[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]








                                      CSTRATEGY
                                         OF THE
                                      PENNSYLVANIA
                             COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM











                                   Performed Under the
                        Coastal Zone Enhancement Grants Program
                                       Section 309
                               Coastal Zone Management Act






                                     March 26, 1992










                                                Zan








                                       Prepared by
                              commonwealth of Pennsylvania
         GC               Department of Environmental Resources
         1021             Bureau of Water Resources Management
          I
















































         P4                Division of Coastal Zone Management
         -1992



                                                                                                I --@-i
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                      I
                                             Property Of                                              I
                                    NOAA Coastil Services Ckmtw
                                               Library                                                I
                                                                                                      I


















                               This Assessment of the Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Progr= was funded in part by a grant
                           from the Office of Ocean arid Coastal Resource Management. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
                                                  through the Coasta I Zone Management Act -of 1972. as amanded.















































                                                                                                                       n o A n

                      PENNSYLVANIA










                      PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM


                                  SECTION 309 STRATEGY




                                                                   PAGE



        Introduction                                                  1

        Coastal Hazards                                               2

        Cumulative and Secondary Impacts                            17

        Public Access                                               34


        Wetlands                                                    41

        Cost Summary                                                46

        Lake Erie Coastal Zone Map                                  48

        Delaware Estuary Coastal Zone Map                           49











                                     Introduction


            This document contains the Section 309 final strategy for the
       Pennsylvania Coastal Zone Management Program (CZM). The strategy
       focuses on four priority enhancement areas: coastal hazards (CH),
       cumulative and secondary impacts (CSI), public access (PA), and
       wetlands. The following information is provided for each enhancement
       area: summary of the problem, program change, justification for the
       monies.
       change, cost, work schedule, and likelihood for success.`

            After a thorough review by CZM and NOAA, the draft strategy was
       significantly altered for the final version. Specifically, the changes
       involve special area management planning (SAMP), geographic areas of
       particular concern (GAPC) and wetlands.

            In the draft strategy, SAMP was a priority enhancement area. Our
       proposal was to address the Bucks County disposal sitesand the Presque
       Isle Bay issues under SAMP. NOAA's review, however, pointed out that
       although both were important projects, they did not qualify strongly as
       SAMPs because they lacked multi-issue and collaborative processes. we
       agreed with this finding, and after discussion with and concurrence
       from NOAA staff, decided to address these issues under cumulative and
       secondary impacts.

            Use of the GAPC designation process for several of the enhancement
       areas was also changed. We agreed with NOAA's assertion that using
       GAPCs was weak because, in general, they cannot be made "enforceable."
       Therefore, in concurrence with NOAA staff, we have downplayed the
       importance of GAPC usage except to complement more enforceable tools
       when addressing the priority enhancement areas.

            The wetlands enhancement area was also changed from the original
       version. our initial approach was to develop new interagency agree-
       ments for additional coordination with local and county governments and
       county conservation districts. These new agreements, which would be
       enforced by the creation of a new wetlands policy, would provide the
       necessary review by CZM or local/county officials to protect wetlands
       from locally permitted development projects. After consultation with
       NOAA, we agreed that these changes could best be handled with 306 monies.

            The "new" program change for wetlands is actually an extension of
       an original change from the draft strategy. CZM will explore the
       expansion of the coastal boundaries to include all wetlands that are
       hydrologically connected to coastal wetlands. This change will provide
       better protection from land and water resources outside the coastal
       boundaries that impact coastal wetlands. The other priority
       enhancement areas -- CH, PA, and CSI -- have slight modifications,
       specifically in the work schedules. Certain work tasks will be
       Implemented earlier in the 5-year work plan than originally proposed.

            The final strategy also contains specific task descriptions for
       the areas scheduled for work in 1992. These descriptions reiterate
       what is stated in the strategy, while offering a more detailed view of
       the work to be performed.


                                           1









                      PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT
                               SECTION 309 STRATEGY
                                 COASTAL HAZARDS


    1A. Problem Summary

    The major problems affecting the management of coastal hazards in
    Pennsylvania's coastal zones are improper structure siting (ISS) and
    unrestricted bluff development (UBD). Both of these problems are
    associated with the Lake Erie coastal zone. As discussed in the final
    assessment, the coastal hazards in the Delaware Estuary coastal zone
    are not current (or significant enough) problems and, therefore, will
    not be addressed through the strategy.

    The major factors causing ISS along the bluffs of Lake Erie are
    incomplete monitoring of bluff recession (which may result in
    inaccurate erosion rate data), inconsistent local official decision
    making, and lack of a single file source of all legal interpretations
    of the Bluff Recession and Setback Act (BRSA) for both CZM and
    municipal reference. These factors can cause structures regulated by
    the BRSA to be placed within the bluff recession hazard area in a way
    that is inconsistent with the act.

    UBD on the unregulated bluff face ranges from construction of
    structures, roads, and stairways to devegetation of forested areas.
    These activities, which often destabilize the bluff, can initiate or
    accelerate bluff recession. Even though these activities are not
    currently occurring at a high rate, Coastal Zone Management (CZM)
    strongly feels, as the bluff areas become more populated, the
    unregulated bluff face will experience increased use by a population
    wanting access to the lake.

    1B. Program Change

    Each program change will fall under either of the major management
    problems of ISS or UBD.

    Amend "Shoreline Erosion and Floodincr - Erie County" and Coastal Hazard
    Area Policy I-A-1 to Incorporate New or Updated Methods of Monitoring
    and Calculating the Rate of Bluff Recession (ISS)

    This task will improve the accuracy of bluff recession rates. These
    more accurate recession rates will assure that new structures are
    placed safely within the Bluff Recession Hazard Area (BRHA) and
    improvements to*threatened structures are limited.

    Research will be conducted into new or better ways of measuring,
    calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff recession. CZM staff
    will do extensive library searches and will contact state and federal
    agencies for current information on lake bluff monitoring (i.e., Ohio's
    new bluff setback regulations and the Federal Emergency Management
    Agency's new study of Illinois bluff recession). It is not known how
    the current process will change. It may be as complex as using remote
    sensing to as simple as increasing the density of monitoring control
    points. As a result of this research, the document Shoreline Erosion
    and Flooding - Erie County will be amended or rewritten. This document


                                         2








        is the primary support document for the BRSA and provides the basis for
        designating BRHAs and determining the rate of bluff recession for each
        township. If fundamental changes occur to the document, the
        BRSA/regulations may be amended. At a minimum, changing this document
        to address how bluff recession rates are obtained will require amending
        the Coastal Hazard Area Policy I-A-1. Briefly, this policy is the
        enforceable policy that requires coastal municipalities with BRHA to
        enact setback ordinances.

        Using newer and updated methods of obtaining    rates of bluff recession
        will result in more accurate predictions. These new rates will be
        incorporated into the local bluff setback ordinances. With better
        accuracy, it is likely that the bluff recession rates will increase.
        If this occurs, it will expand the BRHA and the minimum setbacks for
        residential, commercial, and industrial structures. Overall, new
        structures placed in the BRHA will provide better protection from the
        hazards of bluff recession. Also, CZX will use the new rates to
        accurately and safely relocate structures via the NFIP (which is a
        long-term savings for the federal goverrment because of less repeat
        insurance claims from improperly relocated structures).

        1C. Appropriateness of Tools

        This task is the appropriate means of updating the methods used to
        calculate recession rates. Research will be necessary into new ways of
        measuring, calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff recession in
        order to revamp the current method used in Shoreline Erosion and
        Flooding - Erie County.


        1D. Costs

        1992 - $15,000 staff cost (weighted formula)/$35,000 consultant cost
                (weighted formula)

        1993 - $10,000 staff cost   (weighted formula)

        1994 - $22,000 staff cost   (weighted formula)

        Total Cost: $82,000

        1E. Schedule

        1992 -  Research into new techniques of measuring, calculating, and
                monitoring the rate of bluff recession. If possible, this grant
                year, determine new rates of bluff recession. (These new rates
                will be used to help support Program Change 3B.)

        1993 -  Amend Shoreline Erosion and Flooding - Erie County to
                incorporate new bluff recession rate tec'hniques. Also, if not
                accomplished in 1992, develop new recession rates.

        1994 -  Amend local bluff setback ordinances to incorporate new bluff
                recession rates and amend the BRSA/regulations if fundamental
                changes occur to these regulatory documents.




                                              3









     1F. Likelihood of Success

     The department already supports the concept of bluff setbacks by
     adopting the BRSA in 1980. By improving the accuracy of designating
     structure setbacks, this task is consistent with the intent of the
     BRSA. The likelihood that the department will support this task is
     very high. CZM foresees no opposition to this program change.

     FY92 Work (weighted formula)

     Research will be conducted into new techniques Of measuring,
     calculating, and monitoring the rate of -bluff recession. ..Library.
     searches and surveys of coastal states and appropriate Canadian
     provinces will be completed to find the techniques to update the
     current erosion rate mechanisms.

     First Quarter (Oct-Dec) Selection of a contractor to complete this
     first year grant task. A complete library search for techniques of
     measuring, calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff recession will
     be completed this quarter.

     Second Quarter (Jan-Mar) Federal agencies, coastal states, and
     appropriate Canadian provinces will be contacted and surveyed to gather
     information on optional ways of determining rates of bluff recession.

     Third Quarter (Apr-June) Information gathered from library searches and
     surveys on techniques to amend how bluff recession rates are measured,
     calculated, and monitored will be analyzed to determine appropriateness
     to Pennsylvania's coastal situation.

     Fourth Quarter (July-Sep) Review Shoreline Erosion and Flooding - Erie
     County and make recommendations on how the document can be changed to
     incorporate the selected mechanism from the Third Quarter work.

     OUTYEAR TASKS


     1993

     Amend Shoreline Erosion and Flooding - Erie County - Incorporate the
     new techniques for determining the rates of bluff recession from the
     research and analysis completed in the 1992 grant year.

     Benchmarks:

     a.   Draft changes to the document. Circulate for comments (including
          public involvement).

     b.   Amend document with approved changes.

     C.   Measure and calculate new recession rates.


     1994


     Amend Local Ordinances, the BRSA, and Regulations - Determine new
     recession rates (if not already completed in 1993 grant year) and meet
     with and guide each municipality to amend their bluff setback


                                         4









       ordinances to incorporate the changed recession rates. If fundamental
       changes occur to the BRSA/Regulations, then these documents will also
       be amended.


       Benchmarks:

       a.   Remeasure or establish additional control points (or whatever
            techniques are chosen) and calculate new recession rates.

       b.   Work with municipalities to adopt new recession rates and BRHA
            designation.

       c.   Start the amending process for the BRSA/Regulations (if
            necessary).

       2B.  Program Change

       Amend Coastal Hazard Area Policy I-A.1 to Include Guidance on Legal
       Interpretations to the BRSA (ISS)

       The Coastal Hazards Policy I-A.1 will be amended to include official
       written guidance to local municipalities on legal interpretations and
       CZM field implementation policies concerning important aspects of the
       BRSA regulations. A compilation of interpretations and field policy
       decisions are important for consistent oversight and implementation of
       the BRSA. This information will be put into a document format that can
       be amended or superseded as new interpretation and field policy
       decisions are made. This document will be given to each municipality
       with the primary document and amending capability located in the CZM
       office. The document will go through extensive legal, CZM, and
       municipal review before it is finalized. As part of this process, Czm
       will also ask legal to interpret sections of the BRSA/regulations that
       are not clear and will need legal guidance in the near future (i.e.,
       aspects of the variance and substantial improvement language relating
       to restoring fire damaged structures currently located inside the
       minimum bluff setback distance). CZM will seek public input into the
       existing and proposed legal interpretations and field operations,
       decisions. There will likely be many new interpretations and decisions
       in this document. The final document will-be adopted by the department
       as official "guidelines" to guide CZM and municipal implementation of
       the BRSA. These guidelines are deemed crucial and timely and will be
       used to pilot municipal building permit programs in order to properly
       regulate home construction and improvements within hazardous areas.

       This task is considered a program change because it represents the
       creation of new guidelines to provide specific interpretations of an
       snforceable policy (for local government use). Furthermore, these
       guidelines will result in meaningful improvements in coastal resource
       management. As stated in the final assessment, "The major factors
       causing improper structure siting along the bluffs of Lake Erie are ...
       lack of a single file source of all legal interpretations of the BRSA
       (regulations) for both CZM and municipal reference." This task will
       provide a single file source as guidelines for CZM and local
       . plementation of the BRSA and, therefore, improve how new structures
       are located, and improvements to existing structures are monitored.
       "m






                                           5








     2C. Appropriateness of Tools

     This program change will provide the means for legal interpretations
     and internal field implementation policy decisions to be put in the
     hands of those needing them. This information is necessary for the
     proper implementation of the municipal bluff setback ordinances. By
     creating a compilation of existing and proposed legal interpretations
     of the BRSA and field implementation decisions into a guidelines
     document for CZM and municipal use, proper implementation of the BRSA,
     regulations, and local ordinances will be improved. Also, as the
     regulations are interpreted in the future, the interpretations will be
     reviewed with the municipalities and incorporated into the guidelines
     document to be sent to the municipalities for their future reference.-
     Written guidance in an expandable format is the best way to provide the
     necessary information to the coastal municipalities to assure proper
     imvlementation of their bluff setback ordinances. Therefore, this
     program change is the best way to provide new guidelines for specific
     interpretations of a major enforceable policy of the CZM Program.

