**Meeting Agenda  January 28, 2009  EPA Lab in North Chelmsford, MA**

+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [9:30  | **Welcome & Passing of the Rock**                           |
| am]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | Kathleen Leyden of the Maine Coastal Program and Mel Coté   |
| lcaps} | of US EPA accept 2009 chairmanship.                         |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [9:40  | **Quarterly Updates**                                       |
| am]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *Kathleen Leyden, Maine -- State Chair*                     |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | Quarterly updates are intended to provide Council members   |
|        | with information on recent NROC activities, state or        |
|        | federal initiatives of interest, and other items of         |
|        | regional significance. The Council is encouraged to review  |
|        | the updates and come to the meeting with questions,         |
|        | suggestions for NROC action, etc. Approximately 20 minutes  |
|        | will be set aside for discussion of updates at each         |
|        | meeting. *Please review items before the meeting.*          |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Content]{.underline}:                                      |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Northeast Coastal Hazards Resilience Workshop --        |
|        |     Results and Next Steps\[Page 3\]                        |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   CZ09 Sessions \[Page 4\]                                |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Changes in NROC Membership \[Page 5\]                   |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   NERACOOS Update from NROC Representatives \[Pending\]   |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Sea Grant Research Plan Summary \[Pending\]             |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Interagency Climate Change Workshop \[Pending\]         |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [10:00 | **Appropriations Strategy Update**                          |
| am]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *Kathleen Leyden, Maine -- State Chair*                     |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | [Desired decision(s) or other outcome:]{.underline}         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Councilors are aware of appropriations strategy         |
|        |     timeline and commit to implementing strategy.           |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Content]{.underline}:                                      |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Review appropriations strategy and timeline for state   |
|        |     and federal action                                      |
|        |                                                             |
|        | *Materials: 2010 Appropriations strategy* \[Page 6\]*, 2010 |
|        | Appropriations Congressional Request* \[Page 8\], NROC One  |
|        | Pager \[Page 17\]                                           |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [10:35 | **NROC 2009 Work Plan Activities**                          |
| am]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *Committee Chairs*                                          |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | Committees will report out to NROC members on activities    |
|        | for 2009. Committees will be asked to report back to NROC   |
|        | on their progress with highlighted activities at the Spring |
|        | meeting.                                                    |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Desired decision(s) or other outcome:]{.underline}         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Councilors are aware of what the committees will work   |
|        |     on and have offered suggestions of people/organizations |
|        |     that need to be involved.                               |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Councilors provide information on efforts that support  |
|        |     work plan activities for Committees to engage           |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Content]{.underline}:                                      |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Committee leads highlight activities from final work    |
|        |     plans slated for action in 2009                         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Review Committee rosters and request suggestions for    |
|        |     organizations/individuals that need to be involved on   |
|        |     Committee and with activities                           |
|        |                                                             |
|        | *Materials: NROC Work Plans (Available on website)*         |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [11:30 | **Timeline Review**                                         |
| am]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *Mel Coté, EPA -- Federal Chair*                            |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | Review timeline and flow of activities for the year.        |
|        |                                                             |
|        | *Materials: Gant chart* \[Pending\]                         |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [12:00 | **Lunch**                                                   |
| pm]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | Please feel free to bring your own lunch or money for a     |
| lcaps} | lunch order.                                                |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [12:45 | **LiDAR Discussion**                                        |
| pm]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | Susan Russell-Robinson, USGS                                |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | This session builds upon the strong need expressed by NROC  |
|        | members and partners within the coastal community for       |
|        | consistent, comprehensible and easily accessible            |
|        | high-resolution elevation data. NROC participants will      |
|        | learn about                                                 |
|        |                                                             |
|        | (1) NH/ME LiDAR proposal included in NROC appropriations    |
|        |     request (see document submitted by Cameron Wake)        |
|        |                                                             |
|        | (2) NE Airborne LIDAR Workshop, May 5-7, 2009, Woods Hole   |
|        |     Massachusetts                                           |
|        |                                                             |
|        | (3) Efforts to identify existing NE LiDAR data repositories |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Desired decision(s) or other outcome:]{.underline}         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Confirm state interests in regional LiDAR dataset       |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Agree to send appropriate staff to LiDAR workshop in    |
|        |     Spring                                                  |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Recommend speakers and participants for LiDAR workshop  |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Discuss process for setting NE LiDAR acquisition        |
|        |     priorities                                              |
|        |                                                             |
|        | *Materials: LiDAR Proposal from UNH and Great Bay NERR*     |
|        | \[Page 19\]*, USGS LiDAR workshop description* \[Page 21\]  |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [1:45  | **NROC Activities and Perspectives in Climate Change**      |
| pm]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *David Russ, USGS*                                          |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | [Desired decision(s) or other outcome:]{.underline}         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Council members are aware of other New England climate  |
|        |     initiatives including responses to the NEGC Climate     |
|        |     Resolution and the Federal Partners Interagency Climate |
|        |     Workshop.                                               |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Council agrees on role of NROC in facilitating a        |
|        |     regional strategy for coastal climate adaptation        |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Partner with NEGC and support climate interests related |
|        |     to coast                                                |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Major regional players, opportunity for NROC to explain |
|        |     what we're doing, esp re hazards.                       |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   GOMC climate network activities                         |
|        |                                                             |
|        | [Content:]{.underline}                                      |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Updates from regional climate initiatives               |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Outline NROC's role in climate change response and      |
|        |     adaptation based on other regional efforts              |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Review and discuss draft NROC statement on climate      |
|        |     change including advantages/disadvantages of having a   |
|        |     statement                                               |
|        |                                                             |
|        | -   Opportunity for integration of regional climate efforts |
|        |                                                             |
|        | *Materials:* GOMC Climate Network update \[Page 22\], *NEGC |
|        | Resolution on CC* \[Page 23\]*, Partner updates* \[Page     |
|        | 25\]*, Revised NROC statement on climate change* \[To be    |
|        | distributed at meeting\]*,*                                 |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [3:20  | **Closing Business**                                        |
| pm]    |                                                             |
| {.smal | *Kathleen Leyden, Maine - Chair*                            |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
|        | -   Next meeting date and location                          |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| [3:30  | **Adjourn**                                                 |
| pm]    |                                                             |
| {.smal |                                                             |
| lcaps} |                                                             |
+--------+-------------------------------------------------------------+

**Northeast Coastal Hazards Resilience Workshop -- Results and Next
Steps**

***Submitted by Ron Rozsa, Susan Russell-Robinson, and Adrianne
Harrison***

Approximately 60 federal, state, and local hazards professionals
attended a Coastal Hazards Resilience Workshop sponsored by NROC's
Coastal Hazards Resilience committee and the NOAA Coastal Services
Center. Elements of coastal resilience were introduced and discussed as
well as opportunities for regional collaboration around each element.
The workshop participants identified four primary roles for NROC in
regional coastal hazards resilience action.

