DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 166/Monday, August 27, 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 166/Monday, August 27, 2012 51744 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules * Elevation in feet (NGVD) ∂ Elevation in feet (NAVD) # Depth in feet above State City/town/county Source of flooding Location ** ground ∧ Elevation in meters (MSL) Existing Modified City of Newport Stoney Run-Denbigh Just downstream of Richneck Road ......... None +27 News. Branch. Just downstream of McManus Boulevard None +33 * National Geodetic Vertical Datum. # Depth in feet above ground. + North American Vertical Datum. ∧ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter. ** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the ref- erenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed. Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emer- gency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472. ADDRESSES City of Newport News Maps are available for inspection at The Department of Engineering, 2400 Washington Avenue, Newport News, VA 23607. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. approximately 0.47 mile downstream of management requirements. The 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) I–190 and approximately 1.21 miles community may at any time enact Dated: August 8, 2012. upstream of I–190 are to be submitted stricter requirements of its own or Sandra K. Knight, on or before November 26, 2012. pursuant to policies established by other Deputy Associate Administrator for ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Federal, State, or regional entities. Mitigation, Department of Homeland identified by Docket No. FEMA–B– These proposed elevations are used to Security, Federal Emergency Management 1083, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, meet the floodplain management Agency. Engineering Management Branch, requirements of the NFIP and also are [FR Doc. 2012–20985 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am] Federal Insurance and Mitigation used to calculate the appropriate flood BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Administration, Federal Emergency insurance premium rates for new Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., buildings built after these elevations are Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064 DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND made final, and for the contents in those or (email) buildings. SECURITY [email protected]. Correction Federal Emergency Management FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Agency Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering In the proposed rule published at 74 Management Branch, Federal Insurance FR 66602, in the December 16, 2009, 44 CFR Part 67 and Mitigation Administration, Federal issue of the Federal Register, FEMA [Docket ID FEMA–2008–0020; Internal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C published a table under the authority of Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1083] Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ‘‘Pointe (202) 646–4064 or (email) Coupee Parish, Louisiana, and Proposed Flood Elevation [email protected]. Incorporated Areas’’ addressed several Determinations SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The flooding sources, including Bayou AGENCY: Federal Emergency Federal Emergency Management Agency Fordoche. The proposed rule incorrectly Management Agency, DHS. (FEMA) publishes proposed listed the flooding source name, Bayou ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. determinations of Base (1% annual- Fordoche, for the location chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and approximately 0.47 mile downstream of SUMMARY: On December 16, 2009, FEMA modified BFEs for communities I–190 and approximately 1.21 miles published in the Federal Register a participating in the National Flood upstream of I–190. The correct flooding proposed rule that included an Insurance Program (NFIP), in source name is Bayou Grosse Tete. This erroneous flooding source name for the accordance with section 110 of the proposed rule correction is reopening Town of Livonia in Pointe Coupee Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, the comment period for Bayou Grosse Parish, Louisiana. The flooding source 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). Tete, for the location approximately name of Bayou Fordoche, in effect for These proposed BFEs and modified 0.47 mile downstream of I–190 and the location approximately 0.47 mile BFEs, together with the floodplain approximately 1.21 miles upstream of I– downstream of I–190 and approximately management criteria required by 44 CFR 190, due to the error in listing the 1.21 miles upstream of I–190 should 60.3, are minimum requirements. They flooding source name in the previously have been listed as Bayou Grosse Tete. should not be construed to mean that published proposed rule at 74 FR 66602. DATES: Comments pertaining to the the community must change any Bayou Grosse Tete Base Flood existing ordinances that are more (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. Elevations for the location stringent in their floodplain 97.022, ‘‘Flood Insurance.’’) VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:06 Aug 24, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\27AUP1.SGM 