DOCSLIB.ORG

Mainedot Work Plan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MaineDOT January 25, 2021 Dear MaineDOT Customers and Partners, On behalf of the nearly 1,800 dedicated employees at the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT), I am privileged to present this 2021 Edition of our Work Plan for the three calendar years 2021, 2022, and 2023. This Work Plan includes all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions. This plan contains 2,180 individual work items with a total value of $2.71 billion. It consists principally of work to be delivered or coordinated through MaineDOT, but it also includes funding and work by other transportation partners, including airports and transit agencies. This is the first – and hopefully last – Work Plan we will release during a global pandemic. Obviously, COVID-19 has impacted everything, including transportation in Maine. Despite a year like no other, MaineDOT’s essential mission remains unchanged: to support economic opportunity and quality of life by responsibly providing our customers with the safest and most reliable transportation system possible, given available resources. Those last three words – given available resources – are critical. Transportation needs in Maine continue to far outpace available resources for several reasons including Maine’s large land area, expansive transportation system, relatively low and widely dispersed population, and geology and weather that – while beautiful – are challenging when it comes to transportation infrastructure. The scope of the chronic shortfall is daunting. In 2019, a nonpartisan Blue Ribbon Commission – made up of legislators, transportation professionals, and other stakeholders – was specifically formed to recommend transportation funding solutions. This Commission found that Maine’s unmet transportation need is more $230 million per year. That shortfall figure was calculated after assuming that state bonding of $100 million or more will continue every year. The Commission called for redirecting and raising additional revenue and more federal funding for transportation. The Commission’s final report was released on March 9, 2020. Less than a week later, COVID-19 hit Maine. The economy shook. Unemployment spiked. Many businesses – especially those in hospitality – are fighting to hang on. Many Maine people are struggling with basic needs like maintaining their jobs, paying their rent or mortgage, and providing food for their families. The pandemic also caused traffic volumes to plummet, and they remain down, making an already tough state transportation revenue situation worse. Despite these challenges, MaineDOT immediately pivoted to what became known as business unusual, a term indicating that we need to keep delivering for Maine while acknowledging that everything is different. We shifted to remote work, prudently reduced hiring and other spending, and accelerated the use of bond funds made available from the earlier-than-usual July 2020 referendum vote. To take advantage of increased safety from lower traffic volumes and better bid prices, we used bond funds to add ten capital projects valued at $33 million to MaineDOT’s 2020 capital program. We delivered this augmented capital program at a record-breaking 94% on-time delivery rate, providing a silver lining in the economic dark cloud caused by the pandemic. We all can be proud of the many ways MaineDOT continues to deliver during this time of business unusual. Although we will need to continue the quest started by the Blue Ribbon Commission and find transformational state revenue solutions for transportation, the pandemic requires different priorities for the next year or two. We now focus on defeating the virus, restoring our economy, helping Maine people and businesses in need, and addressing budget shortfalls. Reflecting the reality of COVID-19, this Work Plan: • Keeps Maine working now and builds on our long-term economic foundation by maintaining solid capital transportation programs. It does so with robust and prudent state bonding made possible by historically low interest rates and by fully utilizing discretionary and extraordinary federal funding. • Requires MaineDOT to squeeze the most value from every existing reliable dollar. To do so, we must continue to “MacGyver,” which means “to make or repair (an object) in an improvised or inventive way, making use of whatever items are at hand.” • Requires MaineDOT to be agile enough to respond to possible different federal funding futures, including more economic stimulus or a large national infrastructure package. • Expands partnership programs, supports existing and emerging businesses, refocuses investment in our villages, enhances planning and communication, and confronts climate change. Transportation is fundamental to our safety, economic prosperity, and quality of life. It is fundamental to everything we do and who we are. Admittedly, we have big challenges in the near-term as we defeat the virus. In the long-term, we have great opportunities to make a real difference for the people of Maine after we resolve the chronic funding challenge. We look forward to working with you to maximize these opportunities as we move forward together. Respectfully, Bruce A. Van Note Contents Introduction MaineDOT’s Three-Year Work Plan – 2021 Edition .................................................................................... i A. Sources of Funds ....................................................................................................................................... iii 1. State Highway Fund Revenues ......................................................................................................... iv 2. Federal Funds ..................................................................................................................................... iv 3. Bonding ............................................................................................................................................. vii 4. State Multimodal Funding................................................................................................................. viii 5. Municipal Matching Funds ............................................................................................................... ix 6. Other Funding Sources ..................................................................................................................... ix 7. Previously Programmed Funds ........................................................................................................ ix 8. Adapting to Funding Uncertainty .................................................................................................... x B. Uses of Funds ............................................................................................................................................. xi 1. Principles and Processes .................................................................................................................... xi 2. Breakdown of Uses of Funds ............................................................................................................. xii C. Unmet Need ............................................................................................................................................. xx Reading the Work Plan ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Work Plan Tabs ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Tips on Using This Work Plan .......................................................................................................................... 2 Counties • Androscoggin ………………………………………………………………...……………………… 3 • Aroostook …………………………………………………………………......................................... 14 • Cumberland ………………………………………………………………......................................... 32 • Franklin …………………………………………………………………............................................ 55 • Hancock ……………………………………………………………………..……………………….. 62 • Kennebec …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 71 • Knox …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 82 • Lincoln ……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 88 • Oxford ………………………………………………………………………………………............... 94 • Penobscot …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 103 • Piscataquis …………………………………………………………………........................................ 121 • Sagadahoc ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 125 • Somerset ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 129 • Waldo ………………………………………………………………………………………………… 136 • Washington …………………………………………………………………………………............... 140 • York …………………………………………………………………………………………………... 146 Statewide Capital Programs …………………………………………………………………………… 160 Statewide Operations …………………………………………………………………………………… 177 Municipal Index …………………………………………………………………………………………. 230 Work Plan Terms and Definitions ……………………………………………………………………… 238 MaineDOT’s Three-Year Work Plan 2021 Edition Introduction This Work Plan describes all work planned by the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT) and its transportation partners for calendar years 2021, 2022, and 2023. Published early each calendar year, all MaineDOT work plans since 2013 have included all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions for three calendar years.1 This Work Plan contains 2,180 work items with a total value of $2.71
Recommended publications
  • David Mohler Signature

