MASONVILLE DREDGED MATERIAL CONTAINMENT FACILITY: THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC AND REGULATOR OUTREACH PROCESS

Transcription

1 MASONVILLE DREDGED MATERIAL CONTAINMENT FACILITY: THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC AND REGULATOR OUTREACH PROCESS Melissa Slatnick 1, Stephanie Lindley 2, Paul Massicot 3, George Chmael 4, Katrina Jones 5, Carol Eshelman 6 ABSTRACT The Masonville Dredged Material Containment Facility (DMCF) is located in the Baltimore Harbor, within the estuarine reaches of the Patapsco River in Baltimore, Maryland. To address a dredged material placement capacity shortfall, the Maryland Port Administration (MPA) used the committees of the State s Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) to identify and screen potential placement options for material dredged from the Baltimore Harbor. This resulted in the formation of the Harbor Team, which is comprised of local citizens groups, government agencies, local industry, and non-profit groups. Site selection screening performed by members of the DMMP and Harbor Team led to the identification of the Masonville site for a DMCF. Coordination with agencies, technical experts, non-profit environmental groups, and community organizations was essential to the successful implementation of the Masonville DMCF project. Agency representatives, as well as the public, were involved in the selection of Masonville as a Harbor placement site and were involved in the development of the compensatory mitigation package plus community enhancements, which were not required by regulatory agencies, but were agreed to by MPA at the communities request. Opportunities for public involvement included public hearings and meetings with local community groups. The public involved in the project planning and implementation process included a diverse group of organizations and individuals, ranging from large government agencies to local citizens living in the vicinity of the project site. Some of the most critical outreach aspects of the planning process included the integration of the public at the initiation of the project and the continued community involvement throughout the planning process by integrating community leaders. Citizen input resulted in the incorporation of community ideas and desires in the project and mitigation/enhancement plans. Throughout the site screening and mitigation/community enhancement development processes, both formal and informal consultations between the MPA and various resource agencies and citizen s groups have been ongoing. Public and agency coordination continues as the project progresses through regular meetings of the Masonville Citizens Advisory Committee and through communications with the regulatory agencies. Keywords: dredged material management, public involvement, outreach, agency coordination, regulatory 1 Senior Project Manager, Maryland Environmental Service, 259 Najoles Road, Millersville, Maryland 21108, USA, T: , mslat@menv.com. 2 Environmental Specialist, Maryland Environmental Service, 259 Najoles Road, Millersville, Maryland 21108, USA, T: , slind@menv.com. 3 Project Manager, EcoLogix, 410 Rowe Boulevard, Annapolis, Maryland 21401, USA, T: , pmassicot@toad.net. 4 Senior Project Manager, Council Fire, 3285 Chrisland Drive, Annapolis, Maryland 21403, USA, T: , gchmael@mac.com. 5 Outreach Coordinator, Maryland Port Administration, World Trade Center, Suite 1900, 401 East Pratt Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21202, USA, T: , kjones1@marylandports.com. 6 Executive Director, Brooklyn and Curtis Bay Coalition, Inc., 320 East Patapsco Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21225, USA, T: , carol@baybrook.net. 268