27AUP1 pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51745 Dated: August 8, 2012. Christina River, and West Branch Laurel insurance premium rates for new Sandra K. Knight, Run. buildings built after these elevations are Deputy Associate Administrator for DATES: Comments are to be submitted made final, and for the contents in those Mitigation, Department of Homeland on or before November 26, 2012. buildings. Security, Federal Emergency Management ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Agency. Corrections identified by Docket No. FEMA–B– [FR Doc. 2012–20981 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am] 1145, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, In the proposed rule published at 75 BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Engineering Management Branch, FR 62061, in the October 7, 2010, issue Federal Insurance and Mitigation of the Federal Register, FEMA DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Administration, Federal Emergency published a table under the authority of SECURITY Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ‘‘Cecil Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064 County, Maryland, and Incorporated Federal Emergency Management or (email) Areas’’ addressed the following flooding Agency [email protected]. sources: Back Creek, Big Elk Creek, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Bohemia River, Chesapeake and 44 CFR Part 67 Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Delaware Canal, Christina Creek, Dogwood Run, Gravelly Run, Hall [Docket ID FEMA–2010–0003; Internal Management Branch, Federal Insurance Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1145] and Mitigation Administration, Federal Creek, Herring Creek, Laurel Run, Little Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Bohemia Creek, Little Elk Creek, Little Proposed Flood Elevation Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, Northeast Creek, Long Creek, Mill Determinations (202) 646–4064 or (email) Creek, Mill Creek (Tributary to Little Elk [email protected]. Creek), Northeast Creek, Perch Creek, AGENCY: Federal Emergency Plum Creek, Susquehanna River, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Management Agency, DHS. Tributary 1 to Stone Run, Unnamed ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) publishes proposed Tributary to Laurel Run, West Branch SUMMARY: On October 7, 2010, FEMA determinations of Base (1% annual- Christina River, and West Branch Laurel published in the Federal Register a chance) Flood Elevations (BFEs) and Run. proposed rule that contained an modified BFEs for communities That table contained inaccurate erroneous table. This notice provides participating in the National Flood information as to the location of corrections to that table, to be used in Insurance Program (NFIP), in referenced elevation, effective and lieu of the information published at 75 accordance with section 110 of the modified elevation in feet, and/or FR 62061. The table provided here Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, communities affected for the following represents the flooding sources, location 42 U.S.C. 4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a). flooding sources: Big Elk Creek, of referenced elevations, effective and These proposed BFEs and modified Christina Creek, Dogwood Run, Little modified elevations, and communities BFEs, together with the floodplain Elk Creek, Little Northeast Creek, Mill affected for Cecil County, Maryland, and management criteria required by 44 CFR Creek, Northeast Creek, Tributary 1 to Incorporated Areas. Specifically, it 60.3, are minimum requirements. They Stone Run, and West Branch Christina addresses the following flooding should not be construed to mean that River. It also did not include the sources: Back Creek, Big Elk Creek, the community must change any flooding source Tributary 2 to Stone Bohemia River, Chesapeake and existing ordinances that are more Run, and the flooding source Christina Delaware Canal, Christina River, stringent in their floodplain River was erroneously referred to as Dogwood Run, Gravelly Run, Hall management requirements. The Christina Creek. Additionally, the Town Creek, Herring Creek, Laurel Run, Little community may at any time enact of Perryville has been added as a Bohemia Creek, Little Elk Creek, Little stricter requirements of its own or community affected by Mill Creek. In Northeast Creek, Long Creek, Mill pursuant to policies established by other this notice, FEMA is publishing a table Creek, Mill Creek (Tributary to Little Elk Federal, State,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flood Insurance Study
    FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY CECIL COUNTY, MARYLAND AND INCORPORATED AREAS Cecil County Community Community Name Number ↓ CECIL COUNTY (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) 240019 *CECILTON, TOWN OF 240020 CHARLESTOWN, TOWN OF 240021 CHESAPEAKE CITY, TOWN OF 240099 ELKTON, TOWN OF 240022 NORTH EAST, TOWN OF 240023 PERRYVILLE, TOWN OF 240024 PORT DEPOSIT, TOWN OF 240025 RISING SUN, TOWN OF 240158 *No Special Flood Hazard Areas Identified Revised: May 4, 2015 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 24015CV000B NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report may not contain all data available within the Community Map Repository. Please contact the Community Map Repository for any additional data. Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of the FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: July 8, 2013 Revised Countywide FIS Effective Date: May 4, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Choptank Tributary Summary: a Summary of Trends in Tidal Water Quality and Associated Factors, 1985-2018