    David Mohler Signature

    Massachusetts Division 55 Broadway, 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 January 15, 2021 (617) 494-3657 (617) 494-3355 www.fhwa.dot.gov/madiv In Reply Refer To: HDA-MA David J. Mohler Executive Director Office of Transportation Planning Massachusetts Department of Transportation 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116-3969 Subject: FY 2021-2025 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Amendment #2 Dear Mr. Mohler: Thank you for your letter received on January 5, 2021. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has reviewed the Fiscal Years (FY) 2021-2025 STIP with the following amendments and adjustments received from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and endorsed by the relevant Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): Action Organization MPO Endorsement Date 1.01 Berkshire MPO December 22, 2020 1.02-1.05 Boston MPO December 17, 2020 1.06-1.08 Merrimack Valley MPO December 30, 2020 1.09-1.10 Pioneer Valley MPO December 22, 2020 1.11 Southeastern Mass MPO December 9, 2020 Our review consisted of ensuring that the FY 2021-2025 STIP Amendment #2 and associated FY 2021- 2025 TIP Amendments adopted by the MPOs are based on a continuing, comprehensive and cooperative transportation planning process that substantially meets the requirements of 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135 and 23 CFR 450. The actions listed above do not require an air quality determination. Changes called for in this STIP amendment maintain financial constraint as required under 23 CFR 450.218. Additionally, our approval of the FY 2021-2025 STIP was subject to the resolution of one corrective action. On December 29, 2020, we received an action plan update addressing the corrective action and a number of recommendations, indicating that all self-certifications have been updated and completing the corrective action.
  • Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon

