioration, boating accidents, and boater complaints. Boating impacts (e.g., fuel leakage, damage to aquatic grasses, wildlife disturbance, disposal of raw sewage) are most significant in shallow, enclosed waters, areas of poor water quality, and areas of intense use. Problems of congestion and high accident rates are evident in nine of the region's ten tidal rivers. To solve these . ~problems, more information is needed regarding the reasons for boating conflicts, such as information relating to mooring areas and site specific congestion problems. Full realization of the region's recreational boating potential is hampered by inadequate access to the water, by lack of sufficient shoreline facilities, by physical obstructions, by restricted waters, and by conflicts with commnercial boating (See Chapter III). Study reconunendations regarding these problems identify areas where recreational boating facilities could be provided, and demonstrate the need for improved licensing and safety regulations, the necessity to eliminate disposal of untreated waste from boats, and the need to increase our practical understanding of boating congestion and water use conflicts throughout the region. Commnerical Boating in light of the frequency' of major oil s~pills in coastal, areas throughout the country, the potential of such an occurrence in Chesapeake Bay is a major concern. The physical characteristics and sensitivity of this estuary would indicate that potentially adverse impacts would be economically and ecologically substantial. While there are many chemical and petroleum-related products stored, manufactured, or transported on or near the Bay, oil is of particular concern because its impact on aquatic life is direct and immediate. The key Study recom- mendation calls for an oil spill risk analysis focusing on oil-related facilities * ~which handle crude products. The second section, "The Land/water Edge ", covers such areas as the Fort of Baltimore, water-related employment centers, spoil disposal, wetlands, marinas, public access, and parkland. The Port of Baltimore Key concerns in the management of the Port are the limited number of feasible sites for terminal expansion, the necessity of channel improvements and associated spoil disposal sites necessary for the Port to maintain its competitive position, the type of terminal expansion required, and the long- term question of balancing economic vitality and environmental integrity. Study recommendations call for means to ensure a significant voice for the Maryland Port Administration in the use of land adjacent~to deep draft channels, a regular maintenance dredging program, construction of the Hart and Miller island spoil disposal facility, the construction of new terminal capacity, the conversion of certain facilities from break-bulk to container uses, and timely and consistent Federal and State action an the various permits required for Port improvements. Water-Related Employment Centers Given the limited amount of water-accessible land where significant employ- ment levels can be generated, the Problem of providingr jobs and taxes with the least negative impact on coastal resources is a central concern. There is little water-dependent employment within the coastal zone, and much of the land with access to primary channels is now used for storage of such materials as ore and refined oil. Storage generates very little employment and constitutes an inefficient use of scarce water-accessible land. Remaining open land with frontage on access channels must be reserved for water-dependent industries and employment or, if they cannot be found, industries that are labor-intensive rather than land- intensive. Study recommendations deal with such specific land use and transportation needs as the placement of fill at Port Covington to allow expansion of marine terminals, the provision of westbound ramps for the Beltway in the Hawkins Point/ Marley Neck area, and the realignment and reconstruction of railyards in the Canton area to improve their operational efficiency.. Areas covered include Fells Point, Falls Harbor, Locust Point, Canton, Curtis Say, Hawkins Point, Thorns Cove, and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, and Harford Counties. Spoil Disposal Dredging operations in the region may generate 155 million cubic yards of spoil material over the next twenty years, 140 million cubic yards of which could result from Federal, State, and private dredging activities in Baltimore Harbor and the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and approaches. Existing and proposed containment sites will not accommodate the maximum expected dredging quantities from the Harbor and related channels. The State must clearly establish its priorities regarding completion of major dredging projects, continuance of open water disposal, construction of State disposal facilities, and accommodation of material generated by the private sector in Baltimore Harbor. To this end, Study recommendations call for investigation of the impacts of and standards for open water disposal, the construction of inner harbor containment sites with a capacity of 20 million cubic yards over the next ten years, the provision of disposal areas for private interests when capacity exceeds the State's needs, and the immediate drafting of a 20-year schedule for selection, construction, and use of disposal areas for dredging projects. Current management roles and regulatory -,,?sl )nsibilities for dredging and disposal operations have led to problems in the following areas: planning and providing legal assurances for the deepening d~id maintenance of Federal channels 316 in Baltimore Harbor, responsibility and procedures for open water disposal, responsibility for long-range disposal facility planning, funding, and construction, monitoring of non-Federal dredging projects, and the review of project applications. * ~Study recommendations call for the assignment of management responsibility for reviewing and scheduling disposal alternatives for major projects to a single lead agency, extensive monitoring of non-Federal dredging projects, improved procedures for State-Federal coordination of maintenance dredging and disposal schedules, the development of guidelines for acceptable disposal methods, and an investigation of the possibility of controlling water-oriented land use through regulations of new channel dredging. Wetlands Wetlands are a highly productive biomiass, a source of nutrients, and an essential factor in the life cycles of economically important fish and shellfish. Physically, they control erosion mechanisms and trap sediment. Hydrologically, they are buffer systems to flood waters. The Maryland Wetlands Act of 1970 seeks to protect and regulates the use of tidal wetland areas. However, the Wetlands Act does not af ford State protection of non-tidal wetlands. Study.recoimmendations call for the protection of both tidal and non-tidal wetlands from the effects of adjacent land use changes, internal alterations, dredge and waste disposal activities. Other recommendations call for a new compensation policy for fast land created from wetlands, increased fines for Wetland Act violators, a mandatory buffer zone around wetlands, and investigations of the feasibility of creation, of new marsh and the cumulative impacts of wetland alterations. . Marinas Marinas, piers, mooring buoys, and boat launching ramps are among the most common uses of the region's shoreline and adjacent waters. Even so, current demand for launching ramps exceeds supply, and the demand for slips will exceed supply by 1990. The contribution of these facilities to the region's economy and to boating in general is beneficial, but there are are also social and environmental problems associated with them. For instance fuel leakage and spills from marina fuel docks and discharge~ of sewage and fuel from boats around a marina degrades water quality, and unless the marina is located in an area well-flushed by tidal currents, the damage to water quality may be long- lasting. The region's marinas are regulated at the Federal, State, and local levels, but comprehensive zoning regulations for marinas are in effect only in Anne Arundel County. Study recoammendations point out the-need for better understanding of the impacts of marinas, piers, and mooring buoys, implementation of marina zoning regulations, coordination between local, state, and federal agencies evaluating marina applications, studies investigating the effectiveness of boat pollution regulations, and alternative waste disposal methods and facilities at marinas.- Public Access To The Shore Even though the basic right of Public access to all coastal tidelands is firmly grounded in Maryland law, homes, businesses, and industries have often cut . off existing or potential public access to the rhoreline, eliminated waterfront vantage points, used up available road capacity and off-street parking, and generally precluded the use of the shoreline for recreation. The severity of this lack of public access in an urban region is addressed in recommendations 317 proposing various methods of permanently securing public access, and calling for multiple, public-oriented uses of major coastal energy and public service facilities. Parkland Coastal park, open space, and recreation facilities are vital to the quality of life in the region, and their supply is currently extremely limited. Only eight miles (or less than four percent) of the region's 792-mile shoreline is in public parkland. Present coastal facilities are overused because regional demand for most coastal recreation activities exceeds the supply. Recent increases in State and local parkland acreage and the expansion of recreation facilities within the region have nearly kept pace with new demands, but the past supply deficit remains unfilled. Thus, even though the supply of parkland and recreation facilities has increased, it has not done so at a rate sufficient to meet existing demands. Study recommendations call for balancing coastal development with adequate open space and recreation, placing acquisition priori+y on open space with maximum shoreline frontage, establishment of Regional Shoreline Park and Coastal Reserve systems, protection of existing parks from overuse, and increased use �of zoning and subdivision controls to promote provision of open space. The third section, "Inland Coastal Areas", deals with non-water related employment centers, land transportation, archeological and historic preservation, natural areas, agricultural resources, and mineral resources. Non-Water Related Employment Centers Certain employment centers not dependent on a shoreline location have impacts on the coastal environment. These centers include the I95-Route 40 corridor in Harford County; the Patapsco Neck, Back River Neck, and Middle River Neck areas of Baltimore County; the Middle Branch area of Baltimore City; and the Marley Neck area of Anne Arundel County. Problems facing these areas are described and guidelines for their future use and development are recommended. Land Transportation The transportation stimulus that originally made the region a natural hub for growth has been outpaced by development in many coastal areas, resulting in overutilization and congestion. This is particularly evident on coastal peninsulas where transportation options are naturally limited, in corridors where a single facility is used for both local and regional traffic, in residential communities lacking nearby employment opportunities, and in such bottleneck areas as Annapolis, Parole, and the South River Bridge. Also of concern are a) the coordination between policies and plans for county growth and realistic transportation opportunities, b) the special environmental problems encountered in locating a transportation system in the coastal zone, and c) the necessity for a well-coordinated regional transportation planning process. Study recommendations call for growth controls on coastal peninsulas where the capacity of new or existing transportation facilities must be protected from overuse, discouragement of residential growth in the Marley Neck/Magothy River area until alternate transportation links are provided, application of traffic management techniques in Annapolis ..g., staggered work hours, parking restrictions; rather than attempts to accommodate increased traffic flows), and improvement of access to the Mayo Peninsula to allow future growth. Planning 318 recoimmendations call for local and regional agencies to coordinate closely their land use policies with the State transportation planning process,- special con4deration of the environmental impacts of protects in the coastal zone, greater representation of MDOT's Modal Administrations in Baltimore City and Regional Planning Council transportation planning activities, and more emphasis on funding and the efficient use of existing facilities by coastal planning groups. Archeological and Historic Preservation The many historic, architectural, and arc1heological sites within the region's coastal areas provide a significant link with Maryland's past and an important addition to its educational and cultural resources. Efforts toward preservation, however, are hindered by the rapid loss of archeological sites in coastal areas to natural processes, a lack of knowledge about the relative importance and practical benefits of historic properties in the coastal zone, and uncertain coordination and support of preservation among government agencies and private groups. Study recommendations point out the need for consistent criteria in evaluating historic or archeological significance, a survey of archeological resources, an expanded public and agency review procedure, and better public understanding of the- implications of preservation. Natural Areas There has been substantial destruction of natural areas in the coastal zone. The loss of these areas can be attributed primarily to the expansion of residential development and the resulting development of public and private support services. Significant natural areas have also been lost due to industrial expansion, including sand and gravel mining operations. Thus, urbanization of the coastal zone has resulted in the preemption of natural areas for other land uses. It has also meant an increase in incompatible land uses adjacent to natural areas, thus reducing their value. The cumulative impact of encroaching urban land uses upon natural areas seriousl~y threatens the continuation of their ecological processes. Public benefits from coastal natural areas can only be assured if they are sufficiently protected from incompatible land uses. Study recommnendations call for specific limitations and controls on development near significant or fragile natural areas, the adoption of tree preservation ordinances, and priority acquisition of Natural Environment Areas and Natural Resources Management Areas within the region's coastal zone. Agricultural Resources Vast areas of agriculturally productive coastal land have been lost to urban expansion. The number of coastal farms'in the region has steadily declined for two decades. The urbanization df the coastal zone has resulted in the location of subdivisions and homes that fragment agricultural land and ownership patterns, making many coastal farm operations less economical. Coastal development and land speculation have rapidly increased the cost of agricultural land and its tax assessment, thus increasing their operating costs and decreasing their economiic viability. The retention of coastal agricultural land can help guide the region's future urban growth, reduce costs for public service extensions, provide beneficial ute of land that could be hazardous or inappropriate for other types of development, and maintain sr,7~h future land use options as the * ~extraction of mineral resources. 