1.  Convene partners to advance hazard resiliency. NROC is positioned to
    facilitate regional communication around coastal hazards resilience.

2.  Develop regional coastal hazards resilience message. NROC has
    expertise to lead effort in developing shared messaging for regional
    consistency when discussing hazards resilience.

3.  Develop information network. While NROC does not have the capacity
    to develop and house an information network, NROC can facilitate the
    development of a coastal hazards resilience community of practice
    and work with regional partners to develop the technical
    requirements for an information network.

4.  Advocate for funding. NROC is positioned to work with state and
    federal funding sources to support building coastal hazards
    resilience capacity in New England.

The workshop proceedings are available on the NROC website under the
Coastal Hazards Portal.

**CZ09 Session Update**

***Submitted by Adrianne Harrison***

The preliminary program for the Coastal Zone 2009 Conference in Boston,
MA includes three sessions devoted to region ocean governance
discussions. These sessions will highlight NROC, the Gulf of Mexico
Alliance, the West Coast Governor's Agreement, and several other
regional entities as an example of governance structures developing in
the US. The three sessions are summarized below:

1\. Challenges of Regional Collaboration - The purpose of this two and a
half hour conversation is to bring together representatives from the
full spectrum of regional ocean governance initiatives: from the more
mature efforts in the Great Lakes and Gulf of Maine to the active
efforts in the Gulf of Mexico, West Coast, Northeast, Puget Sound and
the Chesapeake, and finally, the newer alliances in the South Atlantic
and Mid-Atlantic, as well as others. We invite representatives of these
efforts and their partners to discuss the specific challenges with
working across geographic, cultural, political and agency jurisdictions,
as well as to develop strategies for moving forward with regional or
ecosystem scale alliances. \*Note: NROC is the actual host for this
session and will be asking for support from members to organize and
facilitate this session.

2\. Lessons Learned Comparative Panel -- The purpose of this one and a
half hour panel is to bring together representatives from the four
regional ocean governance groups formed in response to the US Commission
on Ocean Policy Report (West Coast Governors Agreement, Great Lakes
Commission, Northeast Regional Ocean Council, and the Gulf of Mexico
Alliance) to share lessons learned. This panel will ask each group to
describe their structure, process for mobilizing to action, and outcomes
of the partnership.

3\. Ocean Governance in Practice -- The purpose of this one hour panel
is bring together representatives from ocean governance groups not
included in the comparative panel that can offer lessons learned and new
approaches as regional efforts continue to grow around the country. This
session will include groups from outside the US.

The official CZ09 technical program will be available in late March.

**Changes in NROC Membership for 2009**

***Submitted by Adrianne Harrison***

The Executive Committee would like to update the Council on several
changes in membership for 2009.

1\. Due to staff changes, Deerin Babb-Brott will serve as the Council
member for Massachusetts' Executive Office of Energy and Environmental
Affairs. Bruce Carlisle and Julia Knisel will serve as alternates. Greg
Watson remains the second Council member for Massachusetts.

2\. Due to budget limitations, Vermont will not be sending a
representative to quarterly Council meetings. Vermont will continue
involvement at the Standing Committee level. Additionally, the Executive
Committee will communicate with Vermont through quarterly updates on
NROC's progress and upcoming activities.

3\. Due to staff changes, the Minerals Management Services NROC
participant will be Bob LaBelle with Erin Trager serving as the
alternate and member of the Energy committee.

The NROC roster for 2009 will be updated to reflect these changes.

**\*\*Additional quarterly updates will be supplied in an addendum on
Monday, January 26^th^.**

**2010 Appropriations Strategy**

***Submitted by Kathleen Leyden***

**Garnering Support for NROC**

NROC's strategy to garner support for the Council's work plans includes:

-   Securing cash and in-kind support (e.g., state, federal, non-profit)
    for 2009 work plan tasks;

-   Pursuing a coordinated NE approach through the NE Governors to
    obtain 2009-10 support from Congress; and

-   Working collaboratively with regional programs around the country to
    raise the visibility and possible role of regional ocean governance
    programs.

I.  **Secure 2009 support**

In January 2009 the Council will act on the three Committee work plans
and request the committees to advance some items in 2009 with in-kind
and grant support. (This item will be discussed in a separate agenda
item on 1-28-09.)

II. **Pursue New England approach** (for funding in March 2010 and
    beyond)

NROC needs to pursue a NE approach, in collaboration with the Gulf of
Maine Council (GOMC), to secure the resources it needs to implement its
work plans. This would entail:

A.  [Seeking Congressional assistance]{.underline} -- NROC and GOMC have
    developed a 2009-2010 NE Governors' request to Congress to implement
    pertinent sections of the three committee work plans. Note:
    Consultation with affected federal agencies (e.g., NOAA, DOI, etc.)
    and programs (e.g., Sea Grant, Joint Hydrographic Center, etc.)
    needs to be completed.

B.  [Signatories]{.underline} -- NROC has spoken with NEGC. Maine's
    Governor Baldacci is the current NEGC chair and should circulate a
    draft letter to his fellow governors containing the request that he
    would sign on behalf of his colleagues. (State representatives need
    to notify their Governor's Office this request is coming \-- remind
    them the Governors' created these organizations (e.g., NROC and
    GOMC); describe the purposes of these interstate efforts; alert them
    of the pending Congressional request & timing; and request timely
    Governor's Office consideration when the request arrives in their
    office.)

C.  [Timing]{.underline} -- It will likely take 30-days for a letter to
    be approved by the Governors and signed by Baldacci. NROC then needs
    to develop and implement a January to June roll-out strategy.