2 INTRODUCTION The Masonville Dredged Material Containment Facility (DMCF) is located in Baltimore, Maryland within the estuarine reaches of the Patapsco River (Figure 1). The footprint of the DMCF is 141 acres, which required mitigation to offset the loss of 130 acres of tidal open water, 1 acre of vegetated wetlands, and 10 acres of upland in the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. Owned and operated by the Maryland Port Administration (MPA), the Masonville DMCF will provide 11.8 million cubic meters (mcm) (15.4 million cubic yards (mcy)) of placement capacity for material dredged from the Baltimore Harbor. Immediately west of the Masonville DMCF are approximately 55 acres of upland area and 70 acres of water known as Masonville Cove (Figure 2). The Cove area is undeveloped and used by fish and wildlife species; however, prior to the initial cleanup, the area contained substantial amounts of debris from unauthorized dumping. Cleanup and enhancement of this area are one part of the extensive compensatory mitigation plan for the DMCF. The identification of Masonville as the location of the next DMCF location for Baltimore Harbor, as well as the development of the Masonville mitigation package, was an involved process, which required extensive coordination and outreach between MPA, the public, and the regulatory agencies. The State of Maryland Dredged Material Management Program (DMMP) is a comprehensive process used to establish long-term dredging placement plans and identify potential new placement sites. The DMMP relies on input from a variety of stakeholders including citizens and environmental groups, and state and federal agencies. Stakeholders are organized into three committees (the Executive Committee, the Management Committee, and the Citizens Advisory Committee) and are supported by several working groups, including the Bay Enhancement Working Group (BEWG) and the Harbor Team, that are tasked with identifying, studying, reviewing, and prioritizing potential dredged material placement sites from technical and community perspectives (Figure 3). The MPA s consideration of the views and information provided by persons interested in potential DMCF sites promotes open communication and enables better planning and decision-making by MPA. Resource and regulatory agencies, organizations, and members of the public with an interest in the Masonville DMCF and associated mitigation elements participated in the process from decision making for selection of the site of the Masonville DMCF thru the planning for the associated mitigation and community enhancement projects. Public involvement and agency coordination were integrated into each stage of project development and planning, and consultation and coordination with all interested parties continues as the Masonville project progresses through construction and implementation. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Members of the public involved in the planning and implementation of the Masonville DMCF and the associated mitigation and community enhancement projects included a diverse group of organizations and individuals, ranging from large government agencies to local citizens living in the vicinity of the DMCF. Participants varied in their degree and type of involvement with the project, as well as their backgrounds and perspectives. Participants belonged to five identifiable groups: agency representatives, local government, defined groups, educational institutions, and private citizens. MPA initiated efforts to include community representatives in the planning of the proposed facility, including planning for the necessary engineering and environmental studies. Harbor Team In order to include the public in the planning process, MPA initiated the formation of a special committee of the DMMP, known as the Harbor Team, in December The specific charge of the Harbor Team was to identify sufficient dredged material management alternatives to annually manage 1.1 mcm (1.5 mcy) of harbor dredged material for a 20-year period. The Harbor Team is comprised of local citizen groups, government agencies, local industry, and non-profit groups. The Harbor Team members include: local government leaders from Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City, and Baltimore County; representatives from citizen groups and associations from Brooklyn, Curtis Bay, Dundalk, Marley Neck, North Point, Turners Station, and Cox Creek; and businesses in the area with investment or interest in dredged material projects such as International Steel Group (Severstal), Domino Sugar, the National Aquarium in Baltimore, Rukert Terminals, and W. R. Grace & Co. Other members of the Harbor Team included representatives from various watershed associations, Living Classrooms Foundation, and the Association of Maryland Docking Pilots. 269

3 Figure 1. Masonville DMCF project vicinity map 270

4 Figure 2. Masonville DMCF, Masonville Cove, and adjacent land area Governor of Maryland Executive Committee Management Committee Bay Enhancement Working Group Harbor Team Masonville CAC Figure 3. Maryland State DMMP committee structure 271

5 The Harbor Team initially met every third Thursday from March through October 2003 in order to develop a recommendation to the State s Executive and Management Committees on future placement options for material dredged from Baltimore Harbor. At these meetings, the Team received technical presentations on topics including, but not limited to, sediment quality in the Harbor, socioeconomic information on the areas surrounding the potential placement sites, and natural resources in those areas. Following the development of an initial list of potential placement and management options, the BEWG ranked these options on the basis of environmental and quality of life factors. After taking into account the BEWG ranking, the Harbor Team recommended Masonville as one of the sites to move forward for further study as a potential location to construct a DMCF. To date, meetings of the Harbor Team still occur quarterly. During the meetings, the Team receives updates on the status of current MPA projects, and continues to assist and provide input on the planning of future dredged material management options. Public Meetings There were both formal and informal public meetings held throughout the Masonville permitting process. Parallel to the Harbor Team meetings, MPA met with representatives of Brooklyn and Curtis Bay, which are the communities in closest proximity to the DMCF. These meetings began with a presentation to the Board of the Brooklyn and Curtis Bay Coalition which was the local community development corporation. The strong support of this Board set the stage for opportunities for community input. The Coalition sponsored three town meetings to discuss the project and to solicit input on the community enhancements, as well as attendance at community association meetings and one-on-one meetings with individuals who sought additional information. Out of these meetings emerged the communities desire for an urban nature center with public access to the waterfront and an education/community center. The community members input throughout the planning stage of the project, through informal meetings, was key to the strong support at the public meetings described below. Additionally, many of the community members continue to participate by serving on the Masonville Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). Throughout the permitting process for the Masonville DMCF, three formal public meetings were held in order to present information on the project and solicit comments from the public. The first of these meetings was a public scoping meeting held in June This meeting was followed by two public hearings in June and July The three public meetings were attended by a variety of citizens and representatives from local businesses, interest groups, and resource agencies. Verbal and written comments provided during these meetings and during the subsequent public comment period were generally positive, mainly due to the extensive communication MPA had with the stakeholders and public throughout the development of the project concept and plans for the Masonville DMCF at Harbor Team meetings and subsequent formal and informal meetings with the public and community groups. One of the comments received from the public indicated that the citizens from the residential areas in close proximity to the Masonville DMCF advocated the creation of an oversight committee for the Masonville project. The MPA supported the community in this request and worked with the community to develop the Masonville CAC. Masonville Citizens Advisory Committee The Masonville CAC was formed in January 2008 to allow citizens to provide ongoing guidance to MPA on the construction and operation of the Masonville DMCF and the associated mitigation and community enhancement projects. The members of the Masonville CAC include people who live and/or work in the area surrounding Masonville. Committee members include citizens from the nearby communities of Brooklyn and Curtis Bay, administrators from local schools, representatives of local community groups, as well as representatives from real estate agencies, investment firms, and neighboring businesses. The mission statement of the Masonville CAC was adopted unanimously on April 22, 2008 and reads: The Mission of the Masonville DMCF CAC is to provide a forum for communication, advice, oversight and support among the stakeholders in the Masonville DMCF and Environmental Education Center (EEC) site of the Baltimore Harbor s Dredged Material Management Program. Invested stakeholders include the Harbor Team and the communities using the site and the Cove, including the citizens, businesses, churches, schools and other community organizations 272