319 Study recommnendat-Dns call for tight zoning restrictions on the use of agriculturally productive land, the establishment of urban-rural demarcation agricultural preservation and discourage land speculation, and subdivision regulations that discourage the reduction of agricultural parcels to an unproductive size. Mineral Resources Since most of the region's supply of sand and gravel is obtained from within the coastal zone, the management of this limited resource is of critical concern. Current management problems include the lack of accurate data on the availa~bility of coastal mineral resources, land use conflicts caused by urban expansicn into mineral producing areas, the environmental hazards of mining, and inadequate review procedures for mining permits. Study recommendations focus on the need for better inventories of mineral deposits, the establishment of mineral-resource zones, improved enforcement of local and State mining, grading and sediment control regulations, and the establishment of watercourse buffers for coastal mineral extraction sites. The final section, "Growth Pressures and Their Management", proposes planning techniques to manage future growth in sensitive coastal areas. Growth Pressures Policies for urban coastal zone management should be directed toward a pattern of centralized development for the Baltimore region. This reflects consideration of a number of alternative future regional development patterns, and a comparison of their consequences with the goals established for urban coastal management. The benefits of a centralized development pattern can be found in air, water, and energy resource use, land resource preservation, public facility and infrastructure coxmmitments, and economic and fiscal patterns. Recommnended policies include the establishment of an urban/rural boundary, directing growth to existing communities where support facilities are available, the establishment of a permanent open space system in urban areas. Local jurisdictions are to prepare 'Coastal Guidance Packages' which determine how each policy will be implemented in each jurisdiction. These Coastal Guidance Packages will combine continuing land use planning activities, coastal management goals and objectives, and recommendations of the Study in a framework that includes a description of appropriate land and water uses, management policies and implementation techniques, applicable performance standards and guidelines, and points of consideration that are required for the State's project evaluation and program review process. The Coastal Guidance 'Packages should be prepared by the local jurisdictions, with technical assistance from Regional Planning Council staff and the Coastal Zone Unit, and should integrate ongoing adequacy-of-facilities studies, 208 planning, facilities planning, and comprehensive land use planning with the coastal zone management program. State/Local Action on the Findings of the Study The fourth and final element of the 'Study describes a three-step procedure for local/state decision-making and action on the findings of the study. The Coastal Zone Management Act requires specific management policies, legislative recommendations, and implementation tools at the conclusion of the program developmen.t stage. TO this end, this portion of the Study analyzes the local and state role in coastal zone management and describc- c process by which 320 each Study participant will examine the reconmmendations appropriate to its concerns. As the first step in the study process, the Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study can be used as a guide tracing two years' work to coordinate action, to build consensus, and to resolve conflicts in the preservation, conservation, and use of its coastal lands and waters. The second step in the overall process is the actual examination of the recommendations by the participating goverments and agencies. The Baltimore Metropolitan Coastal Area Study was distributed regionally inMarch, 1978. From March through Spring 1978, participants in the Study will present the recommendations to policy-making bodies in each local jurisdiction and State agencies. These policy bodies will evaluate the recoumendations and endorse those that are consistent with their goals and objectives. The third step is the preparation' and distribution of a report describing the outcome of the Study's recommendations and the new comitments of the study participants to coastal management. The final report will attempt to provide this resolution by describing how each jurisdiction and agency acted on the recomnendations directed toward it, and what methods they have developed to carry them out. The Coastal Zone Unit will incorporate into the State Program recommendations approved by Study participants as a result of this review assuming that they are consistent with the State Program. One of the major recommendations of the Study is that the local governments develop coastal guidance packages in order to fully integrate coastal zone concerns into their land use, zoning, and other relevant management activities. Adoption of the reconmendations of the Study is considered to be an effective way to enhance the basis structure provided by the State Prograpsist the time of its approval by the federal government. Incorporation of recommendations will take place during Maryland's first annual recertification of the Program. This recertification will occur one year from the date of approval of the Program by the Federal government. The endorsed recommendations will be placed in one of three substantive portions of the Program -- policies, project evaluation, or program review (see Chapter III). Recommendations that related to State policy, as opposed to local authority, will be added to the policy sections in Chapter III. Recommendations related to methods for evaluating projects will be incorporated into project evalutation procedures for the Baltimore Metropolitan Area. Recommendations relating to program review (studies, cumulative impacts, policy evaluation) will also be incorporated into the Program after review. 321 .STATE & FEDERAL INTERACTION * 4k~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 40 VI. State - Federal Interactions The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act and the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program establish reciprocal state-federal relationships. The State has provided, and will continue to provide full opportunity for federal involvement in the program. When the program is approved, federal agencies will be obligated to carry out their activities in a manner which is consistent, to the maximum extent possible, with the Program. This chapter explains how (1) the State has consulted with federal agencies in the course of program development, (2) the State will consult with federal agencies in the implementation of the program, (3) the national interest in Maryland's coastal zone has been considered and reflected in the Program's design and content, and (4) the procedures for federal consistency will operate. I. State/Federal Consultation The federal Coastal Zone Management Act, in sections 306(b) and 307(c)(1), requires that the views of federal agencies principally affected by the program be adequately considered, and that these federal agencies be granted full opportunity for participation in the development and adoption of the program. Federal regulations further require that States: - Contact each relevant federal agency to develop arrangements or understandings regarding that agency's participation during program development; - Provide for federal agency input on a timely basis; - Summarize the nature, frequency, and timing of contacts with federal agencies; - Evaluate federal comments received during program development; - Indicate the nature of major federal comments provided during program development (15 CFR 923.51; 42 FR 43571, August 29, 1977). A. Federal Participation in Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program Development Maryland's Coastal Zone Unit has maintained open channels of communication with all interested federal agencies for discussion and resolution of technical and policy matters. These channels have been particularly useful in two-way exchanges during the second and third years of program development. The Coastal Zone Unit has met on numerous occasions with representatives of the Department of Interior to discuss OCS matters, has jointly funded a study of the Baltimore region with the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and has participated in an FEA-funded contract to ass:ez, the ability of middle atlantic states to manage the onshore impacts of offshore oil development. The Coastal Zone Unit has also participated in a number of technical studies sponsored by EPA, has worked clos'Ay with environmental officers of major defense installations on inv-ntc ies of coastal resources, has interacted extensively with the Corps of Engineers on such issues as 322 dredging and spoil disposal assessment and policy, and has participated in Department of Agriculture'(SCS) planning programs. During the second and third years of program development, the Coastal Zone Unit has worked with the Federal Regional Council's ad hoc Is ~task force on coastal zone management in a successful effort to inicrease the participation of federaa regional offices in program development. in addition to a day-long'meeting on Maryland's Program, the Federal Regional Council has sponsored two general sessions to exchange views with federal agencies, and has inventoried all relevant Region 3 federal offices to determine their preparedness for, and involvement in, the program development process. The Coastal Zone Unit has emphasized bilateral contact and discussion with interested agencies because it believes that each agency's interests can be understood best and incorporated into the program development process if they are given individual consideration. The results of extensive interchange with each relevant federal agency is catalogued in the worksheets in Appendix F. The worksheets on federal agencies digest each federal agency's interests in Maryland's Program and present the Program's response to those interests. Specifically, the worksheets identify: - The agency's designated contact; - other federal and state agencies which participate in that agency's program; - Federal property, under the jurisdiction of that agency, which is excluded from the coastal zone; - The statutory authorities of that agency; - The nature of coordination between that agency and the Coastal Zone Unit in the development of the program; - Primary interests of that agency in the Coastal Zone Management Program; - Permit programs subject to consistency (see also Table VI-5) - The Coastal Zone unit response to the federal agency's interpretation of its role in the program; - Means of program coordination with that agency during program implementa- tation; and - Excerpts from federal agency letters of comment on the draft Coastal Zone Management Program, and Coastal Zone Unit responses to those comments. During the first IS months of program development, contacts were initiated and views exchanged with all interested agencies. Since early in 1976, the Coastal Zone Unit has initiated more formal coordination, according to the following timetable: 323 Contact Timetable MARCH, 1976: Letters were sent to designated contacts, providing information on the state program and requesting federal agency views on the topics listed above and summarized in the worksheets. The Coastal Zone Unit expressed its willingness to document the exchange of views between agencies in an agreement on exchange of letters in support of the Coastal Zone Management Program. Responses to this initiative were received during April and May. MAY, 1976: Federal agencies were mailed draft copies of the third year 305 grant proposal, and the request for proposal for the Major Facilities Study. Comments received from interested agencies contributed to the final version of these documents. AUGUST, 1976: Quarterly Report on program development was routed to all relevant federal agencies. SEPTEMBER, 1976: Working papers describing the Coastal Zone Unit's approach to establishing (1) program goals and objectives, (2) coastal zone boundaries, (3) geographic areas of particular concern, and (4) authorities and administrative structure, were routed to federal agencies for review. These documents and responses contributed directly to the design of the 306 program. NOVEMBER, 1976: Federal agencies were sent copies of the Statement of Work pursuant to the Major Facilities Study, and a paper describing the "Strategy for the Establishment and Implementa- tion of a Coastal Zone Management Program for Maryland." Each federal agency was sent a letter which described the Coastal Zone Unit's understanding of areas of interaction between specific federal programs and an implemented state coastal zone management program. Comments were received during December and January. MARCH, 1977: Federal agencies were sent the draft of Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program. Response from interested agencies were received during the spring and summer of 1977. Major comments on the draft program are summarized below. Responses to individual comments are found in the worksheets. Federal comments were addressed or incorporated into this version of the program document to the maximum extent possible. OCTOBER, 1977: Federal contacts were invited to appoint designees to serve as ex-officio members of the program's advisory group, the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee. 324 9 DECEMBER, 1977: Coastal Resources'Advisory Conmmittee members, including federal designees, received for review the program document to be submitted to NOAA later in the month. MAY, 1978: Federal agencies receive Draft Environmental impact Statement f roth NOAA for review. MAY, 1978 through program approval: Because intergovernmental coordination is a continuing activity, the Coastal Zone Unit anticipates greater bilateral agency contact in the months leading to program approval. Meetings to discuss and resolve any remaining concerns of federal agencies, and to develop specific agreements on federal responsibilities in complying with federal consistency requirements, will be particularly appropriate during this period. B. Federal Conmments on the Draft Coastal Zone Management Program Conmments on the draft program distributed in March, 1977 were received during the spring and sunmmer. These commnents -were applied in the revision of the program document. The following were major concerns expressed by federal agencies: - The goals and objectives were not specific enough to indicate to federal agencies how State and local agencies will act in support of the program, and they were not specific enough to provide guidance to federal agencies seeking to make their actions consistent with the program. - The program did not sufficiently recognize certain national interests, i.e., national security, the integrity of the Chesapeake Bay, energy (oil and gas) production, and transportation. - The program did not provide for state over-ride over local decisions. This issue was of concern both to agencies that felt that local govern- ments might exclude certain facilities with strict environmental standards, and to agencies that felt local environmental protection might be too weak. - The continuing federal role in the program was ill-defined. - The federal consistency section was not in accord with NOAA regulation. - The project evaluation process might delay approvals of necessary or desirable projects, or notification might hot be provided on a timely basis, thus undermining the process. in response to these,,,ouuents and to thosecf other groups, the following changes and additions have been made: (1) Policy statements have been added to provide guidance to all participants in the program. With solid foundations in state or federal law, these policies are enforceable. 325 (2) A section on national interest has been added to this chapter, to identify how the program addresses each national interest identified by the State with the help of federal agenices. (3) A Chapter on Legal Authorities has been added to demonstrate how the State meets the authorities' requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act (Chapter VIII). (4) A section on the continuing federal role in the program has been added to this chapter. (5) The section on federal consistency has been revised and is now in complete accord with the most up-to-date NOAA regulations. (6) The project evaluation process has been further delineated in Chapter 1. Continuing Federal Involvement during Program Implementation The design of the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program depends upon participation from all levels of government. Federal agencies are defined as participants in the program and are expected to play a continuing role in the following activities: 1. The Coastal Resources Advisory Committee [CRAC) Federal agency representatives serve as ex officio members of CRAC. The role of CRAC is described in Chapter I. CRAC will provide a forum for federal agencies' participation in the guidance of the program, and will keep federal representatives informed of major issues that arise in program implementation. 2. Project Evaluation and Program Review Federal agencies are expected to participate in project evaluations and program reviews whenever a project or program involves its regulatory authority, or an area of special interest or expertise in the agency. Participation in project evaluation will provide federal agencies with the opportunity to express views on the national interest in any aspect of a particular project. 3. Federal Consistency Procedures for federal consistency are described in this chapter. The Coastal Zone Unit and federal agencies may enter into agreements to further specify how these procedures can be simplified or streamlined. 