DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Bay Enhancement Working Group
January 28, 2003
10:00 AM, Maryland Port Administration Conference Room A
Maryland Port Administration, 2310 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Md.
ATTENDEES
Aberdeen Proving Ground (APG): Steve Wampler
Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF): Jenn Aiosa
EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc. (EA): Jane Boraczek, Peggy Derrick, Frank Pine
Ecologix Group: George Chmael, Bob Hoyt
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): Tom Slenkamp, Ralph Spagnolo
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): John Gill, Martin Kaehny, Dan Murphy
Gahagan & Bryant Assoc. (GBA): Dennis Urso, Walter Dinicola
Maryland Charter Boat Association (MCBA): Russ Green
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE): Charles Poukish
Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE)/ TARSA: John Hill
Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR): Dave Brinker, Roland Limpert, Ray Dintaman,
Maryland Environmental Service (MES): Karen Cushman, William Bonk, Lauren Franke, Elizabeth Habic,
Cece Donovan, Rebecca Halloran
Maryland Geological Survey (MGS): Jeff Halka
Maryland Port Administration (MPA): Stephen Storms, Fran Flanigan, Frank Hamons, Bill Lear
National Marine Fisheries Service, Habitat Conservation (NMFS): John Nichols
NOAA, Chesapeake Bay Field Office: Peter Bergstrom
University of Maryland Center for Environmental Studies (UMCES): Lisa Wainger, Elizabeth Price,
Dennis King
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District (CENAB): Jeffery McKee, Scott Johnson, Mimi Bistany,
Michelle Gomez
USACE-Planning: Mary Pittek
STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD
Dan Murphy of USFWS stated, for the record, that USFWS supports a maximum 1,000-acre restoration project
at Barren Island.
ACTION ITEMS
1. BEWG reviewed Corps list of 100+ islands and began a preliminary review of the 10 islands remaining
from the Corps elimination matrix. The BEWG was asked to provide feedback to the Corps on the
criteria in the elimination matrix. Clay and Sandy Islands were eliminated from this list leaving James,
Holland, Barren, Hooper, Ragged, Little Deal, South Marsh, and Smith Islands. Some islands were
unable to be located using existing maps – the BEWG was asked to provide available information on
location of any sites eliminated because they could not be found.
2. Add Winter flounder to Finfish Spawning Habitat in the Corps’ scoring matrix of Environmental
Factors, Weights and Scores. Also, include Winter flounder in the definition. John Nichols will check
on winter flounder spawning potential for the new sites.
3. Navigation definition/Table C-1 needs to be updated, as this is more encompassing for Smith Island than
other islands that have previously been scored.
4. Compile a list of further needed research on new islands and distribute.
5. Update matrix and scores and send new, re-ranked islands out to BEWG before February 13th meeting.
6. A February 13th BEWG meeting is set to determine acceptability (by the BEWG) of the adjusted scoring
and re-ranking of the new islands, if BEWG responds that this is necessary after they receive the
information and updated ranking.
7. MES will make appropriate changes to the Synopsis report.
8. BEWG will have an opportunity to review new information on the Hydrodynamics Effects for James
and Smith (from the Corps), and adjust their Environmental score in the matrix accordingly at the next
BEWG meeting.
9. John Nichols to review Shallow Water Habitat, all Finfish/Shellfish, Fossil Shell Mining/Buried Shell,
and possibly Salinity for all new islands.
10. Groundwater to be further investigated by Jeff Halka/MGS.
11. Peter Bergstrom to review potential SAV impact with Bob Orth (VIMS), particularly at Smith Island.
12. Russ Greene was recommended to review Recreational Fishing in the vicinity of the new island options.
13. BEWG to review HAPC scores if SAV scores change.
14. Dave Brinker to review Waterfowl Use, and Wading and Shorebird Use for new sites. Also, check
Public Land/State Ownership of new sites.
15. UMCES to gather terrestrial GIS information.
16. MES, MPA and Corps need to review Cultural Resource information from the Corps (specifically
Ragged Island) of 5 new islands.
