review process, review of the environmental impact statements, and review of Corps of Engineers public notices, supplemented as necessary with special coordination with individual federal agencies. The coastal agency will make every effort to notify federal agencies of potential inconsistencies with the state's coastal management program as early as possible. At the same time, as is implicit in the statement of national interest, it is expected that each federal agency proposing to conduct or support an activity that may directly affect the coastal area, or to undertake any development within the coastal area, will advise the coastal agency of such activities or developments as early as possible in the federal agency's planning process. In addition, federal agencies will be requested to enter into memoranda of understanding with the coastal agency with regard to any activities or development within the coastal resource management area that would otherwise require a commission permit. These memoranda of understanding will be processed as if they were coastal agency permits, including public hearings where required, and will be based upon the consistency of the proposed project or activity with the management program. If the coastal agency determines that the proposed activity or development isn't consistent with the management program, it will not enter into a memorandum of understanding. In that case, the federal agency will be expected to go forward with the activity, if at all, only after it has advised the coastal agency, in writing, that the project or activity complies with the coastal agency management program to the maximum extent practicable, and has set forth, in detail, the reasons why this is so. Activities conducted or supported by any federal agency which could directly affect land, water, air, and other coastal resources will be expected to conform to the management program to the maximum extent practicable. The determination as to whether a specific activity could directly affect the uses of land, water, air, and other coastal resources' will be made by the coastal agency, which will also determine whether the activity is, or isn't, consistent with the management program. California identifies specific federal agency licenses and permits for coastal land and water uses that will be subject to certification by the state coastal agency for consistency with its management program. Organizational arrangements The state coastal agency would bear the principal responsibility for the administration of California's coastal management program. Its functions would include: administration of local coastal program development grants; review and approval of local coastal programs; coordination of local program development with other state and federal planning and operational programs; facilitation of public involvement; administration of special contracts and interagency agreements; review, coordination, and involvement of federal agencies; assesment of management program effectiveness, and legislative liaison for management program refinement and conflict resolution; development of regulations, procedures, and recommended legislative amendments to effectuate program implementation; and coordination with other coastal states including participation in and administration of interstate coastal organizations. The state coastal agency would continue to regulate development along the coast through its regional commissions until certified local issues of statewide significance will be appealable to the state coastal agency as would regional commission decisions in the interim. Local plans would be brought into conformity with the state management program over a two-year period. It remains to be determined how the San Francisco Bay segment of the California management program will be brought fully under the umbrella of the state management structure or will continue to be administered separately by the Bay Conservation Development Commission. Authorities California's plan will be implemented by legislation that was in the final stages of approval by the state legislature at the time of this writing. GRANT RECIPIENT: Dept. of Environmental Protection Coastal management program contact: Charles D. OTHER MAJOR PARTICIPATING AGENCIES: Total Plan Development Allocation (through June 1976): $912,644 AUTHORITY: The Connecticut Dept. of Environmental Protection was mandated by legislation passed between 1969 and 1971 to regulate construction and dredging in tidal, coastal and navigable waters and to develop a permit system to regulate wetlands use. The Long Island Sound Regional Study managed by the New England River Basin Commission focused attention on coastal resources when it began in 1971. Comprehensive plans authorized for the purpose of guiding state policies included the Proposed Plan of Conservation & Development, completed in January 1973. During 1972, the governor appointed a state-leve: coastal zone management committee. It prepared a report on coastal issues after public hearings, and in 1973 sent to the legislature a bill that would have created a Coastal Resources Management Council. That measure died in the legislative committee. On June 30, 1974, the first federal Section 305 program development grant was awarded under the Coastal Zone Management Act. The state anticipates that it will enter the Section 306 implementation phase in 1977. PRIORITY ISSUES: The coastal area is densely populated and highly urbanized with the heaviest development in those areas that are most prone to flood and hurricane damage. Only a small percentage of the coastline is accessible to the public, thereby limiting recreational opportunities. The pressures for growth are