    Penobscot Rivershed with Licensed Dischargers and Critical Salmon

    0# North West Branch St John T11 R15 WELS T11 R17 WELS T11 R16 WELS T11 R14 WELS T11 R13 WELS T11 R12 WELS T11 R11 WELS T11 R10 WELS T11 R9 WELS T11 R8 WELS Aroostook River Oxbow Smith Farm DamXW St John River T11 R7 WELS Garfield Plt T11 R4 WELS Chapman Ashland Machias River Stream Carry Brook Chemquasabamticook Stream Squa Pan Stream XW Daaquam River XW Whitney Bk Dam Mars Hill Squa Pan Dam Burntland Stream DamXW Westfield Prestile Stream Presque Isle Stream FRESH WAY, INC Allagash River South Branch Machias River Big Ten Twp T10 R16 WELS T10 R15 WELS T10 R14 WELS T10 R13 WELS T10 R12 WELS T10 R11 WELS T10 R10 WELS T10 R9 WELS T10 R8 WELS 0# MARS HILL UTILITY DISTRICT T10 R3 WELS Water District Resevoir Dam T10 R7 WELS T10 R6 WELS Masardis Squapan Twp XW Mars Hill DamXW Mule Brook Penobscot RiverYosungs Lakeh DamXWed0# Southwest Branch St John Blackwater River West Branch Presque Isle Strea Allagash River North Branch Blackwater River East Branch Presque Isle Strea Blaine Churchill Lake DamXW Southwest Branch St John E Twp XW Robinson Dam Prestile Stream S Otter Brook L Saint Croix Stream Cox Patent E with Licensed Dischargers and W Snare Brook T9 R8 WELS 8 T9 R17 WELS T9 R16 WELS T9 R15 WELS T9 R14 WELS 1 T9 R12 WELS T9 R11 WELS T9 R10 WELS T9 R9 WELS Mooseleuk Stream Oxbow Plt R T9 R13 WELS Houlton Brook T9 R7 WELS Aroostook River T9 R4 WELS T9 R3 WELS 9 Chandler Stream Bridgewater T T9 R5 WELS TD R2 WELS Baker Branch Critical UmScolcus Stream lmon Habitat Overlay South Branch Russell Brook Aikens Brook West Branch Umcolcus Steam LaPomkeag Stream West Branch Umcolcus Stream Tie Camp Brook Soper Brook Beaver Brook Munsungan Stream S L T8 R18 WELS T8 R17 WELS T8 R16 WELS T8 R15 WELS T8 R14 WELS Eagle Lake Twp T8 R10 WELS East Branch Howe Brook E Soper Mountain Twp T8 R11 WELS T8 R9 WELS T8 R8 WELS Bloody Brook Saint Croix Stream North Branch Meduxnekeag River W 9 Turner Brook Allagash Stream Millinocket Stream T8 R7 WELS T8 R6 WELS T8 R5 WELS Saint Croix Twp T8 R3 WELS 1 Monticello R Desolation Brook 8 St Francis Brook TC R2 WELS MONTICELLO HOUSING CORP.
  • KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds

    KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds

    FALL/ WINTER 2015 THE NEWSLETTER OF MAINE RIVERS KENNEBEC SALMON RESTORATION: Innovation to Improve the Odds Walking thigh-deep into a cold stream in January in Maine? The idea takes a little getting used to, but Paul Christman doesn’t have a hard time finding volunteers to do just that to help with salmon egg planting. Christman is a scientist with Maine Department of Marine Resource. His work, patterned on similar efforts in Alaska, involves taking fertilized salmon eggs from a hatchery and planting them directly into the cold gravel of the best stream habitat throughout the Sandy River, a Kennebec tributary northwest of Waterville. Yes, egg planting takes place in the winter. For Maine Rivers board member Sam Day plants salmon eggs in a tributary of the Sandy River more than a decade Paul has brought staff and water, Paul and crews mimic what female salmon volunteers out on snowshoes and ATVs, and with do: Create a nest or “redd” in the gravel of a river waders and neoprene gloves for this remarkable or stream where she plants her eggs in the fall, undertaking. Finding stretches of open stream continued on page 2 PROGRESS TO UNDERSTAND THE HEALTH OF THE ST. JOHN RIVER The waters of the St. John River flow from their headwaters in Maine to the Bay of Fundy, and for many miles serve as the boundary between Maine and Quebec. Waters of the St. John also flow over the Mactaquac Dam, erected in 1968, which currently produces a substantial amount of power for New Brunswick. Efforts are underway now to evaluate the future of the Mactaquac Dam because its mechanical structure is expected to reach the end of its service life by 2030 due to problems with the concrete portions of the dam’s station.
  • The Case for Reconnecting Southeast Washington DC