    Choptank Tributary Summary: A summary of trends in tidal water quality and associated factors, 1985-2018. June 7, 2021 Prepared for the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) Partnership by the CBP Integrated Trends Analysis Team (ITAT) This tributary summary is a living document in draft form and has not gone through a formal peer review process. We are grateful for contributions to the development of these materials from the following individuals: Jeni Keisman, Rebecca Murphy, Olivia Devereux, Jimmy Webber, Qian Zhang, Meghan Petenbrink, Tom Butler, Zhaoying Wei, Jon Harcum, Renee Karrh, Mike Lane, and Elgin Perry. 1 Contents 1. Purpose and Scope .................................................................................................................................... 3 2. Location ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Watershed Physiography .................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Land Use .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Land Use ................................................................................................................................................ 6 2.3 Tidal Waters and Stations ................................................................................................................... 8 3. Tidal
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Stream Waders 10 Year Report
    MARYLAND STREAM WADERS TEN YEAR (2000-2009) REPORT October 2012 Maryland Stream Waders Ten Year (2000-2009) Report Prepared for: Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 1-877-620-8DNR (x8623) [email protected] Prepared by: Daniel Boward1 Sara Weglein1 Erik W. Leppo2 1 Maryland Department of Natural Resources Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division 580 Taylor Avenue; C-2 Annapolis, Maryland 21401 2 Tetra Tech, Inc. Center for Ecological Studies 400 Red Brook Boulevard, Suite 200 Owings Mills, Maryland 21117 October 2012 This page intentionally blank. Foreword This document reports on the firstt en years (2000-2009) of sampling and results for the Maryland Stream Waders (MSW) statewide volunteer stream monitoring program managed by the Maryland Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Monitoring and Non-tidal Assessment Division (MANTA). Stream Waders data are intended to supplementt hose collected for the Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS) by DNR and University of Maryland biologists. This report provides an overview oft he Program and summarizes results from the firstt en years of sampling. Acknowledgments We wish to acknowledge, first and foremost, the dedicated volunteers who collected data for this report (Appendix A): Thanks also to the following individuals for helping to make the Program a success. • The DNR Benthic Macroinvertebrate Lab staffof Neal Dziepak, Ellen Friedman, and Kerry Tebbs, for their countless hours in
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Maximum Fish Meals Each Year For
    Recommended Maximum Meals Each Year for Maryland Waters Recommendation based on 8 oz (0.227 kg) meal size, or the edible portion of 9 crabs (4 crabs for children) Meal Size: 8 oz - General Population; 6 oz - Women; 3 oz - Children NOTE: Consumption recommendations based on spacing of meals to avoid elevated exposure levels Recommended Meals/Year Species Waterbody General PopulationWomen* Children** Contaminants 8 oz meal 6 oz meal 3 oz meal Anacostia River 15 11 8 PCBs - risk driver Back River AVOID AVOID AVOID Pesticides*** Bush River 47 35 27 PCBs - risk driver Middle River 13 9 7 Northeast River 27 21 16 Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor AVOID AVOID AVOID American Eel Patuxent River 26 20 15 Potomac River (DC Line to MD 301 1511 9 Bridge) South River 37 28 22 Centennial Lake No Advisory No Advisory No Advisory Methylmercury - risk driver Lake Roland 12 12 12 Pesticides*** - risk driver Liberty Reservoir 96 48 48 Methylmercury - risk driver Tuckahoe Lake No Advisory 93 56 Black Crappie Upper Potomac: DC Line to Dam #3 64 49 38 PCBs - risk driver Upper Potomac: Dam #4 to Dam #5 77 58 45 PCBs & Methylmercury - risk driver Crab meat Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor 96 96 24 PCBs - risk driver Crab "mustard" Middle River DO NOT CONSUME Blue Crab Mid Bay: Middle to Patapsco River (1 meal equals 9 crabs) Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor "MUSTARD" (for children: 4 crabs ) Other Areas of the Bay Eat Sparingly Anacostia 51 39 30 PCBs - risk driver Back River 33 25 20 Pesticides*** Middle River 37 28 22 Northeast River 29 22 17 Brown Bullhead Patapsco River/Baltimore Harbor 17 13 10 South River No Advisory No Advisory 88 * Women = of childbearing age (women who are pregnant or may become pregnant, or are nursing) ** Children = all young children up to age 6 *** Pesticides = banned organochlorine pesticide compounds (include chlordane, DDT, dieldrin, or heptachlor epoxide) As a general rule, make sure to wash your hands after handling fish.