     2D. Costs

     1992 - $5,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

     1993 - $6,500 staff cost (weighted formula)

     Total Cost: $11,500

     2E. Schedule

     1992 - Compile legal interpretations of the BRSA and implementing rules
            and regulations into a guidelines document. See FY92 work for
            more details.

     1993 - Amend Coastal Hazard Area Policy I-A.1 to include BRSA
            guidelines.

     2F. Likelihood of Success

     The department is committed to regulating development in the BRHA along
     Pennsylvania's portion of Lake Erie. The department adopted the BRSA/
     regulations in 1980 and has since-committed substantial time and money
     to regulating development in the identified hazard areas. Providing
     additional tools for CZM and municipal use to help manage these areas
     more efficiently to prevent loss of property and threats to human
     health and safety are a high priority for the department. Furthermore,
     the guidelines will add clarity to the direction the department is
     providing regarding the municipal bluff setback ordinances to ulti-
     mately promote proper structure siting. Overall, this task has a very
     high likelihood of support by the department.

     FY92 Work (weighted formula)

     CZM will compile past legal interpretations to the BRSA, and Rules and
     Regulations (PA Chapter 85) and field implementation policy decisions
     into a draft guidelines document. CZM will: meet with the coastal
     municipalities to discuss the interpretations to determine appropriate-


                                           6









       ness of the interpretations and adjustments to be made (incorporate
       public involvement at this point); meet with department legal staff to
       also review proposed interpretations and recommended adjustments; and
       create a system to amend the guidelines document as new interpretations
       occur. Also, CZM will incorporate current and proposed field implemen-
       tation policy decisions. These are decisions made by field operations
       staff on specific situations that occur during BRSA monitoring and
       technical assistance activities. These policies will be reviewed by
       the municipalities, department legal staff, and the public. czm will
       finalize these guidelines as an official document, approved by the
       department. Work involved in completing this task will"include
       extensive coordination with all coastal municipalities, department
       legal staff and the regulated public. Public involvement aspects of
       this task will include surveys, workshops, and information seminars.

       Staff orientation and new project startup are time-intensive functions
       and will be part of the task work schedule.

       First Quarter (Oct-Dec) Review CZM files to locate past legal interpre-
       tations and field implementation policy decisions. Also, complete list
       of areas that need legal interpretation and/or field policy decisions.
       Start meetings with coastal municipalities, department legal staff, and
       community groups to discuss all items.

       Second Quarter (Jan-Mar) Complete meetings, prepare draft document, and
       incorporate comments.

       Third Quarter (Apr-Jun) Conduct public workshops and seminars to
       generate additional comments and public understanding and acceptance.

       Fourth Quarter (Jul-Sep) Incorporate final comments. Complete an
       additional legal review, finalize the guidelines document, have the
       document deemed "official," and distribute to the.Erie County
       municipalities with bluff setback ordinances.

       OUTYEAR TASKS


       1993

       Amend CHA Policy I-A-1 - Amend this enforceable policy to include the
       guidelines on legal interpretations on the BRSA/regulations, and field
       implementation policy decisions.

       Benchmarks:

       a.   Circulate draft policy change for formal review and comment.

       b.   Amend CHA Policy I-A.1 to include the guidelines.

       3B. Program Chancre

       Amend the BRSA/Requlations and CZM Policy to Restrict-Bluff Face Use
       (UBD).

       Following the format of the BRSA/regulations, theprotection of the
       bluf f area will be extended lakeward of the bluff crest to the ordinary


                                           7







     high water mark (OHWM) at the base of the bluff. This will require an
     amendment to the BRSA and subsequent change to the coastal hazard area
     policy I-A.l. This amendment will regulate new structures and substan-
     tial improvements of these structures located between the OHWM and the
     bluff crest (an area known as the bluff face), and other uses which
     affect the stability of the bluff face.

     This amendment will address two scenarios. First, for structures and
     other uses to be built on the bluff face, which are part of a lot
     subdivided after the adoption of this amendment, CZM will explore
     prohibiting construction of such structures and prohibit/restrict other
     uses based on the results of the research and testing. Second,
     structures and other uses to be built on the bluff face, which are part
     of a lot subdivided prior to the adoption of this amendment, will be '
     restricted via variances based on criteria developed as a result of the
     research and testing.

     Research and testing of uses of the bluff face (structures, stairways,
     roads, and devegetation) will lessen many negative influences on bluff
     stability. This will be accomplished by providing timely and accurate
     information and assistance to eliminate many poorly designed
     construction and man-induced impacts to the bluff. This effort will
     direct research into better and safer techniques of traversing and
     using the bluff face, i.e., stairway construction that will remain
     stable and will not cause bluff recession, road and new structures that
     will incorporate proper erosion and sedimentation controls and bluff
     stabilizing techniques, and the proper management of forested areas to
     maintain bluff stability. Proper methods/techniques to traverse/use
     the bluff face will provide safe and lasting structures on the bluff
     face that will not initiate or accelerate bluff recession.

     This amendment is consistent with the intent of the BRSA to restrict
     development from the eroding bluffs along Pennsylvania's Lake Erie
     shoreline.


     3C. Appropriateness of Tool

     This task is the best way to restrict new structures and other uses on
     the bluff face. Restricting  these activities will require more than an
     encouragement policy and technical assistance. In hazard areas such as
     the bluff face, these activities-can have serious consequences.
     Therefore, restricting these activities via regulations is warranted.
     As stated in the final assessment "these areas (bluff face) are
     affected by bluff recession and should be covered by the BRSA (or a new
     statute)." A new statute will only be explored if the BRSA is not able
     to be amended.

     Also, an additional benefit ofthis task will be a long-term savings to
     the federal government. By restricting uses on the bluff face (new
     home construction and other uses that may cause or accelerate bluff
     recession) fewer homes will be threatened by bluff recession and fewer
     claims will be filed under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
     Research and testing are also the appropriate means to provide better
     and safer uses of the bluff face. By doing research into new methods
     of traversing and using the bluff face, new information can be given to









        property owners to help them make better decisions on activities that
        effect their bluff properties. This new information, as a regulatory
        restriction and supplemented with a technical assistance delivery, is
        the best way to get this information to the public and to have them use
        it. This information can also be used to complement other areas of the
        strategy. As an example, new stairway design, researched and demon-
        strated as part of this task, can be used in public easement areas
        along Lake Erie. Public access through these easement areas is
        addressed in the public access strategy. Properly designed stairways
        will provide safe and lasting access that will not threaten bluff
        stability.

        In the Lake Erie coastal zone there are approximately 900 property
        sites that have access to Lake Erie. The majority of these sites are
        either forested or partially forested and have potential for stairway,
        road, and development of structures. With the type of information
        provided via this task, many future construction activities will be
        properly designed and will not cause or accelerate bluff recession,
        thereby decreasing the overall threat and costs of coastal hazards.

        3D. Costs

        1993 - $46,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

        1994 - $48,000 staff cost (weighted formula),,

        1995 - $28,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

        Total cost: $122,,000

        3E. Schedule

        1993 - Review of the statute amending process and the BRSA to determine
               how and where to amend to restrict development on the bluff
               face. Use workshops and seminars to gather comments and public
               acceptance/support.

             - Amend the BRSA to include bluff face restrictions.

             - Using research from the 1991 grant year on an inventory of
               bluff face uses, CZM will conduct research into innovative ways
               to traverse and use the bluff face. Use workshops and seminars
               to get new information to the public. Create a new coastal
               hazard area policy.

        1994 - Amend the PA Chapter 85, Bluff Setback Regulations to restrict
               development on the bluff face.

             - Incorporate BRSA/regulation changes into all the local
               ordinances.

             - Initiate bluff face construction/use demonstration projects.





                                              9








    1995 - Monitor/evaluate demonstration projects.

         - Create technical assistance package. Use slide shows,
           brochures, and fact sheets to get this information to the
           public.

    3F. Likelihood of Success

    The department has already committed resources to the problem of bluff
    recession by adopting the BRSA and implementing rules and regulations.
    There is a high possibility that the department will agree to expand
    the BRHA lakeward once shown the need for such actions. In addition,
    the Lake Erie legislative delegation has been very supportive of the
    BRSA and what the CZX Program has accomplished with the local
    municipalities in enforcing the regulation. Because of CZM's working
    relationship with many of the legislatures and the local municipali-
    ties, there is high probability that amending the BRSA and regulation
    will be successful.

    Since all the mechanisms are in place for implementing the BRSA, there
    will be little, if any, additional commitment needed to carry out this
    task.

    Through past CZM grants, the department has committed much time and
    money into providing technical assistance on how to maintain bluff face
    stability. To increase the effectiveness.,of this type of technical
    assistance, the department will support the development of new informa-
    tion on how to traverse and use the bluff face in a safe and lasting
    way. Therefore, there is a very high possibility that the department
    supports the technical assistance aspects of this task.

    FY 92 Work

    There is no work task this year. CZM will use the information from
    Program Change 1B (amend "Shoreline Erosion and Flooding - Erie
    County" ... ), being conducted in 1992, as baseline data for future year
    work under this program change.

    OUTYF.AR TASKS


    1993

    BRSA Amendment - CZM will conduct a thorough review of the statute
    amending process to determine the necessary steps and time schedule
    needed to properly amend the BRSA. Also, CZM will examine the BRSA to
    determine where the statute should be amended. A draft amendment
    package will be drafted for internal review and comment which will
    include a legal review to determine the validity of the change
    proposed. After state, federal, and public comment requirements are
    met, the BRSA amendment package will be finalized and submitted for
    adoption to the Environmental Quality Board.

    In Grant Year 1991, CZM will inventory current uses of the bluff face.
    The inventory will be used to determine how many types of uses exist,
    how they are designed, and what affects they have on the bluff face.
    This information will be used in Grant Year 1993 to guide research into


                                         10









        new and innovative ways of traversing and using the bluff face, i.e.,
        stairway, road and home construction, and management of forested areas.

        Benchmarks:

        a.  Conduct thorough review of statute amending process. In
            Pennsylvania, the program staff is responsible for completing the
            amendment package. The legal staff will give guidance, but will
            not undertake the amending process. Therefore, CZX staff must
            commit substantial time to this process.

        b.  Examine the BRSA to determine where it needs amended.

        c.  Draft amendment package for CZM and legal review.

        d.  Present proposed amendment to CZSCs, CZAC, and other federal,
            state, and local agencies to get comments. Public involvement is
            an essential part of this task. Finalize amendment package.

        e.  Formal review and comments on final amendment package.

        f.  Review and approval by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB).

        g.  Analyze information from the 1991 Grant Year inventory of bluff
            face uses and select the types of uses to focus Program efforts.

        h.  Conduct library searches to gather information on successful
            construction types and bluff face uses.

        i.  Conduct surveys of federal and state agencies and all coastal
            states to determine preferred construction types and uses of the
            bluff face or areas similar to Pennsylvania c oastal bluffs.

        3   Conduct surveys of consultants and specialty construction companies
            to determine construction types that apply to Pennsylvania's
            coastal bluffs.


        1994

        Bluff Recession and Setback Re4ulation Amendment - Update Local
        ordinances - Construction/Use Demonstration Prolects - CZM will amend
        the regulations to restrict construction on the bluff face. This task
        will include all coordination and review procedures required by the
        state of Pennsylvania to amend a statute. CZM will also direct the
        construction of demonstration structures on areas of the bluffs
        experiencing various bluff conditions from stable to rapidly receding.
        These structures will be evaluated on their performances. Also, various
        forest management techniques will be studied on bluff face areas
        ranging from completely forested to partially devoid of vegetation and
        receding.

        Benchmarks:

        a.   Draft an amendment package and present to CZSCs, CZAC, and other
             federal, state, and local agencies for comments. Finalize
             amendment package.








     b.  Formal review and comment on final amendment package.

     C.  Review and approval by the Environmental Quality Board.

     d.  Meet with each township to explain the changes and advise them on
         how to change their bluff setback ordinances to reflect the intent
         of the amendments.

     e.  Compliance check to make sure townships amend their bluff setback
         ordinances correctly and in'a timely manner.

     f.  Develop MOUs with agencies of publi c lands to allow construction
         of the demonstration projects and for forested areas to be
         studied.

