Docstoc

ATTACHMENT I - Maryland Department of Natural Resources

Document Sample
ATTACHMENT I - Maryland Department of Natural Resources Powered By Docstoc
					Annotated Agenda – Meeting Snapshot
Briefing for CBP Executive Council – June 3rd, 2010
Denotes agenda topic and time
Denotes Issues Specific to Maryland or suggested Response
Denotes Additional Briefing Materials


 Please Note: The dress code for the day is “Business Casual” as the program will include an opportunity for the
  Executive Council Members to participate in a “hands-on” restoration event along-side students from the Living
  Classrooms Foundation. Boots and gloves will be provided.

PARKING LOGISTICS
Executive Council members will be dropped off at the main entrance to the Living Classrooms Foundation Building at
1417 Thames Street, Baltimore, MD 21231 and escorted to the main meeting room. EC member vehicles will then be
parked in reserved spaces at the Foundation. For other participants, pay parking can be found 1.5 blocks away at 1530
Thames Street or at 934 S. Caroline Street.

INFORMATION ABOUT THE SITE
The Living Classrooms Foundation is a Baltimore-Washington based non-profit educational organization that provides
hands-on education and job training, using urban, natural, and maritime resources as “living classrooms.” The Living
Classrooms Foundation Building is adjacent to the former Baltimore Chrome Works Facility, a Superfund Site, where
Chromium ore was processed to produce chromium chemicals until 1954. Now, the site is on the verge of reuse with a
$400M redevelopment project. Harbor Point will include green design office buildings, a hotel, a waterfront park, a
public promenade and green space.

A one pager on the Allied/Honeywell Site Remediation and Redevelopment at Harbor Point is include under Tab N.

GOALS OF THE MEETING
The Executive Council Meeting will provide an opportunity for each of the Bay leaders to:

   Highlight progress in meeting the first 2-Year Milestones since their adoption in May 2009;
   Privately discuss with Chesapeake Bay Program Advisory Committees their thoughts and concerns on
    continuing to improve upon accountability and adaptive management of overall Bay restoration;
   Privately discuss the “State of the Program” report with the interim Bay Program Office Director;
   Privately view “ChesapeakeStat,” similar to Maryland BayStat, prior to it being released to the public today;
   Discuss the key components of the Chesapeake Bay Executive Order Restoration Strategy;
   Provide public remarks and answer questions from the press;
   Engage in a hands-on restoration project at the meeting location to showcase urban restoration practices with
    students from Federal Hill Preparatory Academy, Hampstead Hill Academy, and The Crossroads School

OVERVIEW THE PROGRAM AND TIMING
There are four parts to the program:

11:00 – 12:00   Private meeting for State of Program, Advisory Committees reports
12:00 – 1:15    Private lunch (important topics, ChesapeakeStat walk-through)
1:15 – 2:00     Hands-on restoration work for EC members
2:00 – 3:00     Public Remarks and News conference



                                                                                                                        1
MEETING PARTICIPANTS
 Representing EPA, Administrator Lisa Jackson
 Representing Virginia, Governor Robert McDonnell
 Representing the Chesapeake Bay Commission, Senator Thomas “Mac” Middleton
 Representing Washington D.C., Mayor Adrian M. Fenty
 Representing Delaware, Collin O’Mara, Secretary for Natural Resources and Environmental Control
 Representing Pennsylvania, John Hines, Deputy Undersecretary for Water Management
 Representing New York, James Tierney, Assistant Commissioner for Water Resources
 Representing West Virginia, TBD
 Representing the USDA, Ann Mills, Deputy Undersecretary for Natural Resources and Environment
 Represent the Chesapeake Bay Program, James Edward, Acting Director for the Chesapeake Bay Program




                                                                                                       2
Annotated Agenda – Morning Session
Briefing for CBP Executive Council – June 3rd, 2010

10:45 – 11:00 am        ARRIVAL AND PARKING – Living Classrooms Foundation, Baltimore
11:00 -11:05    Administrator Jackson provides welcome and agenda review
11:05-11:15     Local Action Video Showcase
        DISCUSSION ISSUES:
        A video montage will be shown to celebrate the local work being championed throughout the Bay
        watershed to restore and protect the Bay and its many streams, creeks and rivers.


        IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
        For Maryland, this video will highlight the Magothy River Watershed Association (Anne Arundel County), the
        Izaak Walton League of America (Gaithersburg), Evergreen Elementary School (Leonardtown), Kennard
        Elementary School (Centreville). The Magothy River a priority area for the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays
        Trust Fund and the County will be receiving $480,000 in SFY 11 to address stormwater runoff impacts.


11:15-11:35     State of the Program Report and Advisory Committee Reports
        DISCUSSION ISSUE:
        Administrator Jackson will introduce the four speakers, who will each have 5 minutes for their presentations.
        The questions/comments will be addressed in the open discussion following the last presentation.


        State of the Program Overview: Presented by Jim Edwards, Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program. The
        following is an overview of the key topics to be presented.
               Review of the Chesapeake Bay Barometer
               TMDL Status/Update
               New Bay Modeling Update
               Funding Update
The State of the Program Report is included under Tab E in this briefing binder


        Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Issues: Presented by Jim Elliot, Chair. The following is an overview of the
        key topics to be presented. Maryland’s CAC Members: Rabbi Nina Beth Cardin, Director, Baltimore Jewish
        Environmental Network; Nikki Tinsley - Vice Chair, NT Inc.; Robert Etgen - Eastern Shore Land Conservancy; Verna




                                                                                                                        3
       Harrison - The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment; Charlie Stek - Retired, Senator Paul Sarbanes
       Staff; Neil Wilkie - Davidson Capital Group, and; Jeremy Rothwell - Young Delegate Mentor


              Equity in all Sectors and Levels of Government to Implement the TMDL – All source sectors have to do
               their part in reducing nutrients and sediment inputs.
              Advocate for Accountability – Advocate for clear, transparent accountability measures.
              “Do No Harm” in regards to the rivers and the living resources that citizens relate to and care about.
               Address issues such as the Conowingo Dam, Marcellus Shale, added pollution from stormwater and the
               TMDL.
The Citizens Advisory Committee Report is included under Tab F.


       Scientific Advisory Committee (STAC) Issues: Presented by Denice Wardrop, Chair. The following is an
       overview of the key topics to be presented. Maryland’s Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee
       representatives include: Bill Dennison, UMD Center for Environmental Science and Russ Brinsfield, University of
       Maryland. At-large Appointees include: Gerrit Knaap, University of Maryland; Doug Lipton, University of
       Maryland; Michael Paolisso, University of Maryland; Larry Sanford UMCES; David Secor, UMCES; Lisa Wainger,
       UMCES, and; Claire Welty, UMBS.
              Address Cross-cutting Themes such as climate change, the social sciences, monitoring and tipping
               points.
              How do you propose to integrate Social Factors, Information and Alternative models of system into
               Restoration Effort, milestones and consequences?
The Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee Reports under Tab F.


       Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) Issues: Presented by Tommy Wells, former Chair. The following
       is an overview of the key topics to be presented. Maryland’s Local Government Advisory Committee Members
       include: Sheila Finlayson - City of Annapolis; Mary Ann Lisanti - Chair, Harford County Council; Craig Moe - City
       of Laurel; Kelly Porter - Vice Chair, Seat Pleasant City Council; Robert Willey - Town of Easton, and; Bruce
       Williams, City of Takoma Park
              Circuit Rider Development – EPA has funded two Circuit Rider demonstration projects as called for by
               LGAC. Both approaches promise to overcome the barrier of a lack of technical assistance to help local
               governments implement effective restoration projects on the ground. A “Circuit Rider” is a term used
               for a technical expert that provides training and assistance to local communities for a specific
               geographic region. In this case, the assistance provided include watershed and land use planning
               assistance.