reflected by management problems of municipal and industrial waste and increasing energy needs. Leasing for offshore oil and gas off Georges Bank might be expected to impact the Connecticut coastal area. OBJECTIVES OF COASTAL PLAN: Goals and objectives of Connecticut's coastal plan are: *To manage and control industrial, residential and institutional the state and minimizes adverse effects on coastal resources. *To preserve and protect areas of unique, scarce, fragile or vulnerable natural habitat, historical or cultural value and scenic importance. *To improve air and water quality. *To provide sufficient and diverse recreational opportunities. *To maximize productivity and value of fishery and wildlife resources. *To achieve and maintain a data base upon which to base decisionmaking and regulation. *To effect coordinated management of the coastal area. CURRENT STATUS: Following delays caused by a reorganization of key units of the Dept. of Environmental Protection in 1975, Connecticut has in place its central program staff and has broadened the membership of the Coastal Area Management Board. Connecticut, recognizing that it misjudged the magnitude of tasks required and that it underestimated the time required to accomplish many of its objectives, has rescheduled a number of work items. Work tasks that were deferred until the second or third year of program plan development include: recommendation for an inland boundary; delineation of critical regulatory boundaries; examination of tools for the maintenance, protection and management of geographic areas of particular concern; consideration of possible sites for establishment of estuarine sanctuaries; monitoring of major new plans, programs and activities in the coastal area; legislative recommendations; public meetings; and evaluation of public participation methods. OCS oil and gas development studies Among 1975's activities were efforts to develop an analytical capability in marine affairs and to focus on outer continental shelf regulations. Connecticut familiarized itself with industrial processes of petroleum development that might occur in response to the federal government's intent to offer oil and gas leases on the North Atlantic OCS. With state funds and federal funds authorized by the Coastal Zone Management Act, Connecticut is undertaking a resource inventory phase for onshore planning, analyzing facility siting mechanisms and assessing probable economic, social and environmental impacts on the state of OCS exploration and development. Close statewide and regional cooperation is seen as central to the effort. The state will attempt to estimate the number and types of oilrelated facilities that might locate along its coast, assess the ability of the coast to sustain those facilities and describe the long-term effects of offshore development on air and water quality, land use patterns, employment, housing, public services and commerce. Boundary identification ased on the following markers. A fixed linear distance of 500 feet nland from mean high water was considered as the management boundary In line with the recommendations of the Long Island Sound Study. ther alternatives include use of a land transportation corridor, flood azard zone, aesthetic distance, riparian municipality and geograhic areas of particular concern. An ecoregional boundary -- based n physiographic, climatic and biotic factors -- would correspond o the 250-foot contour, but precise delineation of this contour akes sole use of this method difficult. study of boundary options ontinues. lefinition of permissible land and water uses Development of a strategy for defining land and water uses is eing based upon a review of currently permitted uses as set by local oning and review of priorities as recommended in local, regional and state land use plans and previous studies. An analysis of esource capabilities is underway. Specifically, each of the six coastal regional planning agencies as contracted to report on zoning districts within 500 feet of the horeline and analyze land use plans for coastal municipalities. Composite maps of districts and plans were prepared for the municialities. The state compiled regional plans and refined the map proluced by the Plan of Conservation & Development. Regional planning gencies analyzed the recommendations of the Long Island Sound Study. Identification of geographic areas of particular concern "Coastal Areas of Particular Concern: An Approach for Connecticut" outlines a framework for defining geographic areas of particular concern and suggests a two-step approach patterned after that of California. Initially, the CAM program would select GAPCs and establish management objectives and guidelines for land use. Secondly, unicipalities would use federal monies to enable them to adopt and administer standards consistent with state guidelines, and to prepare a detailed plan for the coastal area. The state would review Local standards for consistency or take over management in cases where municipalities didn't participate. In other work, the state made recommendations on delineating Mapping techniques and display are in place and a coastal resource atlas is being prepared. Additional data is being collected, especially in urban redevelopment areas, areas of intense development pressure and in several types of critical natural areas. While certain areas of particular concern already are regulated and will be included as GAPCs, most other areas will undergo a process of nomination that will occur during the third year of planning. Public and governmental involvement The Coastal Area Management Program interacts primarily with Che CAM Advisory Board for intrastate coordination and, for interstate |