D.  [Connect with House Members]{.underline} -- A lynchpin in our
    strategy is to enlist the support of House members and encourage
    them to communicate with:

-   Rosa Delauro (9-term Democrat from New Haven, Connecticut) -- She
    serves on the House Appropriations and Budget Committees.  She is
    chairwoman of the Agriculture-FDA Appropriations Subcommittee and is
    a member of the Labor-Health and Human Services-Education and
    Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittees. (This latter
    committee oversees NOAA's budget.) (202-225-3661
    <Ivery.Pakulis@mail.house.gov>)

-   Patrick Kennedy (6-term Democrat from Rhode Island) -- He serves on
    the House Appropriations Committee and the Subcommittees on Labor,
    Health and Human Services, and Education, and on Commerce, Justice,
    Science. (202-225-4911 Rachel.Bornstein@mail.house.gov)

These two members need to hear from their colleagues via a note or
conversation about the importance of this work. Of special importance is
for state staff from Connecticut and RI to connect with staff from their
respective Appropriations member's office (see above) and encourage them
"to do the right thing".

E.  [Connect with Senators]{.underline} -- There are three key members:

-   Jack Reed (10-years in the Senate -- Democrat in Rhode Island) -- He
    serves on the Appropriations Committee and a number of subcommittees
    including Commerce, Justice, and Science. (202-224-4642 Kristen Sari
    is lead staff on ocean issues)

-   Sheldon Whitehouse

-   Susan Collins (Republican \-- Senate Appropriations Committee)

-   Judd Gregg (Republican from NH) -- He serves on the Appropriations
    Committee and the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and
    Related Agencies. He is a long-standing advocate of regional
    initiatives. For example, as Governor he helped to create the Gulf
    of Maine Council. (202-224-3324)

F.  [Seeking Administration support]{.underline} -- Federal agency staff
    on NROC can work within their agencies to promote NROC priorities,
    allocate staff time to work on activities in the committee work
    plans and work with agency staffing drafting 2010-12 budgets to
    incorporate support for NROC.

> In late January --early February the Appropriation's sub-committee and
> federal representatives with NOAA and DOI needs to further engage
> respective programs that may be affected by this request and to ensure
> the request is integrated with ongoing, parallel activities.

III. **Collaborate with regional governor's programs in other parts of
     the country**

Commencing in November 2008 NROC led an initiative to develop a 1-page
statement on the importance of interstate ocean governance programs with
four Governor's efforts around the country. This is now final and will
be used by the regions with their members of Congress, presented to the
Obama Administration, and distributed at national events (e.g.,
testimony on the Hill, Joint Ocean Commission events, etc.).

**2010 Appropriations Request**

***Submitted by Kathleen Leyden***

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="1.34375in" height="0.5284722222222222in"}

**Priority ocean issues: responding to climate change, energy and
ecosystem health issues**

New England Governors' Request for Congressional Assistance: October
2009 to October 2010

[Introduction]{.underline}

This request is based on the 2007 ***New England Governor's Coast and
Ocean Action Plan*** and the Northeast Regional Ocean Council's (NROC)
2009-2010 work plan. The plan describes collaborative, interstate
actions that address three regional priorities -- ocean and coastal
ecosystem health, ocean energy planning and management, and coastal
hazards resilience. (<http://community.csc.noaa.gov/nroc/>) This request
also supports the 20-year US-Canada partnership lead by the Gulf of
Maine Council (GOMC). It is guided by a 2007-2011 Action Plan
([www.gulfofmaine.org](http://www.gulfofmaine.org/))

[Summary]{.underline}

+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| Activity/Task                               | Pot    |        |      |
|                                             | ential |        |      |
|                                             | Reci   |        |      |
|                                             | pient/ |        |      |
|                                             | Entity |        |      |
|                                             | to     |        |      |
|                                             | P      |        |      |
|                                             | erform |        |      |
|                                             | the    |        |      |
|                                             | Work   |        |      |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
|                                             | NRO    | F      | T    |
|                                             | C/GOMC | ederal | otal |
|                                             |        | Agency |      |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| 1.  **Improve federal and state policy,     | \$     | \$     | \$   |
|     planning and regulatory                 | 1      | 2      | 325  |
|     decision-making**                       | 25,000 | 00,000 | ,000 |
|                                             |        |        |      |
| -   Enhance data management                 |        | \$1,5  | \$1  |
|                                             |        | 00,000 | ,500 |
| -   Address priority coastal & ocean        |        |        | ,000 |
|     research issues                         |        | \$2,7  |      |
|                                             |        | 00,000 | \$2  |
| -   Respond to managers needs for LiDAR and |        |        | ,700 |
|     seafloor mapping                        |        |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| 2.  **Develop a New England ocean           | \$     |        | \$   |
|     governance framework**                  | 3      |        | 350  |
|                                             | 50,000 |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| 3.  **Improve decision-making about         | \$     |        | \$   |
|     ecosystem health**                      | 4      |        | 465  |
|                                             | 65,000 |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| 4.  **Work at the community level to adapt  | \$     |        | \$   |
|     to climate change & sea level rise**    | 3      |        | 350  |
|                                             | 50,000 |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| 5.  **Strengthen our response to renewable  | \$     |        | \$   |
|     and traditional energy activities**     | 1      |        | 100  |
|                                             | 00,000 |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+
| > **Totals**                                | \$1,3  | \$4,4  | \$5  |
|                                             | 90,000 | 00,000 | ,790 |
|                                             |        |        | ,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+--------+--------+------+