                                                                                                                           4
              Effective Stormwater Management – LGAC encourages the development of useful regulations, with
               uniform standards for urban and rural areas, and asks jurisdictions to implement regulations that will
               meet the Bay’s water quality goals.
              Local Involvement in TMDL/WIP Implementation – LGAC insists that local governments throughout the
               Bay watershed be more involved in any discussions about developing and implementing TMDLs in the
               Bay region, especially if, as expected, TMDLs may be allocated down to the city, municipal, or county
               level in one or more of the jurisdictions in the Bay Agreement.
The Local Government Advisory Committee Reports under Tab F.


11:35-12:00    State of the Program Report and Advisory Committee Open Discussion


       Maryland Responses to the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Issues:
              Equity in all Sectors of Government to Implement the TMDL –

               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                 These ambitious plans will only be successful with the full commitment and involvement of our
                    federal and state agencies, county governments, municipalities, soil conservation districts, NGOS
                    and our businesses and citizens.
                 We are encouraged by President Obama’s new Executive Order Strategy, which calls for an
                    unprecedented level of Federal cooperation and leadership for the Chesapeake Bay, and
                    significantly raises expectations for success.
                 Federal efforts must complement and augment state and local efforts and not duplicate them.
              Advocate for Accountability

               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                BayStat has made Maryland the watershed leader in accountability and has been held up as a model
                   for the Program and individual states.
                To ensure that we are accurately tracking agricultural BMPs, we recently created Maryland’s
                   Conservation Tracker, a comprehensive inventory of agricultural conservation practices funded by
                   Federal and State cost-share since 2000. A protocol is under development for inventorying non-
                   government funded conservation practices for TMDL tracking.


              “Do No Harm”
               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                Regarding Conowingo Dam, Maryland has identified a series of studies related to sediment
                   storage behind the dam, sediment transport, water quality, habitat and living resource issues



                                                                                                                        5
                   that will be addressed by the study applicant over the next 2 years. Addressing the sediment
                   behind Conowingo will be a challenging issue both technically and financially.
                In regards to Marcellus Shale drilling, we recognize that there is a potential for negative
                   impacts to our sensitive resources if we do not carefully examine all aspects of the process.
                   We are thoroughly reviewing all drilling applications through both MDE and DNR. Currently
                   four applications are under review.
                Maryland’s stormwater program leads the region and positions the State to be able to more easily
                   meet additional federal requirements that EPA has agreed to develop based on the settlement
                   agreement and Executive Order Strategy between now and 2012.
Additional information on Maryland’s Stormwater Program is included under Tab Q.
Additional information on the CBF Settlement Agreement is included under Tab L.


       Maryland Responses to the Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) Issues:
              Address Cross-cutting Themes such as climate change, the social sciences, monitoring and tipping
               points.
              How do you propose to integrate Social Factors, Information and Alternative models of system into
               Restoration Effort, milestones and consequences?


               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                  The long-term nature of our monitoring program will provide insights to the impacts of climate
                   change and potential tipping points on the ability of the Bay to respond to restoration and
                   protection activities over time.
                  Our long-term Climate Action Plan includes strategies for adaptation and response to climate
                   impacts. We are currently working to incorporate these factors into our land conservation decision-
                   making and our long-term restoration strategies.


       Maryland Responses to the Local Government Advisory Committee (LGAC) Issues:
              Circuit Rider Development

               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                In Maryland, we launched a similar effort in the fall of 2008 in response to the passage of the
                   Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Trust Fund called the Watershed Assistance Collaborative.
                   Through the Collaborative we have been able to provide nearly $500,000 in planning and design
                   grants and assisted more then 20 communities in their local restoration efforts.



                                                                                                                     6
                As we have advocated through our comments on the Executive Order Strategy we need to continue
                   to integrate programming, with federal, state, local and grassroots organizations targeting resources
                   and personnel to the same geographic areas wherever possible. This approach will greatly increase
                   the opportunity for measurable success in the shortest period of time.
Background material on the Watershed Assistance Collaborative is included under Tab S.