     9-  Select the types of structures and contractors to do the work.
         This work includes contractors to operate the forested bluff
         projects.

     h.  Supervise, observe, and document the progress of the projects.

     i.  Assure projects are complete and approve final invoices.

     1995

     Monitoring/Evaluation - Technical Assistance Package - CZM will monitor
     the construction and the forested bluff projects. CZM will evaluate
     the results of the monitoring to determine success of the projects.
     Recommendations will.be made on which construction types should be used
     and the changes to make them successful. This also applies to the
     forested bluff project(s). The task could take more than one year to
     complete. Depending on the structure/activity type, some projects may
     produce tangible results within one year, while others may take more
     time to produce results that are usable. Taking the information from
     the demonstration projects, a technical assistance package will be put
     together. This will include: brochures, fact sheets, and slide shows.
     This information will be made available to the public via general
     mailings, the SAR service, and CZM sponsored workshops/seminars.

     Benchmarks:

     a.  Establish monitoring techniques and schedules.

     b.  Evaluate the monitoring results.

     C.  Select successful structure/activities types and make
         recommendations for improvements.

     d.  Develop brochures, fact sheets, and slide shows.

     e.  Distribute the information and set up workshops/seminars.






                                        12











                                     TASK DESCRIPTION

        No. 92-EG.01       Title: Bluff Recession and Setback Act (BRSA)
                                    Guidelines

        Federal: $   5,000(309)   Non-Federal:  $    0        Total:  $    5,000
        -------- -   ----------   ------------ -              ------ -
                                            :Start Date: October 1, 1992
        Work being done by:                 :Completion Date: September 30, 1993

        Grantee:   X   #Person Days:    20  :
                                            :Section 309 Enhancement Area:
        Others:                                 Coastal Hazards


                                             GAPC Involvement:
                                                NV-1 (Lake Erie Bluffs)
                                                    ------------------------------
        Location:--Lake-Erie-Coastal-Zone,-Erie-County, Pennsylvania.

        Background: The major factors causing improper structure siting along
        the bluffs of Lake Erie are incomplete monitoring of bluff recession
        (which may result in inaccurate erosion rate data), inconsistent local
        official decision making, and lack of a single file source of all legal
        interpretations of the BRSA for both CZM and municipal reference.
        These factors can cause structures regulated by the BRSA to be placed
        within the bluff recession hazard area in a way that is generally
        inconsistent with the intention of the act.

        This project is the result of the Section 309 Strategy to address major
        program enhancement objectives for coastal hazards. This project,
        which will ultimately result in amending the CZM Programs Coastal
        Hazard Policy I-A.1, will provide the means for legal interpretations
        and internal field implementation policy decisions to be put in the
        hands of those needing them. This information is necessary for proper
        implementation of municipal bluff setback ordinances. By creating a
        compilation of existing and proposed legal interpretations of the BRSA
        and field implementation decisions into a guidelines document, proper
        implementation of the BRSA regulations and local ordinances will be
        improved. Furthermore, as regulations are interpreted in the f uture,
        they will be reviewed with the local municipalities and incorporated
        into the guidelines document.

        These "guidelines" are deemed crucial and timely and will be used to
        pilot municipal building permit programs in order to properly regulate
        home construction and improvements within hazardous areas. This effort
        will result in meaningful improvements in coastal resource management.
        As stated in CZM's Section 309 Final Assessment, "The major factors
        causing improper structure siting along the bluffs of Lake Erie are ...
        lack of a single file source of all legal interpretations of the BRSA
        regulations for both CZM and municipal reference." This task will
        result in a single file source (guidelines) for CZM and local municipal
        implementation of the BRSA; and therefore, improve how new structures
        are located, and improvements to existing structures are monitored.





                                              13







     Proiect Description: For this effort CZM will compile past legal
     interpretations to the BRSA, Rules and Regulations (PA Chapter 85), and
     field implementation policy decisions into a "guidelines" document.
     that can be amended or superseded as new interpretation and field
     policy decisions are made. Copies of this document will be given to
     each municipality with the original document and amending capability
     located in the CZM office. The document will go through extensive
     legal, CZM, and municipal review before it is finalized. As part of
     this process, CZM will ask legal to interpret sections of the BRSA
     regulations that are not clear and require legal guidance (i.e.,
     aspects of the variance and substantial improvement language relating
     to restoring fire damaged structures currently located inside the
     minimum bluff setback distance). CZM will also seek public input into
     the existing and proposed legal interpretations and field operations,
     decisions. The final document will be adopted by the department as
     official "guidelines" to guide implementation of the BRSA. All work
     under this task will be completed by CZM staff..

     Work involved in completing this task will include extensive
     coordination with all coastal municipalities, department legal staff
     and the public as appropriate. Public involvement aspects of this task
     will include surveys, workshops, and information seminars.

     Estimated Project Budget

     Salaries and wages                        $ 3,300
     Fringe benefits                                1,300
     Overhead                                         100
     Travel                                           200
     Materials & supplies                             100
     Equipment                                          0
     Consultant/contractor                              0
                                     Total     $    5,000

     Expected Products and Timetable: The product of this effort will be
     final "guidelines" which will be a single file source of all legal
     interpretations of the BRSA regulations. Information regarding the
     status of this effort will be submitted to OCRM as part of DER-DCZM's
     quarterly performance report. The anticipated timetable for completing
     this effort is as follows:

     12-31-92   Review CZM files to locate past legal interpretations and
                field implementation policy decisions. Complete list of
                areas that need legal interpretation and/or field policy
                decisions. Initiate meetings with coastal municipalities,
                department legal staff, and community groups.

     03-31-93   Complete meetings, prepare draft "guidelines" document and
                incorporate comments.

     06-30-93   Conduct public workshops and seminars to generate additional
                comments and public understanding and acceptance.

     09-30-93   Finalize and adopt the official "guidelines" document and
                distribution to the Erie County municipalities with bluff
                setback ordinances.



                                           14











                                     TASK DESCRIPTION



        No. 92-EG.02       Title: New Techniques of Measuring, Calculating,
                                    and Monitoring the Rate of Bluff Recession

        Federal: $ 15,000(309) Non-Federal: $        0        Total: $ 15,000
        -----------------------------------------  7 -----------------------------
                                            :Start Date: October 1, 1992
        Work being done by:                 :Completion Date: September-30, 1993

        Grantee:   X   #Person Days:    60  :
                                            :Section 309 Enhancement Area:
        Others:                                 Coastal Hazards

                                             GAPC Involvement:
                                                NV-1 (Lake Erie Bluffs)
        -----------------------------------------------------------------------
        Location: Lake Erie Coastal Zone, Erie County, Pennsylvania.

        Background: This project is the result of the Section 309 Strategy to
        address major program enhancement objectives for coastal hazards. The
        major factors causing improper structure siting along the bluffs of
        Lake Erie are incomplete monitoring of bluff recession (which may
        result in inaccurate erosion rate data-), inconsistent local official
        decision making, and lack of a single file source of all legal
        Interpretations of the Bluff Recession and Setback Act (BRSA) for both
        CZM and municipal reference. These factors can cause structures
        regulated by the BRSA to be placed within the bluff recession hazard
        area in a way that is generally inconsistent with the intention of the
        act.

        This task is the appropriate means of updating the methods used to
        calculate recession rates. Research will be necessary into new ways of
        measuring, calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff recession in
        order to revamp the current method used in Shoreline Erosion and
        Flooding - Erie County. This task will improve the accuracy of bluff
        recession rates. These more accurate recession rates will assure that
        new homes are placed safely within Bluff Recession Hazard Area's (BRHA)
        and improvements to threatened homes are limited.

        CZM1s Coastal Hazard Area Policy I-A.1 is an enforceable policy that
        requires coastal municipalities with BRHA to enact setback ordinances.
        Tsing newer and updated methods of obtaining rates of bluff recession
        will result in a more accurate prediction of how bluffs recede. These
        new rates will be incorporated into the local bluff setback ordinances.
        with better accuracy, it is likely that the bluff recession rates will
        increase. If this occurs, it will expand the BRHA and the minimum
        setbacks for residential, commercial, and industrial structures.
        overall, new structures placed in the BRHA will be provided better
        protection from the hazards of bluff recession. Also, CZM will use the
        new rates to accurately and safely relocate structures via the NFIP
        (which is a long-term savings for the federal government because of
        less repeat insurance claims from improperly relocated structures).








     Proiect Description: Research will be conducted into new or better
     ways of measuring, calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff
     recession. CZX staff will do extensive library searches and will
     contact state and federal agencies for current information on lake
     bluff monitoring (i.e., Ohio's new bluff setback regulations and FEMA's
     new study of Illinois bluff recession). It is not known exactly how
     the current process will change. It may be as complex as using remote
     sensing to as simple as increasing the density of monitoring control
     points.

     As a result of this research, the document Shoreline Erosion and
     Flooding - Erie County will be amended or rewritten. This-document is
     the primary support document for the Bluff Recession and Setback Act
     (BRSA) and provides the basis for designating BRHAs and determining the
     rate of bluff recession for each township. If changes occur to the
     document, the BRSA regulations will be amended. At a minimum, changing
     this document to address how bluff recession rates are obtained will
     require amending the Coastal Hazard Area Policy I-A.l.

     Estimated Prolect Budget

     Salaries and wages                         $ 9,800
     Fringe benefits                                3,800
     Overhead                                         700
     Travel                                           500
     Materials & supplies                             200
     Equipment                                          0
     Consultant/contractor                              0
                                     Total      $  15,000

     Expected Products and Timetable:     The product of this effort will be
     the establishment of a new bluff recession rate technique developed
     through research into new methods of measuring, calculating and
     monitoring the rate of bluff recession. Information regarding the
     status of this effort will be submitted to OCRM as part of DER-DCZM1s
     quarterly performance report. The anticipated timetable for completing
     this effort is as follows:

     12-31-92   Selection of a contractor to complete this task which
                includes a complete library search for techniques of
                measuring, calculating, and monitoring the rate of bluff
                rec ession.

     03-30-93   Federal agencies, coastal states, and appropriate Canadian
                provinces will be contacted and surveyed to gather
                information on optional ways of determining rates of bluff
                recession.

     06-30-93   Information gathered from library searches and surveys on
                techniques to amend how bluff recession rates are measured,
                calculated, and monitored will be analyzed to determine
                appropriateness to Pennsylvania's coastal situation.

     09-30-93   Review Shoreline Erosion and Flooding - Erie County and make
                recommendations on how the document can be changed to
                incorporate the selected mechanism as identified above.


                                           16










                      PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
                                   SECTION 309 STRATEGY
                            CUMULATIVE AND SECONDARY IMPACTS




        1A. Problem Summary

             The assessment identified three issues which will be addressed
        under Cumulative and Secondary Impacts (CSI) associated with coastal
        growth and development. The issues are: finding dredge spoils
        disposal sites in Bucks County, impacts to Presque Isle Bay from
        increasing boater use, and nonpoint source pollution impacts on water
        quality.

             Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Resources (DER) is
        responsible for providing disposal sites for all channel maintenance
        dredging performed by the US Army Corps of Engineers (COE) on the
        Navigational Channel of the Delaware River from Allegheny Avenue in
        Philadelphia north to the Trenton Marine Terminal. Dredging is
        necessary in this area to maintain adequate channel depth for commerce
        on the river. Based on economics and environmental concerns, hydraulic
        dredging is the only prudent and feasible way to keep the channel open.
        The former USX site in this area has the potential to once again be a
        major economic factor. Maintaining shipping access in the area could
        play a vital role in future economic revitalization activities.

             Because of growth and development that has taken place in this
        part of the coastal zone, there are few remaining areas where the
        dredge spoil can be placed. In the remaining undeveloped areas,
        wetlands, open waters, and fishery concerns further limit where dredge
        spoils can be placed. Furthermore, some previously used sites have
        been eliminated because, as a result of the disposal, wetlands have
        been created, or the spoils were contaminated. Therefore, these areas
        cannot be "cleaned out" and reused as spoils disposal areas. The
        Department may be faced with either not allowing the dredging to take
        place, thereby, severely restricting commerce in this area of the
        coastal zone, or else having to resort to bucket dredging which is
        environmentally damaging and more expensive.

             All potential existing sites for spoil disposal are owned or
        controlled by Waste Management Incorporated. Because of the limited
        space, a system whereby the spoils can be periodically removed and the
        sites reused, must be devised to insure there will be future capacity.
        It is imperative that the Department secures disposal sites on a
        long-term basis and sets up a process that insures that their
        utilization will not negatively impact wetland and fisheries resources
        and that the areas can be "reused" to insure adequate future capacity.

