Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Agenda 10/03/2017
PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION Municipal Service Taxing and Benefit Unit NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING OCTOBER 3, 2017 THE CLAM BAY COMMITTEE OF THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION WILL MEET AT 10:00 AM ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3 AT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION, 3RD FLOOR OF THE SUNTRUST BUILDING, SUITE 302, LOCATED AT 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE, NAPLES, FLORIDA 34108. AGENDA 1. Roll call 2. Agenda approval 3. Approval of 06/08/17 meeting minutes 4. Audience comments 5. Clam Bay a. Condition of mangroves b. Water level logger data c. Hand-dug channel maintenance d. Other updates 6. Clam Pass a. Update on current conditions b. September tidal ratio report c. Bathymetric surveys and findings d. Dredging Clam Pass 7. Water Quality a. Sediment report b. Copper results c. 2nd quarter report on TP and TN d. Adding water clarity to WQ parameters e. WIN data entry 8. Annual reports — due December 15, 2017 a. Clam Bay monitoring b. Water Quality— due 30 days after October WQ results reported c. Bathymetric and tidal monitoring 9. Next meeting: January 4 10. Adjournment ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK ON AN AGENDA ITEM WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER ITEM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD. THE BOARD WILL SOLICIT PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SUBJECTS NOT ON THIS AGENDA AND ANY PERSON WISHING TO SPEAK WILL RECEIVE UP TO THREE (3) MINUTES. THE BOARD ENCOURAGES YOU TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN WRITING IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETING. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL A DECISION OF THIS BOARD WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDING PERTAINING THERETO,AND THEREFORE MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD IS MADE, WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS AN ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING YOU ARE ENTITLED TO THE PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION AT (239) 597-1749. VISIT US AT HTTP://PELICANBAYSERVICESDIVISION.NET. 06/29/2017 9:43 AM PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION CLAM BAY COMMITTEE MEETING JUNE 8,2017 The Clam Bay Committee of the Pelican Bay Services Division met on Thursday, June 8 at 1:00 p.m. at the SunTrust Bank Building, 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 302,Naples, Florida 34108. In attendance were: Clam Bay Committee Bohdan Hirniak Susan O'Brien, Chairman Gary Ventress Pelican Bay Services Division Staff Mary McCaughtry, Operations Analyst Neil Dorrill, Administrator (absent) Lisa Jacob, Associate Project Manager Marion Bolick, Operations