              Effective Stormwater Management.

               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                Maryland’s stormwater program leads the region and positions the State to be able to more easily
                   meet additional federal requirements that EPA has pledged to develop between now and 2012.
                New Requirements for New Development: As of May, Maryland now requires use of
                   "environmental site design" to the maximum extent practicable. This means that where feasible,
                   management techniques that keep water on-site and allow water to infiltrate into the ground --
                   vegetated swales, pervious pavers, green roofs -- must be used. Previously, these practices were an
                   option.
                Municipal Stormwater Permits: Because over 95% of stormwater runoff in Maryland comes from
                   already developed land, there is significant regulatory focus on stormwater discharge permits issued
                   to Maryland's 10 largest counties and the State Highway Administration—that require control of
                   stormwater pollution from existing developed land. After several legal challenges, the first of a new
                   generation of permits—for Montgomery County—went into place in January. Permits for the other
                   10 jurisdictions will be issued over the next 2 years.
Additional information on Maryland’s Stormwater Program is included under Tab Q.


              Local Involvement in TMDL/WIP Implementation –

               IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
                Without improved management of the local actions with respect to development and growth on the
                   urban side and agricultural controls on the rural side we will not achieve our goals. Extensive
                   participation by local interests, including county, municipal and town governments, soil
                   conservation districts, the state highway administration and federal facilities is essential.
                We are working to identify the best process for effectively engaging local governments through two
                   pilot projects (Anne Arundel County and Caroline County).
                Maryland has obtained services through the EPA contractor, TetraTech, for the pilot project. The
                   pilot projects will assist us in developing a better understanding of the issues and possible solutions



                                                                                                                             7
                   along with developing a template for the allocation process that can be applied to other
                   jurisdictions.
                We are in the process of creating an advisory committee lead by Tributary Team representatives and
                   local governments to help guide the development/implementation of the WIPs.
Additional information on Maryland’s Watershed Implementation Plan Pilot Status is included under Tab K.


12:00-12:15    Chesapeake STAT Presentation


       DISCUSSION ISSUES:
       Administrator Jackson will introduce ChesapeakeStat as an effort that was built off of the work of BayStat and
       introduce Governor O’Malley and ask that he share his experiences and lessons learned of BayStat.
              Introduction of Chesapeake STAT by Administrator Jackson
              Governor O’Malley to share Lessons Learned from BayStat and Maryland’s STAT process
              Demonstration of key features of the ChesapeakeStat Website

               A NOTE ABOUT CHESAPEAKESTAT: ChesapeakeStat is a tool to array data in such a way that progress
               can be continually assessed and that strategies and tactics can be designed and redesigned as new
               information leads to new approaches. The goal of ChesapeakeStat is to improve transparency, so that
               the public can better understand what is going on, recognize gaps in implementation and synchronize
               with ongoing efforts to enhance performance. Like BayStat, ChesapeakeStat will include a public
               website component and will be publically released by EPA Administrator Jackson as part of the Executive
               Council Meeting.
Additional information on Chesapeake Stat is included under Tab G.


               PRESENTATION BY GOVERNOR O’MALLEY
               Administrator Jackson has asked you to provide a brief five minute overview on key elements of
               Maryland’s BayStat/State Stat Process and lessons learned. The purpose of this presentation will be to
               offer some principals for Executive Council Members to consider as they discuss how we can collectively
               use the data and information that we have been collecting and reporting on annually. Your presentation
               will precede a presentation by EPA on Chesapeake Stat as part of the morning session. In addition to the
               remarks provided below, Staff has provided several power point slides that can be used to highlight key
               features of the BayStat website and will be available to use for the Meeting. A live internet feed can be
               made available.
The presentation is provided under Tab D.