    The Case for Reconnecting Southeast Washington DC

    1 Reimagining DC 295 as a vital multi modal corridor: The Case for Reconnecting Southeast Washington DC Jonathan L. Bush A capstone thesis paper submitted to the Executive Director of the Urban & Regional Planning Program at Georgetown University’s School of Continuing Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Masters of Professional Studies in Urban & Regional Planning. Faculty Advisor: Howard Ways, AICP Academic Advisor: Uwe S. Brandes, M.Arch © Copyright 2017 by Jonathan L. Bush All Rights Reserved 2 ABSTRACT Cities across the globe are making the case for highway removal. Highway removal provides alternative land uses, reconnects citizens and natural landscapes separated by the highway, creates mobility options, and serves as a health equity tool. This Capstone studies DC 295 in Washington, DC and examines the cases of San Francisco’s Embarcadero Freeway, Milwaukee’s Park East Freeway, New York City’s Sheridan Expressway and Seoul, South Korea’s Cheonggyecheon Highway. This study traces the history and the highway removal success using archival sources, news circulars, planning documents, and relevant academic research. This Capstone seeks to provide a platform in favor DC 295 highway removal. 3 KEYWORDS Anacostia, Anacostia Freeway, Anacostia River, DC 295, Highway Removal, I-295, Kenilworth Avenue, Neighborhood Planning, Southeast Washington DC, Transportation Planning, Urban Infrastructure RESEARCH QUESTIONS o How can Washington’s DC 295 infrastructure be modified to better serve local neighborhoods? o What opportunities
  • Kennebec Estuary Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance Kennebec Estuary

    Kennebec Estuary Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance Kennebec Estuary

    Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance: Kennebec Estuary Focus Areas of Statewide Ecological Significance Kennebec Estuary WHY IS THIS AREA SIGNIFICANT? The Kennebec Estuary Focus Area contains more than 20 percent of Maine’s tidal marshes, a significant percentage of Maine’s sandy beach and associated dune Biophysical Region habitats, and globally rare pitch pine • Central Maine Embayment woodland communities. More than two • Cacso Bay Coast dozen rare plant species inhabit the area’s diverse natural communities. Numerous imperiled species of animals have been documented in the Focus Area, and it contains some of the state’s best habitat for bald eagles. OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONSERVATION » Work with willing landowners to permanently protect remaining undeveloped areas. » Encourage town planners to improve approaches to development that may impact Focus Area functions. » Educate recreational users about the ecological and economic benefits provided by the Focus Area. » Monitor invasive plants to detect problems early. » Find ways to mitigate past and future contamination of the watershed. For more conservation opportunities, visit the Beginning with Habitat Online Toolbox: www.beginningwithhabitat.org/ toolbox/about_toolbox.html. Rare Animals Rare Plants Natural Communities Bald Eagle Lilaeopsis Estuary Bur-marigold Coastal Dune-marsh Ecosystem Spotted Turtle Mudwort Long-leaved Bluet Maritime Spruce–Fir Forest Harlequin Duck Dwarf Bulrush Estuary Monkeyflower Pitch Pine Dune Woodland Tidewater Mucket Marsh Bulrush Smooth Sandwort
  • Gregor Weichbrodt on the Road 0X0a

    Gregor Weichbrodt on the Road 0X0a

    0x0a On the Road Gregor Weichbrodt On the Road Gregor Weichbrodt 0x0a © 2014 Gregor Weichbrodt All rights reserved. www.ggor.de CONTENTS About this book ........................ 5 Chapter 1 ............................... 7 Chapter 2 .............................. 23 Chapter 3 .............................. 41 Chapter 4 .............................. 53 ABOUT THIS BOOK Based on the novel “On the Road” by Jack Kerouac and Google Maps Direction Service. The exact and approximate spots Kerouac traveled and described are taken from the book and parsed by Google Direction Service API. The chapters match those of the original book. Gregor Weichbrodt January 2014 www.ggor.de 7 CHAPTER 1 Head northwest on W 47th St toward 7th Ave. Take the 1st left onto 7th Ave. Turn right onto W 39th St. Take the ramp onto Lincoln Tunnel. Parts of this road are closed Mon–Fri 4:00 – 7:00 pm. Entering New Jersey. Continue onto NJ-495 W. Keep right to continue on NJ-3 W, follow signs for New Jersey 3 W/Garden State Parkway/Secaucus. Take the New Jersey 3 W exit on the left toward Clifton. Merge onto NJ-3 W. Slight right onto the Garden State Pkwy N ramp. Merge onto Garden State Pkwy. Take exit 155P on the left to merge onto NJ-19 N toward I-80/ Paterson. Turn left onto Cianci St. Turn right onto Market St. Head west on Market St toward Washington St. Turn left onto Main St. Turn right onto County Rd 509 S. Take the Interstate 80 E ramp. Merge onto I-80 E. Take exit 62A-62B toward Saddle 9 Brook/Saddle River Rd/Garden State Pkwy.
  • NSF S2S Tip Sheet