             After several years, the water drains out of the spoils and the
        resulting material can be used if it is not contaminated. Waste
        Management Inc., which runs a large landfill, is interested in using
        this material as cover layers for their landfill. Therefore, when
        selecting sites we will check to see if trucks, loaders, etc., could
        readily access the disposal sites, without harming adjacent wetlands,
        etc. otherwise, even if there was a use for' the material it might not


                                             17








     be feasible to recover it, therefore, this space would not be available
     for future disposal activities.

          As mentioned earlier, one problem that has prevented the recovery
     of spoils disposal for reuse is that sometimes the disposal areas
     become wetlands. Therefore, these areas cannot be used again and new
     areas have to be found. The Bureau of Dams and Waterways Management
     has expressed a willingness to develop an agreement for specific future
     disposal sites targeted for "reuse." These specific sites would be
     targeted for recovery and; therefore, even if they exhibited wetland
     characteristics, they could still be allowed to be recovered. We
     believe such actions are environmentally sound and preferable to
     constantly placing spoils in new areas.

     1B. Program Changes

     New Designated GAPC, New MOU Covering Spoils Created wetlands and.New
     Department Policies Concerning the Placement and Future Use of Dredge
     spoils.

          Concerning the Bucks County Dredge Disposal Sites, a strategy will
     be developed. The strategy will assess all potential dredge sites in
     the area and rank them with regard to desirability. Desirability will
     be determined by proximity to the river, likelihood of impacts to
     wetlands and fisheries, capacity, and ability of the site to be reused.

          The strategy will also explore means for the Department to secure
     the selected sites on a long-term basis, i.e., long-term lease or
     purchase. Also identified will be ways to reuse/dispose of the spoils
     on a periodic basis so that the sites can be reused. The strategy will
     also identify what action the Department should take to secure these
     sites.

          Program changes resulting from the strategy are as follows. The
     area will be identified as a designated GAPC- A management plan will
     be developed for the GAPC which precludes any actions that affect the.
     ability of this area to be used as a dredge spoils disposal site. An
     MOU will be developed with the Bureau of Dams and Waterway Management
     (BDWM) working out an agreement whereby these sites could be reused
     even if they developed wetland characteristics. Procedures for
     utilizing the clean spoils and disposing of'contaminated spoils at
     upland sites will be developed and incorporated into Department policy.
     Any necessary inter/intra agency agreements needed to implement those
     procedures will also be developed.

          Securing sites and developing a dredge disposal plan that is
     environmentally responsible will accomplish two major goals of the CZM
     Program. It will ensure that commerce can be maintained in this
     portion of the coastal zone; thereby, improving its chances for
     maintaining economic viability. It will also ensure that actions will
     not be taken that could compromise the environmental integrity of this
     area in an effort to keep the channel dredged if sites are no longer
     available where hydraulically dredge spoils could be disposed of in an
     environmentally responsible manner.




                                         18









             This project has transference implications because as coastal
       development increases, other states will be forced with fewer options
       for disposing of dredge materials and the concept of "recycling" these
       sites may prove very useful.

       1C. Appropriateness of Tools

             The proposed program changes concerning the Sucks County disposal
       sites are appropriate and address the concerns of the assessment. The
       assessment clearly showed the need to secure dredge disposal sites in
       this area that ensure the channel can'be maintained, and thus the
       economic vitality of the area, without compromising the environment.
       The tools that CZM will use/develop are appropriate for the task.
       Securing sites either through purchase or long-term lease is critical.
       If these sites are not secured, coastal growth and development could
       eliminate all potential hydraulic disposal sites thus severely
       compromising the Department's ability to maintain commerce in this area
       without adverse environmental affects. Developing agreements, setting
       up guidelines as to how the spoils can be disposed and covering how
       they can be reused or, if contaminated, ultimately disposed of at an
       inland site is also necessary. If this area is to be utilized on-a
       long-term basis, "recycling" will need to occur.

       1D.   Costs

       1992 - $7,500 staff cost (weighted formula)/$50,000 consultant cost
               (Project of Special Merit)

       1993 -  $7,500 staff cost (weighted formula)

       1994 -  $10,000 staff cost (weighted formula).

       Total Cost: $75,000

       1E. Schedule

       1992 -  Develop scope of work for dredging spoil disposal study which
               involves analyzing and ranking sites, determining how to serve
               sites on long-term basis, identifying agreements that need to be
               developed to be able to "recycle" sites, let contract, manage
               contract.

       1993 -  Analyze results of study and begin implementing recommendations.
               Develop purchase agreement, lease, etc. Develop MOUs and other
               agreements identified in study.

       1994 -  Finalize 1993 activities, secure the sites, and execute and
               implement the agreements.

       1F. Likelihood of Success

             The Department is responsible for securing dredge disposal sites
       and  fully supports this effort. The Department is cognizant of the
       ramifications to commerce in this area and possibly the environment if
       environmentally responsible means for depositing of dredge disposals 4Ln
       the future is not assured.



                                              19








    FY92 Work (weighted formula and project of special merit)

         A study will be undertaken which will identify sites that need to
    be secured by the DER to insure that dredging spoils can be disposed of
    in an environmentally safe and responsible manner on a long-term basis.
    The study will also recommend how these sites can be secured and will
    identify all inter/intra agency agreements that will need to be
    developed to insure that all actions concerning the deposition of the
    spoils and its eventual "reuse" will be accomplished in an
    environmentally responsible manner.

    OUTYEAR TASKS


    1993

    Develop Agreement to Service Sites, Develop MoUs, Agreements, and New
    Department Spoils Disposal Policy

    Benchmarks:

    a.   Lease agreement will be developed on contract negotiations for
         purchase of the sites will be initiated.

    b.   MOU with BDWM concerning wetland occurrence on dredge disposal
         sites will be developed and executed.

    C.   Department policy concerning environmental parameters to be
         observed when "recycling" dredge spoils disposal will be
         developed.

    1994 Execute Agreement Adopt Policies


    Benchmarks:

    a.   Lease agreement for contract will be executed.

    b.   New Department policies concerning dredge spoils "recycling", will
         be adopted and implemented.

    2A.  Problem Summary

         Presque Isle Bay is a popular boating and recreational area. The
    3,200-acre bay is surrounded by five miles of shoreline. A large part
    of that shoreline is associated with Presque Isle State Park which
    receives 4.5 to 5 million visitors annually. Presque Isle shelters the
    bay which is not subject to as many rough water episodes as the
    surrounding open lake waters. This is one of the reasons why the bay
    is so attractive to boaters.

         In the past decades, the number of marinas has increased
    significantly. The bay currently has approximately 2,500 public and
    private slips, and demand still exists. Additionally, many boats are
    launched in the bay from trailers and car tops.




                                        20








            The Department is currently developing a Remedial Action Plan
       (RAP) for Presque Isle Bay. The RAP is designed to address the Bay,s
       water quality. The focus of the RAP is on land based sewage and
       contaminated sediment. The RAP will not be looking at the impact of
       recreational boating on the Bay's water quality. Therefore, a Boating
       Impacts study will complement the RAP and provide a missing link in
       addressing Bay water quality issues. As water quality improves, it
       will lead to increased boating demand and increased fishing pressure
       which could lead to conflicts between boaters and fishermen.

            Presque Isle Bay is being subjected to increased r'ecreational
       usage as a result of coastal growth and development. Boating pressure
       has increased significantly in the past decade and additional marina
       capacity is planned for the Bay. The City of Erie has recognized the
       need to do a study to determine what impacts recreational boating is
       having on the Bay for several years. Also they have recognized the
       need to develop a management plan to address existing impacts and
       prevent future impacts from uncontrolled boating pressure. Impacts
       from boating are both environmental and social.

            Environmental impacts include: water quality (sewage and gasoline
       from the boats), as well as impacts from waves generated by the boats.
       Sewage from boats is a concern in all waters of the Commonwealth, but
       especially in enclosed bodies such as the Bay. There are currently no
       state regulations requiring marinas to have pump out stations for
       sanitary facilities on boats, or covering the usage of those pump out
       stations by boats having sanitary facilities. There is little doubt
       that sewage from boats is being pumped/dumped into the Bay. With such
       a concentration of boats fugitive escapes of gasoline and oils into the
       bay from boats and marina filling stations is occurring. The escapes
       could currently be adversely affecting the bayi water quality and the
       severity is likely to increase as boating usage increases. Waves from
       boating causes shoreline erosion which can harm wetlands. The
       increased sediments and wave action can also harm fish spawning.
       Boating disturbance may also be resuspending contaminated sediments
       which are known to exist in the Bay.

            overuse by boating also has social impacts. Safety is a major
       concern as boating capacity for a given body of water is reached and
       ultimately exceeded. The Bay is an attractive site for power boaters,
       sailing craft, and small fishing boats. Overuse by boaters can also
       lead to a diminished recreational experience for all concerned, not
       only among the boaters. As the Bay's waters are cleaned up, there will
       be increasing demands placed on it by shore fishermen because of its
       proximity to a large urban population. The potential exists for in-
       creased conflicts among boaters and between boaters and shore fisherman.

       2B. Proctram Chancres

       New State Authorities/Regulations Concerning Marina Pump Out Station
       Placement and Usage, and BMPs for Boat Fueling Activities. New MOUs
       with Erie City, PFBC, and Coast Guard Concerning Restrictions on
       Presque Isle Bay.

            A management plan will be designed for Presque Isle Bay to ensure
       that boating activity does not degrade its environmental resources, and


                                           21








    prevent conflicts among boaters and between boaters and other
    recreational users of the Bay. A compendium of tools will be developed
    to implement the management plan.

         New state authorities wil 1 be developed covering requirements
    dealing with placement of sanitary pump out stations at marinas and the
    usage of these stations by boat owners. These regulations will be
    designed to prevent the discharge of sewage from boats into the Bay.
    New regulations will be developed covering the implementation of BMPs
    for marina filling stations and boat fueling procedures in general to
    prevent the escape of gas and oil into the Bay. We will work with the
    City of Erie to limit new marina and boat launching development through
    the use of zoning ordinances. A new CZM policy concerning
    considerations of the waterbodies boating capacity will be developed to
    guide the program's review of new marina permits. CZM will work with
    the PFBC and local sportsman groups such as the S.O.N.S. of Erie to
    restrict boating activities around areas set aside for shore fishermen.
    CZM will also develop agreements with the PFBC and the Coast Guard to
    restrict boating in areas of sensitive habitats and areas where prop
    wash could be resuspending toxic sediments.

         The changes will lead to improved water quality in the Bay. This
    effort will complement and provide a missing piece to the RAP which is
    currently being developed for the Bay. It will provide protection for
    wetlands and fishing from cumulative and secondary impacts from which
    they currently have no protection. The changes will eliminate present
    and future conflicts between Bay recreations users and will provide for
    a more enjoyable experience for all involved. Another major aspect of
    this action is that it will increase the Program's visibility in the
    Department and will help establish CZM as a proactive program that
    takes the lead on addressing coastal issues and problems.

         This project has transference implications because other coastal
    states are/will be faced with problems associated with over use of
    water bodies by recreational boating.

    2C. Appropriateness of Tools

         The proposed Program changes for the Presque Isle Bay Boating
    Impact Analysis addresses all the issues raised in the assessment. New
    regulations are needed to address pump out station placement and usage
    and prevent sewage from entering the Bay from boats. New regulations
    covering the usage of various BMP designed to prevent gasoline and oils
    from boating activities contaminating the Bay are also needed. Both of
    these activities will not only help the Bay, but will lead to water
    quality improvement; both coastwide and statewide. A new CZM policy
    covering how the Program will revise future marina permit applications
    with regard to capacity, pump out stations and gasoline BMPs will
    provide assurances that the new activities will be properly implemented
    in the coastal zone in general and the Bay in specific. Agreements
    with the City of Erie, PFBC, and the Coast Guard are the proper way to
    limit boater capacity and restrict boating in a manner that addresses
    wetlands, fisheries, and water quality and boater safety issues as well
    as preventing conflicts between Bay recreational users.




                                        22











       2D. Costs

       1992 - $7,500 staff cost (weighted formula)/$100,000 consultant cost
               (Project of Special Merit)

       1993 -  $7,500 staff cost (weighted formula)

       .1994 - $10,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

       Total Cost: $125,000

       2E. Schedule

       1992 -  Convene a task force to develop scope of Presque Isle Bay Study.
               Based on task force input, develop RFP, let contract, finalize
               scope of work, manage study/contract.

       1993 -  Review study recommendations and begin implementing them.
               Develop new pump out station regulations, agreements with City
               of Erie, Fish Commission and Coast Guard concerning fuel BMPs,
               marina restrictions, slow wake zones, no boating zones, etc.

       1994 -  Continue with 93 work. Finalize development of regulations,
               agreements, etc., and begin implementing.