+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 1.  **Improve federal and state policy,     |               |       |
|     planning and regulatory                 |               |       |
|     decision-making**                       |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| Work Plan Activity                          | Deliverables  | A     |
|                                             |               | mount |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| A.  Enhance data management (OCEH #5, CHR   | -   A         | \$20  |
|     #2, OEPM #1)                            |     regional, | 0,000 |
|                                             |     co        |       |
| Coastal and ocean decision-makers need      | nsensus-based | (Fe   |
| access to physical, biological, chemical    |     schema    | deral |
| and geologic information and metadata for   |     for data  | pr    |
| existing datasets.                          |     int       | ogram |
|                                             | eroperability | to    |
| Actions:                                    |               | pe    |
|                                             | -   A network | rform |
| 1.  Accelerate the data management          |     of        | the   |
|     activities of the Northeastern and      |     regional  | work) |
|     Mid-Atlantic Regional Associations of   |     data      |       |
|     Coastal and Ocean Observing, COIN       |     providers | \$12  |
|     Atlantic and the Ocean Data             |     with      | 5,000 |
|     Partnership.                            |     metadata  |       |
|                                             |               | (     |
| 2.  Develop data delivery tools responsive  |    registered | GOMC) |
|     to managers needs including             |     in a      |       |
|     implementation of the prototype         |     national  |       |
|     web-based GOM Habitat Monitoring Data   |     directory |       |
|     System (HMDS). This system enables the  |     (GCMD,    |       |
|     sharing, integration, and use of        |     FGDC, or  |       |
|     coastal habitat monitoring data. It     |     Ge        |       |
|     provides standardized data entry,       | oConnections) |       |
|     centralized data storage, synthesis and |     with      |       |
|     dynamic visual display of coastal and   |     robust,   |       |
|     estuarine habitat monitoring results    |               |       |
|     from around the Gulf of Maine. It       |    searchable |       |
|     enables monitoring programs to safely   |     discovery |       |
|     store their data, while facilitating    |     metadata  |       |
|     simultaneous use of information from    |     that can  |       |
|     multiple sources. The data can be       |     be        |       |
|     displayed in maps, graphs, and reports  |     accessed  |       |
|     that describe habitat conditions and    |     through   |       |
|     trends regionally and at individual     |     portals   |       |
|     sites. The HMDS data synthesis and      |     on the    |       |
|     visualization tools provide answers to  |     Global    |       |
|     two questions of importance to resource |     Change    |       |
|     managers: (a) what are "natural" (i.e.  |     Master    |       |
|     reference) conditions of critical       |     Directory |       |
|     habitats in the Gulf of Maine and (b)   |               |       |
|     how do habitats change over time        | -             |       |
|     following restoration activities        |    Functional |       |
|     relative to reference conditions?       |     Habitat   |       |
|                                             |               |       |
|                                             |    Monitoring |       |
|                                             |     Data      |       |
|                                             |     System    |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| B.  Address priority coastal & ocean        | -             | \     |
|     research issues (OCEH #6)               | Peer-reviewed | $1.5M |
|                                             |     research  | (Fe   |
| It is timely to commence implementation of  |     that      | deral |
| the 2009 Regional Ocean Science Plan that   |     responds  | pr    |
| focuses on climate change, human health and |     directly  | ogram |
| human activities as they relate to the      |     to        | to    |
| ocean; coastal resiliency; and management   |     priority  | pe    |
| and governance.                             |     coastal   | rform |
|                                             |     and ocean | the   |
| Actions:                                    |               | work) |
|                                             |    management |       |
| 1.  Support the New England Sea Grant       |     issues in |       |
|     Programs and the scientific community   |     New       |       |
|     in responding to the most pressing      |     England   |       |
|     ocean and coastal research needs of the |               |       |
|     management community.                   |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| C.  Respond to managers needs for high      | -   LiDAR     | \     |
|     resolution LiDAR and seafloor mapping   |     maps for  | $1.2M |
|     (OCEH #4 , #5, #6; CHR #2; OEPM #1)     |     coastal   | (Fe   |
|                                             |               | deral |
| [High Resolution (LiDAR)                    |   communities | a     |
| Mapping]{.underline}                        |     (i.e.,    | gency |
|                                             |     towns     | or    |
| Accurate, high resolution surface elevation |     with      | pr    |
| data support a variety of public and        |               | ogram |
| private sector needs. Elevation data are    |    elevations | to    |
| available at various resolutions that are   |     below 10  | pe    |
| often inadequate to support priority        |     meters),  | rform |
| coastal decision-making. LiDAR (Light       |     LiDAR     | the   |
| Detection and Ranging) can provide seamless |     data with | work) |
| high resolution (1- to 3-m spacing)         |     1-meter   |       |
| elevation data over large spatial areas. In |     point     | \     |
| 2009, NROC will determine the regions LiDAR |     spacing   | $1,50 |
| priorities and costs.                       |     and 9 cm  | 0,000 |
|                                             |     RMSE      |       |
| Actions:                                    |     vertical  | (Fe   |
|                                             |               | deral |
| 1.  Advance the LiDAR coverage of New       |    resolution | a     |
|     England by supporting a mapping project |     would     | gency |
|     in New Hampshire and southern Maine.    |     support   | or    |
|     This project will 1) help to better     |     1-foot    | pr    |
|     define requirements and costs           |     contours  | ogram |
|     associated with the acquisition,        |     within    | to    |
|     processing, management, and             |     the       | pe    |
|     distribution of LiDAR data; 2) enable a |     gradual   | rform |
|     thorough analysis of diverse user needs |               | the   |
|     to ensure the data products are useful  |    topography | work) |
|     for multiple purposes; and 3)           |     of the    |       |
|     demonstrate ways the data can be used   |     coastal   |       |
|     as the basis of advancing community     |     zone) in  |       |
|     resilience to the impacts of climate    |     the NH    |       |
|     change.                                 |     seacoast  |       |
|                                             |     and       |       |
| [Seafloor Mapping]{.underline}              |     southern  |       |
|                                             |     Maine     |       |
| There is increasing urgency to reduce green |     (York to  |       |
| house gas emissions through the development |     Casco     |       |
| of alternative energy in ocean              |     Bay)      |       |
| environments. Human uses of the seafloor    |               |       |
| are growing rapidly in variety and          | -   High      |       |
| intensity, as population expands,           |               |       |
| technologies develop, and new economic      |    resolution |       |
| activities emerge. Trawling, dredging,      |               |       |
| aquaculture, mining, fiber-optic and        |  bathymetric, |       |
| electric power cables, oil and gas          |               |       |
| pipelines, wind farms, and other activities |   geological, |       |
| can affect seabed habitats, which support a |     and       |       |
| diversity of animals and plants.            |               |       |
|                                             |    ecological |       |
| Successful management of these activities   |     seafloor  |       |
| (e.g., balance ecological impacts and       |     maps      |       |
| conflicting uses, etc.) requires            |               |       |
| comprehensive maps of seafloor              |               |       |
| characteristics. While some mapping is      |               |       |
| being done with federal and state resources |               |       |
| less than 50% of the offshore area is       |               |       |
| currently mapped.                           |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| Actions:                                    |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 1.  Produce high resolution bathymetric,    |               |       |
|     geological, and ecological seafloor     |               |       |
|     maps for designated priority areas to   |               |       |
|     support sound alternate energy          |               |       |
|     facilities, identification of suitable  |               |       |
|     routes for cables and pipelines, to     |               |       |
|     identify ecologically significant       |               |       |
|     habitats, and assist states that are    |               |       |
|     implementing ocean management programs. |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| > Sub-total                                 |               | \     |
|                                             |               | $4,52 |
|                                             |               | 5,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+