Manager (absent) Barbara Shea, Recording Secretary Also Present Jennifer Bobka, Earth Tech Jeremy Sterk, Earth Tech Mike Shepherd, PBSD Board APPROVED AGENDA (AS PRESENTED) 1. Roll call 2. Agenda approval 3. Approval of 04/06/17 meeting minutes 4. Audience comments 5. Clam Bay monitoring a. H&M reports b. Timeline for bathymetric survey report c. Escarpment near Clam Pass d. Mangrove die-off update in June e. Timeline for sediment testing f. ETE observations and recommendations g. Copper results for Feb. & March h. Quarterly report on TP and TN i. Entering WQ data into WIN 6. High-speed boat activity in Clam Bay 7. Next meeting: July 6 8. Adjournment ROLL CALL All members were present and a quorum was established AGENDA APPROVAL 1 Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Bay Committee Meeting June 8, 2017 Mr. Ventress motioned, Mr. Hirniak seconded to approve the agenda as presented. The motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF 04/06/17 MEETING MINUTES Mr. Hirniak motioned, Ms. O'Brien seconded to approve the 04/06/17 meeting minutes as amended. The motion carried unanimously. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Mr. Pete Merkel commented on a possible mangrove die-off area behind the Vizcaya, observed from his residence in Bay Colony. Ms. O'Brien suggested that this month's Turrell Hall aerial photos of the mangrove die-off area include the area specified by Mr. Merkel. Mr. Sterk commented that he will also take drone photos of this same area. CLAM BAY MONITORING H&M REPORTS The agenda packet included a memo from Dr. Dabees on current conditions in Clam Pass; he will continue to closely monitor its tidal hydrodynamic and physical conditions. Ms. O'Brien reported that although April tidal gauge ratio data was good, the May data was not. She commented that we will continue to closely monitor the monthly tidal gauge ratio data. TIMELINE FOR BATHYMETRIC SURVEY REPORT Ms. Jacob commented that she will obtain an expected completion date for the Clam Pass bathymetric survey report from Humiston& Moore. ESCARPMENT NEAR CLAM PASS Ms. Jacob reported that she has contacted Mr. Gary McAlpin, Coastal Zone Management, to request re-grading of the escarpment near Clam Pass. MANGROVE DIE-OFF UPDATE IN JUNE Ms. O'Brien reported that Mr. Tim Hall is scheduled to take aerial photos and complete an assessment of the mangrove die-off area in June. Ms. Jacob reported that an infrared photo of Clam Bay will be taken in July,per FDEP permit requirements. TIMELINE FOR SEDIMENT TESTING Ms. Jacob reported that sediment testing at 12 locations in Clam Bay has been completed. She will obtain an expected report completion date from Turrell, Hall. ETE OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Sterk's comments on his June 8 site visit to Clam Bay included, (1) he observed 6-12 inches of standing water throughout the system, (2) he observed the dune swale "completely full of water," (3) he will closely monitor how the system recovers from the recent 5-day storm event, and (4) he recommended pursuing a future phase 2 dune swale project to re-establish the dune swale back to its original position/location. 