       2F.   Likelihood of Success

             The Department supports the clean    up of Presque Isle Bay which
       this  study will control so they will support this effort. The City of
       Erie  has requested CZM funds in the past to conduct such a study and is
       very  supportive of such an endeavor. The local sportsmen, boaters, and
       environmental groups will support this effort because they all want to
       see the water quality of the Bay and its resources improved and they
       want to see user conflicts avoided.

       FY92 Work (weighted formula and project of special merit)

             A study will be taken to document present and future        environmental
       and social impacts that recreational boating is having on        Presque Isle
       Bay. The study will also determine what capacity usage the Bay can
       support, a determination of what restrictions need to be placed on
       boating, how these restrictions should be applied, and who should be
       responsible for placing and enforcing those restrictions. The study
         'll also determine where and how boating should be restricted to
       protect the environment and avoid user conflicts.
       wi



       OUTYEAR TASKS


       1993

       Begin Implement Report Recommendations - Implement the recommendations
       of the report concerning what actions to take to manage boating in
       Presque Isle Bay in a way that minimizes environmental and social
       conflicts.






                                               23









    Benchmarks:

    a.   Develop marina pump out station and usage regulations.

    b.   Develop BMPs concerning marine fueling activities.

    C.   Develop MOU agreements concerning boating restrictions in Presque
    1994 Isle Bay.

    Finalize Implementation of Report Recommendations - Finalize the
    recommendations.


    Benchmarks:

    a.   Implement marina pump out station regulations.

    b.   Implement BMPs concerning marine fueling activities.

    C.   Implement MOUs concerning boating restrictions in Presque Isle
         Bay.

    3A.  Program Summary

         The assessment showed that there is a general consensus that
    coastal water quality is suffering as a result of nonpoint source
    pollution (NPS) and that the threat will increase, from cumulative and
    secondary impacts associated with growth and development, as projected
    coastal growth occurs. Unfortunately, nobody has a good handle on what
    NPS pollutants are causing the most problems, i.e., toxins, BODSr heavy
    metals, etc. The Department and the Delaware River Basin Commission
    have some pertinent data but it has never been analyzed with respect to
    trying to determine how much of the pollution is attributable to NPS.

         The Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program (CNPCP) will
    require the Commonwealth to identify what NPS pollutants are impacting
    coastal waters and also identify critical coastal areas. The following
    is excerpted from CNPCP Draft Guidance "The establishment of critical
    coastal areas must focus on those areas with.the greatest potential for
    causing or contributing to the impairment of or threat to coastal water
    quality from nonpoint source pollution." The implementation of
    additional management measures in these areas is required by the
    statute in order to protect against any increased contributions of
    pollutants which may result from any new or substantial expansion of
    existing land uses.

         The statute specifically requires that the critical coastal areas
    be adjacent to the waterbodies to be protected. Selecting these
    adjacent areas for implementation of additional management measures can
    have a significant effect in preventing water quality problems and
    protecting designated uses of the coastal waterbodies.11

         Since the Commonwealth does not have a lot of resources to devote
    to CNPCP and since federal funds available for CNPCP development is
    limited, it is imperative that additional sources of funds be found to


                                        24









       enable Pennsylvania to develop a program that adequately addresses NPS
       pollution in coastal waters.

            The aspect of the CNPCP that has the most relevance for CZM is the
       identification of critical coastal areas. This aspect of the CNPCP
       focus on addressing the land component of the problem via land use
       measures. CZM was designed to manage the land portions of the coastal
       areas. The CZM Program provides the best vehicle for implementing the
       critical coastal areas portion of the CNPCP.' Therefore, CZM will
       undertake a study to identify geographic areas that possess the
       greatest potential for causing or contributing to the impairment of or
       threat to coastal water quality from NPS pollution.

            CZM will contract to have these areas identified in both the Lake
       Erie and Delaware Estuary coastal zones. The following criteria will
       be used to identify critical coastal areas under this initiative.

            - The nature of the coastal water quality problem(s) caused by
              nonpoint sources.

            - The extent to which the nonpoint sources are located adj  acent to
              the waterbodies vs. farther inland.

            - The biophysical characteristics of the adjacent lands     that
              will affect the extent to which'uses of these lands will cause
              nonpoint source pollution problems. These include
              topography/slope, soil characteristics (erodibility, etc.);
              shoreline erosion characteristics; hydrology, in particular
              groundwater linkages to coastal waters and high water tables;
              and forest, wetlands, and other natural areas that may provide
              natural buffers or nutrient sinks

            - Important biological features that should be included as a whole
              in critical coastal areas.

            - The type(s), density, and characteristics of the new or expanded
              land uses that are anticipated and their effect(s) on water
              quality.

            - The extent to which the above effects can be prevented or
              reduced by implementation of (g) management measures and/or the
              additional management measures for land uses.

            - The need for an understandable and mappable area.

       3B.  Proctram Chancre

       New Authorities Concerning Land Use Management and Regulatory
       Activities Associated With NPS Pollution Control, Development of New
       Designated GAPCS.

            This project will provide the basis for determining what action
       needs to be taken to address land use issues that are contributing to
       NPS pollution problems in coastal waters. This will lead to
       significant program changes based on the development of new state
       authorities to address the identified land use issues. All the



                                            25








     identified areas will become designated GAPCs for NPS critical areas.
     Management plans will be developed for each of the GAPCs detailing how
     they will be managed to prevent NPS pollution impacts to coastal
     waters. Furthermore, a program enforceable policy will be developed,
     based on the new state authorities created, that will describe how
     Pennsylvania will address NPS critical coastal areas. Since the NPS
     problems and the land use issues creating those problems have not been
     identified yet, it would be extremely speculative to hazard a guess as
     to what specific new authorities will be developed.

          This project will lead to program changes that will improve
     coastal water quality through controlling land use impacts.. The new
     authorities that will be developed will give the program the ability to
     control land use impacts in the coastal zones. This will be critical
     not only to NPS water quality issues, but to other issues as well.
     Controlling land use activities/impacts will be critical to address
     other forms of Cumulative and Secondary Impacts that the resources of
     the coastal zone will be subjected to from future growth and
     development.

          This project will have transference implications because all
     coastal states will eventually be faced with this task as they
     implement the CNPCP.

     3C. Appropriateness of Tools

          The proposed changes concerning identifying critical coastal areas
     and developing land use controls are appropriate. This process will
     address the concerns expressed in the assessment regarding the problems
     associated with NPS pollution. Additionally, it is appropriate to take
     this action under 309 because with the scarcity of resources available
     for the CNPCP this is one way to insure this aspect of it will be
     accomplished. It will further demonstrate the importance of the CZM
     Program and further its role as a leader on coastal issues.

     3D. Cost

     1992 - $15,000 staff cost (weighted formula)/$275,000 consultant cost
            (Project of Special Merit)

     1993 - $7,500 staff cost (weighted formula)

     1994 - $10,00-0 staff cost (weighted formula)

     Total Cost: $307,500

     3E. Schedule

     1992 - Develop sccne of work and let contract for identifying critical
            coastal areas in both coastal zones. Develop RFP, let contract,
            finalize scope of work, manage study and contract.

     1993 - Work with CNPCP to develop authorities/tools to address land use
            general NPS problem identified in 1992 study.




                                           26









       1994 - Continue working on 1993 tasks, developing tools/authorities,
              etc.


       3F. Likelihood of Success

            The Department is required to accomplish the task as part of the
       CNPCP. If it does not, it will incur penalties as its federal funding
       for its 319 nonpoint source and CZM Programs. Resources to devote to
       this issue are scarce and this. would provide the Department an oppor-
       tunity to accomplish CNPCP requirements and avoid future penalties.
       The Department, therefore, strongly supports this effort because it
       provides an opportunity to fulfill a federal requirement that it may
       not be able to do otherwise.

       FY92 work (weighted formula and project of special merit)

            The study will analyze existing water quality data, collect new
       data if necessary, and analyze existing land use data to identify
       critical coastal areas with regard to NPS pollution. Once these areas
       are identified the source(s) of NPS pollution will be identified.
       Recommendations will then be made as to what new regulations,
       authorities, tools, BMPs, agreements, etc., need to be developed to
       address the NPS pollution problem in these critical coastal areas.

       OUTYEAR TASKS


       1993

       Initiate Development of Authorities and BMPs   As a result of the study
       recommendation new authorities and BMPs will have to be developed to
       address NPS pollution in critical coastal areas.

       Benchmarks:

       a.   Draft BMPs need to address NPS pollution in critical coastal areas
            will be developed.

       b.   Authorities needed to implement the BMPs will be developed.

       1994


       Finalize BMPs and authorities.


       Benchmarks:

       a.   BMPs will be.finalized.

       b.   Authorities will be implemented as appropriate.









                                           27









                                  TASK DESCRIPTION


    No* 92-EG.04        Title: Bucks County Dredge Disposal Study


    Federal: $ 57,500(309) Non-Federal: $         0        Total: $ 57,500
    ----------------------------------  :-Start-Date:-October-l,-1992   --------
    Work being done by:                   Completion Date:.Set)tember-30, 1993

    Grantee:    X   #Person Days:    30 :
                                        : Section 309 Enhancement Area:
    Others:    X                             Cumulative & Secondary Impacts
    1. Consultant
                                          GAPC Involvement:
                                             All as Appropriate (Bucks Co.)

    Location:    Delaware Estuary coastal zones,  Bucks County,  Pennsylvania.

    Background: Pennsylvania's DER is responsible for providing disposal
    sites for all channel maintenance dredging performed by the US Army
    Corps of Engineers (COE) on the Navigational Channel of the Delaware
    River from Allegheny Avenue in Philadelphia north to the Trenton Marine
    Terminal. Dredging is necessary in this area to maintain adequate
    channel depth for commerce on the river. Based on economics and
    environmental concerns, hydraulic dredging is the only prudent and
    feasible way to keep the channel open. The former USX site in this
    area has the potential to once again be a major economic factor and
    maintaining shipping access in this area could play a vital role in
    future economic revitalization activities.

    Because of growth and development that has taken place in this part of
    the coastal zone, there are few remaining areas where the dredge spoil
    can be placed. In the remaining undeveloped areas,'wetlands, open
    waters, and fishery concerns further limit where dredge spoils can be
    placed. Furthermore, some previously used sites have been eliminated
    because, as a result of the disposal, wetlands have been created, or
    the spoils were contaminated. Therefore, these areas cannot be
    "cleaned out" and reused as spoils-disposal areas. The DER may be
    faced with either not allowing the dredging to take place, thereby,
    severely restricting commerce in this area of the coastal zone, or else
    having to resort to bucket dredging which is environmentally damaging
    and more expensive.

    All potential existing sites for spoil disposal are owned or controlled
    by Waste Management.Incorporated. Because of the limited space, a
    system whereby the spoils can be periodically removed and the sites
    reused, must be devised to insure there will be future capacity. It is
    imperative that the DER secures disposal sites on a long-term basis and
    sets up a process that insures that their utilization will not
    negatively impact wetland and fisheries resources and that the areas
    can be "reused" to insure adequate future capacity.





                                          28









        This project continues CZM1s effort regarding dredge disposal in
        Pennsylvania's coastal zones which was initiated under FY 1991 Section
        309, Cumulative and Secondary Impactsf (Grant Task No. 91-EG.01).

        Proiect Description: The proposed study will identify sites that need
        to be secured by the DER to insure that dredging spoils can be disposed
        of in an environmentally safe and responsible manner on a long term
        basis. The study will also recommend how these sites can be secured
        and will identify all inter/intra agency agreements that will need to
        be developed.

        Estimated Project Budget

        Salaries and wages                          $ 4f9OO
        Fringe benefits                                  1,900
        Overhead                                           400
        Travel                                             200
        Materials & supplies                               100
        Equipment                                            0
        Consultant/contractor                       $ 50,   00
                                         Total      $ 57,500

        Expected Products and   Timetable: The results of     this effort will be a
        final report which identifies potential disposal      sites the DER could
        secure and how these sites can be secured. Information regarding the
        status of this effort will be submitted to OCRM as part of DER-DCZM1s
        quarterly performance report. The anticipated timetable for completing
        this effort is as. follows:
        12-31-92   Execute contract with consultant based on Scope of Work and
                   RFP developed under FY 1991 Section 309 (Grant Task No.
                   91-EG.01).

        03-31-93   Consultant will identify potential dredge disposal sites and
                   make recommendation to the DER on securing these sites (i.e.,
                   outright purchase, lease, etc.)

        06-30-93   Consultant will identify all environmental parameters and
                   outline inter/intra agency agreements the DER needs to
                   develop.

        08-31-93   Draft report submitted to the DER-DCZM for review and
                   comment.

        09-30-93   Final report which incorporates all comments will be
                   submitted to DER-DCZM.