+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 2.  **Develop a New England ocean           |               |       |
|     governance framework**                  |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| Work Plan Activity (OCEH #4 & OEPM #2)      | Deliverables  | A     |
|                                             |               | mount |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| The coastal and ocean sectors of New        | -             | \$35  |
| England's economy are significant           |  Quantitative | 0,000 |
| contributors to the region's Gross Domestic |     and       | (     |
| Product. To both protect and grow the New   |               | NROC) |
| England economy the states will engage      |   qualitative |       |
| public and private interests in the         |     baseline  |       |
| development of a governance framework that  |               |       |
| is based on a core set of mutually agreed   |   information |       |
| on goals, objectives and assumptions about  |     on New    |       |
| current conditions and the future. This     |     England's |       |
| initiative assumes that there will be       |     coastal   |       |
| differences within and among each state but |     and       |       |
| that it is a key step in strengthening      |     marine    |       |
| regional ocean stewardship.                 |               |       |
|                                             |  environment; |       |
| Actions:                                    |               |       |
|                                             | -   A ocean   |       |
| 1.  Create highly collaborative approach to |               |       |
|     sustained engagement of public and      |    governance |       |
|     private interests;                      |     framework |       |
|                                             |     for New   |       |
| 2.  Establish marine spatial baselines      |     England   |       |
|     (e.g., determine the time frame for     |     marine    |       |
|     planning, describe current uses and     |     waters;   |       |
|     demands for space, document economic    |               |       |
|     and environmental conditions and        | -             |       |
|     threats, define key values of the       |   Significant |       |
|     marine area, etc.);                     |     and       |       |
|                                             |     sustained |       |
| 3.  Create governance framework (e.g.,      |               |       |
|     define general goals and objectives for |    engagement |       |
|     the marine environment, develop general |     of        |       |
|     decision-making processes, create       |     public,   |       |
|     alternative use scenarios, describe the |               |       |
|     significance of each spatial sea use    |    non-profit |       |
|     scenario for the different functions    |     and       |       |
|     and activities in the marine area,      |     private   |       |
|     evaluate each scenario, etc.);          |     interests |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 4.  Broaden engagement (e.g., develop and   |               |       |
|     implement extensive communication and   |               |       |
|     outreach tools, etc.)                   |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+

+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 3.  **Improve decision-making about         |               |       |
|     ecosystem health**                      |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| Work Plan Activity (OCEH #8)                | Deliverables  | A     |
|                                             |               | mount |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| State legislators, agency decision-makers,  | -   Web and   | \$4   |
| members of Congress and the region's        |     print     | 0,000 |
| Governors need ongoing access to            |     materials | (     |
| information about the condition and trends  |     (e.g.,    | NROC) |
| of New England's coastal and marine         |     fact      |       |
| environment.                                |     sheets,   |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| Actions:                                    |    brochures, |       |
|                                             |     reports,  |       |
| 1.  Produce & disseminate New England       |     etc.)     |       |
|     specific communications and outreach    |               |       |
|     materials that describe the conditions  | -   Meetings  |       |
|     and trends of the coastal and marine    |     and work  |       |
|     environment.                            |     sessions  |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 2.  Accelerate state of the environment     | -             | \$30  |
|     reporting in the Gulf of Maine          |    Indicators | 0,000 |
|                                             |     of        | (     |
| > Actions:                                  |     ecosystem | GOMC) |
|                                             |     health by |       |
| -   Complete the compilation of indicator   |     the       |       |
|     datasets, display this information via  |     Ecosystem |       |
|     the web and other communication tools,  |     Indicator |       |
|     and assist the target audiences through |               |       |
|     training and education efforts through  |   Partnership |       |
|     the Gulf of Maine Times and other       |     (ESIP)    |       |
|     mechanisms.                             |               |       |
|                                             | -   State of  |       |
|                                             |     the       |       |
|                                             |               |       |
|                                             |   environment |       |
|                                             |     materials |       |
|                                             |               |       |
|                                             | -   Training  |       |
|                                             |     sessions  |       |
|                                             |     for       |       |
|                                             |     target    |       |
|                                             |     audiences |       |
|                                             |               |       |
|                                             | -             |       |
|                                             |    Production |       |
|                                             |     of two    |       |
|                                             |     editions  |       |
|                                             |     of the    |       |
|                                             |     GOM Times |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 3.  Support implementation of the Gulf of   | -   Produce   | \$12  |
|     Maine Environmental Monitoring Plan by  |     annual    | 5,000 |
|     conducting Gulfwatch \-- a monitoring   |     data      |       |
|     program (circa 1991) that measures      |     report on | (     |
|     chemical contaminants in blue mussels,  |     chemical  | GOMC) |
|     Mytilus edulis, to assess the types and |     c         |       |
|     concentration of contaminants in the    | oncentrations |       |
|     near-shore marine environment.          |               |       |
|     Disseminate the results to managers,    | -   Produce   |       |
|     the media and decision-makers.          |     and       |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| > Actions:                                  |   disseminate |       |
|                                             |     outreach  |       |
| -   Collect, process, prepare mussels for   |     and       |       |
|     shipment; deliver all samples to        |               |       |
|     respective labs for analysis; review    | communication |       |
|     all trace metal analytical results,     |     materials |       |
|     morphological measurements; tabulate    |     for       |       |
|     data; report out results; engage        |     managers  |       |
|     managers and other users via            |               |       |
|     communication and outreach              |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| > Sub-total                                 |               | \$46  |
|                                             |               | 5,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+