2 Pelican Bay Services Division Clam Bay Committee Meeting June 8,2017 Mr. Sterk commented that in the near-term he expects to make a site visit to the areas where maintenance work was completed on the hand-dug channels a few months ago. He will report on any longer term effects he observes in these areas at the next committee meeting. COPPER RESULTS FOR FEB. & MARCH Ms. O'Brien commented that the February and March copper results, included in the agenda packet, were encouraging; just 3 out of 45 results over five months exceeded the state standard. QUARTERLY REPORT ON TP AND TN Ms. O'Brien commented that the Tomasko quarterly water quality report was encouraging, with only a few instances of problematic total phosphorus results. She suggested that a map of the sampling sites be included in future Tomasko reports. ENTERING WQ DATA INTO WIN A copy of the Turrell Hall proposal ($7000) for set-up and data entry of existing Clam Bay WQ data (March 2015 - present) into the new FDEP Watershed Information Network (WIN) database, was provided in the agenda packet. Staff has also requested a quote for this work from the Collier County Pollution Control Dept. HIGH-SPEED BOAT ACTIVITY IN CLAM BAY The committee listened to taped comments by Mr. McAlpin at a recent BCC meeting (provided by Ms. O'Brien), which included, (1) "there are no speed zones in Clam Bay," and (2) "there is no boat activity in Clam Bay." Ms. O'Brien pointed out that Mr. McAlpin made no mention of the "idle speed zone no wake" designation by County ordinance, previously in effect for 13 years. Ms. O'Brien commented on the PBF's appeal to FWC for a manatee protection zone designation for Clam Bay; the outcome will not be known until August or September. She suggested that if the PBF is unsuccessful with their appeal, then safety speed zones for Clam Bay should be pursued with the County. Ms. O'Brien commented that the County has scheduled public workshops on boating safety over the summer. NEXT MEETING: By consensus, the committee agreed that the next meeting of the committee would be held on July 6 at 1:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m. Susan O'Brien, Chairman Minutes approved [ 1 as presented OR 1 as amended ON F 1 date 3 l. '$ o � X750 ;. 3,000. _� `F m �y { y� q y 4. 1, CID y,,.''.S—,,, y- ' V Upper? t 4a Cj i• Clam s as ' Bay ' w.�f"Ar a �s; ? s -q O '�3 BANYAN RD r/_i�j � v ....h„,„,.. d YJ( ¢'SHADOW LAKE LN F� $.# Z 1f�7 i* p'L a 1 II: -01'44 "`s # g 7 4 r t `r � ,��nfy � "` � � TURKEYOAK LN � � ��i 0 '1 4 . ,titt'e c' "*4' ' 4'. 'Pi tag t.,.. '� a E RIDGDR . 4'0 c,Ktr "�..;... y , x€ a IMLLOWWO{7D LN - } r y ice ' kr r 4- .