                                                29









                                    TASK DESCRIPTION


     No. 92-EG.05@        Title: Prescrue Isle Bay Boating Impact Analysis


     Federal: $ 107,500(3091 Non-Federal: $          0          To--.al: $ 107,500
     ----------------------------------     :-Start-Date:-October-l,-1992    ---------
     Work being done by:                     Completidn Date: SeMember 30, 1993

     Grantee:    X    #Person Days:     30  :
                                            :Section 309 Enhancement Area:
     Others:    X                                Cumulative & Secondary Impacts
     1. Consultant
                                             GAPC Involvement:
                                                 OV-1 (Prescrue Isle Bay)
                                                           ---- 7 ------------------
     Location:    Presque  Isle Bay,  Erie  County, Pennsylvania.

     Background: Presque Isle Bay is a popular boating and recreational
     area. The 3,200-acre bay is surrounded by five miles of shoreline. A
     large part of that shoreline is associated with Presque Isle State Park
     which receives 4.5 to 5 million visitors annually. Presque Isle
     shelters the bay; which is not subject to as many rough water episodes
     as the surrounding open lake waters (one-reason why the bay is so
     attractive to boaters). However, the Bay is being subjected to
     increased recreational usage as a result of coastal growth and
     development. In the past decades, the number of marinas has increased
     significantly. Additionally, many boats are launched in the bay from
     trailers and car tops. The bay has approximately 2,500 public and
     private slips, and demand still exists. The City of Erie has
     recognized the need to study the impacts recreational boating is having
     on the Bay and develop a management plan to address them.

     Environmental impacts include water quality (sewage and gasoline from
     the boats) as well as impacts from waves generated by the boats.
     Sewage from boats is a concern in all waters of the Commonwealth, but
     especially in enclosed bodies such as the Bay. There are currently no
     state regulations requiring marinas to have pump out stations for
     sanitary facilities on boats, or covering the usage of those pump out
     stations by boats having sanitary facilities. There is little doubt
     that sewage from boats is being pumped/dumped into the Bay. With such
     a concentration of boats fugitive escapes of gasoline and oils into the
     bay from boats and marina fiiling stations is occurring. The escapes
     could currently be adversely affecting the bays water quality and the
     severity is likely to increase as boating usage increases. Waves from
     boating causes shoreline erosion which can harm wetlands. The
     increased sediments and wave action can also harm fish spawning.
     Boating disturbance may also be resuspending contaminated sediments
     which are known to exist in the Bay.

     overuse by boating also has social impacts. Safety is a major concern
     as boating capacity limits are reached and ultimately exceeded. The
     Bay is an attractive site for power boaters, sailing craft, and small
     fishing boats. Overuse by boaters can also lead to a diminished


                                              30









        recreational experience for all concerned, not only among the boaters.
        As the Bay's waters are cleaned up, there will be increasing demands
        placed on it by shore fishermen because of its proximity to a large
        urban population. The potential exists for increased conflicts among
        boaters and between boaters and shore fishermen.

        This project continues CZM1s effort regarding boating capacity and
        boating impacts in Presque Isle Bay initiated under FY 1991 Section
        309, Cumulative and Secondary Impacts, (Grant Task No. 91-EG.02).

        Proiect Description: The study will-document present and future
        environmental and social impacts that recreational boating is having on
        Presque Isle Bay. Also, the study will determine what boat capacity
        usage the Bay can support, a determination of what restrictions need to
        be placed on boating, how these restrictions should be applied, and who
        should be responsible for placing and enforcing those restrictions.
        The study will also determine where and how boating should be
        restricted to protect the environment and avoid user conflicts.

        Estimated Prolect Budget

        Salaries and wages                         $ 4,900
        Fringe benefits                                1,900
        overhead                                         400
        Travel                                           200
        Materials & supplies                             100
        Equipment                                          0
        Consultant/contractor                       $100,000
                                        Total       $107,500

        Expected Products and Timetable: The results of this effort will be a
        final report identifying the impacts boating is having on Presque Isle
        Bay. This includes information regarding boat capacity, restrictions
        on boating, and who, how, and where these restrictions should be
        applied to protect the environment and avoid user conflicts.
        Information regarding the status of this effort will be submitted to
        OCRM as part of DER-DCZM's quarterly performance report. The
        anticipated timetable for completing this effort is as follows:

        12-31-92   Execute contract with consultant based on Scope of Work and
                   RFP developed under FY 1991 Section 309 (Grant Task No.
                   91-EG.02).

        06-30-93   Consultant will identify present and future environmental a-nd
                   social impacts that recreational boating is having on Presque
                   Isle Bay. Also, what restrictions are needed to protect the
                   Bay environment and avoid user conflicts. This information
                   will be reviewed and coordinated through the Presque Isle Say
                   Task Force.

        08-31-93   Draft report submitted to the Presque Isle Bay Task Force and
                   DER-DCZM for review and comment.

        09-30-93   Final report which incorporates all comments will be
                   submitted to DER-DCZM.




                                               31









                                  TASK DESCRIPTION



     No. 92-EG-06       Title: Nonpoint Source Critical Coastal Area
                                 Identification

     Federal: $ 290,000(309) Non-Federal: $       0         Total: $ 290,000

                                         : Start Date: October 1, 1992
     ----------------------------------  :-C-o  ----------------------------------
     Work being done by:                     mpletion Date: Selptember 30, 1993

     Grantee:   X   #Person Days:    60  :
                                         : Section 309 Enhancement Area:
     Others:   X                              Cumulative & Secondary Impacts
     1. Consultant
                                           GAPC Involvement:
                                              All as Appropriate

     -----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Location: Both Delaware Estuary and Lake Erie coastal zones.

     Background: Coastal water quality is suffering as a result of nonpoint
     source (NPS) pollution. This threat will increase from cumulative and
     secondary impacts associated with growth and development as projected
     coastal growth occurs. Unfortunately, nobody has.a good handle on what
     NPS pollutants are causing the most problems (i.e., toxins, BODS, heavy
     metals, etc.). The DER and the Delaware River Basin Commission have
     some pertinent data but it has never been analyzed with respect to
     trying to determine how much of the pollution is attributable to NPS.

     The Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program (CNPCP) will require the
     Commonwealth to identify what NPS pollutants are impacting coastal
     waters and also identify critical coastal areas adjacent to the
     waterbodies to be protected. Including these adjacent areas for
     implementation of additional management measures can have a significant
     effect in preventing water quality problems and protecting designated
     uses of the coastal waterbodies.

     Since the Commonwealth does not have a lot of resources to devote to
     CNPCP and since federal funds for CNPCP development are limited, it is
     imperative that additional sources of funds be found for Pennsylvania
     to develop a program that addresses NPS pollution in coastal waters.
     Therefore, cZM will use Section 309 monies to hire a consultant to
     identify these critical areas in both coastal zones. The following
     criteria will be used to identify critical coastal areas under this
     initiative.

     * The nature of coastal water quality problem(s) caused by NPS
       pollution.

     * The extent to which NPS pollution is located adjacent to the
       waterbodies vs. inland.

     * The biophysical characteristics of the adjacent lands that will
       affect the extent to which uses of these lands will cause NPS
       pollution problems. These include topography/slope, soil
       characteristics (erodibility, etc.); shoreline erosion


                                           32









          characteristics; hydrology, in particular groundwater linkages to
          coastal waters and high water tables; and forest, wetlands, and other
          natural areas that may provide natural buffers or nutrient sinks

        * Important biological features that should be included as a whole in
          critical coastal areas.

        * The type(s), density, and characteristics of the new or expanded land
          uses that are anticipated and their effect(s) on water quality.

        * The extent to which the above effects can be prevented or reduced by
          implementation of management measures for land uses.

        * The need for an understandable and mappable area.

        Project Description: The proposed study will analyze existing water
        quality data, collect new data if necessary, and analyze existing land
        use data to identify critical areas with regards to NPS pollution.
        Once these areas are identified the source(s) of NPS pollution will
        also be identified. Recommendations will be made as to what
        regulations, authorities, tools, best management practices (Bmps),
        agreements, etc. need to be developed to address the NPS pollution
        problem in these critical coastal areas.

        Estimated Project Budget

        Salaries and wages                         $ 9,800
        Fringe benefits                                3,800
        Overhead                                         700
        Travel                                           500
        materials & supplies                             200
        Equipment                                          0
        Consultant/contractor                      $275,000.
                                        Total       $290,000

        Expected Products and Timetable: The product, a final report will
        identify critical coastal areas with regards to NPS pollution and the
        source(s) responsible for the pollution. Also, recommendations
        regarding how to address the NPS problem will result. Information
        regarding the status of this effort will be submitted to OCRM as part
        of DER-DCZM's quarterly performance report. The anticipated timetable
        for completing this effort is as follows:

        12-31-92   Scope of Work and RFP developed. Consultant selected.

        04-30-93   Consultant will collect data for review and analysis in
                   determining and identifying critical coastal areas.

        06-30-93   Consultant will identify and make recommendations for
                   addressing the NPS problem (authorities, regulations, etc.).

        08-31-93   Draft report submitted to the DER-DCZM as well as other
                   appropriate agencies/programs for review and comment.

        09-30-93   Final report which incorporates all comments will be
                   submitted to DER-DCZM.



                                              33









                       PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGENIENT
                               SECTION 309 STRATEGY
                                  PUBLIC ACCESS



    IA. Problem Summary

    The need for increased public access in both the Delaware Estuary and
    Lake Erie coastal zones remains high. The approach the Coastal Zone
    Management Program (CZM) has used, directing 306/306A funds toward this
    issue, has not proven adequate to meet the needs/demand for public
    access. Additionally, the coastal zones.,do not always receive the
    attention from other state public access providers because of their
    statewide responsibilities to provide public recreation. The coastal
    zones are small geographic areas with respect to the whole state.
    Therefore, the Program needs to take a more active role as a public
    access facilitator and focus state, federal, local, and private
    resources to provide more public access opportunities in both coastal
    zones.


    1B.,Prociram Change(s)

    The following Program Changes are proposed in addressing Public Acce'-%s
    in Pennsylvania.

    Program Change 1 - Development of Public Access   Management Plan (PAMP)

    Program Change 2 - Development of Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)
                        or letters of agreement

    These program changes, further described within this strategy, will
    enable CZM to better focus its limited resources, help identify and
    clarify responsibilities of other entities who provide public access,
    and help define how CZM can act as a facilitator in fulfilling public
    access needs in both coastal zones. Additionally, this approach will
    consolidate all CZM and non-CZM resources (i.e., staff, money, etc.),
    thus providing a broader spectrum of opportunities for providing public
    access. This will enable CZM to address public access through a more
    unified approach by creating a better working relationship among all
    public access providers (i.e., those who build, fund or coordinate
    public access development) as well as focus limited resources on public
    access priorities in the coastal zones.

    Initially in 1993, CZM is proposing a public access policy change. CZM
    will develop a new public access policy and present it to federal, .
    state, and local agencies responsible for providing public access, for
    review, input, and ultimate adoption. This new policy is an important
    step in the entire process. Based on the Governor's Executive Order,
    to the maximum extent pex3nitted by law,, all administrative departments,
    independent administrative boards and co=lssions, and other state
    agencies shall enforce and act consistently with the goals, policies,
    and objectives of the CZX Program. By developing a formal policy
    statement it brings the public access issue to a higher level of
    visibility within the Commonwealth. Although not enforceable per se,
    once formulated it will provide the basis for discussions and action by
    those agencies with authorities to provide public access. The policy


                                         34









       will more clearly articulate responsibility as well as provide leverage
       in pursuing, managing, and directing other state and local resources
       toward this issue.

       As part of this process, CZX will meet with these public access
       agencies/providers to discuss, negotiate, and coordinate the new policy
       concept and explain CZM1s role as a coastal public access facilitator.
       Additionally, CZM will begin to investigate and analyze existing
       authorities, mechanisms, and tools these agencies/providers use to
       provide public access opportunities in Pennsylvania. This information
       will be further developed and incorporated as part of tfie PAMP which is
       discussed below.

       In subsequent years (1994-1995), CZX will create a Public Access Task
       Force to assist in establishing public access priorities and guide the
       development of the PAMP. Furthermore, CZM will look at developing
       stronger links between appropriate public access providers through MoUs
       or letters of agreement to ensure these public access agencies adopt
       the new public access policy and PAMP.

       Program Change 1 - Development of a PAMP

       CZX will undertake the development of a PAMP. As part of this    effort.,
       CZX will create a Public Access Task Force, composed of representatives
       of federal, state, and local public access agencies/providers (possibly
       a subcommittee of the CZAC or local CZSC) to assist in establishing
       public access priorities and guide the development of the PAMP.