17. MES to search for Toxic Contaminants and CERCLA/UXO liability and review with MDE.
18. BEWG members should contact Katrina at MPA if they have not received a copy of the 2002 report to
the General Assembly.
Baltimore Harbor Committee Highlights
• Technical and Citizen Subcommittee group members will be decided and each group and first meeting
will be scheduled.
• The technical group will report findings and decision to BEWG for review.
• Executive Committee committed to focusing on the Harbor & reporting to the General Assembly on
progress in December of 2003. Activities will proceed for identifying options to meet the short and long
term needs.
• Harbor site needs to support a capacity of 600,000 cy plus a buffer annually.
1.0 Welcome and Global Information
Rebecca Halloran
1.0 Meeting Goals
To discuss the incorporation of the Corps DMMP to the State’s existing DMMP structure and to
move forward with the Harbor Options Committee.
1.1 Review action items from October
2.0 Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) Updates
Steve Storms
2.1 2002 Report to the General Assembly Update
On December 5, 2002 the Executive Committee accepted the Management Committee’s report and
submitted their report to the General Assembly on December 31, 2002. Copies are being sent to the
BEWG. BEWG members should contact Katrina at MPA if they do not receive a copy in the next
week.
3.0 Harbor Options for Dredged Material Management
Frank Hamons
3.1 Development of Baltimore Harbor Committee & Subcommittees
Frank Hamons thanked the BEWG for their hard work. The Harbor capacity shortfall remains an
issue and technical representatives from the various agencies and the public need to be involved as
the Harbor Options move forward. In the next 2 weeks, the Harbor Committee of the BEWG should
be better developed. Mr. Hamons stated that the BEWG’s original purpose was to look for new
options. He suggested that incorporating representatives from the BEWG with Harbor knowledge as
well as local government representatives into the Harbor Committee would be beneficial. A BEWG
member raised concern as to whether enough citizens will be able to participate in the Harbor
Committee meetings if they are scheduled during business hours as many members also work during
that time. Mr. Hamons suggested that the Technical Subcommittee could hold meetings during the
day and discuss issues and findings with the Citizens Subcommittee after business hours
3.2 Role of BEWG
The role of the BEWG will continue and be supplemented by the Harbor Committee. The Harbor
Committee will not be responsible for designating specific options, but rather will report their
findings to the BEWG, and other DMMP Committees for review. Note: Subsequent to the BEWG
meeting reported here, further discussions have focussed on the structure and organization of the
group to be formed to focus on the harbor options; at this writing, the exact structure and reporting
relationships have not been finalized. Mr. Hamons stated that a capacity of 600,000 cy annually
needs to be met by the new Harbor site selection(s) and that they are looking for a 20-30 year plan to
support this capacity.
3.3 Waterfront Land Use in Baltimore Harbor
Eldon Miller gave a short presentation on the limited availability of land space in and around
Baltimore Harbor.
4.0 Corps’ DMMP Process
Scott Johnson
4.1 Utilizing State’s existing committees & support structure
Scott Johnson gave a short presentation outlining the Corps’ DMMP process. Information was
included in a flow chart showing the Poplar Island Expansion Study beginning in February 2003
(LRR/EIS 2005), and the Mid Bay Island Study having begun in November 2002 (Feasibility
Report/EIS 2006). The Corps has been given permission to conduct a separate Eastern Neck Study
although, no dates were given as to when these studies would begin.
4.2 Role for BEWG in Corps DMMP process
Presentation also discussed the BEWG’s role in the Corps’ DMMP process. The Corps will
incorporate the BEWG because they are a valuable group of experts in Bay activities and they are
already familiar with the MPA DMMP process. The BEWG can also help the Corps to incorporate
public and agency opinion into its decision-making as well as assess whether the team is giving the
public understandable information.