    [Show full text]
  • Watersheds.Pdf
    Watershed Code Watershed Name 02130705 Aberdeen Proving Ground 02140205 Anacostia River 02140502 Antietam Creek 02130102 Assawoman Bay 02130703 Atkisson Reservoir 02130101 Atlantic Ocean 02130604 Back Creek 02130901 Back River 02130903 Baltimore Harbor 02130207 Big Annemessex River 02130606 Big Elk Creek 02130803 Bird River 02130902 Bodkin Creek 02130602 Bohemia River 02140104 Breton Bay 02131108 Brighton Dam 02120205 Broad Creek 02130701 Bush River 02130704 Bynum Run 02140207 Cabin John Creek 05020204 Casselman River 02140305 Catoctin Creek 02130106 Chincoteague Bay 02130607 Christina River 02050301 Conewago Creek 02140504 Conococheague Creek 02120204 Conowingo Dam Susq R 02130507 Corsica River 05020203 Deep Creek Lake 02120202 Deer Creek 02130204 Dividing Creek 02140304 Double Pipe Creek 02130501 Eastern Bay 02141002 Evitts Creek 02140511 Fifteen Mile Creek 02130307 Fishing Bay 02130609 Furnace Bay 02141004 Georges Creek 02140107 Gilbert Swamp 02130801 Gunpowder River 02130905 Gwynns Falls 02130401 Honga River 02130103 Isle of Wight Bay 02130904 Jones Falls 02130511 Kent Island Bay 02130504 Kent Narrows 02120201 L Susquehanna River 02130506 Langford Creek 02130907 Liberty Reservoir 02140506 Licking Creek 02130402 Little Choptank 02140505 Little Conococheague 02130605 Little Elk Creek 02130804 Little Gunpowder Falls 02131105 Little Patuxent River 02140509 Little Tonoloway Creek 05020202 Little Youghiogheny R 02130805 Loch Raven Reservoir 02139998 Lower Chesapeake Bay 02130505 Lower Chester River 02130403 Lower Choptank 02130601 Lower
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 77, No. 166/Monday, August 27, 2012
    Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 166 / Monday, August 27, 2012 / Proposed Rules 51745 Dated: August 8, 2012. Christina River, and West Branch Laurel insurance premium rates for new Sandra K. Knight, Run. buildings built after these elevations are Deputy Associate Administrator for DATES: Comments are to be submitted made final, and for the contents in those Mitigation, Department of Homeland on or before November 26, 2012. buildings. Security, Federal Emergency Management ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, Agency. Corrections identified by Docket No. FEMA–B– [FR Doc. 2012–20981 Filed 8–24–12; 8:45 am] 1145, to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, In the proposed rule published at 75 BILLING CODE 9110–12–P Engineering Management Branch, FR 62061, in the October 7, 2010, issue Federal Insurance and Mitigation of the Federal Register, FEMA DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND Administration, Federal Emergency published a table under the authority of SECURITY Management Agency, 500 C Street SW., 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled ‘‘Cecil Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–4064 County, Maryland, and Incorporated Federal Emergency Management or (email) Areas’’ addressed the following flooding Agency [email protected]. sources: Back Creek, Big Elk Creek, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Bohemia River, Chesapeake and 44 CFR Part 67 Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Delaware Canal, Christina Creek, Dogwood Run, Gravelly Run, Hall [Docket ID FEMA–2010–0003; Internal Management Branch, Federal Insurance Agency Docket No. FEMA–B–1145] and Mitigation Administration, Federal Creek, Herring Creek, Laurel Run, Little Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Bohemia Creek, Little Elk Creek, Little Proposed Flood Elevation Street SW., Washington, DC 20472, Northeast Creek, Long Creek, Mill Determinations (202) 646–4064 or (email) Creek, Mill Creek (Tributary to Little Elk [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality in Cecil County
    Land Conservation, Restoration, and Management For Water Quality Benefits in Cecil County, Maryland Technical Report for the Cecil County Green Infrastructure Plan December 2007 Ted Weber The Conservation Fund 410 Severn Ave., Suite 204 Annapolis, Maryland 21403 410-990-0175 [email protected] ABSTRACT Streams in Cecil County, Maryland provide the majority of the county’s drinking water, drain into the nationally significant Chesapeake Bay, and support fish and other aquatic life. Yet many of the county’s streams are impaired. The Conservation Fund examined biological and chemical stream data collected statewide and countywide, and compared these to watershed and site conditions to search for possible relationships. These analyses were consistent with previous