    NSF S2S Tip Sheet

    Submission tips for system-to-system NSF proposals in RAMP 1. Proposals that do not include any committed effort/salary for the PI cannot be submitted system-to-system but must be submitted in either Fastlane or Research.gov. The Grants.gov application defaults adding the PI to the budget, but NSF does not allow anyone without salary to be included in the budget. 2. All solicitations should be reviewed to ensure Grants.gov submission is allowable before beginning an application. 3. The Biosketch and Other Support (Current and Pending) documents do not map to the SF424 for NSF applications, so it’s not necessary to upload them to the Personnel page in the Funding Proposal smartform. 4. NSF-Approved Formats must be used for the Biosketch and Current and Pending Support documents. If a different format is used, or the NSF template is altered in any way, the proposal will not upload successfully into Fastlane. The links for the approved templates can be found here: • https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/biosketch.jsp • https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/cps.jsp Last Revised 2/18/2021 5. RAMP does not flag an error if you are missing an additional performance site. You have to know if additional sites should be included (e.g. when you have subawards). 6. If a Performance Site is added, but the Organization Name is left blank, RAMP will return a non- descriptive error that will prevent the proposal from validating for submission. 7. Person month effort maps from the Proposal Budget to the SF424 as Calendar Months and may also calculate a number with several decimal places.
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline

    Passaic River Navigation Update Outline

    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
  • Passaic River Navigation Update Outline

    Passaic River Navigation Update Outline

    LOWER PASSAIC RIVER COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS United States Army Corps of Engineers New York District Original: March, 2007 Revision 1: December, 2008 Revision 2: July, 2010 ® US Army Corps of Engineers LOWER PASSAIC RIVER RESTORATION PROJECT COMMERCIAL NAVIGATION ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Study Background and Authority…………………………………………………1 2.0 Study Purpose……………..………………………………………………………1 3.0 Location and Study Area Description……………………………………………..4 4.0 Navigation & Maintenance Dredging History…………………………………….5 5.0 Physical Constraints including Bridges…………………………………………...9 6.0 Operational Information………………………………………………………….11 6.1 Summary Data for Commodity Flow, Trips and Drafts (1980-2006)…..12 6.2 Berth-by-Berth Analysis (1997-2006)…………………………………...13 7.0 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………26 8.0 References………………………………………………………………………..29 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Dredging History………………………………………………………………...6 Table 2. Bridges on the Lower Passaic River……………………………………………..9 Table 3. Channel Reaches and Active Berths of the Lower Passaic River………………18 Table 4: Most Active Berths, by Volume (tons) Transported on Lower Passaic River 1997-2006………………………………………………………………………..19 Table 5: Summary of Berth-by-Berth Analysis, below RM 2.0, 1997-2006.....................27 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1a. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 0.0 – 8.0)………………………………….2 Figure 1b. Federal Navigation Channel (RMs 8.0 – 15.4)………………………………...3 Figure 2. Downstream View of Jackson Street Bridge and the City of Newark, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..5 Figure 3. View Upstream to the Lincoln Highway Bridge and the Pulaski Skyway, May 2007………………………………………………………………………………..8 Figure 4. View Upstream to the Point-No-Point Conrail Bridge and the NJ Turnpike Bridge, May 2007……………………………………………………………......10 Figure 5. Commodities Transported, Lower Passaic River, 1997-2006…………………12 Figure 6.
  • Mainedot Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation

    Mainedot Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation

    Maine State Library Digital Maine Transportation Documents Transportation 2-2019 MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 Maine Department of Transportation Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs Recommended Citation Maine Department of Transportation, "MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021" (2019). Transportation Documents. 124. https://digitalmaine.com/mdot_docs/124 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Transportation at Digital Maine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Transportation Documents by an authorized administrator of Digital Maine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MaineDOT Work Plan Calendar Years 2019-2020-2021 February 2019 February 21, 2019 MaineDOT Customers and Partners: On behalf of the 2,000 valued employees of the Maine Department of Transportation (MaineDOT), I am privileged to present this 2019 Edition of our Work Plan for the three Calendar Years 2019, 2020 and 2021. Implementation of this plan allows us to achieve our mission of responsibly providing our customers with the safest and most reliable transportation system possible, given available resources. Like all recent editions, this Work Plan includes all capital projects and programs, maintenance and operations activities, planning initiatives, and administrative functions. This plan contains 2,193 individual work items with a total value of $2.44 billion, consisting principally of work to be delivered or coordinated through MaineDOT, but also including funding and work delivered by other transportation agencies that receive federal funds directly including airports and transit agencies. Although I have the pleasure of presenting this plan, it is really the product of staff efforts dating back to the summer of last year.
  • 1998 CCSWCD Royal River Water Quality Management Plan