+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 4.  **Work at the community level to adapt  |               |       |
|     to sea level rise**                     |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| Work Plan Activity (CHR #1)                 | Deliverables  | A     |
|                                             |               | mount |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| The NE states need to expedite climate      | -   Five      | \$30  |
| change scenario planning to enable state    |     pilot     | 0,000 |
| agencies and municipalities adapt to        |     projects  | (     |
| identify vulnerabilities and then to devise |     at the    | NROC) |
| specific implementation approaches for      |     municipal |       |
| adaptation. In addition, it is timely to    |     level     | \$    |
| accelerate on-the-ground action by          |     that      | 5     |
| municipalities that are adapting to rising  |               | 0,000 |
| sea levels by supporting the approach of No |   demonstrate | (     |
| Adverse Impact (NAI). It is a               |     how to    | GOMC) |
| forward-thinking, fair, and legally         |     implement |       |
| defensible approach to coastal land         |               |       |
| management. In its broadest sense, it is a  |    successful |       |
| set of \"do no harm\" principles that       |               |       |
| communities can use when planning,          |    adaptation |       |
| designing, and evaluating public and        |               |       |
| private projects. By following the NAI      |    approaches |       |
| approach and leveraging ongoing activities  |     to sea    |       |
| (e.g., StormSmart Coasts, etc.) communities |     level     |       |
| can protect people, property, ecosystems    |     rise;     |       |
| and municipal budgets.                      |               |       |
|                                             | -             |       |
| Through this regional initiative NROC will  | Dissemination |       |
| showcase successful adaptation strategies,  |     of        |       |
| strengthen networking and communication     |               |       |
| among the coastal hazards community in New  |    adaptation |       |
| England, and make measurable progress in    |               |       |
| addressing the adverse effects of rising    |   techniques, |       |
| sea levels. (This activity also advances    |     case      |       |
| the New England Governors' Conference 2008  |     studies   |       |
| resolution concerning "Climate Change       |     and other |       |
| Adaptation".) Anticipated project partners  |     resources |       |
| include state emergency management          |     that      |       |
| officials and professional associations,    |     enable    |       |
| FEMA, local governments and associations,   |     other     |       |
| etc.                                        |               |       |
|                                             |   communities |       |
| Actions:                                    |     to act;   |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 1.  Select one community-based competitive  |               |       |
|     proposal in each of the five states.    |               |       |
|     (Examples of selection criteria include |               |       |
|     history of vulnerability, urban vs.     |               |       |
|     rural, demonstrated community           |               |       |
|     commitment to addressing sea level rise |               |       |
|     issues, willingness to work with other  |               |       |
|     communities in NE, likelihood of        |               |       |
|     measureable reduction in sea level rise |               |       |
|     exposure, etc.);                        |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 2.  Provide the services of technical       |               |       |
|     experts directly to the communities to  |               |       |
|     conduct inundation scenario planning    |               |       |
|     and to identify the role of federal,    |               |       |
|     state and municipal governments as to   |               |       |
|     their specific roles in implementing    |               |       |
|     their proposed adaptation strategies.   |               |       |
|     Anticipated examples include: hazard    |               |       |
|     mapping & vulnerability assessments of  |               |       |
|     public infrastructure that enables      |               |       |
|     community action, develop and implement |               |       |
|     regulations and development standards,  |               |       |
|     etc.                                    |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 3.  Enhance communication among state and   |               |       |
|     federal hazard resilience initiatives   |               |       |
|     that results in these efforts better    |               |       |
|     able to implement sea level rise        |               |       |
|     adaptation strategies;                  |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 4.  Create ongoing communication among the  |               |       |
|     communities to share lessons-learned    |               |       |
|     and innovative approaches.              |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 5.  Promote successful community adaptation |               |       |
|     responses via the NROC webpage, the GOM |               |       |
|     Council Knowledgebase, stakeholder      |               |       |
|     workshops in coordination with the      |               |       |
|     Maritime provinces, distribution of     |               |       |
|     written materials, conferences, etc.    |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| > Sub-total                                 |               | \$35  |
|                                             |               | 0,000 |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+

+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| 5.  **Strengthening our response to         |               |       |
|     renewable and traditional energy        |               |       |
|     activities**                            |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| Work Plan Activity (OEPM \# 4)              | Deliverables  | A     |
|                                             |               | mount |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+
| The planning, permitting and operation of   | -   Voluntary | \$10  |
| renewable and traditional energy projects   |               | 0,000 |
| is a top priority for New England.          |    guidelines | (     |
| Considerable information and experience in  |     for       | NROC) |
| assessing renewable ocean energy facility   |     assessing |       |
| development and design is accumulating      |               |       |
| through pilot project implementation and    | environmental |       |
| full-scale project planning. However        |     and       |       |
| controversies and uncertainties remain      |     economic  |       |
| regarding how to balance renewable ocean    |     impacts,  |       |
| energy resources development with existing  |     use       |       |
| and traditional uses of the marine          |               |       |
| environment. New England specific methods   |    conflicts, |       |
| for assessing the environmental and         |     and       |       |
| socio-economic impacts of renewable ocean   |     safety    |       |
| energy resource development will address    |     concerns  |       |
| these uncertainties and controversies.      |     when      |       |
|                                             |     siting    |       |
| Actions:                                    |     and       |       |
|                                             |     designing |       |
| 1.  Develop voluntary guidelines for        |     coastal   |       |
|     assessing environmental and economic    |     and ocean |       |
|     impacts, use conflicts, and safety      |     energy    |       |
|     concerns when siting and designing      |               |       |
|     coastal and ocean energy facilities,    |    facilities |       |
|     including recommendations for critical  |               |       |
|     data, its collection, archiving, and    | -   State and |       |
|     analysis. These guidelines will address |     regional  |       |
|     the differences between offshore        |     meetings  |       |
|     renewable electric generation           |     to        |       |
|     facilities (wave, wind, and tidal), and |               |       |
|     fossil fuel facilities such as          |   disseminate |       |
|     liquefied natural gas terminals, cables |               |       |
|     and pipelines, as well as incorporate   |    guidelines |       |
|     climate change and sea level rise       |               |       |
|     considerations.                         |               |       |
|                                             |               |       |
| 2.  Disseminate guidelines via the web,     |               |       |
|     print materials and meetings/workshops. |               |       |
+---------------------------------------------+---------------+-------+

**NROC One-Pager**

Submitted by Kathleen Leyden

+----------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| ![](media/image4     | ***"Reaching across jurisdictional boundaries |
| .jpeg){width="1.5in" | to solve the regions most pressing ocean and  |
| height="1            | coastal issues"***                            |
| .054861111111111in"} |                                               |
|                      | **Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode  |
|                      | Island Connecticut and Vermont**              |
+----------------------+-----------------------------------------------+

The Northeast Regional Ocean Council is a dynamic state/federal
partnership that is breaking new ground in the management of the
region's coastal and ocean resources. Created by the New England
Governors in response to the US Ocean Action Plan, NROC facilitates
progress on regional ocean concerns. NROC works directly with the
President\'s Ocean Policy Committee and its Subcommittee on the
Integrated Management of Ocean Resources (SIMOR), focusing the resources
of eleven federal agencies on the New England's ocean and coastal
priorities. Guided by its *Coast and Ocean Action Plan,* NROC's
2009-2010 work plan includes collaborative state and federal projects
that support three regional priorities, Healthy Ocean Ecosystems,
Balanced Ocean Energy Development and Storm-Resilient Coastal
Communities.