studies that indicated that forest cover and impervious surfaces had a significant impact on water quality. As indicated by the benthic macroinvertebrate community, nitrate levels, and phosphorus levels, water quality in Cecil County was generally highest in watersheds with <7% imperviousness and >50% forest and wetland cover. We used these thresholds to develop goals and models for land conservation and restoration for water quality benefits. To meet water quality goals, Cecil County should minimize conversion of forest to development, limit house lot size, complete upgrades of the county’s wastewater treatment plants, install denitrifying septic systems, construct tertiary treatment wetlands, restore riparian forest and wetlands in targeted watersheds, use low impact site design techniques, treat existing sources of stormwater and point source runoff, reduce nutrient and sediment runoff from agriculture, and implement other best management practices. KEYWORDS: Cecil County, Maryland, Green Infrastructure, water quality, conservation, reforestation, watersheds, TMDL, best management practices, MBSS INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Water quality in Cecil County Water quality is a major issue throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
    [Show full text]
  • Illl'i1iii'"Illlllllllll!Ll MARYLAND BIRDLIFE Il!':L!Ii,,,Mlllllllllll
    illl'I1iii'"Illlllllllll!ll MARYLAND BIRDLIFE il!':l!ii,,,mlllllllllll, I MARCH 1973 VOLUME 29 NUMBER 1 MARYLAND ORNITHOLOGICAL SOCIETY, INC. Cylburn Mansion, h915 Greenspring Ave., Baltimore, Maryland 21209 STATE OFFICERS President: Dr. Lawrence Zeleny, 4312 Van Buren St., Hyattsville 20782 927-3971 First V.P.: John W. Poteet, Jr., 5608 Stonington Ave., Baltimore 21207 448-1967 Second V.P.: Dickson J. Preston, R.D. 5, Box 607, Easton 21601 822~535 Secretary: Mrs. Edwin C. Gras, 125 Academy St., Annapolis 21401 263-4708 Exec. Sec'y: Mrs. Alger Zapf, 5913 Meadowwood Rd., Baltimore 21212 435-9542 Treasurer: H. Edmund Stiles, 16125 Malcolm Drive, Laurel 20810 776-4314 EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Mrs. Frances Pope 503 F St., Mountain Lake Park 21550 334-4908 Mrs. Raymond Qeddes Jr. 503 Overbrook Rd., Baltimore 21212 377-6583 Mrs. Percy M. Seudder Route 2, Box 230, Federalsburg 21632 479-0524 Dr. Howard Hodge h36 W. Greenwood Rd., Linthicum Hts. 21090 ST9-3687 Dr. Mildred Gebhard Box 33, Perry Point 21902 642-6749 Mr. Carl W. Carlson 5706 Lone Oak Drive, Bethesda 20014 EM~-3836 Mr. Joseph A. Robinson St. Michaels 21663 745-9438 STATE TRUSTEES Allegany: *Mr. James Paulus Harford: *Dr. Frank Buckley Mrs. Frances Pope Mr. Barclay Tucker Anne Arundel: *Lt. Cdr. Anthony White Dr. Mildred Gebhard Mrs. Ellen Gizzarelli Kent: *Mr. Floyd Parks Mr. Richard Heise Mrs. Thomas Carswell Baltimore: *Mr. Gordon MacGregor Mrs. Edward Mendinhall Mr. William Corliss Montgomery: *Mr. Robert Hahn Mrs. Raymond Geddes Mr. Carl W. Carlson Mr. C. Douglas Hackman Dr. Thomas Valega Mr. Rodney B. Jones Patuxent: *Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Bay Grasses Backgrounder
    Bay Grasses Backgrounder - Page 1 of 5 Upper Bay Zone In the Upper Bay Zone (21 segments extending south from the Susquehanna River to the Bay Bridge), underwater bay grasses increased 21 percent from 18,922 acres in 2007 to 22,954 acres in 2008. Ten of the 21 segments increased by at least 20 percent and by at least 12 acres from 2007 totals: 21%, Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment: 1,833 acres (2007) vs. 1,008 acres (2008) 21%, Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 2: 11,725 acres (2007) vs. 14,194 acres (2008) 59%, Northeast River: 116 acres (2007) vs. 183 acres (2008) 70%, Upper Chesapeake Bay: 373 acres (2007) vs. 633 acres (2008) 50%, Sassafras River Segment: 1,368 acres (2007) vs. 551 acres (2008) 1204%, Sassafras River Segment 2: 5 acres (2007) vs. 52 acres (2008) 40%, Gunpowder River Segment 1: 558 acres (2007) vs. 783 acres (2008) 50%, Middle River: 551 acres (2007) vs. 828 acres (2008) 53%, Upper Central Chesapeake Bay: 124 acres (2007) vs. 188 acres (2008) 23%, Lower Chester River: 67 acres (2007) vs. 84 acres (2008) None of the 21 segments decreased by at least 20 percent and by at least 12 acres from 2007 totals. Two of the 21 segments remained unvegetated in 2008. Acres of SAV & Goal Attained Upper Chesapeake Bay Region Segment 2007 2008 Restoration Goal 2008 % of goal Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 1 834 1007 754 134 Northern Chesapeake Bay Segment 2 11726 14194 12149 117 Northern Chesapeake Bay Total 12560 15202 12903 118 Northeast River 115 183 89 205 Elk River Segment 1 1590 1907 1844 103 Elk River Segment 2 391 440 190 232