- q ''4 44 y,� �.4 . MYRTLE RD .y ' aye, $ <" -;y e.SyX ' �<. 3 r: t z Inner r. °�_ 4 ; � Clam a L K Bay 7 a 4';",. 'ft 4'Vottlr 1,. 11 ,@ a ✓ E '! ,} . ..if. � 3 m '� 1.. i``aZ { .g, , x' ' k-,„: - , {r ' d . is . GULF PARK DR } ,x ¢R9 C % "F' '' „¢ 3 ` R '• ,s { 'MAHOGANY DR Ez .4' kt Gulf --- ;'$ �• of � Mexico , r_ of xs ii -e a`4 ~ F<N, sus G� 7R3 g n ', ' R Y • �',.1 Outer s ° ' ' u Clam a`. o ir >. ,, . Bay it y 1-11,17- ° � �4 m . SEAGATE DR "' '"'I," awE RIDGE 1' =EAST AVE.,_ • 0 WATER LEVEL LOGGERS (3) r 1, „ . a iso CASTELLO DR 1"„?.?„:,->4 v Ta s' • , II 3 3 4 r z.c4 �ii'4�r•�~ +�+� &W 1,4 11PV II ed''I E PELICAN BAYn k' EARTH TEC" ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC iiri,L WATER LEVEL LOGGERS a 3455 RAIL HEAD BIll D SUITE 8 Collier Count Florida NAPLES, FLORIDA 34134 SHEET No oA,E sxore xo L y, PHONE (239) 344-0430 FAX (239) 324-OD54 Ea.r..wui uc 08/11/16 N/A AS SHOWN 0 Jo sa- t.° .� k o E N a.) asll iut Ilei ute� as (BQ tAvm m N I L 40Z/bZ/L I LLOZ/bl/L Q L LOZ/b/L L LOZ/bZ/9 _ ._ i LL°Z/bL/9 L I OZ/b/9 �,m�. - LLOZ/S4/S N ,, . LLoZISIS o ��' 44-1 _ L 40Z/SZlb N [ � = LIOZ/SLib c ....�.., L LOZ/S/b ro LLOZ/9L/£ a = ` ~ LLOZ/9/£ a cc ' / N Y V L LOZ1171-/Z �� I - LLOZ/VIZ ,..,. ----. LIOZ/SZ/L 0 It `�� LLOZ/94/4 `,J LLOZ/S/l Co- a) ' V 9LOZ/9Z/ZL fd I ,T,`,17,;-;-:' — 9LOZ/91-/ZI. -o I » 9LOZ/9Z/44 cu (n ! 9L44L 9 Li' OZ/9/OZ/94/4 70 " _ 9LOZ/LZ/04 m CI) g "" — 9LOZ/LL/OL c „ „ J 1 '", "' L ' --‘1"1-= 9LOZ/LZ/6 m CUE 9LOZ/LL/6 E no CO I L _ : 9LOZ/L/6 u LE u .'."" �."; Q119I.0Z/8l/8 3 >, _ - 9IOZ/8/8 co '. v _� .. 9LOZ/6Z/L z CIO ..-_ -- ��� r14'i .' ,:.. 9L0Z/6UL a E v 9 LOZ/6/L 940Z/6Z/9 i _ r 9lOZ/6L/9 c _ 0 in U ! 9LOZ/6/9ro 94o3/0£/S i , ,._ 9LOZ/OZ/S . , , ;F'''''' ''''- 9LOZ/oL/S _,----r-%.,.�- 9LOZ/OZ/17 °»-- . 9LOZ/0Lit .--„,----=i;‘,'„ ------` — 9LOZ/4£/£ 9LOZ/LZ/£ 9LOZ/LL/C 1 9LOZ/L/£ • 9 LOZ/OZ/Z N y o (1i)9N 78(44)uopenal3 Ja}ennpunoi9 - d' u7 E ' ( (UI) Ile3Uiei a) CD c V1 Ln In Ln (6 (a z E 't m en i N c •-i d o G � : . . . . I . . . . I . . .I . I . . . . 1. .I . L l OZ/17Z/L C ' L40Z/174/L Q W ` I I L40Z/17/L L I.OZ/17Z/9 —+��r•.=— LI-OZ/171.19 L 40Z/17/9 L 4 0Z/SZ/S I rwir•� r, .,--, L40Z/94/9 rsi L 4 0Z/S/S N I _` L 40Z/SZ/17 v = c I "' L40Z/SL/17 m I _ L 4 OZ/S/17 -0 vL40Z/9Z/£ ami •— 1 I L40Z/94/£ ' - L40Z/9/£ cc _.....--+ L 40Z/17Z/Z ;° N I I ' - L4O /174/Z o - L40Z/17/Z I LI.OZ/SZ/4 0 v I ^� _ L40Z/S4/4 `" ro CD _ __ 1 L40Z/S/4 --��� 940Z/9Z/Z4 5 J I - 940Z/94/Z4 9 4 0Z/9/Z 1- CnI — I 91-0Z/9Z/4 4 °' ei "----'"'IJ — I' I 94OZ/94/44 I 91-0Z/9/4I- c a) co ( I 9 4 02/LZ/O l L 9 Lro 940Z/L/04 � �� 9 40Z/LZ/6 4-3 I 940Z/L4/6 co ` CO � ; 0 ; 940Z/L/6 E 5 J I 940Z/8Z/8 I I ' ._ c 940Z/84/8 CU 91-0Z/8/8 +� NCO I ---- 1940Z/6Z/L N 940Z/64/L z I I I 94OZ/6/L —... 9 4 0Z/6Z/9 ..-�-_ 9 40Z/6 4/9 33 U o �"`I 91-0Z/6/9 �— • 9LOZ/0£/S co z I 9 4 0Z/OZ/S ITu n I .r1 91-0Z/0 1-/S J 9 40Z/OE/17 9 40Z/OZ/17 a to 9 4 0Z/0 4/17 — ' 940Z/4£/£ — i 940Z/4Z/£ I I 940Z/4 4/E • • . . . . I . . . . 