Los Angeles Basin Contaminated Sediments Task Force

Summary of the Implementation Committee Meeting
June 9, 1999

bar4.gif (2919 bytes)

 

Attendees:

Michael Lyons, Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board
Terri Ely, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/Regulatory
Ralph Appy, Port of Los Angeles
Lauma Jurkevics, California Coastal Commission
Dennis Eschen, City of Long Beach
Steven John, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (via phone)

Workplan

The committee reviewed the workplan (revised 12/29/98). We are progressing according to the schedule. In July, we will be presenting the Strategy Adoption Process report to the Task Force for their review and approval. At the Task Force’s September meeting, we will present the Streamlining Report.

Funding

Regional Board budget augmentation: Peter Douglas met with Winston Hickox to discuss CalEPA’s perspective of not allowing a request letter to be sent by the Regional Board to augment its budget. CalEPA remained firm on its decision. Furthermore, Peter decided not to send a letter to the legislators on behalf of the Regional Board. Also, we have no information as to whether Karnette or Lowenthal requested funding to be added to the Regional Board’s budget for Task Force projects.

Corps’ $400,000 request (C-MANC supported): The Port of Long Beach sent its letter of support. No further information is known about the status of this funding. Engineering News-Record’s May 10th issue had an article on the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). The House passed a $4.3 billion measure authorizing Corps of Engineers’ water projects, which included dredging, beach renewal, flood control, and environmental projects and studies. The Senate had also passed a similar version ($2.5 billion). Now the two bills need to be reconciled.

NOAA funding: Coastal Commission staff met with NOAA staff to discuss the Lands Legacy Initiative proposed for FY 2000. NOAA was supportive of identifying confined aquatic disposal sites as a beneficial re-use of coastal waters (making such waters more biologically productive). However, NOAA was also looking for potential watershed pilot studies. Peter Douglas informed NOAA staff of the work the Task Force is doing, as well as the watershed link with the Los Angeles River revitalization – not only in terms of biological enhancement but also pollutant source reduction. NOAA seemed interested in the Los Angeles River, particularly since there are several groups pursuing this revitalization. However, the proposed funding is not yet guaranteed. So we will need to see what happens with this initiative. The ports, however, were not able to send support letters for this NOAA funding.

Other funding: Engineering News-Record’s April 19 issue indicated that there is a move to finance harbor dredging out of the general Treasury. This legislation has the support of the American Association of Port Authorities. However, Ralph indicated that this funding is not likely to be available for environmental or Task Force projects.

Other issues: Tracy Wilcox, who had attended our May meeting, raised questions about the committee’s functions. Concerns of having key players in investigating and obtaining funds for Task Force studies need to be addressed. We will discuss our funding role at the July meeting. The committee recommended we identify two people familiar with funding mechanisms. One person could be Dean Smith (LA County Department of Beaches and Harbors).

Strategy Adoption Process Report

A draft Adoption of Long-Term Management Strategy report was presented to the committee. One issue not addressed in the report was the ports’ involvement. What do they need to do, if anything, to adopt the management strategy? What would be the ports’ expectations during the adoption process? The ports and the City of Long Beach may need to have the strategy legally binding by including it in the Port Master Plans and Local Coastal Program, respectively. The strategy might be more effective if adopted at the local level. This could ease adoption at the Coastal Commission level since the plans and program require concurrence from the Commission. This component would need to be addressed in the report.

The other issue involved USEPA’s and the Corps’ process relating to 404 permits and Corps projects. We need to get a better understanding of the Corps and USEPA processes. Steven believed a joint Memorandum of Agreement was the preferred approach. But we need to also define the timing of the EIS (2 yrs? or timing with Marina del Rey EIS?). How do we include the Corps’ timing of the Marina del Rey EIS with the strategy adoption and incorporate CEQA and NEPA issues?

The goal is to finalize the draft at the July committee meeting in order to have it ready for the July Task Force meeting. Electronic and hard copies were sent to all committee members for comments due June 30th.

Streamlining Report

Copies of the 6/8/99 version of the draft streamlining report were provided to the members. Some of the comments included:

Some of the recommendations included unifying the permitting approach through interagency meetings (or through a Dredge Material Management Office) by indicating that "here is the information we need before we make a decision." We also need to address environmental concerns that Heal the Bay raises. Perhaps we need to frame an issue and look at the data or information related to that issue. The members recommended we include the flow chart Ralph finalized, as well as a flow chart identifying the streamlined process. Michael is willing to develop a sketch to give to Ralph, via Lauma, so he can develop a flow chart.

The goal is to refine the draft and have it ready for the September Task Force meeting. Electronic and hard copies were sent to all committee members for comments due June 30th. It was requested that members provide some alternatives or solutions, evaluate for accuracy, and improve on the language as needed. Some questions to consider included:

Next meeting

July 13, 1999 - 10:00 am – noon, Coastal Commission office (Long Beach)


bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the Contaminated Sediments Task Force Committee Meetings page.

bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the Contaminated Sediments Task Force home page.

bluebull.gif (1028 bytes) Return to the California Coastal Commission's home page.