4. Amendments to the Program a. Goals, Objectives and Policies: As new concerns, issues, or national interests in coastal management are identified, either by the State or by the federal government, it may be necessary to make amendments or modifications to the program. As described in NOAA Regulations (15 CFR 932, Suibpart I, 43 FR 4525 - 4529, March 1, 1978) amendment or modification to the program. will require federal review. Minor revisions will not require 326 formal federal review, but all federal agency contacts will be informed of proposed revisions and will be given the opportunity to respond directly to the Coastal Zone Unit. Federal agencies may propose amendments or revisions to the program whenever they believe that some change in circumstances justifies a change in goals, objectives or policies.. b. Geographic Areas of Particular Concern: The State Critical Areas program calls for ongoing review of critical area suggestions and annual designations. Many State Critical Areas will become Geographic Areas of Particular Concern. Federal agencies, like other interested parties, may suggest areas to local governments. These in turn, will be considered for nomination by the Department of State Planning. Identifying individual State Critical Areas as Geographic Areas of Particular Concern will require amendment or modification of the program, and thus will require federal review as described in NOAA regulations. II. The National Interest and Uses of Regional Benefit Federal agencies, responding to Maryland's Draft Coastal Zone Management Program, and in earlier correspondence and contact, cited those spedific coastal activities and resources that are considered to be in the National Interest. Regulations issued by the Office of CoastialZone Management also list activities and resources in which there may be a national interest (15 CFR 923.52). These expressions of national interest, covering activities such as power plant siting and operation and natural resources such as wetlands, have been and will . ~continue to be considered in the decision-making process by Maryland. The State recognizes the national interest in activities and resources, and neither arbitrarily excludes nor unreasonably restricts them. However, Maryland also recognizes that different national interests may conflict and therefore considers them collectively, so that decisions regarding them will strike a balance between resource use and preservation. As a basis for balanced decision-making, policy statements constituting minimum standards for resource management are set forth in Chapter III. These policy statements, as they relate to national interest, are summnarized in Table VI-l following this discussion. If, during program implementation,. a federal agency disputes Maryland's application of policies as contrary to the national interest, consultation and mediation procedures described-under "federal consistency" may be followed. 327 During program implementation, the State will continue to consider %he national interest in its decisions. During implementation, Maryland will take into consideration the following federal policy information, in addition to federal/state consultation: i. Presidential tiiaLis cui.u eand u~ive urders relting to energy, the environment, conmnerce, and recreation. 2. Future federal laws and regulations. 3. Future statements from federal agencies regarding national interests. 4. Plans, reports and research studies from federal and interstate groups, (e.g., interstate energy plans, river basin plans). 5. Testimony from federal officials at public hearings. Uses of Regional Benefit Table VI-2 on page 315 identifies uses of Maryland's Coastal Zone which should be considered uses of regional benefit. Uses of regional benefit are defined to mean those uses of the coastal zone which will clearly provide a public benefit to the citizens of more than one specific local jurisdiction. The following criteria were used to identify these uses. (1) There must be a clear relationship between the location of the use and the region served by the use, and (2) There must be recognition in State or federal statutes, regulations, policy statements and public hearing testimony, or in plans, reports, or research studies by federal, state or interstate groups that it is necessary or desirable to locate such uses within Maryland. Once identified, the State must demonstrate that these uses will not be arbitrarily restricted by local laws and regulations. The methods to be used by the State to prevent arbitrary restrictions of uses of regional benefit are sunmmarized on Table VI-2 and are discussed in more detail in Chapter viII, pp. 431-435. III. Consideration of the National Interest in State and Local Coastal Zone Management Decisions The various national interests in Maryland's Coastal Zone, as expressed by federal participants have been carefully weighed and considered in the development of this program. This fact is evident in the summary of the 328 provisions of the program addressing the national interest shown in Tables V7I-l and VI-2. In all cases, where there is an identifiable national interest in a State or local decision, the State will weigh carefully these concerns through the project evaluation process as described on pp. 60-66. The findings and recommendations developed as a result of the project evaluation process will include consideration of the national interest~s that may be involved. As noted in the discussion that follows, the framework of the program makes it clear that the program will operate most smoothly with the participa- tion of interested federal agencies. A. Facilities in Which There may be a National interest A project evaluation will be done on any facility proposed for Maryland's coastal zone, in which there is a clear national interest. Generally these facilities will be automatically considered for project evaluation, because they are defined as major facilities. (See chapter III, Section D). Any federal agency may, however, bring to the Coastal Zone Unit's attention the possibilit'7 that there is a national interest in a facility which is not a major facility. Project evaluation is the means of weighing the various interests and concerns in decision on a coastal facility. Federal agency representatives are invited to participate in project evaluations to present their national interest concerns in a particular facility. The product of the project evaluation process will be both the technical analysis, and the issue analysis necessary for the State to develop a position on a given facility, specifically on whether the permits and approvals necessary for the facility will be granted, denied, or granted * ~~with certain conditions. Within the framework of the evaluation process, the State will attempt to reconcile apparent conflicts between facilities in which there is a clear national interest and any adverse impacts to the State. For an example, use of Coastal Energy I:mpact Funds to offset potential adverse economic or environmental effects of energy facilities will be explored. The Major Facilities study will be employed to compare the proposed site with possible alternative sites. Means of reducing or mitigating impact during construction and operation will be examined. Federal agencies will be asked to provide infbrmation on the comparative advantages ox disadvantages of a particular location within the multi- state region. The Department QfState Planning-will give all due consideration to the national interest in the exercise of its intervention authority as described on pp. 434-435., 329 B.Resources in Which There may be a National Interest in addition to specific facilities, national interest concerns have been expressed in resources such as wetlands, living resources of the Chesapeake Bay, historic sites, and water and air quality. Again, these @ interests have been carefully weighed in developing goals, objectives -ad-po~cieiln~ddiiont le-review of ~reg~Qypo ses and management techniques that will be undertaken as part of the program for the consideration of national interest. As in the case with project evaluation process described previously, national interest concerns as empressed by appropriate federal agencies will be considered in developing the State's position on program review issues. Furthermore, several of the programs of which the Coastal Zone Management Program is comprised, e.g., the State's water quality program, involve delegation of authority from the federal agencies. Thus they provide direct mechanisms for ensuring that national interest concerns as expressed by federal agencies are adequately considered. 330 TABLE VI-1 National Interest Considerations in Maryland's CZMP COASTAL ACTIVITIES AND RESOURCES SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE MARYLAND CZMP IN WHICH THERE MAY BE A WHICH ADDRESS NATIONAL INTERESTS NATIONAL INTEREST Energy Production and Transmission - Maryland has recognized that meeting energy needs is essential to sustain the health of the - OCS development Nation and to improving the Nation's balance of payments status. Decisions on facilities - onshore facilities to meet energy needs, however, will be balanced with other, sometimes conflicting economic, - power plants environmental and social goals. - LNG facilities - The Coastal Energy Impact Program is a means of preventing, amerliorating or mitigating - distribution facilities potential adverse environmental, economic and fiscal impacts of energy development. - deepwater ports - The State has undertaken a Major Facilities See objectives (17),(18),(19),120),(21), Study to identify suitable energy facility sites (31),(32),(35) and (421 and also, policies on a'regional scale, and to provide assistance and management procedures under "Appro- to local governments, state agencies, and priate Land and Water dses. Major industry in analyzing the suitability of Facilities." specific sites. - Maryland recognizes that the national public interest in assuring adequate facilities for production of energy resources requires that State and icoal governmetns promptly and expeditiously assess the impact of those facilities and determine, at the earliest practicable time, whether to grant necessary state and local authorizations. - Criteria for State decisions for each type of energy facility are described in existing State legislation and will be consistent with the objectives for Major Facilities (See Section III-D). Generally, energy projects must meet the following criteria: a) Meets all applicable air, water, noise, and. solid waste laws of Maryland; b) Represents optimal location from standpoint of risk to public safety; c) Represents optimal location from standpoint of economic and environmetnal impacts as commared to other locations. - Maryland recognizes that, without aderuate planning, the establishment of oil-related facilities in the coastal area may have an immediate impact on the environmental, economic, fiscal. social and cultural well-being for the people residing in the area where these 331 facilities are established. Therefore, local concerns should be reflected in decisions on location of these facilities, and to that end, county governments should be actively involved in the planning for the coastal areas. If, however, the contemplated extent of oil-related facilities affects environmental, economic, social, and cultural factors beyond the borders of the particular subdivision involved, in addition to involving potential expenditure of State funds in excess of tax revenues derived from the facilities, then the State interest and the national interest become a factor in the consideration of the location of these oil- related facilities. - It is the State's policy to ensure that adequate electric power is provided on a reasonable schedule, at reasonable costs and with the least possible depreciation of the qulaity of Maryland' s environmetn. - State policy recognizes that the construction of deepwater ports may have certain advantages over conventional ports in helping the State and the Nation meet energy reouirements. These advantages may include assured access to the world's total petroleum fleet; reduced economic costs and environmental and safety hazards to harbors and shorelines. Procedures to ensure expeditious reivew of deepwater port applications and to.protect the people of the State in the location construction and operation of deep- water prots have, therefore, been established. - During project evaluations on national interest energy facilities, federal agencies will be given the opportunity to voice national interest concerns. The Department of Natural Resources also will raise national interest issues during poriect evaluation, ensure their consideration in project evaluation findings and recomendatiOns and enter the findings and recommendations in appropriate hearing records. The Secretary of DNR will request DSP inter- vention in support of the findings and Employment and Income recommendations, whenever he deems it necessary. - Ecomomic and social stability of - The State is committed to reducing uncertainty, coastal communities delays and duplication in regulatory decisions in order to reduce the costs involved in complying See objectives (9),(10),(ll),(12),(17), with federal, State and local environmental (l8),(19),(20),(22),(24),(25), and standards. (32). See also "Appropriate Land and Water Uses: Major Facilities." Maintenance and enhancement of water and ar quality nd -he construction of facilities for these purposes, provides local employment, enhances 332 ecomomic opportunity and improves the quality of life. - Through the projact evaluation process, the maintenance and enhancement of viable seafood, agricultural, manufacturing, recreational and other industries will be considered in making National Defense and Aerospace resource management decisions. - military installations - Lands owned, in trust, or whose use is other- wise by law subject solely to the discretion - defense manufacturing of the federal government, are excluded from the Coastal Zone. - aerospace installations - Nothing'in the program arbitrarily excludes or See objectives (17). (18) and (19). unreasonably restricts militray or aerospace See also oclicies listed under: operations. "Appropriate Land and Water Uses: Major Facilities" - In cases where defense manufacturing is a coastal project all policies of the CZMP apply. In instances where national security concerns are deemed to be paramount by federal agencies, federal consistency mediation procedures can Interstate Transportation be utilized by federal agencies. - highways - Maryland is committed to providing a balanced, integrated transportation system serving the - airports movement of persons and goods via air, rail, sea and land, while preserving the unique - navigation qualities of the State's historical and natural resources, maintaining fiscal integrity and - ports strengthening the economy. See objectives (17),(18),(19),(20),(22), - Development of private facilities in existing (24),(25), and (28). port areas is encouraged in the public interest See also policies and management pro- but may be supplemented by public port cedures under"Appropriate Land and facilities. Expenditure of public funds for Water Uses: port construction and operation is based on comprehensive economic and environmental criteria. - Commercial Shipping - Port facilities are coastal dependent activities - Ports that will be promoted in appropriate locations so long as adverse enviornmental impacts are - Land Transportation Networks" mitigated. Approval of associated activities such as dredging and filling of wetlands is considered in the basis of economic need, environmental impact and mitigation masures. - Spoil disposal necessary to ensure timely port- related development in the future will be developed, including a permanent rehandling facility within the Baltimore Harbor. - The State is comitted to a strong program of oil pollution control and an effective oil disaster, containment, cleanup and contingency 333 program to prevent or mitigate impacts associated with commercial shipping. -Highways shall be sited on the basis of compre- hensive evaluation-, including "no build", of Production of Food and Fiber the social, economic, and environmental impacts. - agriculture -Easements on agricultural lands are acquired to provide sources of agricultural products, - fishing to-manage urban expansion, and to maintain open space areas. - shellfishing harvesting -Decisions to convert use of coastal land and - forestry waters from agricluture to uses not associated with production of food and fiber must take See objectives (2),(3),(6), and (13). into account the benefits of agriculture in Also see policies and management pro- providing a local source of products for cedures under "Appropriate Land and Maryland residents in promoting economic Water Uses: stability and in countering out-migration of local workers. - Use