**Ocean Ecosystem Health**

Healthy ocean and coastal ecosystems support New England's vitally
important fishing, maritime trades, tourism, defense and related
sectors. The Council's 2009-2010 work plan focuses on:

-   Effective restoration and protection of coastal habitats on a
    watershed scale;

-   Spatial planning to improve decision-making about new and competing
    uses in marine waters;

-   Other priorities include improving regulatory standards,
    accelerating priority research, developing ecosystem health
    indicators, and controlling the spread of invasive species.

**Ocean Energy Planning and Management**

Energy from renewable ocean wind and tidal power will help meet the
regions' energy needs, create new jobs and increase energy independence.
NROC is concerned about sound planning and siting of renewable and
fossil-fuel based coastal and ocean energy facilities. The Council's
2009-2010 work plan focuses on:

-   Developing shared data and information requirements for ocean energy
    projects and streamlining permitting processes; creating a regional
    strategy to acquire needed information;

-   Facilitating the exchange of creative ocean energy approaches among
    the states;

-   Other priorities include improving the assessment of economic
    impacts, use conflicts and safety concerns of ocean energy projects.

**Storm-Resilient Coastal Communities**

Billions of dollars in public infrastructure and private property
continues to be at risk from coastal storms in New England and
projections of the impacts of sea level rise are dire. NROC is working
to produce state-of-the-art data and tools to advance planning and
response to storms, shoreline erosion, and coastal inundation due to
projected sea-level rise from global warming. The Council's 2009-2010
work plan focuses on:

-   Enacting sea level rise adaptation strategies;

-   Acquiring data needed to create accurate inundation models;
    identifying the components of an Integrated Ocean Observing System
    to support coastal hazards planning and response;

-   Developing analytical tools for coastal managers to anticipate and
    response to climate change.

Through NROC, the Governors of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island and Connecticut have requested \$5.5 million in federal
support to advance shared federal and state priorities in the areas of
ecosystem health, ocean energy planning and coastal hazards resiliency.

**UNH/Great Bay NERR LiDAR Proposal**

***Submitted by Cameron Wake, UNH***

*Full text available on NROC website -- LIDAR Proposal NH&ME
1-22-09.pdf*

Accurate high resolution surface elevation data support a variety of
public and private sector needs. Elevation data for many states,
including New Hampshire and Maine, are available atvmixed resolutions
that are often inadequate to support certain key uses and analyses.
LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) is a proven technology that is
available to acquire seamless high resolution (1- to 3-m spacing)
elevation data over large spatial areas. This position paper outlines
the rationale and need to acquire LiDAR data to improve topographic
products for the New Hampshire and southern Maine coastal region to
support several important community needs. A pilot acquisition and
demonstration project in this area will 1) help to better define
requirements and costs associated with the acquisition, processing,
management, and distribution of LiDAR data; 2) enable a thorough
analysis of diverse user needs to ensure the data products are useful
for multiple purposes; and 3) demonstrate one way the data can be used
as the basis of advancing community resilience to the impacts of climate
change.

A number of studies have called attention to the inadequacies of
existing elevation data. At the state level, the New Hampshire
Geographic Information System (GIS) Strategic Plan (New Hampshire GIS
Advisory Committee, 2007) identifies developing statewide high-quality
topographic data as a high priority. The available data can at best
support generation of a statewide 10' contour data set, and thus are not
suitable for several important analyses, such as floodplain delineation,
land use planning, and transportation infrastructure development. For
example, FEMA's floodplain delineation standards require 4' contours in
rolling and hilly terrain and 2' contours in flat areas (FEMA, 2003). A
recent report by the National Research Council, *Elevation Data for
Floodplain Mapping* (2007), identifies similar deficiencies in available
land surface elevation data nationally. The report finds that for most
of the nation, "FEMA needs land surface elevation data that are about
ten times more accurate than data currently available" to support
modernization of floodplain maps under the National Flood Insurance
Program (NRC 2007). This report recommends that FEMA adopt 1' contour
accuracy as the standard basis for floodplain mapping in flat coastal
and inland areas.

The benefits of high resolution elevation data become apparent when
comparing the elevation models that can be generated from different
resolutions of baseline data. The figure below shows digital elevation
models constructed from data available at 30-meter, 10-meter, and
1-meter resolutions. Landscape details become much more apparent and
clear as the resolution of the elevation data increases, yielding
distinct advantages for regulatory decision-making and

other management applications.

Airborne LiDAR uses laser pulses to measure elevations of the earth's
surface, vegetation, and the built environment. The technology offers a
way of obtaining very precise, accurate, and high resolution elevations
(equivalent to the 1-meter resolution shown below) in a consistent
manner across large spatial areas. Despite its value, large-area LiDAR
acquisitions are rare, but a number of states are developing statewide
LiDAR programs.

High resolution elevation data are particularly important in shallow
sloping coastal areas, but LiDAR is currently available only along the
edge of the coastline, and coverage does not extend into low relief
portions of coastal watersheds. These data limitations pose challenges
as coastal communities attempt to make decisions in the context of
climate change. Communities are

struggling to identify areas that may be inundated due to sea level rise
and/or flooded during intense storms. Flood risk assessment products can
be developed using existing models to guide planning, zoning, and
infrastructure decisions in these communities; however, high resolution
elevation data are necessary for these products to be specific and
credible within decisionmaking arenas.

