Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutArticle 68 Wrk Grp Minutes - 05 03 2010_001_201402041900173037 ARTICLE 68 WORK GROUP MEETING OF TUESDAY, MAY 18, 2010 AT 10:30 AM, CONFERENCE ROOM, 2 FAIRGROUNDS ROAD Final Minutes In Attendance Members: Peter Boyce, Cormac Collier, Bam LaFarge, Mark Lucas, Wendy McCrae, Mike Misurelli, Richard Ray, Seth Rutherford, Lee Saperstein, and Lucinda Young. Guests: Ben Champoux, Michael Kopko, Natalie Marcus, Patty Roggeveen, Chris Ryder, Whitey Willauer, and Jonathan Wisentaner. Absent: Caroline Ellis, David Fronzuto, Ernest Steinauer. Call to Order. Acting Chair Young called the meeting to order at 10:33 am. The agenda, sent previously, was introduced and the group had no changes to it. The Chair said that it was described as ambitious and unlikely to be completed by noon, the time set for adjournment (ATTACHED). Minutes of May 3, 2010. The draft minutes of May 3, 2010, which were taken by Secretary pro tem Roggeveen, were moved for approval by Bam LaFarge, seconded by Mark Lucas, and, after some editorial corrections were inserted, approved unanimously. These minutes have been posted to the Town’s web site (go to Boards and Committees, then Article 68 Work Group, then Minutes) and are attached to these draft minutes (ATTACHED). Announcements. At the next meeting, the Agenda will include a presentation by David Fronzuto and Richard Ray on nutrient loading in the waters of the Harbor. Election of Officers. Acting Chair Young opened the election by describing her experience as Acting Chair and how it influenced her interest in becoming Chair. Mr. Boyce also spoke about his interest in assisting the Work Group. Mr. Lucas nominated Ms Young for Chair and Saperstein seconded. With no other nominations forthcoming, the nominations were closed and Ms Young elected by acclamation. Ms Young then nominated Mr. Boyce for Vice Chair (Saperstein seconded) and a similar result was obtained. Mr. Saperstein was nominated by Ms Young for Secretary (Boyce seconded) and he also was elected without opposition. Reference List of Common Documents. Chair Young opened the discussion on the need for a good list of reference documents used by the Work Group to arrive at its recommendations (the “common documents”). Secretary Saperstein indicated that he has assembled a draft of that list and also has sent it to the members for whom he had e-mail addresses. Saperstein indicated that he did not have the text of Article 68 as amended and passed and it was noted that the Town Clerk’s Office could provide that. Mr. Boyce, as representative of the Harbor Plan Implementation Committee (HPIC), which proposed Article 68, gave names of other jurisdictions that passed fertilizer ordinances. He also said that it was important that good references were needed to assure passage of a 2 regulation, bylaw, or ordinance. Ms McCrae moved and Mr. Boyce seconded putting the reference list on the Town’s web site. Mr. Saperstein has amended the list (ATTACHED) and it is now on the web site. Where there is an “Uniform Resource Locator (URL)” for a document, the link connects to the document. Those documents without an URL are archived on the web site. Review of Draft Regulation. Chair Young turned to the next agenda item and suggested that the Work Group begin its review of draft legislation. Mr. Lucas and others indicated that using the draft HPIC legislation was the appropriate way to go and the Group agreed with him. It was agreed that, while laborious, a line-by-line review would ensure completeness of the review. Mr. Saperstein asked if the Group was comfortable with the Title and the response was yes. Mr. Saperstein also indicated that Sections 1-9 of the draft were in the manner of “Findings and Purposes” and he thought that they could be consolidated into one or two sections. Mr. Saperstein said the he believed it was the Secretary’s responsibility to edit the draft in response to the suggestions made; comments in the draft indicate the source of the changes made. Section 1. Misurelli and others suggested the removal of the word, “Manufactured,” as a modifier of “fertilizer” and consensus was given. Section 2. Ms Roggeveen asked about waters other than estuaries, namely groundwater and the ponds both fresh and marine. The group agreed that they should be included in this section and elsewhere. Section 2 includes examples of what is meant by “species”. The suggestion was to expand the list, e.g. oysters, but the group eventually concluded that a generic reference to “species” was preferable to a list. Section 3. As above, ponds were added to the types of waters. Mr. Willauer suggested, and the Group agreed, that the list of industries should include “commercial fisheries.” Section 4. The question arose here if the only planting of concern was “turf” and after several trials of words and lists of plants, it was concluded that the simple words “plants” or “plantings” would suffice. This change was requested for all locations showing the word “turf.” Sections 5 and 6. These were accepted as is but with the previous change from “turf” to “plants.” Section 