of Agricultural Lands - Use of Forested Lands -While dredging or filling in floodplains or - Living Aquatic Resources tidal or non-tidal wetlands is generally - Channelization' against the public interest, agricultural drainage is considered for approval when it provides substantial agriclutural benefits, is carried out in ways which minimize environmental damage, and meets specific guidelines. -Clam and oyster beds are valuable economic and natural resources which will be managed to maintain and enhance a viable shellfish industry. -State Forest lands are managed to provide a variety of uses to meet public needs in an Recreation environmentally acceptable manner. - National Seashores - The Department of Natural Resources, on the behalf of the State, acquires and manages lands - parks suitable for State parks, scenic preserves, historic monuments, parkways, State recreation - forests areas, forest culture, forest reserves, water- shed protection, water conservation, open space, - beaches protection, propagation, or management of wildlife resources, and hunting. - public access - The State carries out a scenic and wild rivers See objectives (2),(S),(13), and (22) program. See also, "Appropriate Land and Water Uses: - The State makes funds available to local - Recreational Boating governments for acquisition and development - Use of Beach Areas of outdoor recreational and open space areas. - Activities on Tidal Wetlands - Activities Associated with Provision of Sufficient Recreational Open Space 334 and Natural Areas" -The State has developed and is implementing a State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan which supports increased shoreline access. -The State provides recreational boating facilities through the Waterways Improvement Program. -All waters of the State are to be protected for use for water contact recreation as well as other uses. Historic, Cultural and Archeological -Historic areas of Maryland are considered Values basic assets; and their proper use and preservation are necessary to protect and - historic sites promote the general welfare of the people of the State. - areas of cultural significance -Historic sites are preserved through historic - archeological sites district zoning or through acquisition of easements. see objective (7). See also, policies and -Historic sites may be placed on the federal or managem~ent procedures under 'hppropriate State historic registers to assure consideration Land and Water Uses: of their value in federal and State decisions which may affect them. -Activities Affecting Coastal Historical, Cultural, and Archeo- I-Archeological excavations on private land are logical Resourcesr discouraged except when overseen and approved by the State Archeologist. -Archeolocical resources on State lands are protected by a permit system administered by the Maryland Geological Survey. Preservation of Life and Property -Maryland requires a flood management program for every watershed in the State. - flood and storm protection -Projects in coastal tidal and non-tidal flood - shore erosion plains which would create additional flooding upstream or downstream or which would have an See objectives (13), (14), (15), and (16). adverse impact upon water quality or other Also see, policies and procedures under environmental factors, are contrary to the 'Appropriate Land and, water uses- public interest. - Activities Occurring in Non-Tidal -In general, construction of residential, comn- Wetlands mercial, or industrial developments is not permitted within the riverine 100-year flood plain - Activities Occurring in Coastal Tidal of any stream or body of water. and Non-Tidal Flood Plains -Shore erosion control measures shall be undertaken - Activities Occurring in Areas Under- in a manner that thas minimim adverse affect going Significant Shore Erosion upon the ecological, economic, hydrological, aesthetic, historical and recreational values in - Channelization the area. - Shoraland Activities Generally' The use of shoreline setbacks and the restriction of :eve.1opment in high-risk erosion areas shall be promoted. 335 Mineral Resources Mineral extraction is a basic industry contribu- ting to the economic well-being of Maryland. - sand and gravel extraction facilities However, minimg must be conducted so that adverse environmental effects are minimized. See objective (21). Also see policies To mine sand and gravel in Maryland, a person and management procedures under "Appro- must be licensed, obtain a surface mining permit priate Land and Water Uses: Major and prepare and carry out a reclamation plan. Facilities." - Sequential multiple use of land used for mineral extraction purposes is encouraged. RegionalSevaqe Treatment Plants -Sewage Treatment Plants are necessary to maintain water quality standards existing water uses. - Sewage Treatment Plants -Sewage Treatment Plants will not be located in See objectives (17), (18),(19),(24), and tidal or non-tidal wetlands, in floodplains, or (25). Also see policies and management where their effluent will impinge upon harvb.t of procedures under"Appropriate Land and seafood resources, unless no feasible alternative Water Uses: Major Facilities."' exist. - Before sewage treatment plants are constructed, county water and sewer plants must be prepared and must be consistent wtih the 208 Plan and population projections for the service area. Air and Water Quality - Air quality shall be protected, maintained, and, where feasible, improved in the State's coastal See objectives (l),(2), (13),(23),(25),(26), zone. (27), and (33). Also see policies and -oer management procedures under"Appropriate - The quality of the State's tidal waters shall be Land and Water Uses. protected, maintained and improved. - Recreational Boating - All discharges into State waters and emissions into the air require permits and must meet stan- - C~xe rcial Shipping dards equal to or more stringent than federal standards. - Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources - The tidal wetlands of the State shall be protected, maintained and where feasible restored. - Ocean Dumping - Coastal terrestrial areas of significant resource value, particularly non-tidal wetlands, are to be protected. Wetlands - Dredging and filling in tidal wetlands and See objectives (2) , (3),(4), and (5). Also filling or channelization within non-tidal poicesatprocedures wetlands will be minimized threugh State and see policies nd managementfederal permit programs. under %ppropriate Land and Water Usess - All vegetated tidal wetlands are geographic - Activities in Tidal Wetlands areas of particular concern. - Activities in Non-Tidal Wetlands' 336 Barrier Tslands - Construction of other than requlated shore BarrierIsad erosion control measures are prohibited in See objectives (8),(14), and (15). Also beaches of Atlantic barrier islands. see policies and management procedures under"nppropriate Land and Water Usesz - Assateague Island is protected in its natural condition as a National Seashore and State Park. - Use of Beach Areas - Activities in Areas with Significant Shore Erosion - Activities Associated with the Provision of Sufficient Recreational Open Snace and Natural Areas. Endangered Species - State law prohibits taking. killing, molesting, or distributing species on State or federal See objectives (2),(3),(4),(5), and (19). threatened rare or endangered species lists. Also see policies and management proce- dures under 'DuroDriate Land and Water - A program of habitat protection for endangered tMsest and non-game species is required by State law. - Activities Associated with Living Aquatic Resources - Activities in Tidal Wetlands - Activities in Non-tidal - Use of Forested Lands - Use of Agricultural Lands - Activities Associated with Provision of Sufficient Recreational, Open Space and Natural Areas., Wildlife Refuges - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is to be involved inall project evaluations which See objectives (2),(3),(4),(5), and (19). relate to projects which could affect Also see policies and management proce- wildlife refuges. dures under"Appropriate Land and Water Usest ~u~~~~ses&s~ ~- Tidal wetlands and terrestrial areas of - Activities Associated with Living high wildlife value are to be protected. Aquatic Resources - The State operates a system of wildlife - Activities in Tidal Wetlands preserves and wildlife management areas. - Activities in Non-tidal Wetlands - Use of Forested Lands - Use of Agricultural Lands - Activities Associated with Provision of Sufficient Recreational, Open Space and Natural Areas." 337 TABLE VI-2 Uses of Regional Benefit in Maryland's CZMP USES OF REGIONAL BENEFIT METHODS OF ASSURING THAT UNREASONABLE RESTRICTIONS OR EXCLUSION BY LOCAL LAND AND WATER USE REGU- LATIONS SHALL NOT OCCUR 1. Electric Generating Facilities - State authority to select alternative future power plants sites and acquire them without need for local ammovals. - State authority to approve or deny utility-owned sites for future electric generating capacity. 2. Transmission Lines - State authority to approve or deny generator lead routes. 3. Wastewater Treatment Plants - State approval of county water and sewer plane - State control over all waters of Maryland as related to quality, sanitary and physical conditions. - State approval of all construction projects related to Wastewater Treatment Plants. 4. Recreation - State disbursement of Program Open Space Funds, including Federal dollars for local and state recreation projects. - State power of eminent domain for recreational land acquisition. - State right to control waters of State for all uses including water-based recreational uses. - State control'of beach areas off Atlantic Coast east of dune line. 5. Transportation Facilities -.State disbursement of funds including federal funds for transportation-related projects such as roads, ports, rail, and air ports. - State power of eminent domain for land acquisition for transportation projects. - State establishment of priorities for trans- portation Oroject planning, and construction. 338 IV. Federal Consistency A. Introduction Maryland's procedures for federal consistency respond to the intent of the Coastal Zone Management'Act of 1972, as amended, and as specified in 15 CFR 930 (43 FR 10510, March 13, 1978). The basic consistency require- ment of the Act is that federally conducted or supported activities which affect the State's coastal zone be consistent, to the maximum extent practicable, with an approved state management program. Applicants for federal licenses and permits, state or local recipients of federal funding, and federal agencies proposing projects and programs, will be required to determine whether their projects are consistent with the Program. The State generally will be able to prevent actions (with exceptions as explained in this section and regulations) which are not consistent with the Program. The purpose of the consistency review is to: -- plan for and manage impacts resulting from federal programs; -- develop a factual analysis of the effects of a proposed federal action; -- determine consistency by examining the results of that analysis in the context of the goals, objectives and policies of the Pro-ram; -- screen all federal actions for those with significant potential impact, individually or cummulatively, on coastal resources or activities. Federal consistency procedures should also provide a vehicle for active federal participation in the Program. Federal agencies should consider involvement in developing and maintaining a consensus on goals, objectives and policies for the coastal zone, and if ezerc~'~ng.-uthorities in a manner that supports the agreed-upon goals and objectives of the Program, as a continuing part of federal participation in the Program. The basis for determining consistency of~federal actions with Maryland's Coastal Zone Management Program will be the goals, objectives and policies of the Program as stated in Chapter III. The goals, objectives ahd policies of the Program, are submitted for federal approval pursuant to Section 306 of the Act. Derived from extensive public and governmental interaction, these goals, objectives and policies represent a state-wide concensus on coastal management philosophies, and strike a balance among social, economic, and environmental concerns. A consistent action is gener1lly defined as one which supports or furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the 'Proqram. 339 While in all cases the Coastal Zone Unit will have final responsibility for the State's consistency determination or the State's response to federal agency consistency determination, other appropriate state and local agencies will be expected to assist in the review. In routine cases, the Coastal Zone Unit will simply make a decision after being advised by the State and/or local agency which is presently responsible for reviewing the'type of action involved. When the federal action involves substantial effects or is controversial, a project evaluation will be carried out to review the ,proposed action (See Chapter I). If a project evaluation will be carried out, the federal agency (and any other federal agency normally involved in the decision process) will be informed immediately and invited to participate. Table VI-3 shows those state and local agencies which are likely to be involved in reviews of major federal actions. The Coasta3 Zone Unit will be responsible for: - assuring the project evaluation process is carried through in a timely manner; - answering questions raised by applicants or federal agencies; - reconciling different points of view on consistency into a unified state response, and - articulating the final state consistency determination or response. The product of exhaustive review may be alteration in design and execution of projects and programs. Disagreements arising from this process should lend themselves to administrative resolution. Disagreements which persist to a point at which normal administrative resolution appears unlikely, may be appealed pursuant to NOAA Regulations,.*Part 930, Subparts G and H, (43 FR 10530 - 10533, March 13, 1978). Whenever beneficial, the Coastal Zone Unit, in consultation with federal participants, may develoD guidance through memoranda of agreement for means to conduct or support specific activities in a manner that furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the Program. The current Memorandum of Agreement between the Maryland Department of Natural Resources and the Baltimore District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which defines the Aoint processing and evaluation non-routine (major) project applications for Department of Army permits and state permits, is an example of the type of guidance that might be developed. Initially, federal consistency procedures will apply to all types of projects outlined in this chapter. After consistency procedures are implemented, the Coastal Zone Unit, in consultation with the appropriate federal and state agencies, may wish to narrow the coverage of these procedures. More precise definition of actions subject to consistency may also be handled on an individual basis by memoranda of agreement, after approval and implementation of the Program. 