5.0 Mid-Bay Island Option
Rebecca Halloran/ Mimi Bistany
5.1 BEWG screening of Mid-Bay Islands
The Corps considered all alternatives in its study area with the purpose of a site for habitat
restoration using dredged material. The Corps began screening the 100+ islands and eliminating
them based on established fatal flaws. 10 islands remained to be discussed by BEWG (see below)
Dan Murphy questioned the category of “Limited Restoration Potential <200 acres” stating that the
group was not necessarily opposed to small projects. Scott Johnson pointed out that the number of
acres is based on assessment of benefits vs. costs and fulfilling the Corps DMMP. He also stated
that the Corps needs to establish a project site rather than several possible ones to further study. He
said that they could consider more than one island but it would have to be a spin-off project in order
to get approval and funding. Small areas, Mr. Johnson said, would be feasible for small projects but
this is not included in the Corps’ DMMP.
Clay/Sandy Island
This island was eliminated from the list of new options. Dave Brinker stated that if a project
were completed here it would not be significantly useful to migrating waterbirds.
South Marsh Island
This island’s environmental value could not be determined by the group. Dave Brinker said that
he would have to check with the Public Lands staff of MDNR to determine the ownership of the
island.
Little Deal Island
This island has historic waterbird use according to Dave Brinker. There would be more benefit
to this area if the project were broken into small pieces totaling at least 200 acres. Peter Bergstrom
asked how much of the island had eroded. In the last 15-20 years the south shore has disappeared.
Ragged Island
This island is located close to James Island. Therefore, Mimi Bistany stated, this island is an
attractive option although James and Ragged, if selected, could not be the same project. It was
proposed that one island could contain wetlands and one uplands, however, it was pointed out that
uplands are needed for each island’s restoration as they provide shoreline protection.
Changes were made to the Corps’ Environmental Scores Matrix are as follows:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Turbidity for Little Deal changed from 0 to 1.
Salinity for Little Deal changed from 0 to 0.
Shallow Water habitat for Little Deal changed from 0 to –1.
SAV for Smith Island was changed from –1 to –1. It was stated that this score might change
if concept areas are proposed.
Tidal Wetlands for Little Deal changed from 0 to 1.
Non-tidal Wetlands for Smith and South Marsh both changed from a 1 to a shaded 0.
Finfish Rearing Habitat for Holland was changed from 0 to –1.
Recreational Fishery for South Marsh, Smith, Holland and Little Deal were given a –1.
Ragged and Hooper’s were given a 0.
RTE and SSPRA for Smith Island were changed from a –10 to a 2 after assessing the impacts
to the species possibly found there.
Forests for Ragged were changed from 0 to 1 and from 0 to 0 for South Marsh.
Other Natural Avian Habitat for South Marsh and Little Deal were changed from 0 to 1.
Agricultural Land for Hooper’s was changed from 0 to a shaded 0.
Hydrodynamics effects can be reviewed for Barren, James, and Holland because new
information has been received.
CERCLA/UXO for Little Deal changed from 0 to 0.
Floodplains for Little Deal was changed from 0 to a shaded 0.
Aesthetics for Little Deal was changed from 0 to –1.
Cultural Resources for Ragged changed from a shaded 0 to 0.
Infrastructure for Hooper’s and Smith changed from 0 to 0.
Navigation for Hooper’s and Little Deal changed from 0 to 0. Smith was changed from 0 to
–1. John Nichols raised the question of whether Navigation should include transportation
distance. The Navigation definition should be changed as, Jenn Aiosa pointed out, Smith
Island navigation is more encompassing than the other scored islands.
Adjacent Habitat for Holland was changed from 0 to 1.
6.0 Next Meeting
Ms. Halloran stated that these changes will be updated in the Corps’ scoring matrix, the islands will
be re-ranked, and the results will be sent to BEWG members. A list of outstanding items to be researched
by BEWG members will also be sent out and information should be returned to Ms. Halloran by February
7th. A BEWG meeting was scheduled for February 13th if, after review of the new information and
suggested scores changes.
Ms.Bistany confirmed the 3 upcoming public scoping meetings that are from 7-9pm:
February 18th Queen Anne’s County Library (canceled due to snow storm)
February 20th Dorchester County Free Library
February 25th Anne Arundel Community College