Safe Harbor draft Environmental Assessment for land side of Rockland megayacht plan. EA and Appendices breakouts.

Texas marina holding company Safe Harbor Marinas (SHM) has just released a draft Environmental Assessment of the impacts on the harbor and harbor users of the landward side of their marina expansion plan to make Rockland Maine's inner harbor a fueling center for megayachts and superyachts chugging along the Maine coast. The Safe Harbors proposal will require the city to surrender a portion of one of its few public beach parks to create the petroleum transfer point. MDOT and USFWS want to know what you think about that.

Below LINKS 1 Table of Contents for each section of the 150 pg draft EA

LINKS 2 Appendix A through Appendix I

LINKS 1

Public Notice

Cover and Table of Contents

1. Project Overview 13 pgs

2. Alternatives 6 pgs

3. Affected Environment 5 pgs

4. Environmental Consequences 8 pgs

5. Consultation and Coordination 3 pgs

    5.2 Future Compliance Needs/Permits

6. References 1pg

Full Environmental Assessment document 150 pgs

LINKS 2 APPENDICES

1 Appendix A Project Drawings 18pgs

2 Appendix B Issued Regulatory Permits

`   Title page 1pg

B1 DEP Haz Waste Permit 14pgs

B2 NRPA, Wetlands, Water Quality 23pgs

B3 Army Corps of Engineers 3pgs

   B4 Maps & Blueprints of Proposal 17 pgs

Combined Regulatory Permits 60 pgs

3 Appendix C. List of Threatened and Endangered Species

4 Appendix D. Essential Fish Habitat 7pgs

5 Appendix E. Me Historic Preservation 3pgs

6 Appendix F. FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map 2pgs

7. Appendix G Eco‐Analysts Environmental Assessment/Survey

8. Appendix H NOAA EFH Mapper Report 4pgs

9. Appendix I Tribal Consultation Letters 6pgs

Five Feet of Muck...

I was very disappointed to learn that nearly all of the members of the Bangor City Council did not ask the Army Corps to complete a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). I hope they'll reconsider.

 The folks down on the Midcoast deserve their own extra margin of safety in the form of a full EIS. There were lots of questions asked at the second dredge meeting. The Army Corps claimed their recent determination of “no dredge, not even maintenance” needed for the large DCP-LPG Tankers ( in 2012 ) had originated with a report done by the Coast Guard. We are left wondering if an
Environmental Assessment can perhaps be tailored to fit the political pressures prevailing. An EIS might be an instrument that is not so easily manipulated.

 A recent pronouncement that this project is “too small to warrant an EIS” is surely a cavalier and misleading assessment. The scale of this project is unprecedented in Penobscot Bay. Besides the immediate effects of the dredge, which could be substantial, the Corps needs to look deeper. An expanded and more industrialized port could have a variety of benefits and hazards, and all these futures must be examined.

 Sure, folks down in New York City or Boston wouldn't bat an eyebrow about a million cubic yards of dredge spoils, but we have things here that those large metropolitan areas have lost. Change is inevitable, but this change needs to be accomplished transparently and responsibly.

                                        Sincerely, Mrs. Sally Jones
                                                                    Bangor