340 TABLE VI-3 1~~~0 ~ ~State Agencies Which May Participate in * '~~~ ~~% ~~~ Major Consistency Reviews - DNR L~n 8 a :XL U ga Tidal Wetlands X X X X X X X X Nontidal Wetlands X X X X X X X, X Upland Natural Areas X X X X X X X X X X Aquatic Resource Areas X X X X X x Atlantic Beaches X X x x X X X X Bay Beaches &Boat Access X X X X X X X x Open Space &Recreation X X Areas XX X X X X Forest Zand x X X X X x x ,c Agricultural Land X X X X X x X )~X x x Historic Sites X X X X x X Archaeological'Sif~es X X X X X X X X Soci~al & Cultural Aspects X X X X X x x Flood Plains X X X X X X X X x Erosion Risk Areas X X X X X x x X *Power Plant Sites X X X X x X X X X X X XX X )i Ior Ntura GasX X X K K X K X X X X x X Facility Sites X .Heavy lndustri.IlFacilitieS X x X X X x K K X K x X Mineral Extraction X F8CilitieS K K X X X X X X X intensive Residential or X K K X x X K K Xx X Coimmercial Facilities Ports X K X K X X K K .Zand Transoort~atian X X X K K X X K K K X Facilities XXX Sewage Treatment Plants X X X X x Living Resources X XxXX Aquatic K X Terrestrial x X X X X* x x x )~eny Key SCD soil Conservation District MF.S Maryland Forest s6ervice DA Department of Agriculture MES Maryland Environmental Service DECA Department of Economic & Community Development MET Maryland Environmental Trust DECD. EvrnetlHelhAmnsrto MGS Maryland Geological Survey DSP Department of State Planning CPA Enrycoapital Pronrae Administration piDOT' Maryland Department of TransportationFZA nrg&CosaZnedmntaio DNR Department of Natural Resources CZU Coastal Zone Unit WRA Water Resources Administration PPSP Power Plant Siting Program MWh Maryland Wildlife Administ-ation EPO Energy Policy Off~ice * FA Maryland Fisheries Administration 341 B. Actions Subject to Consistency As stated in the federal regulations, federal consistency procedures apply to the following types of federal actions which occur in the coastal zone, or which substantively affect the coastal zone: a) federal activities. includina development oroiects: b) identified federal licenses and permits; c) outer Continental Shelf activities described in detail in OCS Plans. d) identified federal assistance to state or local governments. The State reserves the right-to review the consistency determination on a federal action occurring outside the coastal zone. For this reason, federal agencies must determine which projects will significantly affect the state's coastal zone. If a project outside the coastal zone will significantly affect the coastal zone, the federal agency must provide the state with a consistency dietermination. Table VI-4 summnarizes the requirements and procedures that must be applied to each types of federal action. Specifically, the table indicates who makes the consistency decision, who must notify the State, and what the federal agency's responsibilities are. 1. Federal Activities Federal activities which significantly affect the states coastal zone must be consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the State's program. Maryland will consider an activity consistent to the maximum extent practicable if: (1) the activity does not inherently conflict with the qoals, objectives and policies of the Program, (i.e. potential conflicts can be avoided through proper planninq and design); and (2) of the practicable alternatives available to carry out the activity, the alternative chosen is the most supportive of the goals, objectives and Policies of the Program; and (3) the project will not cause any violation of standards set by Maryland law or regulations cited in the Program; or (4) the project is clearly necessary in the interest of national security and is carried out in a manner which minimizes conflict with program goal-s, objectives, and Policies. 342 -zh Section 307(c)(1) & (2) 307(c)(3)(A) 307(c)(3)(B) 307(d) (Subpart C). (Subpart D) (Subpart E) (Subpart F) Federal Action Direct Federal Federally licensed Federally licensed Federal assistance activities includ- and permitted and permitted to State and local ing development activities activities described governments projects in detail in OCS plans Coastal Zone "Significantly "Significantly "Siqnificantly affect- "Sigcnificantlv affect- Impact affecting the affecting the the coastal zone" the coastal zone" coastal zone" coastal zone" Responsibility Federal agency pro- Applicant for Person submitting A-95 Clearinghouse to notify State posing the action federal license OCS Plan receiving State or agency or permit local government application for Federal assistance Notification Alternatives chosen Consistency certi- Consistency OMB Circular A-95 procedure by Federal agency fication certification notification pro- (subject to NOAA cedure regulations) Consistency Consistent to the Consistent with Consistent with the Consistent with the requirement maximurm extent the CZM Program CZM Program CZM Program practicable with CZM Program Consistency 14ade by Federal Made by Applicant Made by Applicant Made by State determination agency (Review by with State agency with State Agency agency State agency) concurrence concurrence Federal Federal agency not Federal agency Federal agency may Federal agency may agency required to dis- may not approve not approve Pederal not grant assistance responsibility approve action license or permit licenses or permits following State following a following State following State described in detail agency objection disagreement agency disagree- agency objection in the OCS Plan ment (unless judi- following State agency cially impelled to objection do so) Administrative Mediation by the Appeal to the Secre- Appeal to the Secre- Appeal to the Secre- Conflict Secretary of tary of Commercy by tary cf Commerce by tary of Commerce by resolution Commerce applicant or inde- person or independent applicant agency or pendent Secretarial Secretarial review independent Secre- review tarial review . (Subpart G) (Subpart H) (Subpart H) (Subpart H) TABLE VI-4 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY MATRIX DIAGRAM As stated above, the scope of this section and criteria for decisions may be refined and developed through state/federal consultation, then set out in memoranda of agreement. Except for such written acreements, these provisions apply to all federal activities that directly affect the State's coastal zone. Federal regulations ]5 CFR 930.21 defined "significantly affectino" to mean causing significant: - chanqes in the manner in which waters, lands, or other coastal zone resources are used; - limitations on the range of available uses of coastal zone resources, or - chances in the ouality of coastal resources. Maryland offers the following list of the types of activities which will, generally, directly affect its coastal zone and which thus require a consistency determination and notification to the State. This list is intended to guide federal agencies, and is subject to refinement and modification based on federal - state consultation during the program review process. Actions on Excluded Federal Lands (see Chapter II and Appendix A for identifi- cation of Excluded Federal Lands): - any activity which would cause a discharge as defined by Art. NR, Section 8-1401 air pollution as defined by Art. 43, section 69 1(a), involve a hazardous substance as defined by Art. NR, section 8-1413. 2(a)(2), or exceed noise standards pursuant to Art. 43 section 825, of the Annotated Code of Maryland. - any activity which would lead to a significant'non-point source of pollution to the State's coastal waters. - the construction of any major facility as defined by the Coastal Zone Management Program (see Chapter III). - plans which would cause construction or other activities as described above, or which would cause a significant change in population patterns, and thus require new major facilities within the coastal zone. - any activity, such as dredging or, building of structures in the flood plain, which would significantly change drainage patterns, and/or lead to a significant change in the natural or presently established fresh water flow regime entering the coastal zone from the federal property. - the granting of any easements, rights-of-way, or rights-of-use across excluded federal lands, for any activity integrally related to the federal use of that land. 344 - Acquisition or disposition of land, and - conducting inventories and making designations of lands for the National Landmark Program to the National Historic Register. - Aquatic Plant Control Actions Outside (Landward) of the Coastal Zone: Relatively few actions outside the coastal zone would have significant impacts on the coastal zone. Some projects, however, would have such an impact if they involved or would lead to: - a significant change in the quality, quantity, or temporal pattern of fresh water entering the coastal zone, (e.g., dams on major tri- butaries to tidal waters), or - a major facility in close proximity to the coastal zone which could result in significant impact on land or water use patterns or air quality in the coastal zone, and/or cause the construction of other new facilities within the coastal zone. Actions Seaward of the Coastal Zonei -Outer Continental Shelf ledses and pre-lease activities1 -Designations of Marine Sanctuaries pursuant to the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 -Fisheries Management Plans Actions in the Coastal Zone: - All development projects, including, but not limited to construction of buildings, reclamation projects, channel dredging, beach erosion control, flood control projects, and navigation projects - Major research projects, management studies, or inventories conducted by the federal agency, that will be used in management decisions con- cerning Maryland's coastal resources. - Actions which may significantly alter use patterns and the Chesapeake Bay or ocean tidal waters, (e.g. designations of special anchorage areas by the Coast Guard), -Whether or not Outer Continental Shelf leases are actions subject to federal consistency is still under consideration by NOAA. Maryland reserves the right to review OCS leases and prelease activities if NOAA determines that these actions are subject to consistency. 345 Federal agencies must notify the State at the earliest practicable time of existing or planned federally conducted or supported activities directly affecting the coastal zone. Notification may be accomplished through the State Clearinghouse. The federal agency may notify the Coastal Zone Unit directly of all activities subject to consistency. If the federal agency would normally send copies of plans or designs to other particular state agencies for review, they may send a copy of the transfer letter and the consistency determination to CZU. Federal agencies should notify the State of pending actions at least 90 days before the federal activity reaches a decision stage likely to restrict the use of alternative measures.2 The notification will include a determination that the activity is consistent to the maximum extent practicable, and specify one of the following: - the action is and will be undertaken in a manner consistent with the Program; or - the action is not or will not be undertaken in a manner consistent with the Program but, in the view of the federal agency, necessary and justified because of some circumstances unforseen at the time of program approval; or - the action is not consistent, but necessary in the national interest. Rplevant State agencies will review the federal determination of consistency, ant CZU will agree or disagree with the determination within 60 days. Normally, however, the State's response will be forthcoming within the 45-day Clearinghouse review. Whenever CZU receives notification directly from the federal agency, it will forward either a status report or a response on the consistency review within 45 days of receipt of notification. The status renort will inform the federal agency of the: -- status of the matter -- basis for further delay .- approximate date expected for development of a response. I Agreements among CZU, State Clearinghouse, and individual federal agencies may be developed to identify the review mechanism for each type of activity. NQAA requlations prevent the State from establishing across the board notification requirements. 2The Coastal'Zone Unit recognizes that the interests of national security or another overriding national interest may, in some cases, require a shorter notification peried. 346 If the activity is determined by CZU to warrant project evaluation, the federal agency will be informed and invited to participate. If, after 90 days, the State has not acted on a notification of consistency, state concurrence with the determination may be presumed. The State will attempt to include the response or status report with Clearinghouse comments. If no Coastal Zone Unit response or status report is included, however, the federal agency should not act until (1) the CZU responds, or (2) 90 days from the date of notification expire without further contact from the State. Permit, Licenses, and Activities which are to b. reviewer on a generic basis Several permits, licenses, or authorizations granted by federal agencies are not practicable for the State to review on a case-by-case basis. For this reason, these permits, licenses or regulatory activities are listed as activities which are subject .to consistency on a generic basis. The State may request pertinent federal agencies to provide the State with a determination on whether these activities are carried out in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the Program. The procedures outlined in Chapter I, "Program Review", could be used to resolve inconsistencies between federal and state programs. The State reserves the right to review any of the permits, licenses or authorizations listed below which would fall within the definition of section 307(c) (3)(A) (denoted by an asterisk) in the manner set out under unlisted licenses and permits (see page 331). Federal agency Permit or activity Citation U.S. Coast Guard - authorization for handling 46 U.S.C. 170 of dangerous cargo by vessels in U.S. ports* - authorization for handling 46 U.S.C. 391(a) of flammable or combustible liquids by bulk in U.S. ports.* - authorization for barges 46 U.S.C. 395 to tow over 100 tons.* 347 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service - endangered species permits* 16 U.S.C. 153a National Marine Fisheries - permits for taking of marine 16 U.S.C. 1361 Service mammals* Energy Regulatory - allocation of liquid petroleum 15 U.S.C. 751 Administration feedstock (including naptha, et seq. propane, butane and natural gasoline) for SNG production - prohibition and conversion Energy Supply and orders regarding use of Environmental coal1 Coordination Act 2. Activities Requiring a Federal License or Permit Activities which require a federal license or permit, and which significantly affect land or water uses in the coastal zone, must be consistent with the program. Maryland will consider an acitivty to be consistent if. (1) The proposed project does not inherently conflict with the goals, objectives and policies of the program (i.e. any potential conflicts can be resolved through proper planning and design). (2) The proposed project, by itself, or in combination with existing projects, does not cause an unacceptable level of adverse impact as defined by the policies. (3) The project would not by itself, or in addition to existing projects, cause a violation of a standard set in a Maryland law or regulation cited in the Program. Maryland will consider all of the federal permits and licenses listed on Table VI-5, for activities occurring in the coastal counties to "significantly affect the coastal zone". In addition,, listed permits and licenses for activities outside the coastal zone will "significantly affect the coastal zone," if: �Federal legislation presently being considered by Congress may effect the nature of this regulatory activity. If permits are required for exemption from prohibition and construction orders in the future, these permits will be subject to review as permits. 348 - they apply to &aivities related to Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) exploration, development, or production,1 - they apply to any other type of development activity on the OCS,1 - they apply to a significant change in the quality, quantity or temporal pattern of fresh water entering the coastal zone, in air quality, or involve hazardous substances or, - they apply to activities occurring in close proximity to the coastal zong and would lead to significant impact on land and water use pattern or on air quality within the coastal zone, or would lead to requirements for new major facilities within the coastal zone. Unlisted permits and licenses will be considered to affect the coastal zone if they in any way relate 'to construction within the Area of Focus of the Coastal Zone. The federal consistency review procedures described below will apply to all of the licenses and permits listed on Table VI-5. They will also apply to licenses and permits which are unlisted, or which occur outside the coastal zone if the CZU determines that they will affect the coastal zone, and so notifies the applicant and the federal agency within 30 days of public notice of the federal license or permit. After approval of the Program, the list will be published in the Maryland Register and will be transmitted to all appropriate federal agencies. This list may be refined pursuant to section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act and Part 923 of NOAA regulations. Furthermore, CZU and federal agencies may, after program approval, develop agreements spelling out conditions under which consistency can be automatical.y presumed for minor activities requiring licenses and permits. Applicants for listed federal licenses and permits are responsible for including a certification of consistency with their applications to federal agencies. Applicants should, as a preliminary mattet, seek the views and assistance of appropriate state agencies (i.e. CZU and/or other appropriate agency listed on Table VI-5), regarding means of assuring that the proposed activity complies with, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with, the Program. Applicants may request the CZU to develoy a consistency certification for them. As a matter of convenience to applicants, federal agencies should note on their application forms the requirement for a consistency certication. lIf reviewed together with an Outer Continental Shelf plan submitted to the Secretary of Interior (see section 3 below), sepaate review will not be required. 