    1998 CCSWCD Royal River Water Quality Management Plan

    " . ROYAL RIV£~ WATERSHED: A W1AT£R QUALITY .'l ·MANA6£M£NT PLAN 1 I I J \ ] ( J J J J j J Cumberland County SWCD Project Staff & Report Production Forrest Bell, Project Manager Alison Kisch, Conservation Technician Linda Johnson, Research Assistant ACKNOW'LED6.MENTS The Royal River Watershed Project and this report would not have been possible without the assistance of many individuals, groups and agencies. We would like to recognize and thank the following contributors: Royal River Watershed Advisory Committee Charlie Chandler, resident, New Gloucester Bill Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Judith Ecyleshymer, resident, Yarmouth Dottie Laber, public relations advisor, Orono Edwin Springer, resident, Brunswick Ted Teidemann, resident, North Yarmouth Royal River Watershed Technical Advisory Committee and Report Review Team Deb Aja, Maine DEP Susan Beede, US EPA John Boland, ME Inland Fish & Wildlife Lenny Brooks, New Gloucester David Chiapetta, USDA NRCS Ross Cudlitz, CCSWCD Chris Curtis, Yarmouth Water District Cliff Curtis, Maine DOT Lee Doggett, Maine DEP Betty Farley, CCSWCD Melissa Gormley Florence Grosvenor, Maine DEP Katherine Groves, Casco Bay Est. Project Sherry Hanson, Casco Bay Est. Proj. Phoebe Hardesty, Andy Valley SWCD Mary Holman, Friends of Royal River Bob Houston, North Yarmouth resident John Jemison, UMaine Coop. Exten. Don Kale, Maine DEP Steve Linnell, Greater Portland COG Greg & Lisa Taylor Lord, Americorps Janet Mclaughlin, Town of Yarmouth Wayne Munroe, USDA NRCS Steve Ranney, City of Auburn Diane Switzer, US EPA Leon Tsomides, Maine DEP Peter Wagner, UMaine Coop. Extension Lois Winter, US Fish & Wildlife Serv. Don Witherill, Maine DEP Diane Yorke, US Forest Service Project sponsors/partners and their roles • Cumberland County Soil and Water Conservation District (CCSWCD) is the main sponsor of the Royal River Watershed 104(b)(3) Planning Project.
  • 1.NO-ATL Cover

    1.NO-ATL Cover

    EXHIBIT 20 (AR L.29) NOAA's Estuarine Eutrophication Survey Volume 3: North Atlantic Region July 1997 Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment National Ocean Service National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce EXHIBIT 20 (AR L.29) The National Estuarine Inventory The National Estuarine Inventory (NEI) represents a series of activities conducted since the early 1980s by NOAA’s Office of Ocean Resources Conservation and Assessment (ORCA) to define the nation’s estuarine resource base and develop a national assessment capability. Over 120 estuaries are included (Appendix 3), representing over 90 percent of the estuarine surface water and freshwater inflow to the coastal regions of the contiguous United States. Each estuary is defined spatially by an estuarine drainage area (EDA)—the land and water area of a watershed that directly affects the estuary. The EDAs provide a framework for organizing information and for conducting analyses between and among systems. To date, ORCA has compiled a broad base of descriptive and analytical information for the NEI. Descriptive topics include physical and hydrologic characteristics, distribution and abundance of selected fishes and inver- tebrates, trends in human population, building permits, coastal recreation, coastal wetlands, classified shellfish growing waters, organic and inorganic pollutants in fish tissues and sediments, point and nonpoint pollution for selected parameters, and pesticide use. Analytical topics include relative susceptibility to nutrient discharges, structure and variability of salinity, habitat suitability modeling, and socioeconomic assessments. For a list of publications or more information about the NEI, contact C. John Klein, Chief, Physical Environ- ments Characterization Branch, at the address below.