                                                                                                                           8
IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
   Like BayStat, ChesapeakeStat should be a process, not just a website. The website serves to provide
    transparency and, therefore, forces us to be accountable, but it is of limited value as a stand-alone.
    It needs to be a process of review, discussions/decisions, and follow-up.
   Recommended Process:
    1. Regular and frequent data submission: States need to agree in advance what programs are
        going to be tracked via ChesapeakeStat, decide on a unified format, and a regular (ex 3rd
        Monday of each month) submission deadline. Recommend not trying to track every Bay related
        program as it will get too complex. Instead limit yourselves to the highest priority programs (2-
        Year Milestone), focus on existing reporting requirements to avoid additional work load for the
        jurisdictions.
    2. Informed review of progress: Submitted data needs to be a) published on website in a regular
        and frequent basis, and b) reviewed by staff sufficiently knowledgable in the programs and
        science to identify problems and issues for discussion.
    3. Frequent, well attended, decision-based meetings: Recommend frequent (quarterly) meetings
        of high-level representatives to review progress. Meetings should be scheduled well in advance
        and not changed unless absolutely necessary. Web conferencing may be a preferred approach.
        In order to be meaningful and effective, meetings should:
            o   Preceeded by a detailed briefing memo from analysts presenting the submitted data,
                analysis, questions, and recommended actions.
            o   Agenda should be limited to a few (< 5) discussion items. One option would be to divide
                tracked programs among meetings – rotating topics between meetings such that each
                major program is addressed at least once/year.
            o   Issues discussed at the meetings should be limited to high level, decision oriented
                discussions.
            o   Time should be provided at the beginning of each meeting to address follow-up items
                from previous meeting (see below)
            o   Stick to the agenda, but allow reasonable flexibility to address last minute, high priority
                items.
    4. Timely follow-up: There will inevitably be items at each meeting which cannot be brought to a
        conclusion during the meeting, but will require more information and analysis before a decision
        can be reached. A follow-up memo should sent out ASAP, like our BayStat follow up memo,




                                                                                                              9
        after the meeting identifying those follow-up items, responsible parties, and charging that
        responses be submitted by a specific date.


   One major difference between BayStat and ChesapeakeStat is that, unlike BayStat (in which the
    Governor is present in review of his cabinet secretaries) the parties present in ChesapeakeStat are
    not directly accountable to each other. This will mean that the group will generally come to
    consensus on issues rather than relying on one person to make a difficult decision. There is
    probably no alternative to this approach, but two considerations to help hold all accountable:
    1. All participants need to agree up front to be committed to the process, to regard it as a serious,
        decision making effort to move Bay restoration forward, and to participate in most meetings.
    2. It may be helpful to post agenda items of upcoming meetings on the website, and then update
        after the meeting with decision items and follow-up actions. Doing so may help keep all
        committed to moving forward.

CHESAPEAKESTAT DEMONSTRATION:
John Wolf, USGS Chesapeake Bay Program Office, will lead a demonstration using ChesapeakeStat
information to review progress in implementing 2005 wastewater permitting approach. Similar to
BayStat’s 2-Year Milestone tracking, this demonstration will walk through wastewater performance Bay-
wide. With ChesapeakeStat, we will be able to visually see wastewater performance in each jurisdiction.




                                                                                                       10
Annotated Agenda – Private Lunch Session
Briefing for CBP Executive Council – June 3rd, 2010
LUNCH SESSION
12:15-12:20    Clear Room and Transition to Lunch
12:20-1:10     Private / Informal Discussion among Executive Council Members Lead By EPA Administrator
               Jackson
      DISCUSSION ISSUES:
          ChesapeakeStat discussion
          Executive Order Strategy
          Discussion on Progress for 2 Year Milestones
          TMDL/Waterhsed Implementation Plans (WIPs)