       The PAMP (to be partially completed by a consultant) will include an
       inventory and analysis of existing access areas and use patterns
       (including legal property/ownership rights). In addition, CZX will
       meet with state and local public access agencies/providers (i.e., those
       who build, fund or coordinate public access development) and
       Commonwealth legal counsel to research and analyze the existing legal
       and regulatory authorities, mechanisms, and tools the Program can use
       to help improve and increase public access opportunities in
       Pennsylvania's coastal zones. This information is an integral part of
       the PAMP and will be useful in developing and identifying priority
       public access efforts.
       The following are some of the mechanisms/tools Pennsylvania may have
       available in providing public access opportunities. CZM realizes that
       all of these may not be applicable to the Program; however, we
       anticipate that some could result or lead to program changes.
       Therefore, exploring all potential options is a necessary step in the
       overall process. Once completed, CZM will know what mechanism/tools
       the Program can use and the agencies that can help us in this endeavor.
       Furthermore, if other potential program changes are identified, CZM
       will amend the strategy to reflect them.

          Use of state owned lands or public right-of-ways for providing
          increased active and passive public access opportunities.

          Fee simple and less than fee simple acquisition options other than
          outright purchase.



                                           35








     Partial gift property donation (donor retains unrestricted title to
     portion of property).

     Easements (limited right owner grants for use of property).

     Leasing property with option for purchase.

     Working with local authorities toward adopting public access
     provisions as a component of their comprehensive plans and zoning
     ordinances. Local communities have the power to create special
     zones dedicated to specific uses while prohibiting other uses.
     These include waterfront districts, overlay districts (regulated
     development activities), incentive zoning (provide certain
     concessions to developers in exchange for public benefit), zoning of
     storm or flood damaged property for non-residential, recreational
     use, and adopting an ordinance that requires developers to provide
     public access or a fee in lieu of, to be placed in special fund
     designated for acquisition.or development of public access areas
     and/or opportunities.

     Limited liability for private property owners who open land to
     public recreational use.

     Resolving how to overcome existing environmental barriers and
     conditions (i.e., bluffs, highways, etc.) to provide additional
     public access opportunities. For example, CZM will undertake a
     demonstration project in the Lake Erie coastal zone. An accessway
     will be installed through the bluff face to the water to determine
     what technique and materials are best and if a stabilized method of
     traversing the bluffs and providing increased access is possible.
     once we establish a proven method, CZM can then proceed to use this
     approach in identifying and providing increased public access
     opportunities with local and state entities.

     Tax incentives for property owners who donate or sell property at
     reduced prices to local governments, nonprofit land trusts, etc.

     Donations of property (donor receives public recognition and avoids
     capital gain tax).

     Reduced price/installment sale (phased acquisition parcel by
     parcel).

     Flood damage property (difference between what HUD would normally
     pay to compensate for damages and the outright purchase price).

     Prescriptions (if you use a piece of property long enough without
     the owner's permission, you acquire the right to continue using it.

     Dedications (land owner dedicates land or the use of land to public
     with local government accepting on behalf of public).

     Explore the use of access opportunities with commercial and/or
     industrial property owners in the coastal zones (potential to use
     facilities during weekends and off-work days).


                                      36









         Explore the creation or establishment of a revenue source (local or
         state level) to increase and improve public access opportunities in
         Pennsylvania's coastal zones. These funds could be generated
         through a special tax or fee and would be used strictly for
         development, acquisition, construction, and rehabilitation of
         specific access sites.

      Also as part of the PAMP, Geographic Areas of Particular Concern (GAPC)
      will be incorporated into this'process. CZM will assess its existing
      GAPC process and develop new or revised GAPCs for recreation (public
      access) which will identify specific allowable uses for*each. CZM will
      negotiate with each coastal municipality, public access provider and/or
      public land administrator to set priority uses in each public access
      GAPC. CZM will expand its requirements so that No CZM funding will be
      available to state or local government agencies for public access
      activities (planning, construction or acquisition) unless located in a
      recreation (public access) GAPC. Further, the MOUs/agreements (as
      discussed below) will include language to also preclude the use of any
      state funding for public access activities unless it is located in a
      designated public access GAPC. Periodically the Public Access Task
      Force will meet to discuss public access (update or revise existing
      GAPCs, discuss additional mechanisms to improve or provide more access,
      etc.). This process will force close coordination regarding public
      access and will also increase the focus and commitment of all affected
      parties to only provide public access opportunities identified by the
      GAPCs in the PAMP.

      Program Change 2 - MoUs or letters of agreement

      CZM will look at developing stronger links between appropriate public
      access providers through MOUs or letters of agreement. This is the
      enforceable mechanism CZM will use to ensure these agencies adopt the
      new public access policy and PAMP. MOUs are program agreements between
      the Department of Environmental Resources (DER) and other state
      agencies and/or commissions which details the manner in which they will
      use their authorities in the furtherance of the Program's policies.
      These MOUs will more closely link our agencies' involvement, provide an
      avenue to better coordinate and address the provision of public access,
      and direct limited resources (staff and money) toward providing public
      access opportunities, both active and passive, in Pennsylvania's
      coastal zones. Additionally, they improve the Program staff management
      capabilities by making CZM more aware of pertinent activities in the
      coastal zones.

      CZM will develop new or revise existing MOUs and agreements with the
      Department of Community Affairs, DER Bureaus of State Parks and Dams
      and Waterway Management, PA Game Commission, PA Fish and Boat
      Commission, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service.

        CZM will revise the existing MOU with the Department of Community
        Affairs (DCA) to better focus their efforts in providing greater
        funding opportunities for providing public access in the coastal
        zones. DCA has many programs that provide assistance both technical
        and financial that could augment and/or supplement CZM funding (i.e.,
        Land & water Conservation Fund (LWCF), Heritage Parks Program,
        Recreation Improvement & Rehabilitation Act (RIRA), etc.).


                                          37








        CZM will develop an MOU with the DER Bureau of State Parks to better
        direct and coordinate our agencies efforts in identifying and
        providing both passive and active access opportunities in the coastal
        zones (i.e., Presque Isle State Park and Neshaminy State Park).
        Additionally, this MOU will tie CZM more closely into the statewide
        comprehensive outdoor recreation planning process (SCORP). Because
        of the varied and diverse recreational needs, demands, and
        opportunities exclusive to Pennsylvania's coastal zones, CZM will
        pursue development of a more detailed coastal zone section for the
        next SCORP. This will help CZM to continually identify and update
        the focus of what the public demand is and what facili-ty types to
        provide.

        CZM will develop an MOU with DER's Bureau of Dams and Waterway
        Management to better focus our agencies efforts regarding assessing,
        monitoring, and enforcing public access rights in the coastal zones.
        As part of this, we will explore and analyze riparian rights under
        Chapter 105 regulations and the Public Trust Doctrine to determine
        additional means for public access.

        Developing an MOU with the PA Game Commission will better focus their
        efforts in providing multiple-use public access opportunities on
        state game lands within the coastal zone.

        Revising the existing MOU with the PA Fish and Boat Commission
        (formally PA Fish Commission) will better focus their efforts in
        providing new fishing, boating and passive recreational opportunities
        as well as rehabilitating existing access sites in both coastal
        zones. CZM will become more aware and involved in coastal land
        acquisition efforts and opportunities.

        Development of an MOU/agreement with the National Park Service (NPS)
        will better focus their staff and financial support regarding public
        access opportunities in the coastal zones. The-NPS has many programs
        that provide assistance both technical and financial to augment CZM
        funding (i.e., Historic Preservation Fund Grants-In-Kind, Rivers and
        Trails Conservation Programs, etc.).

        Development of an MOU/agreement with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
        Service will better focus their staff and financial support in
        providing new fishing and boating opportunities as well as
        rehabilitate existing access sites in both coastal zones. CZM will
        become more aware and involved in coastal land acquisition efforts
        and opportunities.

      1C. Apiprooriateness of Tools

      CZM has always had the mandate to address public access needs in the
      coastal zones; however, our approach has not proven adequate to meet
      the demand/needs. The new public access policy will more clearly
      articulate responsibility as well as provide leverage in pursuing,
      managing, and directing other state and local resources toward this
      issue. Proposed program changes (PAMP, MOUs, etc.) are necessary tools
      to implement the new policy. The end result will be greater substance
      and predictability to CZM's efforts to provide increased public access


                                          38









        opportunities in Pennsylvania's coastal zones. It will also ensure
        that CZM1s limited program resources will be used in consort with other
        available resources to maximize public access efforts and impacts.

        1D. Costs

        1993 - $20,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

        1994 - $15,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

        1995 - $37,000 staff cost/$50,000 consultant cost (weighted formula)

        Total cost: $122,000

        1E. Schedule

        1993 - New public access policy development, meet and coordinate with
               affected agencies, and adoption of new policy.

        1994 - Create Public Access Task Force to assist in establishing public
               access priorities and guide the development of a Scope Of Work
               (SOW) and Request For Proposals (RFP) for the PAMP.

        1995 - Conduct and complete PAMP. Development MOUs/agreements with
               appropriate agencies. Develop additional policies, legal or
               regulatory mechanisms, etc. if appropriate. Revise and update
               CZM documents to reflect new direction and coordinate changes
               with affec ted entities.

        1F. Likelihood of Success

        CZM feels that the new public access policy and program change(s),
        (PAMP, MOUs, etc.) will be looked upon very favorably. We have the
        support from DER and the local municipalities in pursuing increased
        public access and the backing to implement the necessary changes to the
        program. Additionally CZM feels it has the acceptability of the other
        agencies identified in the strategy. Many of the identified agencies
        participate as members of CZM's Coastal Zone Advisory Committee or
        locally at the Steering Committee level. These groups had numerous
        opportunities to comment on the Assessment and CZM's direction with
        regards to Section 309. We received no negative input or comments. In
        fact, all of the access agencies/providers were supportive of the
        effort and optimistic of the potential to collectively address the
        problems of providing public access (i.e., scattered funding and
        limited financial and staff resources, etc.) to accomplish
        Pennsylvania's goals for coastal public access.

        This is a high visibility issue. People want more public access
        opportunities (passive and active). To maintain the support for the
        intended program change(s), CZM will direct money and staff efforts in
        pursuing the above identified mechanisms (PAMP, MOUs, etc.) and toward
        providing improved and increased public access opportunities in
        Pennsylvania's coastal zones.





                                             39










       OUTYEAR TASKS

       1993 - Public access policy development, coordination with affected
               agencies, and adoption of new policy.
       12-31-93   Draft new public access policy.

       03-31-94   Distribute policy and meet with appropriate federal, state,
                  local, and private agencies for review/input.
       06-30-94   Coordinate with affected agencies as to responsibilities
                  under new policy and analyze legal and regulatory
                  authorities, mechanisms, and tools available to help improve
                  and increase public access in Pennsylvania's coastal zones.

       09-30-94   Finalize and adopt policy.

       Work Product: * New public access policy
                       ï¿½ Meet and coordinate with public access providers to
                         identify, analyze, and develop tools
                       ï¿½ Adoption of new policy

       1994 - Create Public Access Task Force and develop Scope of Work and
               RFP for PAMP.

       03-31-95 Create Public Access Task Force.

       09-30-95 Scope of Work and RFP for the PAMP '(to be partially completed
                  by a consultant) will be finalized.

       Work Product: * Creation of Public Access Task Force
                       * PAMP Scope of Work and RFP

       1995 - Conduct and complete PAMP. Develop MOUs/agreements with
               appropriate agencies. Develop additional policies, legal or
               regulatory mechanisms, etc., if appropriate. Revise and update
               CZM documents to reflect new direction and coordinate changes
               with affected entities.

       12-31-95 Consultant selected and PAMP initiated.

       03-31-96   Develop MOUs/agreements with appropriate agencies.

       08-31-96   Complete PAMP, and if appropriate, develop additional
                  policies or mechanisms for providing public access
                  opportunities.

       09-31-96   Revise existing procedures for soliciting projects i.e.,
                  application guidelines, selection criteria; coordinate
                  changes with both local steering committees and advisory
                  committee; and update FEIS and program document to reflect
                  changes.

       Work Product: * PAMP
                       * MOUs/agreements
                       * Updated program document and FEIS reflecting new
                         public access direction


                                             40










                     PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
                                 SECTION 309 STRATEGY
                                       WETLANDS



       IA. Problem Sunmary

            Current regulations and Coastal Zone Management (CZM) monitoring
       activities adequately protect and preserve Pennsylvania's coastal
       wetlands within the CZM coastal boundaries. However, direct and
       significant impacts to coastal wetlands result from activities which
       occur in hydrologically connected waters/wetlands and surrounding
       uplands located beyond the current boundaries.

