CONTACT
US!
This site |
MIAMI
RIVER COMMISSION DREDGING COMMITTEE MINUTES: Minutes of meeting |
SEP. 20, 2001 10:00 AM (THIS IS A PUBLIC DOCUMENT) |
|
The Miami River Commission Dredging Working Group meeting was called to order at 10 am in the Library map room of the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science located at 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, FL. The attendee list is attached. |
|
||
Dick Bunnell and Scott Mitchell
opened the meeting and all attendees made self-introductions.
Dick welcomed everyone and stated with the recent events that
have adversely impacted the economy of South Florida (fewer tourists in
hotels, on cruise ships, etc.) that this dredging project has become more
important to the community to help maintain a diversified economy. Dick also expressed concern that there is a possibility that
the project may lose funding as the state may require return of state
funds that are not obligated, such as some of the $5.25 million the
state has provided to Miami-Dade County for the dredging project.
He encouraged the group to move forward with the project as
promptly as possible.
Dick then asked Jerry Scarborough, Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), to tell us where the ACOE is with the project, what they need from us and what we can do for them. Jerry wanted to comment on the Environmental and Economic Studies. He reported that the draft Dredged Material Management Plan, with an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is under internal review by ACOE. After internal review, it will be coordinated with all of the environmental agencies, both state and federal, and placed in the federal register for a 45-day comment period. After the comment period is over a final EIS is completed. A critical piece of the EIS is the Fish & Wildlife Coordination Act Report. Basically the U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service is responsible for the production of the report, however, due to their workload the ACOE & Fish & Wildlife Services agreed the ACOE would complete the report utilizing the services of the ACOE consultant, Gulf Engineers & Consultants. This report was completed and has been in the hands of Fish & Wildlife Service for 90 days. Unfortunately the Service has not provided any comment on the report and is causing a delay in the EIS approval process. This document is critical and without any comment received by FWS, the ACOE is concerned the project timeline may slip. David Miller stated that Mr. Brad Rieck, of the Fish & Wildlife Service was asked to attend this meeting, but he declined. The ACOE is still looking at a December completion date for the Dredge Material Management Plan. Jerry next discussed the status of the Water Quality Certification (WQC) and was pleased that Mr. Kent Edwards, from the Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection was present. Jerry said the ACOE has been working very closely with Kent who is reviewing the ACOE application. Jerry feels the process is moving forward and is hoping the WQC will be approved by the December time frame. Jerry then asked Kent if he would like to comment on the process. Kent explained the WQC process and the key issues. Specifically, he explained the WQC rules are in Florida Administrative Code, Chapter 62-302. This sets rules for types of water bodies, Class 1 through Class 5, and superimposed on the Miami River is an additional level of protection in that the river is also part of the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve and therefore receives some of the highest protection of any water body in the state. The Miami River is defined as an “Outstanding Florida Water”. Kent explained that good sense will prevail in FDEP and anyone involved with the river understands it is more of an industrial river than an aquatic preserve, however, the high water quality protection standards will need to be met at the mouth of the river. That is the area that is most critical from the agency’s perspective. Good justification for all WQC decisions is necessary. Kent explained that reports already show degradation of Biscayne Bay near the mouth of the Miami River; however, he cannot approve any WQC that would create further degradation of the Bay. FDEP must receive assurances, to the extent that is reasonable, that dredging will minimize any additional releases of contamination into the Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. Kent wanted to address the numerous analyses of the Miami River sediment and water quality samples. Kent explained and FDEP must justify all their decisions and he was concerned with the diversity of the samples, some showing clean areas and others showing very contaminated areas. The group explained that we consider the entire river to be contaminated and will not request one area to be considered clean and another area contaminated. Kent explained the option of a “conceptual” WQC permit. Both he and Jerry agreed that this might be a good option for this particular project as the Corps will be putting out the bid under an RFP process and the final disposal and dredging process will only be known after the ACOE awards the contract. After the contract is awarded then the final details of the WQC will be established in an “individual permit”. Jerry Scarborough stated this would be OK with the ACOE, because this shows that the state agrees that this dredging project can be permitted. Kent explained that this WQC will also require a variance and he feels confident that this project can go forward. Discussion ensued. Jerry stated they would need the conceptual permit by the December time frame to maintain the project timeline. Kent explained he could not guarantee this “conceptual” WQC by December, but felt this time frame was doable. Dick Bunnell then explained that one of the major issues for the local sponsor is the requirement by the ACOE that they will not dredge within 25 feet of any manmade structure without approval of the local sponsor. For the dredging project to be worthwhile the county wants to dredge within 10 feet of any manmade structure and even closer if the property owner requested. The county has asked the Miami River Commission (MRC) to assist with the public notification of the 10-foot setback that is necessary for the project to be worthwhile. Dick asked Roman about the status of the utility meeting of all entities that have utilities crossing the river. Roman was not aware of the schedule, but stated he would find out and advise David Miller. (After the meeting, Roman promptly provided the utility meeting information to David Miller. The meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 23 at 10 am in the Stephen P. Clark Bldg. in conference room 18-3). Representatives from DOT explained that it is critical for utilities to be aware of the dredging project. They advised the group that lead times to buy new cable to improve their river crossings may take 6-8 months, so the earlier utilities are notified the better. The ACOE explained that their requirement for any river crossing for the federal navigable channel must be 6 feet below the bottom of the river (6 feet below grade) and any utility not meeting that standard is not in compliance with the required permits. The group was concerned that not all utility crossings were in compliance with the ACOE requirements. Bottom line is that a utility meeting is essential. Discussion ensued. Roman Gastesi was not aware of the status of the land acquisition and leasing of property for the dredging project. Land Acquisition is the full responsibility of the non-federal sponsor and Roman stated he would have that information for the next meeting. Discussion ensued about the status of the state funding for the dredging project. The group was concerned that if the county has not obligated the funds or advised the state of the progress of the project (with dredging work anticipated to start in the summer of 2002) that the state may take back the funds, due to their current funding needs. Jerry Scarborough stated that dredging up to10 feet from a manmade structure would be fine with the ACOE. If a property owner wanted to have the ACOE dredge closer than 10 feet then the property owner must grant a release of liability. Dredging close to manmade structures may be appropriate for the upper section of the river in the marine industrial area. Discussion ensued about dredging outside the federal navigable channel and the ACOE advised the group (for at least the tenth time!) that if the county, city or any other entity wanted to dredge outside the navigable channel that the funding would have to be 100% from the entity requesting the dredging and the entity would have to obtain their own WQC permit. Once that was done the ACOE could easily add it to their navigable channel-dredging project. The ACOE stated that this dredging project dredges soft material only and does not cut or dredge rock. The next dredging meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, October 24, 2001 at 10 am at this same location (Rosenstiel School). No new business came before the group and the meeting was adjourned at Noon |
HOME
CALENDARS
ABOUT THE RIVER
ABOUT THE COMMISSION
DREDGING
GREENWAYS |