      IN THE INTEREST OF MARYLAND:
             Chesapeake Stat Discussion:
                See above comments regarding like BayStat, ChesapeakeStat should be a process, not just a
                   website.
             Executive Order Strategy:
                An unprecedented level of Federal cooperation and leadership for the Chesapeake Bay, and
                   significantly raises expectations for success. The next critical task before all levels of
                   government is to integrate programming, with federal, state, local and grassroots
                   organizations targeting resources and personnel to the same geographic areas wherever
                   possible.
                The creation of new federal “centers” and the creation of new programs for which similar entities
                   exist at the state level need to be carefully reevaluated. Serious consideration should be given to
                   provide federal funding and technical assistance to state programs with similar goals and objectives.
                   The creation of any new federal programs/centers should be evaluated based on their ability to
                   accelerate implementation activities.
                Coordination of Targeting BMP implementation: Every effort should be made by the federal
                   government to complement state targeting initiatives for nutrient/sediment reductions, habitat
                   restoration, land conservation and public access.
                Prioritize Federal Initiatives: It is critical that the federal agencies prioritize the implementation of
                   the multitude of initiatives identified in this strategy. Criteria for prioritization could include
                   nutrient reduction cost effectiveness, willing local and state partners, etc.


                                                                                                                         11
                 Federal 2-year Milestones: The 2-year milestones developed by federal agencies require more
                    definition. It is unclear how the Federal 2-year milestone overlays or offsets plans developed by the
                    States. Are there two sets of plans—a Federal plan and a collection of State plans? Arguably the
                    nutrient reductions realized from BMPs implemented by NRCS in Maryland reduce the level of effort
                    and scope of implementation described in Maryland’s 2-year milestone. If the Federal 2-year
                    milestone simply describes a Bay-Wide level of effort or level of implementation, it is unclear how
                    individual State efforts are affected or benefited. The 2-year milestone process should be modified
                    to incorporate and fully integrate federal efforts into state 2-year milestones, producing one plan.
A briefing on the Executive Order Strategy is included under Tab I.


             Progress on 2 Year Milestones: Given that this year’s meeting is being held one year since the partners
              adopted their first set of 2-year milestones, Administrator Jackson will lead a discussion on how the
              partnership would like to respond to the question, “are you on track to meet your milestone
              commitments?" Given that EPA will likely also be asked to answer this question on behalf of the
              partnership, the Administrator will use time during the private meeting to ensure that EPA’s responses
              reflects the partners' positions as much as possible. With the exception of Washington D.C., Maryland is
              likely to be the only Partner who is in position and will be reporting out on both a programmatic and
              quantitative answer at this time. We provided this information to EPA prior to the meeting using the
              BayStat website and prepared it as part of your remarks.
                 Maryland is 44% (1,650,000 lbs of nitrogen reduced) of the way toward meeting its first two year
                    milestone and is on track to meet 2011 goals (with reductions built in to account for potential
                    shortfalls). Maryland farmers planted 239,000 acres of cover crops in 2009, while poultry farmers
                    transported 52,000 tons of poultry litter out of the watershed, exceeding our milestone goal by 168
                    percent. Maryland’s Bay Restoration Fund provided for the upgrade of over 700 septic systems
                    inside the critical area for a 9,132 pound reduction in nitrogen. Maryland’s storwwater program
                    leads the region. New Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) Permits issued to
                    controlling poultry litter at well over 500 (well over half) of Maryland’s poultry operations for the
                    first time. Maryland is implementing the 2006 Healthy Air Act which requires reductions in
                    emissions of the air pollutants SOx, NOx, mercury and CO2 from the State’s coal-fired power plants.
                    This resulted in significant reductions of atmospheric deposition of nitrogen to the Bay and its
                    tributaries beginning in 2009.
Additional progress information on Maryland’s 2-Year Milestone is provided under Tab H.




                                                                                                                            12
           TMDL/Watershed Implementation Plan Schedules: The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
            leading the development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for nitrogen, phosphorus & sediments to
            the Chesapeake Bay. EPA is requiring states to develop Watershed Implementation Plans (WIPs) in support
            of developing the Bay TMDLs. Development of Phase I WIPs for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL have begun and
            final Phase I WIPs are due in November 2010. Phase II (WIPs) are due in November 2011 and will include
            greater geographic specificity and more detailed and better supported programmatic approaches to
            achieving the specified allocations.
                       Maryland’s on Track: Maryland is well positioned to meet the obligations of the Phase I WIP
                        process.
                       Watershed Implementation Pilots: The WIPs are similar to 2-year milestones for each of the
                        counties. The pilot WIP development in Anne Arundel County and Caroline are identifying
                        issues that will need to be addressed in the more detailed Phase II WIPs.
Additional background material on the TMDL schedule is included under Tab J
Additional background materials on Maryland’s Watershed Implementation Plan Pilot Projects are included under Tab K.