       1B. Program Change

       Expand the Pennsylvania.CZM Boundaries to Include Significant
       Hydrologically Connected wetlands

            This task will result in a change to Pennsylvania CZM boundaries.
       CZM1s wetland enhancement objective is to protect, restore, or enhance
       existing coastal wetlands. By expanding the CZM boundary to include
       hydrologically connected wetlands, it is estimated that CZM will
       increase the number of wetlands they currently protect by tenfold. CZM
       will expand the coastal boundaries in Erie, Delaware, Philadelphia, and
       Bucks counties to include wetlands that are hydrologically connected,to
       coastal wetlands. A boundary change may not be explored in .
       Philadelphia County if it is determined that there are too few wetlands
       within this highly urbanized portion of the coastal zone. Those
       wetlands that do exist may be so degraded it is doubtful they have any
       existing wetland value.

            As stated in the final assessment, Chapter 105 Regulations require
       that mitigation for impacted wetlands within CZM boundaries must occur
       within those same boundaries. By expanding the boundaries, this
       additional protection can be extended to hydrologically connected
       wetlands.

            In the Lake Erie coastal zoner the CZM boundary will be analyzed
       to the limits of the Lake Erie' Primarv watershed. All the streams
       within these limits (except those in Springfield Township) will flow
       into Lake Erie through Pennsylvania land. In Springfield Township, the
       majority of streams within the primary watershed flow west into Ohio
       and then into Lake Erie. The largest of these is Conneaut Creek.
       Turkey Creek, a smaller tributary closer to the Lake Erie shoreline and
       partially within CZX boundaries, also flows into Ohio. The existing
       CZM boundary will be analyzed south approximately two miles beyond the
       existing boundaries to take in all of Turkey Creek watershed drainage.
       The largest expansion analyzed will be approximately ten miles from the
       existing boundary line. The average planned expansion to be analyzed
       is approximately eight miles.

            The expansion analysis of the CZM boundary in the Delaware Estuary
       coastal zone is much more complex than that of Lake Erie. The primary
       and secondary watersheds are too large for expansion purposes. A
       thorough field examination will analyze the limits and process of


                                           41








       expansion. For purposes of this strategy, average limits will be
       approximately three to five miles. This distance was determined by
       measuring smaller (some unnamed) tributaries and the upper limits of
       free flow (dams/reservoirs) of larger streams. The purpose of this
       task would be to analyze all available information and determine a
       process to expand the CZM boundary limits. There is a possibility that
       the Delaware Estuary coastal zone boundary may not be expandable or
       only expandable in special areas subject to special criteria such as
       unique wetlands, rare and endangered species, etc.

            This program change will involve close public involvement and
       coordination with federal, state, county, and local agencies.

       1C. Appropriateness of Tools

            Current regulations and monitoring activities adequately protect
       wetlands within the CZM boundaries. The only feasible way to address
       impacts from hydrologically connected impacts to coastal wetlands is to
       exDand the CZM boundaries to include upland drainage areas/watersheds.

       1D. Costs

       1992 - $3C,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

       1993 - $10,000 staff cost (weighted formula)

       Total Cost: $40,000

       1E. Schedule

       1992 - Evaluate existing boundaries and collect information to
              determine the appropriate expansion process and limits.
              Draft/finalize boundary change proposal.

       1993 - Develop amendment package to distribute for public review and
              comments. Hold public hearings to receive testimony. Complete
              final documents and submit to NOAA/OCRM for approval.

       1F. Likelihood of Success

            There is no perceived negative impacts to having Pennsylvania's
       CZM Program boundaries expanded. There will be adequate federal,
       state, and local support for this action. The department will provide
       additional support for this effort through additional staff to handle
       the wetland protection/monitoring/coordination work. This task has a
       high likelihood of success.
       FY92 Work Program.(Proiect of Special Merit!

            CZM will complete a thorough analysis of boundary, hydrologic,
       topographic, geologic, and political boundary maps. Other resource
       documents will be analyzed along with conducting field work in the
       affected areas. This will be done to determine how far the boundaries
       must extend in order to include all or as many wetlands hydrologically
       connected to coastal wetlands.




                                             42








       First Quarter (Oct-Dec) - Analyze all existing data, maps, and reports
       that may have relevance to how hydrologically connected wetlands can be
       included within CZM boundaries. Draft a boundary change proposal for
       both.

       Second and Third Quarter (Jan-Jun) - Public involvement and
       coordination meeting with federal, state, and local agencies on
       proposed boundary changes.

       Fourth Quarter (Jul-Sep) - Finalize boundary change proposal.

       OUTYRAR TASKS


       1993

       Develop amendment package of boundary changes and submit to NOAA/OCRM
       for approval.

       Benchmarks:

       a.   Develop amendment package to distribute for public review and
            comment.

       b.   Hold public hearings to receive testimony on boundary changes.

       C.   Compile final documents and submit to NOAA/OCRM for amendment
            approval.





























                                           43










                                   TASK DESCRIPTION



      No. 92-EG.03        Title: CZM Boundary Change


      Federal: $ 15,000(309) Non-Federal: $        0         Total: $ 15,000
      ----------------------------------   :-Start-Date:-October-l,-1992 --------
      Work being done by:                   Completion Date: September 30, 19T3

      Grantee:    X   #Person Days:    60 :
                                          : Section 309 Enhancement Area:
      Others:                                  Wetlands


                                            GAPC Involvement:
                                               All as Appropriate
      Location:--Both-Delaware-Estuary-and-  Lake- Erie-coastal-zones  -----------

      Background: CZM1s wetland enhancement objective is to protect,
      restore, or enhance existing coastal wetlands. By expanding the CZM
      boundary to include hydrologically connected wetlands, it is estimated
      the CZM will increase the number of wetlands they currently protect by
      tenfold. CZM will expand the coastal boundaries in Erie, Delaware,
      Philadelphia, and Bucks counties to include wetlands that are
      hydrologically connected to coastal wetlands. A boundary change may'
      not be explored in Philadelphia County if it is determined that there
      are too few wetlands within this highly urbanized portion of the
      coastal zone. Those wetlands that do exist may be so degraded it is
      doubtful they have any existing wetland value.

      As stated in the final assessment, Chapter 105 regulations require that
      mitigation for impacted wetlands within CZM boundaries must occur
      within those same boundaries. By expanding the boundaries, this
      additional protection can be extended to hydrologically connected
      wetlands. Other benefits derived will include a more realistic
      fulfillment of the needs and desires of the coastal residents,
      businesses, industries, and interest groups that were expressed during
      the formulation of the Pennsylvania CZM Program, and to address wetland
      preservation - a national priority.

      Proiect Description: The purpose of this task is to analyze all
      available information and determine a process to expand the CZM
      boundary limits. CZM will complete a thorough analysis of boundary,
      hydrologic, topographic, geologic, and political boundary maps. other
      resource documents will be analyzed along with conducting field work in
      the affected areas to determine how far the boundaries must extend in
      order to include all or as many wetlands hydrologically connected to
      coastal wetlands.

      Following the analysis of existing data (maps, reports, etc.), draft
      boundary change proposals for both coastal zones will be developed.
      They will be subject to review by federal, state and local agencies and
      the public prior to finalizing the boundary change proposals.



                                            44








      Estimated Proiect Budget

      Salaries and wages                        $ 9,800
      Fringe benefits                                3,800
      Overhead                                         700
      Travel                                           500
      Materials & supplies                             200
      Equipment                                          0
      Consultant/contractor                     $        0
                                      Total     $   151000

      Expected Products and Timetable: The product of this effort will be a
      final determination on how far the CZM'boundaries need to be extended
      in order to include wetlands hydrologically connected to coastal
      wetlands (boundary change proposal). Information regarding the status
      of this effort will be submitted to OCRM as part of DER-DCZM1s
      quarterly performance report. The anticipated timetable for completing
      this effort is as follows:

      12-31-92  Analyze all existing data, maps, and reports that may have
                relevance to how hydrologically connected wetlands can be
                included within CZM boundaries. Draft a boundary change
                proposal for both coastal zones.

      06-30-93  Public involvement and coordination meeting with federal,
                state, and local agencies on proposed boundary changes.

      09-30-93  Finalize  boundary change proposal.




























                                             45








                                              COST SUMMARY

                             PENNSYLVANIA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
                                SECTION 309 STRATEGY SCHEDULE AND COST



                                                                                             Projects
                                                                                                of
                                                                                 Weighted    Special
  MAXIMUM PER YEAR WEIGHTED FORMULA: $114,800                          Program     Formula    Merit
                                                                        Change      309        309
                                                                        Areas      Funding   Funding
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 t
   992

    H    - Bluff points/Measures/Monitor                                  1B     $ 50,000
         - Compile legal interpretation changes; BRSA                     2B        5,000
  IL     -Inventory boundary changes 'and develop proposal                1B       30,000
   &SI   -Develop Bucks Co. dredge disposal study                         1B        7,500     $ 50,000
         -PIBay - convene study, develop RFP, execute                     2B        7,500       100,000
            consultant contract
         -NPS - let contract for identifying critical                     31B      15,000       275,000
            coastal areas                                                        -------- -   --------
                                                                                 $115,000     $425,000
 1993

   f'H   -Amend Shoreline Erosion and Flooding, Erie Co.                  1B     $ 10,000
         -Amend CH policy IA.1 to include BRSA guidelines                 2B        6,500
          Pre BRSA Amendment work                                         3B       10,000
         -Amend Act; BRSA                                                 3B       18,000
         -Research new bluff traverse/use possibilities                   3B       18,000

   v)L   -Develop amendment package for OCRM approval                     1B       10,000
 I
         -Analyze dredge study, implement recommendations,                1B        7,500
            develop purchase/lease agreements, and
            MOU/agreements
         -PlBay - Review study recommendations, implement      them       2B        7,500
         -NPS - develop authorities/tools to address land                 3B        7,500
            use NPS problems

    PA   -Develop new public access policy, meet and coordinate           1B       20,000
            with analyze tools and mechanisms, and adopt policy                  ---------
                                                                                 $115,000








                                                  46









     1994

     CH    -Amend Regs, local ord. for recession rate changes               1B    $ 22,000
            Amend Regs, local ord. for bluff face restrictions              3B      26,000
           -Demonstration projects on traversing/using bluff face           3B      22,000

     C&SI  -Finalize activities, secure sites, execute/implement            1B      10,000
               agreements
           -PIBay - finalize regulations, agreements and implement          2B      10,000
           -NPS continue developing tools/authorities                       3B      10,000

     PA    -Create public access task force and develop PAMP SOW            1B      15,000
               and RFP                                                            ---------
                                                                                  $115,000


     1995

     CH    - Monitor and evaluate bluff face use demo projects              3B    $ 13,000
           -Develop technical assistance package                            3B      15,000

     PA    -Develop public access management plan                           1B      62,000
           -Develop MOUs and agreements                                     1B      10,000
           -Develop additional public access policies if                    1B      10,000
               necessary
           -Revise existing project selection criteria and                  IB         5,000
               procedures and inform CZSCs and CZACs                              ---------
               and update (RPI) HIS program document                              $115,000

























                                                    47







                   Lake Erie Coastal Zone










                                           COASTAL ZONE BOUNDARY






                                                                                                                                                                          C


                                                                                                                                                                                   E R I E



                                                                                                                                                                                                           -ARBORCREEK           WP
                                     SPRINGFIELD T WIP                     GIR.RD       T WP                              TWP                                               L
                                                                                                                                                                     MiLL CREEK     TWP
                                                                                                                                                                                             GREENE' TWP                                   GR
                                                                                                                                   McKEAN      I   p          summit        T.P
                                                                                                                                                        I
                 -1NF A. I    I P















                                                                                                                                                                            N.t- Inacc           "I I @ 197(-Ii,yof III,   S 1),I-1-ni of
                                                                                                                                                                                      I
                                                                                                                                                                            1-1. 1 1"d              h:,I,                b@ I.w. ub)-i .I,

                                                                                                                                                                            .01,                       F1 A III, fld'-1,11 II  I,  I.), ".I III,
                                                                                                                                                                                    ........ te-1 1111-11o
                                                                                                                                                                                                          c






























                                                                                                                                                                                                          01
                                                                                                                                                                                                          'F


                                                                                                                                                                                                                               T






                          Delaware Estuary Coastal Zone











                                                                                                                                       P H I L A DE L P H I A

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         NI@L
                                                  TER





                                                                                                                                                                                                                81,11. NI'M


                                                                                                                                                     (1-DE N



                                                 COASIAL ZONE BOUNDARY
















                                                                                                                                                                                      N.W                                          U
                                                                                                                                                                                           I beld           "b" 1, .... .. .. ...... ..... by I-,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                            11 .. ...... I"I " '-@ I 'd
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        'fl'111'1111 ILI 111.11L




                                                                                                                                ;  JOU COASTAL SIRVICES CTR LIBRARY -    -
                                                                                                                                                                        . *
                                                                                                                                     3 6668 14111123 9 '