7. Mr. Kopko suggested that “excess irrigation” be added to the list of precipitation events. The Group agreed. Section 8. This section marks a shift from findings to purposes and it was suggested that it be amended to be specific about the “intent” of the legislation. It was 3 mentioned again by Mr. Saperstein that the legislation should indicate by reference to a list of “authorities” that there is substantial evidence for its need. Section 9. This Section also represents a purpose or intention and should, perhaps, be combined with Section 8. Where reference is made in this Section to waters, it was agreed to by the Group that this would include groundwater and ponds. Definitions. The definitions contained in the HPIC draft were reviewed and found, in general, to be acceptable. Mr. Saperstein and others indicated that we may wish to add to the list before we are done. Mr. Saperstein indicated that he would attempt to include the suggested changes into a new draft, rearrange the Sections, add language on purpose and authority, and add to the list of definitions. The changes that he suggests will not have been reviewed in open meeting and, therefore, are subject to review by the Group at its next available meeting. Adjournment. At 12:05 pm, Mr. Misurelli moved and Ms McCrae seconded that the Group adjourn. All agreed. Draft submitted: May 21, 2010 Final was approved: June 4 Article 68 Workgroup Meeting Agenda for Tuesday May 18, 10:30 at 2 Fairgrounds Rd Conference Room 1 Approval of minutes from 5/14/2010 meeting 2 Election of Officers including chair, vice chair, acting secretary (until town administration provides assistance) 3 Website and common documents discussion 4 Review of originally proposed article 68 5 Review of Best Management Practices as relates to article 68 6 Public comment Adjourn 5 The Article 68 Work Group met for its first meeting at 10:00 am, Monday, May 3, 2010, in the Conference Room at 2 Fairgrounds Road Members Present: Lucinda Young (Acting Chair), Bam LaFarge, Caroline Ellis, Dave Fronzuto, Ernest Steinauer, Lee Saperstein, Mark Lucas, Mike Misurelli, Peter Boyce, Richard Ray, Seth Rutherford, Wendy McCrea Members Absent: Cormac Collier Minutes taken by Board of Selectmen Chair Patty Roggeveen, Secretary Pro Tem Minutes Introductions. Lucinda Young was nominated and voted to be Acting Chair. Mike Misurelli emphasized that landscapers value fertilizing licensing as a potential part of the recommendations; Ms. Young agreed. Discussion ensued, including questions on identifying models for a licensing initiative. Lucinda noted the need to educate the professionals in best practice for fertilizer application. Mark Lucas proposed using Article 68 in its original form as basis of discussion. There is a need for an educational component, however. NOFA (Northeast Organic Farming Association) Standards for accredited, organic farming were referenced and there was consensus that the group should review copies of this document among others. Also, the Nantucket Land Council is giving out scholarships to attend NOFA classes. In a discussion on what should be considered to be “Common Documents,” there was consensus on the following documents for the group: Estuaries Report; background documents that the HPIC used to develop the original Article 68; Nantucket Best Practice; NOFA Standards; Harbor Plan; NP&EDC documents; Harbor Plan priority matrix; information on the ponds. There was general consensus on the need to identify other outside experts whom the group may want to hear from with information that would help draft a home rule petition. Administratively, there was consensus for a request to the BOS to set-up a link on the town’s website, and explore possibilities of town revenue to support someone to take Minutes and organize meetings. Lee Saperstein noted the importance of working with legislative liaisons early. Discussion on difficulty in getting soil tested on the island; alternative test laboratories were explored. Richard Ray talked about other (non-fertilizer) town activities to reduce nitrogen loading in the harbor. Harbor once again being aggressive tested for water quality. Had done it annually from 1993-2007. Next meeting: Tuesday, May 18th at 10:30am at 2FG. The group will convene every second Tuesday same time, same location. Adjourned at 12 noon. These minutes were approved by the Work Group in their meeting of Tuesday, May 18, 2010. 6 ARTICLE 68 WORK GROUP The Fertilizer Committee REFERENCE LIST OF COMMON DOCUMENTS As of May 19, 2010 Compiled by Lee W. Saperstein Documents Providing Authority Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), “Nonpoint Pollution Source (NPS) Management Plan,” Found on May 16, 2010 at URL: www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/nonpoint.htm. The plan itself is hot linked from this menu page and can be downloaded as a Word or PDF document. In the Executive Summary, page 12, it says that a DEP objective is to assist "communities in drafting river protection bylaws and ordinances." Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Water, Wastewater, & Wetlands, “Coastal Resources & Estuaries,” A web page with links to explanations on the Massachusetts Estuaries Project (MEP) and reports published or planned; found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/coastalr.htm#reports. The web page for “What are Estuaries?,” http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/brochure.htm, explains why nitrogen loading is a problem for estuaries and then states, as part of the suggestions for a solution, that “including limiting use of lawn fertilizers” may be necessary. Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Nantucket Harbor Embayment System, Total Maximum Daily Loads for Total Nitrogen, Report # 97-TMDL-2 Control #249.0, 32 pages, January 28, 2009. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.mass.gov/dep/water/resources/nantuckt.doc. This final report on the quality of water in Nantucket Harbor is the most quantitatively definitive on nitrogen (nutrient) loading. It is part of a series of reports that comprise the Massachusetts Estuaries Project (q.v.). Nantucket, Town of, Annual Town Meeting, April 5-7, 2010, Warrant Article 68, found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.nantucket- ma.gov/Pages/NantucketMA_TownMeeting/2010atm/2010ATMwarrantFCmotionsFINA L.pdf. This is the Article as proposed by the Board of Selectmen on behalf of the Harbor Plan Implementation Committee (HPIC). It was amended substantially on the floor of the ATM whereby the Town removed most of the technical language of the Article and left the request that the Town write a Home-Rule Petition for the control of fertilizer with the intent of presenting it to the Commonwealth in time for the next legislative session of the General Court. As amended and passed (ATM 10 ART 68 Fert HR(2).doc), this article provides the foundation for the Work Group. 7 Nantucket, Town of, The Nantucket and Madaket Harbors Plan Review Committee and the Department of Marine and Coastal Resources, Nantucket & Madaket Harbors Action Plan, 204 pages, May 2009 (As approved by the Secretary of the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, December 21, 2009). Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.nantucketharborplan.com/. In the letter of approval (12 pages, included as a preface to the Plan), the Secretary listed a number of federal policy principles to which adherence should be maintained. He said, “The federally-approved CZM Program Plan establishes 20 enforceable program policies and 9 management principles which embody coastal policy for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.” Relevant to the purposes of the Work Group is this quotation, “• Water Quality Policy #2: Ensure that non-point pollution controls promote the attainment of state surface water quality standards in the coastal zone.” The section of the 2009 Harbor Plan that is relevant to the Work Group is Section 2.2, “Water Quality,” p. 18 et seq. Ordinances from other Jurisdictions that Control Fertilizer Use Dane, County of, Wisconsin, State of, Ordinances, “Establishing Regulations for Lawn Fertilizer and Coal Tar Sealcoat Products Application and Sale,” Chapter 80; found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://danedocs.countyofdane.com/webdocs/pdf/ordinances/ord080.pdf. Minnesota, State of, Department of Agriculture (MDA), “Phosphorus Lawn Fertilizer Law, “ a web brochure, 3 pages; found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://www.mda.state.mn.us/phoslaw. It provides a link to Chapter 18C of the Minnesota State Statutes, “Minnesota’s Fertilizer, Soil Amendment, and Plant Amendment Law” at https://www.revisor.mn.gov/revisor/pages/statute/statute_chapter_toc.php?year=2006&ch apter=18C. Suffolk, County of, New York, State of, Department of Environment and Energy, “Suffolk County Fertilizer Reduction Initiative,” a web brochure found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://www.suffolkcountyny.gov/departments/EnvironmentandEnergy/fri.aspx. Suffolk, County of, New York, State of, “Local Law No. 41-2007, Suffolk County, New York: A Local Law to Reduce Nitrogen Pollution by Reducing Use of Fertilizer in Suffolk County; “ found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://legis.suffolkcountyny.gov/resos2007/i2117-07.htm. Westchester, County of, New York, State of, “Article XXVI, Chapter 863, Laws of Westchester County, Restrictions on the Application and Sale of Lawn Fertilizer within the County of Westchester;” 863-1301 to 863-1309, found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://www.westchestergov.com/pdfs/ENVFACIL_2008LawnFertilizerLaw.pdf. 8 Westchester, County of, New York, State of, “Phosphorus Fertilizer Ban,” a web brochure found on May 19, 2010, at URL: http://www.westchestergov.com/printerfriendly/environment_fertilizerban.htm. Documents that Further Define the Problem and/or Give Solutions Nantucket Landscape Association, et al., “Best Management Practice for Turf, Tree, and shrub Fertilization on Nantucket Island,” 18 pages, February, 2003. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Natural Resources Conservation Service, (NRCS), "Core 4. Conservation Practices Training Guide: The Common Sense Approach to Natural Resource Conservation," Part II. "Nutrient Management." 