    [Show full text]
  • Water Quality Database Design and Data Dictionary
    Water Quality Database Database Design and Data Dictionary Prepared For: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III Chesapeake Bay Program Office January 2004 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................................................................4 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................6 WATER QUALITY DATA.............................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL CONCEPT ..................................................................................................................6 THE RELATIONAL DATABASE STRUCTURE ...................................................................................7 WATER QUALITY DATABASE STRUCTURE..........................................................8 PRIMARY TABLES ..........................................................................................................................................8 WQ_CRUISES ..................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_EVENT.......................................................................................................................................................8 WQ_DATA..........................................................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents Boating Regulations and the Maryland State
    Table of Contents Registration and Numbering Requirements ................................................ 2-4 Licensing and Registration Regional Service Centers. ...................................5 Law Enforcement .................................................................................................. 6-8 Boating Safety Education Requirements .....................................................9-10 Equipment Requirements .............................................................................. 10-21 Operating Procedures .................................................................................... 22-27 Miscellaneous Regulations and Information ........................................... 28-30 Safety and Survival Tips .................................................................................. 31-34 Aquatic Invasive Species ...................................................................................... 35 Report Suspicious Activity .................................................................................... 36 Boating Regulations and the Maryland State Boat Act The Maryland State Boating Act was enacted in 1960 to work in harmony with the U.S. Coast Guard regulatory scheme. It ensured that revenue generated through regulating boating activity would be earmarked for boating and maritime purposes. The Maryland State Boat Act Advisory Committee The Boat Act Advisory Committee is a governor-appointed committee that makes recommendations to the secretary of the Department of Natural Resources on
    [Show full text]
  • Upper Chesapeake Watershed Management Plan Final Plan
    Upper Chesapeake Watershed Management Plan Final Plan December 2013 Prepared for: Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) Prepared by: KCI Technologies, Inc. 1352 Marrows Road Suite 100 Newark, DE 19711 Upper Chesapeake Watershed Management Plan Final Plan December 2013 Prepared for: Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (DNREC) Prepared by: KCI Technologies, Inc. 1352 Marrows Road Suite 100 Newark, DE 19711 KCI Job Order No. 17133560 Upper Chesapeake Watershed Management Plan 2013 Table of Contents List of Tables ......................................................................................................................... ii 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Goals and Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Regulatory and Programmatic Environment ................................................................................ 2 2 Watershed Characteristics ............................................................................................... 3 2.1 Watershed Delineation and Planning Segments .......................................................................... 3 2.2 Upper Chesapeake ........................................................................................................................ 5 2.2.1 Elk River ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]