6 who are interested in helping to fulfill the needs and goals of the Harbor Team in a way which promotes, protects and restores the environmental integrity of Masonville Cove, the Patapsco River and the Chesapeake Bay. The Masonville CAC currently meets quarterly. During the meetings, the members receive updates from MPA, the project team, and other parties working on projects related to the construction, operations, or mitigation and community enhancement projects for the Masonville DMCF. An example of some of the recent presentation topics heard at the Masonville CAC meetings include dike construction, dredging activities, permitting, Masonville Cove Environmental Education Center construction and use, site access, landside and soil cleanup, biological surveys, and exterior monitoring. During each meeting, the members are given the opportunity to ask questions and express either their concerns or the concerns of the group they are representing. The CAC meetings are a useful tool to ensure that the lines of communication continue to remain open between the public and MPA throughout the construction and operation of the Masonville DMCF and the implementation of the associated mitigation and community enhancement projects. Bay Enhancement Working Group REGULATOR INVOLVEMENT The BEWG played a critical role in the selection of Masonville as the next placement site by providing a technical and scientific evaluation of the list of potential placement options developed by the Harbor Team. The BEWG is a technical working group that is tasked with identifying, studying, reviewing, and prioritizing potential dredged material placement sites. The BEWG provides support to the committees of the Maryland State DMMP, as well as the regulatory agencies, through their specialized expertise and experience with environmental issues related to placement of dredged material. BEWG members represent resource, management and regulatory agencies at the federal and state level, as well as stakeholder groups including fishermen and communities. Members of the BEWG include representatives from the following organizations: Aberdeen Proving Grounds Baltimore City Department of Planning Baltimore Development Corporation Chesapeake Bay Foundation DMMP Citizens Advisory Committee Maryland Board of Public Works (BPW) Maryland Charter Boat Association Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) Maryland Geological Survey (MGS) Maryland Port Administration (MPA) Maryland Saltwater Sportsfishermen s Association Maryland Waterman s Association National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Upper Bay Charter Captains Association Utilizing Maryland s existing DMMP procedure, the BEWG ranked the harbor placement options developed by the Harbor Team on the basis of environmental and quality of life factors. Throughout this process, members of the BEWG used their technical expertise, supplemented with new biological and environmental data and socioeconomic information presented by the MPA s consultant team, to rank each alternative using a technical matrix. The matrix included environmental and socioeconomic factors, and was specifically tailored for harbor options, by including factors such as aesthetics, as well as safety and human health impacts due to the proximity of population centers to these options. 273