395 pages, August 1999. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/ECS/agronomy/core4.pdf. The technical reference section of the NRCS is immense. The Electronic Field Office Technical Guide is accessed by individual location so as to give the best reference for a particular locality. Its menu provides links to all resource conservation topics. A starting point is http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/efotg/. USDA, NRCS, National Handbook of Conservation Practices (NHCP), Conservation Practice Standard, "Nutrient Management," Code 590, 8 pages, August 2006. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://nrcs.usda.gov/technical/standards/ and then open menu for national standards and then slide down to nutrient management or go directly to ftp://ftp- fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NHQ/practice-standards/standards/590.doc. The NHCP is the go-to reference for federal guidance on agricultural conservation: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/standards/nhcp.html. United States Environmental Protection Agency, State-EPA Nutrient Innovations Task Group, "An Urgent Call to Action," August 2009, 170 pages. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/criteria/nutrient/nitgreport.pdf. Background Documents including those Submitted by Members of the Committee and the Public Buzzards Bay National Estuaries Program (BBNEP), “Nitrogen Pollution in Buzzards Bay,” a web page found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.buzzardsbay.org/nitrogen-pollution.htm, including “Nitrogen Management Strategies and Tools,” also found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.buzzardsbay.org/bbpnitro.htm. Coffin, A, Chair, Committee on Long Pond and Madaket Ditch, “Report of the Committee,” 24 pages, Voted to be published by Annual Town Meeting of March 22, 1882 , and published on March 28, 1882. 9 Cole, M. L, et al., “Effects of Watershed Land use on Nitrogen Concentrations and δ15 Nitrogen in Groundwater,” Biogeochemistry, Springer Netherland, Vol. 77, No. 2, page 199-215, Feb 2006. Horsley Witten Group, “Evaluation of Turfgrass Nitrogen Fertilizer Leaching Rates in Soils on Cape Cod, Massachusetts,” Private report prepared for MassDEP, 33 pages, June 29, 2009. Howes, B. L. et al., Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute (WHOI), “Nantucket Harbor Study: A Quantitative Assessment of the Environmental Health of Nantucket Harbor for the Development of a Nutrient Management Plan,” Final Report, 50 pages plus un- paginated tables, figures, references, and appendix, March 1997. Lehman, J. T. et al., “Evidence for Reduced River Phosphorus Following Implementation of a Lawn Fertilizer Ordinance,” Lake and Reservoir Management, Taylor and Francis, London, Vol 25, 9 pages, 2009. Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Massachusetts Estuaries Project, Howes, B., et al., “Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for Nantucket Harbor, Town of Nantucket, Nantucket Island, Massachusetts,” Final Report, 183 pages, November 2006. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.oceanscience.net/estuaries/report/Nantucket/Nantucket_Hbr_MEP_Final.pdf. Massachusetts, Commonwealth of, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), Massachusetts Estuaries Project, Howes, B., et al., “Linked Watershed-Embayment Model to Determine Critical Nitrogen Loading Thresholds for Sesachacha Pond, Town of Nantucket, Nantucket Island, Massachusetts,” Final Report, 107 pages, November 2006. Found on May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.oceanscience.net/estuaries/report/Sesachacha/Sesachacha_MEP_Final.pdf. Nantucket, Town of, Board of Selectmen, Nantucket Harbor Watershed Work Group, “Report of the Nantucket Harbor Watershed Work Group,” 38 pages, June 1, 2003. Paper copy only. Nantucket, Town of, Marine and Coastal Resources Department, Annual Reports on Water Quality; paper only: Conant, K. L., “Hummock Pond, Annual Report, 2006,” 26 pages, March 2007; Conant, K. L., “Hummock Pond, Annual Report, 2007,” 26 pages, March 2008; Conant, K. L., “Nantucket Harbor Water Quality, Annual Report, 2006,” 39 pages, January 2007; Conant, K. L., “Nantucket Harbor Water Quality, Annual Report, 2007,” 38 pages, December 2007. NOFA Organic Land Care Committee, S. Little, Chair, “NOFA Standards for Organic Land Care: Practices for Design and Maintenance of Ecological Landscapes,” Northeast 10 Organic Farming Association (NOFA), 4th Edition, 88 pages, April 2009. Found May 16, 2010, at URL: http://www.organiclandcare.net/sites/default/files/upload/NOFA_Standards_4th_ed_2009 .pdf. Petrovic, A. M., “Report to the Pleasant Bay Alliance on the Turfgrass Fertilizer Nitrogen Leaching Rate,” Self published, 11 pages, August 2008. Tomer, M. D. and M. R. Burkart, “Long-Term Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizer Use on Ground Water Nitrate in Two Small Watersheds.” Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol. 32, pages2158–2171 (2003).