349 At the same time that the applicant submits an application to a federal. agency for a license or permit, the applicant will transmit a co'py of the application to the appropriate state agency listed in Table VI-5 and/or the CZU. if the federal agency as a general rule sends the listed permit-or license application to the appropriate state agency listed on Table VI-5, they should continue this practice. The CZU requests, however, that when notifications are sent directly to another age~ncy, that a copy of the cover letter be sent to czu. 3. Listed Licenses and Permits The State will place legal public noticbe of the application and certification statement in the inmmediate area of the coastal zone which may be affected by the activity, and will notify affected units of government. The notice will include a summary of the application and certification statement, request for comments, and may, at the State's discretion, include notice of public hearings on the action. If hearings are scheduled, they will take place a minimum of 30 days after publication of the public notice. Whenever possible, the notices and hearings will be combined with any state or federal permit or license notices or hearings for the same project. At the earliest practicable time after the close of the public notice comment period (but at maximum within six months of receipt of the applicant's certification statement), the State will decide whether the proposed listed license or permit activity complies with, and will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Program. 350 Table VI-5 Federal Licenses and Permit Subject to Consistency Review State Agency to Federal Agency Permit Description Citation Assist CZU DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers construction of dams or ditches River and Harbor Act of across navigable waters 1899: Section 9, 33 U.S.C. WRA 401 obstruction or alteration of navigable Id. Section 10, 33 U.S.C. WRA waters (including structures of the 403 OCS)1 establishment of harbor lines Id. Section 11, 33 U.S.C. 404, 405 WRA and MPA temporary occupation of sea wall, bulk-Id. Section 14, 33 U.S.C. WRA head, jetty, dike, level, wharf, pier 408 or other work built by the U.S. discharge of dredged spoil into waters Federal Water Pollution WRA of the U.S.1 Control Act of 1972: Section 404, 33 U.S.C. 1344 Ir'ederal Agen~cy IPermit Description ICitation h5ztCi !approval of plans for improvements made'River *and* Harbor Act ofWR U.S.!DEPART161EN OF ]DEFENSE lunder Corps supervision at private j10f3USC 6 ICONTD 13expense Itransportation of dredged snoil for t h ~rne Protection, Research, ! W RI purpose of dumping it in ocean watersl 'and Sanctiuaries Act of, 1972 1 I I 1~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Section 103, 33 U.S.C. 14131 permit for artificial islands and fixed Outer Continental Lands Act! Structures on the OCS, Section. 4(f), 43 U.S.C. USDEPARTMENT OF ENERlGY bi E--cnouic Regulatory licensing Import or export of natural Natural Gas Act: 15 V.S11c, E&CZA (En), PSC Ahjninistrotion S an 717, Natural Gas Act: 15 U.S.C. 717b, Departmaent of Eniergy ('rganization -Act - Orders interconnection of electric IFederal Power Act, Section PSC, E&ZA-(FF5?) (Federal Energy Regulatory transmission facilities 202(b). (16 U.S.C. 824a(b) lCommission I ''..1cnss fr nu-edeal ydoelctrelFederal Power Act, s cinPSCE A(PP pUceeces anassociated transmission 4(e) and 15, (16 U.S.C. EI~A(PP lines 797(e) and 808)f * ~~~~~~~Certificates of public convenience Natural Gas Act, Section ms' Ps and necessity for the construction az-d 7fc) (15 U.S.C. 717f(c)) I ~~~~~~operation of natural gas pipeline facilities, including both interstate pipeline and LNG terminal facilities Permission and approval for the Natural Gas Act, 'Section tICS, Ps� abandonment of natural gas pipeline 7(b) (15 u.S.c. 7175(b)) * 0~~~~~~~ailte IState Agency to7 federal Agency Permit Description Citation Ass-ist CZtJ U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR the granting of any easement, right- dependent on area of-way or rights-of-use across federal Involved laud. for any use not intergrally re- lated to the federal use of that land. Bureau of Lana Masnagemnt approval of OSpipeline corridor 43 U.S.C. 1:i3l(c), 20 U.S.C KOS rlg~hts-of -,tin 1t'5, also OCS Land* Act Section 5, 43 U.S.C. 1334 Geological Survey permit to dril-1 43- V.S.C. 1334 M6s rights-of-use and easements for' con- Id. ' struction and maintanance1 of pipelinar and43e44sedstructure1 rights--of-use-and easesents for con- Id. NGS struct ion and maintenance of ugathering and flow lineal Nfational Park Service construction of electric and ozn- 1 U.S.C. 5 50'.Z.a (PPSP) cation lines across National Pak State Aqgncy t3 Federal Agency Permit Description Citation Assist rCUZU 1u.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANS- permits for private aids to navigation 1 14 USC 83 WRA/HP PORTATION U.S. Coast Guard permits for construction or modifica- 33 U.S.C. 401,491,525 WRA tion of bridges or causeways in navigable waters deepwater port permits Deepwater Ports Act of 1974 33 U.S,C. 1501 MDOT Federal Aviation approval of airport development pro- 49 U.S.C. 1716 HDOT MAdministration j ject applications ENVIRONHETAL PkOTECTION permits for underground injection2 Safe Drinking Water Act WRA AGENCY Section 1421(c)(1), 42 U.S.C. 300h permit to operate underground inJec- Resources Recovery and WRA tion wells in designated areas2 Conservation Act of 1976 42 U.S.C. 300h-3 ? permits for handling and disposal of Resources Recovery and WRA (parallel hazardous substances2 Conservation Act of 1976 State permit) 42 U.S.C. 3257 approvals under prevention of sig- 2 Clear Air Act of 1976 42 EHA nificant deterioration PSD regulationa U.S.C. 1857c-5 ' Id. Section 111 42 U.S.C. EHA new source construction/operations 1857-6 permits1,2 sI I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Stat'.. Agerncyt~ Federal Agency Permit D~escriptionl Citation Assist ENVIRONMENTAL P RTCTO approvals under National Emission Id. Section 112ER AGENCY (CONT10.) Standardii for Hazardous Air 42 u.S.C. 1857c-7 Pollutants (NXSHAPS) Regulations IFederal Water POllution Control Act of 1972 NPDES permits for discharges *into the Section 402, 403 WRA contigous zone and ocean wate'rs1 33 U.S.C. 1342, 1343 sludge runoff permits Id. Section 405 WRA 4,' 1 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~33 U.S.C. 1342. 1343 aquacuiture, Id. Section 318 NFAI Small VMU&TMTperada an .11~wesfor the con- Atooic Energy Act of 1954, E&CZAk (FPSP) C(3SIISSI~u I atruction mid operation of nuclear Sections 6, 7, 8 and 10J - ~~I facilities 42 U.S.C. 2133, 5841 I-If reVISwed &a part Of, Or In conjunction with. aPlan for exploration, deve-lor"~Pt Or Production of petroletm resurcs o th Ouer ontnenAl Shelf MOS), further consistency review WU]. not be necessary. 2Delegation of permit authority to the State to anticipated.WhnteSaeasmspiayfdrlcoitnc review provisions will no longer apply to individual permit applications. The Coastal Zone Unit will be responsible fo'r consistency reviews. Table VI-5 shows the state agency which will assist the CZU in making the consistency determination: This is the State agency which would normally comment on, or issue similar or concurrent permits to, the federal license or permit. Other state and local agencies *ay also participate in consistency r.vir-w. particularly if the project in question is in a location or is of a .maqnitude to warrant a project evaluation.. (See Table VI-3), If the S,:ate's determination has not been forthcoming within six months of receipt of the applicant's certification statement, then the State's concurrence shall be conclusively presumed. Notwithstanding the six month time limit, before 90 days have elapsed irn processing the consistency action, the State shall notify the applicant and the federal agency of the status of the case, the basis for further delay, and the approximate date for the issuance of a decision. During the process of review, if the CZU finds the activity in conflict with the program, it will consult with the applicant to attempt to agree on conditions which would make the activity consistent with the program. If conditions are agreed to, the CZU will note in its consistency determination that the activity will be consistent if the conditions are placed on the permit. If agreement cannot be reached during the review period, CZU will object to the applicants consistency determination. If the CZU objects to an applicant's consistency certification, it will notify both the federal agency and the applicant, and describe (1) how the proposed activity is inconsistent, and (2) alternative measures, if any, which would make the activity consistent. CZU will also inform the applicant of his right to appeal the decision pursuant to NOAA regulations, Part 930, Subpart H, and send a copy of the objection to the Associate Administrator of NOAA. Unlisted Licenses and Permits If, through its monitoring of unlisted licenses and permits through National Environmental Policy Act Statements, State Clearinghouse, or other forums, CZU determines such a license or permit to have an effect upon the coastal zone, it will notifythe applicant and the federal agency. Notification will be made within 45 days of the public notice or sooner. Once notified, the applicant and federal agency must comply with the procedures under "listed licenses and permits." The State's six month review period for the license or permit will begin as of the date of the original public notice for the license or permit. 3. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Activities Activities occurring on the outer continental shelf off Maryland's shore which are subject to federal: licenses or permits must be carried out in a manner consistent with the approved Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program. This includes (1) license and permit activities which are described in detail in a plan for the exploration, development, or production on the OCS, and (2) licenses and permits required for activities related to OCS exploration, 356 development, or production. These permits and licenses include, but are not limited to: (1) Those for all activities described in detail in OCS Plan submitted to. the Secretary of Interior, such as - permits to drill (U.S. Geological Survey) - rights-of-use and easements for construction and maintenance of structures and platforms on the OCS (U.S. Geological Survey) - rights-of-use and easements for gathering and flow lines (U.S. Geological Survey) (2) Licenses and Permits for all related activities which may not be described in the OCS Plan, such as - pipeline corridor rights-of-way (Bureau of Land Management) -. permit for artificial isiands and fixed structures on the OCS (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) - permit for transport of dredged material (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers - permits for discharges or emissions pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 or the Clean Air of 1970 (Environmental Protection Agency) - authorization to tow barges of over 100 tons (U.S. Coast Guardl Outer Contintental Shelf exploration, development and production of oil and gas will not inherently conflict with Maryland's program (See Chapter III, Section D). What may conflict is the manner in which these and related activities are carried out. OCS activities will be considered consistent with Maryland's Program if: (1) Environmental baseline studies- necessary to determine impact on coastal lands and waters are carried out, (2) All safeguards provided for in federal law are stringently applied and enforced, and (3) Among the feasible alternatives available for each activity associated with OCS exploration, development and production, (e.g. alternatives have been chosen which have the least adverse impact on coastal alnds and waters. (4) All policies for OCS oil and gas exploration, production and transportation (pp. 126&131) are followed. The flow diagram (Figure VI-l) on the following page shows the process by which the Coastal Zone Unit reviews OCS plans and federal licenses and permits for OCS-related activities in accord with NOM Regulations, 15 CFR Sections 930.70 *t feq. If the CZU objects to any of the activities described in the plan, the Secretary of Interior may not approve the plan, nor can any of the permits described in the plan be issued, until either (1) the Secretary of Ccoerce finds, on appeal, that the activity is consistent with the purposes of the Coastal Zone Management Act, or (2) the applicant files an amended OCS plan and consistency determination to which the CZU concurs. State objection to the consistency determination for one license or permit for an OCS-related activity does not prevent federal agencies from: 357 Figure Vi-I FLOW DIAGRAM OF OCS PLAN CONSISTENCY REVIEW OCS PLAN & RELATED PERMITS PLUS CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION SECRETARY COASTAL PROVIDES OF ZONE --- PUBUC INTERIOR UNIT NOTICE REVIEW PERIOD lst ROUND 6 MONTHS SUCCESSIVE ROUNDS 3 MONTHS m SECRETARY APPLICANT OF APPLICANT AMENDS COMMERCE APPEALS PLAN j DISAPPROVES PLAN PROCEEDS THROUGH FEDERAL APPROVAL PROCESS 359 (a) issuing otftg licenses or permits to which the State has not objected, or (b) issuing licenaes or permits descirbed in the OCS plan, provided the State has concurred with the consistency determination on the plan. The process is meant to provide for one unified state review of all federal licenses or permits associated withan OCS plan. Then, once the plan is approved, the State will not object to any permits described in or associated with the plan unless conditions of the permits are subsequently changed. If, however, the applicant submits the plan for state review separately from the applications for OCS-related licenses and permits, each must go through the review process described in section B. above, separately. (See NOAA regulations, 15 CYR section 930.82). After the OCS activity described in the OCS plan commences, the State will have the opportunity to object if the applicant fails substantially to comply with the plan. If the state believes that an applicant is not in compliance, it will adhere to the following procedures pursuant to NOMA regulations (15 CFP 930.86). - CZU will file a claim with the U.S.G.S. and allow a reasonable time for remedy; - if the applicant still'fails to comply, CZU or the Governor will file written objection with the Secretary of Commerce. If the Secretary of Commerce finds the lessee not in compliance, the lcs.see must file an amended plan for review as described above. The lessee and the Secretary of Interior have the opportunity to submit c ments to the Secret;-y of Commerce before she makes her finding. If the Secretary of Commerce requires an amended plan, the eassee must comply with the first plan until the amended plan is approved. 4. Federal Assistance to State and Local Governments Federal assistance to state and local governments for projects affecting the coastal zone may only be granted when such activities are consistent with the State's approved Coastal Zone Management Program. Assisfance refers to grants, contractual arrangements, loans, subsidies, guarantese, insurance or other forms of financial aid. Table VI-6 provides a tentative list of federal assistance programs which will be subject to state review for consistency with the Coastal Zone Management Program. This list will normally apply only to those activities occurring in the coastal zone, although the State will monitor assistance for projects outside the coastal zone, and will inform the federal agency and applicant on a case-by-case basis if a federally assisted project outside the coastal zone will be subject to consistency. This will occur only if the project would have those affects described on page 345 'Federal Activities, Actions Landward of the Coastal Zone." All federal actions requiring notification to the State are presently reviewed under the auspices of State Clearinghouse. the application should indicate that it is an action subject to consistency review. The following process is outlined in tho flow chart, Figure VI-2. 