High resolution elevation data obtained from LiDAR can be applied for a
variety of additional purposes to address both public and private sector
needs, including:

-   Hydrologic modeling

-   Floodplain evaluation and mitigation

-   Land protection prioritization

-   Restoration planning

-   Community planning

-   Design of roads and stormwater drainage systems

-   Public facility siting

-   Disaster planning and emergency response

-   Land cover and environmental classification

-   Forestry production and monitoring

-   Siting of cell phone towers

-   Monitoring of utility lines

Coupling the LiDAR topographic data with other remotely sensed data,
such as digital orthophotography, enables additional applications for
LiDAR data---surface feature extraction (e.g., buildings and other human
infrastructure), habitat mapping, and forestry and agricultural
management. In addition, once the LiDAR topographic data have been
collected, it is likely that other valuable analyses can be conducted.

The cost associated with LiDAR and the recognition that a variety of
users will benefit significantly from the availability of an enhanced
topographic data set requires a coordinated effort that will take
advantage of economies of scale in its acquisition and ensure that
products suit the needs of multiple user groups. Such an approach offers
many benefits, including the seamless collection of large swaths of data
and uniform application of expert quality assurance and quality control.
Coordination ensures standardization across the entire data set and
reduces the cost per unit area associated with the data collection,
processing, management, and distribution.

We propose a near-term acquisition of high resolution LiDAR data for the
New Hampshire and southern Maine coastal areas. This collection will
encompass three coastal watersheds--- Piscataqua-Salmon Falls, Saco, and
Presumpscot---as delineated in the figure below. For coastal communities
(i.e., towns with elevations below 10 meters), LiDAR data with 1-meter
point spacing and 9 cm RMSE vertical resolution would support 1-foot
contours within the gradual topography of the coastal zone. For upper
portions of the watershed with more topographic relief, LiDAR data with
2-meter point spacing and 18 cm RMSE vertical resolution would support
2-foot contours.

The authors are contacting groups to contribute supporting paragraphs
explaining their need for and expected utilization of LiDAR data. Many
groups, agencies, and entities need high resolution elevation data to
complete targeted analyses to address existing information needs
including New Hampshire state agencies, Maine state agencies, federal
agencies as well as regional and municipal groups.

**USGS LiDAR Workshop Purpose and Description**

***Submitted by Susan Russell-Robinson***

A \"NE Airborne LiDAR Workshop\" will be held at the USGS Science Center
for Coastal and Marine Geology, Woods Hole, MA during May 5-7, 2009.

Local, state and federal Government agencies, the community and industry
are driving significant increases in the demand for high quality
elevation data. LiDAR and other acquisition technologies are also
developing at a rapid rate. This USGS -- Northeast Regional Ocean
Council (NROC) sponsored workshop will provide an overview of the
current state of Lidar acquisition technologies and discuss applications
and availability of high-resolution topographic data for meeting local
and regional coastal needs in the NE.

**Gulf of Maine Council Climate Network 2009-2010 Work Plan**

***From GOMC Winter Meeting***

The Gulf of Maine Council Climate Change Network has several activities
planned for 2009-2010 that may be of interest to NROC and the three
standing committees. The Executive Committee and committee co-chairs are
considering arranging a meeting with the Climate Change Network chair in
March 2009 (during the Gulf of Maine Council Working Group meeting) to
discuss opportunities for collaboration.

***1. Conduct risk analysis and prioritize the vectors of invasive
species and understand the effects of climate change.*** (Related to
OCEH) The GOMC will only play a minor role in this activity -- seeking
to encourage those assessing the risk of marine invasive species to
consider how a changing climate will affect the future spread of such
species. The Climate Change Network will conduct several tasks to
support this activity including

***2. Convene stakeholder workshops to identify and promote mitigative
and adaptive strategies for dealing with sea-level rise and changes in
water quality related to climate change.*** (Related to CHR and OCEH)
The GOMC seeks to build on existing regional efforts (e.g., Environment
Canada, EPA, state coastal programs, etc.). The GOMC will compile and
assess existing reports and documents on this topic. To assist in the
creation of individual adaptation plans by local experts, the Climate
Change Network will convene experts and stakeholders in two separate
one-day workshops to address sea level rise and extreme precipitation
and discuss and detail ways of addressing threats to freshwater, storm
water, wastewater treatment systems, and clean water.

***3. Enhance the climate change module of the Council's on-line
KnowledgeBase by compiling programs, best practices, and other
information.*** (Related to CHR) This is a regional activity, which is
relevant to the entire Gulf of Maine Region. The Council needs to
partner with other organizations to accomplish this.

***4. Investigate and propose regional climate change adaptation
strategies.*** (Related to CHR) A pilot study location will be chosen
based on an analysis of vulnerability assessed in preceding tasks. Using
a workshop format, an adaptation strategy could be developed with
stakeholders in the targeted community. The results could then be
promoted to other communities to encourage them to undertake similar
efforts.

***5. Prepare regional criteria to identify coastal habitats at risk
from sea-level rise and other climate change impacts; integrate into
habitat restoration decision-making.*** (Related to OCEH) Regional
criteria to identify coastal habitats at risk from sea level rise,
extreme precipitation and other climate change impacts will have been
prepared. The results will then be presented to decision makers
responsible for coastal habitat restoration as one way to increase their
knowledge about the need to restore and monitor coastal habitats.

The full GOMC work plan can be found at
www.gulfofmaine.org/council/internal/docs/apwprevisions.pdf.

**NEGC-ECP Climate Resolution**

***From NEGC-ECP Website***

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="5.995138888888889in"
height="7.706944444444445in"}

![](media/image6.jpeg){width="5.998611111111111in"
height="8.128472222222221in"}

**Regional Climate Partner Updates**

***Submitted by NESCAUM and NEIWPCC***

Climate impacts and adaptation planning continue to be a priority for
New England and a growing list of partners are developing climate
initiatives. These updates are meant to inform NROC as its role in
regional climate adaptation planning is defined.

***1. Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)***

NESCAUM will has been designated the regional body by the NEGC to
undertake regional approach climate adaptation activities. NESCAUM is
essentially responsible for a response to the NEG-ECP Climate
Resolution.

NESCAUM's first climate adaptation meeting was January 26, 2009. This
meeting brought approximately 10 regional partners together to discuss
their approach to climate adaptation planning and to begin identifying
elements that appropriate for regional collaboration. Several members
from NROC organizations were invited including USFWS, EPA and NOAA.
NESCAUM has agreed to share results from this meeting with NROC.

***2. New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission
(NEIWPCC)***

The climate coordinator for NEIWPCC will be attending the meeting in
person to describe NEIWPCC's climate initiative and potential
opportunities for collaboration between NEIWPCC, NESCAUM, and NROC.