           May 2010 Settlement Agreement between CBF and EPA. This subject may be raised during the private
            session. In summation, the Settlement Agreement is consistent with previous guidance from EPA on the Bay
            restoration. The advantage to CBF is that it documents that intent in a legal document. The major points
            are EPA’s commitment to more stringent stormwater and CAFO regulations, that growth must be addressed
            in the TMDL by offsets or allocations, and that the TMDL must be available for review by Dec. 31, 2010.
                 Because of Maryland’s recent work on CAFOs and stormwater, we should be well positioned on this;
                    can’t say definitively no additional requirements but far less likely to be required in Maryland than
                    other states. In addition, our current 2 – Year Milestone accounted for anticipated loads from
                    growth in our restoration strategy.
Additional background material on the Settlement Agreement between CBF and EPA is included under Tab L.




1:10-1:15       Briefing on Restoration and Press Conference Lead By Chesapeake Bay Program Communications Staff




                                                                                                                        13
Annotated Agenda – Hands-On Restoration Session
Briefing for CBP Executive Council – June 3rd, 2010
1:15    Leave Living Classrooms Building, Walk to Restoration Site
1:20    Arrive at Restoration Site (Living Classrooms East Campus)
As part of the program, Administrator Jackson has asked members of the Executive Council to team up with Baltimore
City Public School students to clear trash from the wetland shoreline and adjacent waters, and to plant native species in
the middle and upper wetlands. This will be the first step in a comprehensive plan to fully restore this valuable urban
habitat. Council members will also work with students to help construct the framework for unique floating wetlands.
Boots and gloves will be provided.


1:20-1:25        Informal Welcome / Project Overview by Living Classrooms President
Living Classrooms’ East Harbor Wetlands, located on the water in historic Fell’s Point, is the last protected tidal wetland
in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. Thanks to a grant from the Chesapeake Bay Trust in 1990, Living Classrooms partnered
students from the Maryland Conservation Corps with professionals from Environmental Concern to regrade the
shoreline and plant trees and marsh grasses. Due to the urban challenges of erosion, litter, and storm water runoff,
continued maintenance of the wetlands is necessary in order for it to thrive. Over the past 20 years, hundreds of
students and other volunteers have been involved in the care of this wetland by removing litter, controlling invasive
species, and doing supplemental plantings. As a result, this area has become a natural habitat for a wealth of wildlife
including birds, turtles, and fish.


Students involved:
All of the participating students are part of Living Classrooms’ Voyage of Exploration Program. Funded by the National
Science Foundation, this science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) program serves nearly 1,000 Baltimore City
students per year with a variety of hands-on, science-based projects.


Tentative participants:
15 fifth graders from Federal Hill Preparatory Academy
10 students from Hampstead Hill Academy
5 students from The Crossroads School
1:25 – 1:55      Restoration Work
1:55    Walk to Press Conference Location




                                                                                                                          14
Annotated Agenda – Press Conference Session
Briefing for CBP Executive Council – June 3rd, 2010

PRESS CONFERENCE SESSION
2:00 – 2:02   Welcome by Baltimore Mayor
2:02-2:10     Administrator Jackson Remarks
2:10-2:15     Governor O’Malley Remarks
Remarks for Press Conference are Provided under Tab B
2:15-2:20     Governor McDonnell Remarks
2:20-2:25     Senator Middleton Remarks
2:25-3:00     Media Question and Answer and Buffer Time
Materials for the Media Question and Answer are Provided under Tab C


EVENT CONCLUDES




                                                                       15

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:8/12/2011
language:English
pages:15