359 : - Fgure VI-2 FEDERAL CONSISTENCY REVIEW THROUGH CLEARINGHOUSE APPLICANT SUBMITS APPLICATION STATE CLEARINGHOUSE /J ATTACHES CONSISTENCY NOTICE; SENDS REVIEW CZU ALL REVIEWERS REV EW 30to 60 DAYS NOTE ANY INCONSISTENCY - w w I I \l -/ \r STATE I STATE RESOLUTION I CLEARINGHOUSE I CLEARINGHOUSE CZU UP TO 30 IL i RESOLUTIONDAYS RESOLUTION INFORMAL RESOLUTION CAN BEGIN BEFORE END OF REVIEW PERIOD IF CLEARINGHOUSE ~\I~~ Z ~~~RECEIVES PRIOR NOTICE |APPI ICANTI CZU flNAL r DETERMINATION FEDERAL AGENCY FEDERAL CANNOT FUND AGENCY INCONSISTENT ACTION FUND REJECT Table VI-6 Federal Assistance Programs Subject to Consistency U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 10.409 Irrigation, Drainage,and other Soil and Water Conservation Loans 10.411 Rural Housing Site Loans 10.414 Resource Conservation and Development Loans 10.418 Water and Waste Disposal Systems for Rural Communities 10.419 Watershed Protection Flood Prevention Loans 10.422 Business and Industrial Loans 10.423 Community Facilities Loans 10.424 Industrial Development Grants 10.655 Assistance to States for Tree Planting and Reforestation 10.657 Cooperation in Forest Management and Processing 10.658 Cooperative Forest Insect and Disease Management 10.659 Cooperative Production and Distribution of Forest Tree Planting Stock 10.660 General Forestry Assistance 10.901 Resource Conservation and Development 10.904 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 11.300 Economic Development-Grants and Loans for Public Works and Development Facilities 11.303 Economic Development-Technical Assistance 11.304 Economic Development-Public Works Impact Projects 11.305 Economic Development-State and Local Economic Development Planning 11.308 Grants to States for Supplemental and Basic Funding of Titles I, II, and IV Activities 11.405 Anadromous and Great Lakes Fisheries Conservation 11.406 Conmnercial Fisheries Disaster Assistance 11.407 Commercial Fisheries Research and Development 11.417 Sea Grant Support 11.500 Construction-Differential Subsidies 361 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 14.001 Flood Insurance 14.112 Mortgage Insurance-Construction or Rehabilitation of Condominium Projects 14.7115 'ctta _srn-eeom-to o Y-otipoe 14.124 Mortgage Insurance-InvestoSponsored ope ra tiv- Housing 14.125 Mortgage Insurance-Land Development and New Communities 14.126 Mortgage Insurance-Management Type Cooperative Projects 14.127 Mortgage Insurance-Mobile Home Parks 14.128 Mortgage Insurance-Nursing Homes and Related Care Facilities 14.129 Mortgage Insurance-Hospitals 14.203 Comprehensive Planning Assistance 14.207 New Communities-Loan Guarantees 14.218 Community Development Block Grants/Entitlement Grants 14.219 Community Development Block Grants/Discretionary Grants 14.701 Disaster Assistance U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 15.400 Outdoor Recreation-Acquisition, Development and Planning 15.600 Anadromous Fish Conservation 15.605 Fish Restoration 15.611 Wildlife Restoration 15.612 Rare and Endangered Species Conservation 15.904 Historic Preservation 15.950 Additional Water Resources Research U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION1 20.004 Boating Safety-Financial Assistance 20.102 Airport Development Aid Program 20.205 Highway Research, Planning and Construction 20.214 highway Beautification-Control of Outdoor Advertising, Contr~l of Junk yards, Landscaping and scenic enhancement 20.306 Rail Property Acquisition and Modernization Grant Assistance 20.505 Urban Mass Transportation Technical Studies Grants 20.506 Urban Mass Transportation Demonstration Grants 20.600 State and Community Highway Safety 20.700 Gas Pipeline Safety 1The necessity for making consistency determinations or federally funded transportation projects will be further defined in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Natural Resources and the Maryland Department of Transportation. Projects of a minor nature will generally not require consistency decisions; the MOU will spell out Precisely the review method for each type of project. 362 ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION 80.041 Grants to States for Energy Conservation Plans 80.043 Supplemental State Energy Conservation Grant Program NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION 47.036 Intergovernmental Program WATER RESOURCES COUNCIL 65.001 Water Resources Planning ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 66.001 Air Pollution Control Program Grants 66.005 Air Pollution Control Survey and Demonstration Grants 66.027 Solid Waste Disposal Planning Grants 66.028 Solid Waste Disposal Demonstrat.ion Grants 66.418 Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works 66.419 Water Pollution Control-State and Interstate Program Grants 66.426 Water Pollution Control-Areawide Waste Treatment Management Planning Grants 66.433 Underground Water Source Protection-Consolidated Research Grants 66.500 Environmental Protection-Consolidated Research Grants 66.501 Air Pollution Control Research Grants 66.502 Pesticides Control Research Grants 66.504 Solid Waste Disposal Research Grants 66.505 Water Pollution Control-Research, Development, and Demonstration Grants 66.506 Safe Drinking Water Research and Demonstration Grants 66.600 Environmental Protection Consolidated Grants-Program Support 66.602 Environmental Protection Consolidated Grants-Special Purpose 363 The State Clearinghouse will attach an additional statement to the piezently used Clearinghouse cover letter. This statement will alert all revie'4ers to the fact that the application must be consistent with the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program in order to receive funding. Reviewers will be instructed to inform the State Clearinghouse if they know of any potential inconsistencies with the czm. The State Clearinghouse will immediately notify the C20u of the agencies other than CZU is considered necessary since other State agencies carry out portions of the Program and local agencies may be more familiar with a particluar project. If, within the time period allowed for review, State Clearinghouse receives comments from one or more reviewers stating an application is inconsistent with the CZMP and a statement from CZU that the same application is consistent or vice versa, the State Clearinghouse will take appropriate action in an effort to resolve the disagreement. The final consistency determination will be the responsibility of the CZU and will be transmitted with the Clearinghouse rmview letter. Reviewers will, of course, be able to object to federally funded projects based on grounds other than the Coastal Zone Management Program. These procedures will be adopted by the Coastal Zone Unit and State Clearinghouse in a Memorandum of Understanding during the summer of 1978, after federal agencies have the opportunity to review of the Program. State Clearinghouse and CZU will respond favorably to any requests from federal agencies to establish more specific agreements with those agencies on review of projects they funi. Clearinghouse Review and Project Evaluation Normal time periods for Clearinghouse review - 30 to 60 days - do not allow for time for a full project evaluation to be undertaken. Full project evaluation will only be contemplated in a few cases, when the project was of major proportions. In most of these situations, such as construction of roads or sewage treatment plants, CZU will be involved at an earlier stage of review. Project evaluation in these cases will have already been carried out, and final Clearinghouse review would simply be the means for expressing the State's final consistency determination. 364 .,lCAPERVI THE PUBLIC ROLE IN COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT VAI. THE PUBLIC ROLE IN COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT The role of the public in determining the fate of coastal resources is funda- mental since the principal responsibility for their protection, development and conservation falls directly to citizens in their every day activities as users and landowners. However, because local, state and federal governments have enacted laws and initiated programs that define and affect the rights of users of coastal areas, it is in the government sector that much public interest in coastal management is focused. The Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program, in particular, addresses land values, private use of public resources, and public access to those resources over privately owned land. In this chapter, the Program sets forth the opportunities for timely public input into significant coastal policies and other actions of government. It also describes the formal relationships and functions of coastal government agencies with the public as an important aspect of documenting comprehensively how coastal management works in Maryland. Unfortunately, this cannot adequately convey the depth to which these relation- ships provide for individual property owner, farmer, waterman, or businessman interests on any particular issue. Therefore, it is important to reaffirm here that the relationships presented below respond to specific needs and concerns of the public. The public role in coastal zone management entails participation in the ways existing laws and programs are presently carried out in coastal areas, and representation in the program review and project evaluation processes which are innovations of the Program. The Coastal Zone Unit provides support activities for this public participation, consistent with the following guidelines: 1. To provide information, where existing available information is insufficient, to enable private users to act in a manner consistent with current State coastal programs and policies. 2. To clarify existing coastal management programs with regard to potential conflicts and misunderstandings among competing users of coastal resources. 3. To disseminate this information in a manner which is understandable to the groups most likely to be affected. 4. To serve as ombudsman for citizen grievances concerning conflicting uses of coastal resources.. Public information: Keeping The Public Aware of Coastal Zone Management Activities The Coastal Zone Unit coordinates the distribution of accurate, understandable information on major coastal policy issues, on programs that affect coastal resources, and on public and private projects of State-wide concern. The purpose 365 of this public information is to evoke public awareness of the complexity c~f major coastal issues addressed by the government, and to summarize the salient aspects of these issues objectively, so that the involvement of an educated public in subsequent coastal actions will be possible. This process includes: 1. Newsletter. A bimonthly report has been initiated to keep its readers abreast of significant Program activities and to announce new developments. it also synopsizes coastal resource studies that will be useful to agencies and to the public in their coastal zone management efforts. The newsletter concentrated on discussions of the relationship of these studies and program activities to issues of importance to the citizens of the State. Space in the newsletter can be reserved for citizens' comments on issues of State-wide interest. The newsletter presently reaches over 4,000 persons, groups, government agencies and academic institutions. 2. Distribution of Specific Information. The Coastal Zone Unit produces 'fact sheets, action memoranda, study summaries and other special public education literature pertaining to coastal management. Factual information produced by other Progiam-related agencies may also be publicized and distributed. This information is sent to the Coastal Zone Unit's list of active individuals and groups most likely to be concerned with these issues. In addition, the Unit disseminates information through government information distribution centers around the State, such as libraries and local planning offices. Current technical and program information is provided to the main libraries of coastal jurisdictions. Branch libraries receive general material periodically, and specific information when requested. 3. Special Public Education Projects. When there are public education needs which can be met by single actions, the Coastal Zone Unit sponsors specific projects. These projects may be conducted either by the Coastal Zone Unit on its own, in cooperation with other public service agencies, or with private organizations. For example, the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service, funded by the Program, will provide handbooks for private property owners and concerned citizens. to explain how they may comply with existing State laws regarding coastal zone management, how they can realize the benefits of these laws, and how they may have a voice in public program actions in coastal areas. 4. use of the Media. it i~s the intent of the Coastal Zone Unit to publicize significant meetings or other events of greater than local concern occurring in the coastal zone. Contacts have been established with TV and radio stations, and newspapers, to expand public exposure to program actions through news releases and special features. The Unit also encourages liaison between the media and local citizen representatives to the Coastal R~esources~ Advisory Committee, so that local papers may regularly report citizens' perspectives on those coastal issues addressed by the Program. In addition, spot announcements for radio and TV are produced to give the broadest possible coverage to State-wide issues or special events. 366 5. Expert Spokesmen. The Coastal Zone Unit acts, upon request, as a coordinator to arrange appearances of knowledgeable speakers at work- shops, conferences, and special citizen advisory meetings. 6. Public Accessibility to the Government. To meet the need for more direct public access to coastal management agencies, the Coastal Zone Unit complements other public i:iormation services at the State level. Additionally, the Unit will man a "hot-line". This toll-free number to the Unit's office will be set up so that citizens can 'report problems or seek governmental information from anywhere in 'the coastal zone. The hot-line will be used in conjunrction with "Direct line", a vehicle for handling citizens' written inquiries. Direct line is also a useful means for citizens to ask questions about state actions in coastal areas, or to propcse issues for consideration by the Pr--ram. The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service project will also serve to link public information services along all affected State departments. These c tizens' guides will pa.kage information on sources of government.i assistance and will be widel. distributed. Finally, th. Coa.. _. Zone Unit is working on the establishment of an information retrieval system, making multi-departmental information on coastal resources more readily available to citizens and government agencies. Public Participation In CoastalZone Manaqement Activities Maryland's Program blends new opportunities with existing ways of obtaining public participation in coastal decisions. Whereas the implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Program is based on the networking of existing legal authorities and government agencies, -he public participation element combines existing citizen advisory pro9.:- -,F wi'h t:a pi,. inC olvement element in coastal project evaluations. Ov'<nrit.,nal opportunities, consisting of new and existing citizen advisory bodies at the State, local and regional levels, provide a forum for citizens and special interest groups to: - seek consensus on specific controversial coastal management issues; - evaluate how implementation of various portions of the Program reflect the. needs and values of citizens in coastal areas; - assure that as the Program is updated the priorities and needs of citizens are adequately considered; - discuss how to reach and involve additional individuals and groups likely to be affected by the Program. 367 The following four elemeltnts are the back)bone of the nutlic particip.t on component of the Program: 1. Coastal Resources Advisory Committee. In July, 1976, a 60-member Supplemental Committee was created by th.: Secretiry of Natural Res. urces, to bring wider representation to th. existing Chesapeake Bay and Coastal Zone Advisory commission. The Coriunission, established by law as a unit of the Department of Natural Resources, has the duty to advise the Secretary on rules and regulations which he may adopt. The Cormmittee evolved as an adjunct to the Commission, ensuring that Maryland's varied interests would be reflected during Progr-m development. In June, 1977, the Committee was reconstituted as the Coastal Resources Advisory CDm=Littee. The composition of its membership was altered to represent more acruiately the interests of organizatic- vith functions related to coastal area management. Indlduals representing local governments, umbrella groups, and important interests within the State now constitute the votLnc Dembrs'i _n: the Co.mmittee. Indivi4u'als representing State '- i cieal agernces and rcadex: - ins_ituticns prov. e technical support or- - non-voting b-a- s. Because it, r.ar!.:.;bip represents a br.ad-bas. -f cvernment, interest groups, and the general public, the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee occupies an important position providing guidance on best uses, conservation, and preservation of the Stdte's coastal area resources. The Committee serves as a public forum for the Program, in which individuals and organizations involved in coastal resources activities are kept aware of Program actions and present their views on the ! Program proposals. The various interests represented on the Committee may not always be in total agreement with the direction of policy decisions. However, with the Comitt=- as a regular communication channel, members are provided ar! op?.rCi- t ti '.mr tneir vews integrated with the technical, environnr..