January 2009

Last week, a bill was introduced (H.B. 593) to address concerns about the erosion of Kailua Beach, perhaps Hawaii's most cherished beaches.  Recently, the beach has been subject to unusual erosion leaving shoreline experts puzzled.

This bill directs the Board of Land and Natural Resources to adopt rules relating to the shoreline setback area and mauka (or landward in this case) extent of the conservation zone boundary.

Per the bill:

Accreted beach land, in the form of coastal dunes and dry beach area, is still an integral portion of the  each system.  Accreted land holds the fragile carbonate sands, which the active beach relies upon during periods of episodic erosion.  These same lands will once again transition back into active beach area as the chronic erosion present at the south end of Kailua beach migrates north and as sea-level rises.  As the shoreline migrates through accretion and erosion, so too does the conservation district boundary, where all submerged lands are zoned as resource sub-zone.  The accreted lands, originally within the conservation district, will not only return to the conservation district with subsequent erosion, but also have a significant impact on the function and health of the beach resource to be conserved and protected within the existing conservation district boundaries.  From a management perspective, it is more effective for one agency to steward the entire resource.  As such, the State has a clear interest, as it already manages the existing conservation district and it owns all the lands makai of private property boundaries, including a portion of the accreted lands.  As there are currently no shoreline structures on Kailua beach, with the exception of the boat ramp and ancillary structure at the south end of the beach, there is a significant opportunity for the State to proactively and comprehensively manage the coastal sediment and environmental systems from the nearshore waters to the mauka extent of the shoreline setback area in the best interest of the public, the resource, and the State.  This management scheme will not affect ownership of private property nor dictate the issuance of building permits from the city and county of Honolulu's department of planning and permitting, in conformance with special management area ordinances.

The purpose of this Act is to preserve the existing Kailua beach for the use and enjoyment of future generations.

A bill, H.R. 51 (download here), was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that would require the Fish and Wildlife Service to study the impacts of harvesting asian carp in the Great Lakes.

The bill’s purpose is:

To direct the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to conduct a study of the feasibility of a variety of approaches to eradicating Asian carp from the Great Lakes and their tributary and connecting waters.

Between electrified fences, posted here, and now harvesting, the federal and several state governments are exploring all options to eradicate this potent threat to the Great Lakes ecosystem.

Pacific Business News reported that the Cape Wind Environmental Impact Statement was released today. 

The federal Minerals Management Service does have the EIS available for review, here.

This project and its handling by the federal and state governments, along with community groups, industry and the environmental groups, will be a benchmark for the possible…

The EPA has relased a report, "Predicting Future Introductions of Nonindigenous Species to the Great Lakes" (website with downloads here). 

Per the EPA's website:

This report predicts the spread of aquatic nonindigenous species into the Great Lakes to help resource managers focus monitoring activities on particular species at the most vulnerable U.S. Great Lakes ports. The report also demonstrates the use of a habitat suitability model and ballast water discharge data to predict invasion potential.

Most coastal states with international shipping traffic have struggled to grapple with the vexing problem of invasive species.  Federal legislation and rulemaking have had fits and starts and several states have not waited for the federal government to act.  Certainly an issue to watch in the future.

 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI in enviromental parlance) related to the shipment of municipal solid waste from Hawaii to landfills in Oregon.  APHIS news release here.

Columbia Ridge Landfill Site Specific Environmental Assessment

Columbia Ridge EA – Biological Assessment

Columbia …

The Washington-based Grays Harbor Ocean Energy Company has applied for a permit to construct an alternative energy facility on Penguin Bank, southwest of the island of Molokai. 

The Penguin Bank project description is here. 

The Company’s objective is published as: 

Our power project objective to generate up to 100 MW of wave power in a site that is 12 to 25 miles offshore on the Outer Continental Shelf.

The Project will have 100 offshore fixed three-leg platforms standing on the sea bed and raised about 50 feet above sea level. Wave Energy Converters will be built into each leg, for a total of 300 WECs. They are currently rated at 350kW power, and will generate up to 100 MW hydrokinetic power at peak, typically during winter months, and about 40 MW power on average. The seasonality of power generation matches well to the winter power demand.

What about Cape Wind?  That project’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement here.  Some of the controversy of the Cape Wind project is discussed here.  Visual sitings of Cape Wind project are available. 

Jan from Raising Islands had a good post here.

The two federal agencies currently exercising regulatory authority over offshore (>3 nautical miles from shoreline) are the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).  The latter recently issued a decision declaring its jurisdiction over these projects offshore, here.  Side note:  the MMS actually participated as a litigant in this decision, the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel probably needs to chime in, lest two federal agencies take contrary positions with the regulated public.  This is a good post on the subject:  http://www.carolynelefant1.typepad.com/renewablesoffshore/2008/11/the-ferc-mms-scuffle-continues.html

Most have not heard of these two federal agencies.  Per its website, MMS authority in this area:

Section 388 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) amended the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to grant the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior (Secretary) discretionary authority to issue leases, easements, or rights-of-way for activities on the Outer Continental Shelf that produce or support production, transportation, or transmission of energy from sources other than oil and gas. The Secretary delegated this authority to the Minerals Management Service, which has extensive experience in oil, gas and marine minerals (sand and gravel) offshore leasing. Examples of potential alternative energy projects include, but are not limited to: wind energy, wave energy, ocean current energy, solar energy, and hydrogen production.

Under this new authority, the MMS also may issue leases, easements, or rights-of-way for other OCS project activities that make alternate use of existing OCS facilities for “energy-related purposes or for other authorized marine-related purposes,” such as: offshore aquaculture, research, education, recreation, and support for offshore operations and facilities.

For the Cape Wind project, these are the other federal agencies with interests and regulatory oversight over parts of project.