7 Joint Evaluation Committee Following the ranking by the BEWG and the recommendation from the Harbor Team that Masonville move forward as the next site for harbor dredged material placement, MPA met with the Joint Evaluation Committee (JE) to request guidance on identifying potential issues with the project, required permits, and a relative timetable. The JE consists of representatives from state and federal resource and regulatory agencies including: Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Commission (CBCAC) Maryland Board of Public Works (BPW) Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) The JE meets monthly to discuss projects that will have impacts to the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and provides recommendations to regulatory agencies on how to permit these projects while protecting the watershed. Prior to receiving the state and federal permits to construct the Masonville DMCF, MPA and the project team met with the JE approximately twelve (12) times in a two year period to present the project details and obtain approval on the mitigation that would be required to offset the impacts to 141 acres in the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area. MPA and the project team continue to provide updates to the JE on the construction and discuss changes to the mitigation projects. Any modification to the approved mitigation projects are first presented to the JE for input, then ultimately approval, before submitting the formal request for a change to the permitting agencies USACE and MDE. Coordination with Regulatory Agencies MDE and USACE are the two agencies with regulatory authority on construction of the Masonville DMCF and the associated mitigation projects. The construction and mitigation projects are permitted under a tidal wetlands license, water quality certification, and nontidal wetlands license issued by MDE, and a Section 10/404 Individual Permit issued by USACE. Prior to the issuance of these permits, MDE and USACE required MPA to hold the public hearings discussed previously, in order to ensure that public concerns were heard and addressed. Additionally, while the Masonville mitigation package includes projects that will benefit the environment, there is also a portion of the package related to community enhancements. The community enhancements stemmed from comments and input from the neighboring communities, which were heard and acted upon by the MPA and the regulatory agencies. The regulatory agencies ensure that throughout facility construction, human health and the environment are protected, and that the mitigation and community enhancement projects are complete. MPA and regulatory agencies continue to work together using a combination of formal and informal communication to ensure that projects are completed as specified in the permits. The process of open communication between MPA and the regulatory agencies also provides the regulators with the ability to respond accurately to any public questions or concerns that may arise. Additionally, MPA submits monthly and yearly reports to keep MDE and the USACE abreast of the status of the construction and mitigation projects. CONTINUED ROLE OF THE PUBLIC AND REGULATORY AGENCIES As the construction of the Masonville DMCF nears completion, operations begin, and the mitigation and community enhancement projects progress, there will be a continued role for the public and regulatory agencies. Public involvement will continue through the regular meetings of the Harbor Team and Masonville CAC, as well as through continued informal communication between MPA and the citizens living and working in the project vicinity. Inevitably, throughout the life of the project, situations will arise that will require modifications to the 274

8 existing plans and schedules presented to and agreed upon by the public. Throughout the process of operating a DMCF and constructing mitigation and community enhancement projects, the MPA has committed to an open line of communication to the public. This open communication will reassure the public that the DMCF will be operated in a manner that will protect the safety of the public and environment, and the benefits of the mitigation and community enhancement projects will come to fruition in a timely manner while proving to be an asset to the community and ecosystem. In many ways, the regulatory agencies have the same overarching concerns as the public when it comes to constructing, operating, and mitigating for the Masonville DMCF. The regulatory agencies will continue to be involved throughout the life of the project, as well, to ensure the protection of the human health and the environment. Regulatory agencies will oversee the project as it relates to the permits, and will require MPA to comply with the items in the permit, as well as construct and maintain the approved mitigation and community enhancement projects. The regulatory agencies sought out opinion and approval from the public and resource agencies throughout the permitting process for the Masonville DMCF, and will continue to request input from these groups as the Masonville project moves forward. CONCLUSIONS The process of selecting and permitting Masonville as the next location to construct a DMCF for material dredged from Baltimore Harbor involved extensive coordination between MPA, the public, and the regulatory agencies. Because of the extensive communication throughout each phase of the process, the Masonville project has experienced an unprecedented showing of public support for a major construction project. The public wrote and submitted letters supporting the Masonville project, and encouraged elected officials to do the same. The regulatory agencies took note of the public support, and ultimately, MPA obtained the necessary permits to construct the Masonville DMCF in a timeframe that would meet the state s dredged material placement needs. The success of the Masonville DMCF has also provided the local communities with a sense of trust and respect toward the MPA, which in turn will only benefit the MPA as new Baltimore Harbor placement sites are needed. REFERENCES Harbor Team Final Report of the Harbor Team to the Management Committee and Executive Committee of Maryland s Dredged Material Management Program. Baltimore, MD. October. Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) Maryland Department of Transportation Safe Passage Website. [Online]. Available: (last accessed 1 March 2010). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Tiered Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Masonville Dredged Material Containment Facility Baltimore, Maryland. Baltimore, Maryland. May. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The key Maryland Port Administration individuals responsible for the Masonville DMCF are acknowledged as follows: Frank Hamons Steve Storms Nathaniel Brown Dave Bibo Katrina Jones The authors would also like to express their appreciation to the members of the Harbor Team and the Masonville CAC for their continued support of this project. 275