=-el ,and ec .c -. I' Csi-. s Another impcr t- t function of the Committee is to guide Program implementati-r ri; is accomplished primarily through the efforts of subcommittees and task forces having a broad composition c_ representatives from State agnr-ies, local governments, special interests and citizens-at- 2arge. ;'> s. -.ifi- as=ais they add-,:s.s include; a. The ' .oject Evaluation process, including the procedures and c., ieria that sh-uldi be used in designating and evaluating projects. b. The identification of coastal problems requiring further research and analytical studies for resolution. c. The overall allocation of the Program's technical and financial resources. 368 d. Federal Consistency review. e. The implementation of the Coastal Energy Impact Program established by the 1976 Coastal Zone Management Act Amendments. The Committee also provides the framework for formal public involvement at the State level and for additional coordination between citizens and their local governments. Citizen representation is provided equal recognition with that of government officials. Each coastal county, plus Baltimore and Ocean Cities, has been given the opportunity to ' appoint a citizen representative as a voting member of the Committee. There are, in addition, five at-large citizen representatives elected from five geographical areas of the State. Citizen representatives serve several functions. They can be a valuable information source to citizen bodies appointed by local government, and to the public at-large. They may also be a conduit through which local and regional citizen concerns can be carried to the State Committee. Finally, they can inform their respective local government officials of citizen viewpoints on coastal policy matters and other issues. Although the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee is a broad-based organization, it cannot be all inclusive. The membership recognizes that its actions are more credible when it draws on the participation of the public-at-large for the interest and expertise necessary to make decisions truly comprehensive. For this reason, when tasks are initiated, the Committee and the Coastal Zone Unit jointly consider the need for additional advice. Complete membership lists for the Chesapeake Bay and Coastal Zone Advisory Commission and the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee are included in Appendix C. 2. Local and Regional Committees. In the state's coastal jurisdictions, elected officials have set up local-and regional citizen advisory bodies to study coastal management issues and make reccmndations. These committees help shape comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances and local application of State and federal psograms that affect land and water resources. Existing committees, or others formed in response to special interests in the Program, are encouraged to; i) review the Program continually for its impact in their area; ii) include Program elements in assessing proposed actions at the local and regional level;' and iii) recommend actions to their local governments necessary to preserve compatibility between their policies and the State Program. 369 The Coastal Zone Unit will, upon request, provide technical proposed procedures that may have greater than local impact, and provide additional public information. Complete membership lists of special local and regional committees are included in Appendix C. 3. Advisory opportunities Through The Coalition Of Special Interest Groups And individuals. In addition to formal citizen, advisory bodies, coastal management agencies'receive comments and advicp directly from individuals and special interest groups. The Coastal Zone Unit held at-large regional citizen meetings during the final year of Program development to facilitate direct public influence in the Program, without the encumbrance of additional formal organizations. From these meetings. and other sources, a list of active individuals and groups is maintained. The list is arranged by localities and issues, and can be made available to participating local governments or State-wide special interest organizations fo2: selective use. Prompt contact with knowledgeable citizens and special interest groups can also be made by the Coastal Zone Unit or other State agencies for timely public review and comment. For issues of a regional nature, the list can be used as a basis for notification of public information meetings between two or more local governments, special interest organizations or other levels of government. These meetings can serve as forums and informati on gathering sessions, the results of which may be reported to the Coastal Resources Advisory Committee for assessment and recommended action. An example is the series of four fact-finding forums held on the Patuxent River in early 1977. it was organized by the Coastal Zone Unit and co-sponsored by several public and private organizations with an interest in management of the river. 4. Cooperation With Other Public Participation Programs Related to the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Zone Unit works closely with the public participation programs of other agencies with an interest in coastal issues, to facilitate public understanding of the fundamental relationships between the programs, to improve efficiency by eliminating duplication of effort, and to provide for the greater productivity of each session. The purpose of this cooperation, furthermore, is to exceed the original mandate of each program, by supplementing public participation activities that are intrinsic to each, and by supporting the mutual intent of each citizen advisory opportunity. 3700 The two most important'areas of cooperation at this time are the 208 Water Quality Planning Program (co-administered in this state by the Water Resources Administration, the Regional Planning Council, and the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments) and the Environmental Protection Agency's Chesapeake Say Program. Situations in which the Coastal Zone Unit agrees to cooperate with the 208 Program include the following: a. Where a problem is raised by the public and brought to the attention of either staff, and it appears to have relevance to the other program, this problem is referred by one public participation coordinator to the other agency coordinator for consideration and follow-up. b. Where each program staff is available to meet with public and advisory groups of the other. c. Where use of a single newsletter is proposed as an important means of efficient communication for both programs. d. Where both staffs coordinate the timing and agenda of meetings sponsored by their respective programs. e. where both public participation program staffs seek to be actively involved in other programs affecting water quality management, encouraging similar efficiencies where public education and participation activities are concerned. The public participation staffs of the Coastal Zone Unit, the water Resources Administration, and the Regional Planning Council are encouraging similar means of cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency's new Chesapeake Bay Program. Public Involvement in Coastal Project Assessments just as there are multi-level agencies and programs which constitute the formal process of decision-making in coastal activi ties, there are' multiple-level opportunities for the'public to influence these decisions. on the one hand, there are various existing opportunities to review, evaluate, and 'testify on proposed coastal activities. Additionally, there will be unique opportunities that complement the Coastal Zone Unit's role as lead agency. The following are some examples of existing opportunities on the local level, outside the purview of the Coastal Zone Unit: 1. Planning and zoning commission hearings on-variances to existing ordinances. 2. Public review of certain developmental permits. 3. Local review of proposed State and federal activities. Every State agency participating in the Program provides opportunities for public assessment. For example: 371 1. Public hearings on wetlands permits. 2. Public review of proposed State guidelines or major studies, such as through the Boat Act Advisory Committee to the Secretary of Natural Resources. Finally, there are coastal activities which require multi-level review and evaluation. Examples of combined federal, State and local assessment include: 1. Hearings on major energy facilities, such as power plants. 2. Cooperative planning, review, and funding of proper soil conservation practices at the local level through the Soil Conservation Service, Soil Conservation Districts and the Maryland Department of Agriculture. These opportunities for public assessment are in most cases handled by the lead agency. The role of the Coastal Zone Unit is to expand public awareness of these procedures through such means as citizen guidebooks an regulatory and planning activities in the coastal zone. sometimes, however, these- existing procedures are limited in their ability to offer a comprehensive public review of complex, multi-level coastal proposals. When the lead agency, the Coastal Zone Unit, and the interested public agree that additional efforts are needed to achieve a full airing of a proposal, the Coastal Zone Unit may be able to provide this service. For example, in mid 1977, the Department of Natural Resources endorsed a controversial U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' project to maintenance dredge the western approach channel to the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal and to permit over- board disposal of spoil. The Coastal zone unit supported a public meeting to presentlW the State's justification for the project, and to discuss the mitigation bf possible adverse impacts. Subsequently, an information packet on the public issues of concern regarding the project was prepared by-the Unit. Background information, the specifics of the project and its monitoring program were presented. The Packet was distributed to interested individuals and groups. The Coastal Zone Unit is-primarily responsible for determining Program consistency of proposed activities affecting the coastal zone. This is to be accomplished through: 1. Comprehensive project evaluations for major proposals which have the potential for significant impacts on coastal waters. 2. Procedures for resolving conflicting policies when applied to the evaluation of coastal related activities. 3. Program review, including identification of research and other funding priorities, and providing the means for assessing the cumulative impacts of small coastal projects. 372 The Coastal Resources Advisory Committee provides the main vehicle for public involvement in project assessment, and complements each of these tasks. For example: 1. Through the Committee, the Coastal Zone Unit lays out an explicit role for citizen participation in the Program's Project Evaluation process. Citizen representation is sought as soon as a project proposed for the coastal zone is selected for a full review. Citizens participate with government agencies in identifying key project issues and in monitoring the evaluation. 2. The participation of the Committee in procedures resolving conflicting coastal policies will provide the opportunity for greater public accounting. 3. Committee task forces may be formed for the consideration of major coastal research projects. Task forces share responsibility with funding agencies for selection of contractors and delineation of taqks. The Coastal Zbne Unit public participation stdff provides support for the activities undertaken by th.� Coastal Resources Advisory Committee in project assessment. On occasion, it may be advantageous for the Unit to request the assistance of other public participation or educational agencies to devise special projects that will help the Committee assess public opinion. Accountabi lity To The Public For Coastal Zone Management Activities All participating program agencies have the responsibility to make public the procedures and time schedules upon which they base coastal decisions. For example, State departmental rules and regulations must allow for interested individual's views before being promulgated. Questions raised about rationales or other aspects of significant decisions may be considered for Program Review through the Coastal Zone Unit's public participation mechanisms. The toll-free "hot line" and the information retrieval form "Direct line", make it easy for citizens to reach the Unit or other agencies and to be assured of a prompt answer to their concerns. - Program responses may take the form of personal telephone calls, written replies or personal meetings. in some instances, special reports or public forums may be appropriate. in all cases, a public accounting will be made on controversial aspects of the issue. The Coastal Zone Unit has also formulated a policy on formal position statements submitted by citizens for consideration in Program implementation. Statements (resolutions, etc.) which are intended to represent the views of an entire group, such as a local citizens' advisory coummttee or private organization, should be duplicated and circulated by mail to all members of that group. Then, at the group's next meeting, action can be taken to accept, revise, 373 or reject the statement Of position. When this process is followed, act..on taken by the group is considered by the Coastal Zone Unit to be a fair representation of the views of that group. That is, the appropriate governmental agencies will be notified, and if the issue is of larger than local concern, the Coastal Resources Advisory Coimmittee will consider it. During Program development, formal resolutions were submitted to the Coastal Zone Unit by the Maryland Conservation Council, and several of the regional citizens' advisory meetings were sponsored by the Unit. These resolutions were reviewed and responded to, and have helped shape the management program presented in this document. Resolutions submitted by the Maryland Conservation Council, representative of all those received, are reproduced in Appendix C. Appeals of Public Policy Decisions Regarding Coastal Zone Management When public accounting procedures fail to satisfy the concerns of inditviduals or groups, there are procedures for appeal of State actions under the Program., In such cases, if the individual has standing, he may resort to the administrative appeals provision of the Natural.Resources Article, Set-Iion 1-107, which jp;ovides .that; "Any person aggrieved by any decision, action or failure to act on the part of the Secretary or any unit within the department of Natural Resources is provided by. subsection 1-106 of this article, and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, is entitled to appeal..." Section 1-106 allows an individual to appeal any departmental decision subjectB to judicial review under the Administrative Procedures Act (Article 41 subsection 244, et. seq.) or any other provision of law. Article 41 in turn, provides judicial review for any person aggrieved by a final decision in a contested case and defines the term "contested case" as: "...a proceeding before an agency in which the legal rights, duties or privileges of specific parties are required by law or constitutional right to be determined after an agency hearing." Administrative appeals before the Department of Natural Resources are basically similar to appeals before other state agencies. Once an individual has exhausted his administrative appeals, he may seek judicial relief. For citizens and groups without legal standing, the Coastal Zone Unit may be petitioned in writing on behalf of the State to intervene as an aggrieved party to the decision through the Department of State Planning's intervention authority. This procedure is described more fully in Chapters I and Vill. Through the various organizations and procedural methods described in this chapter, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program has sought to provide for public participation through: 374 1. Information: reports, newsletters, the hot-line, and direct line. 2. Representation: The Coastal Resources Advisory Committee, and public hearings. 3. Appeal: To the Department of Natural Resources Thus, the Maryland Coastal Zone Management Program, itself developed with public participation, fulfills the requirements of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act and provides for the direct involvement of the public that the Coastal Zone Management Program is designed to serve. 9 ~~~~~~~~~~~~375