9402/4/£ 9 4 OZ/OZ/Z ry n o u) o p (11)9N' (11)uoi;ena13 JalennpunoJD in 4— k o a) a) 0) O -o as d 0-1- (u!) iueju!eJ 16 aFoLn in un �n0) tEam m N N ri 0 0 Q � I 1 I 1 I I . . . - LLOZ/bZ/L W I - LI-OZ/b1./L ' I { L L OZ/b IL - LLOZ/bZ/z/9 L 40Z/171./9 L l OZ/17/9 . -I-- '^ LLOZ/5Z/9 0 1 = LLOZ/SL/S N!... i. 1_� 1 L L OZ/9/9 N 1P-- i L4oz/sz/b D LLOZ/94/17 2 --- L lOZ/5/b C v I4 -F-+ el I = L LOZ/9 L/E L tli v I — LLOZ/9/E cc Z I .r"� L1.oz/bz/z ctcao Lloz/17LIZ IlD LLoz/17/z o Cr) Lloz/9z/L N LIOZIGL/L c 7 LLOZ/5/l i iii ter' 9LOZ/9Z/ZL = 9LOZ/9L/ZL ccuo 7 9 L OZ/9/Z L m } - - ' 9LOZ/9Z/LL c (n �. I 9LOz/94/44 a) __,ih" m 91.02/9/LL > 9LOZ/LZ/OL w J1 ! 9LOZ/LL/01. >- 1... --• 9 LOZ/L/0 I- 1. 9LOZ/L/0L m J-- 9 402/LZ/6 ca E a ! i 9LOZ/LL/6 C C6 L.' ! 94OZ/L/6 s I I limmisoleg mem91-0Z/2Z/2 3 1 ( — 14 — 9402/81./ 8 m (13ammum 9LOZ/8/8 CO — z 9LOZ/6Z/L Ci T _ 99lOZ/6l/L 9LOOZZ//66Z/L/9 m I z U — 94O /61/9 m 9 L OZ/6/9 a, I -- i -_ 9 LOZ/OC/G J w I 9 LOZ/OZ/9 v z - 91-0Z/0 I./9 0 ZI 9 LOZ/0E/b I ' - 9LOZ/OZ/b -�� - 9LOZ/OL/b IJnr 9LOZ/4£/E 9LOz/4z/£ I I ' - 9LOZ/LL/C . ( 91.02/L/E 91.OZ/OZ/Z N In N V1 0 In .. o O (1})9N'2(4)uoiwna13 Jawmpunoa9 Agenda Item#5e ,, 'Iry �..._'., 't„ a v yse Photo Q ., -- -44 4. Aor i `0. t Photo go r Photo Q3 Photo gS /* . 18 `‘:, :—: 4 , ,,, I --,..-i Photo -, * L---T--A # 7 . ,tart , (-„, \,:._, if'‘,\ , V r.... T \Photo 31 A V 4 as Channel Ins ection Photos Stations 0 oc zoo ..aoo .j.._,P �r Hand Dug Channels(GPS) p Feet �' et'tee4 HAND CUT CHANNELS Collier County,FloridaSCALE EARTH TECH ENVIRONMENTAL. LLC PELICAN BAY Lass RAIL NEwD BLVD. SVITE a IM FULL SITE OVERVIEW MAP PHPLES. FLORIDA 3!170 SHEET a ore aem xo, PHONE 12391 304-0030 FAX (238)320-0056 esaft....etus 7-5-17 N/A AS SHOWN Agenda Item#5c Page 2 of 8 1.--.•••• sf--N,-,i,r--;„,---,,:-;.w.k.'''' ..- •„1, -..... ::.... -„...,:,,, . - aiy t 4. 4,s, 7 r a iliA)r. .� fes; f ` .. _ / 1, S,. �. 1,/ „ik > . to, \ aL �+ • fi, g R. Photo 1 looking east: March 24,2017 , , . ,,4 , i . . .. : ` i e '�' s � A# ♦ tFd ., ' --.4-10-:: .— .. .,,,...,--.„.. .. - .., ,,- s 44 -. , .;*, . .,.. * ,-, %.s.,,p4,.,..' , ' -„, .' - / ,, . ,, ti, SF T} / .., .-- 4. y Photo 1 looking east: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 3 of 8 --t il,.„._ .4.,..,..4„ ..,., , , .*.,.,-,_ , ,..„. t%` ,,,,, '- - '‘'\ - ..,-,, ,....,,..„7-i. . .:',,. 4,--, '''',7„.‘'-..: -f*--- ,A.t...,..; ' ., , .i , i �_` ':‘,.:t.:,, ,!: :-,i ',,-.1.:y; , , 7 -- — :-', `- o a-..r , v e \<+ s s r �a •,,,,,,„. � w ase. ,*a., �. ' fisr .kr "'""' � � • �off r-.r,-441,0,-,\:, - •� ro ! ' 1.,r .., - ;x'` a Photo 10 looking southeast: March 24, 2017 m '4?' ` . '. }+mak a,. 1. *:* ,.1„. '' 11i i h„-:,443.!..; ,;..,. #�". 'k,•.-- 'r ,t -3 {,,,Ian a s i { , $ I{ r ` . •., id - t ., * ' , j • til wo1 i t t 1.''N .-i$ t -,..,L., -.. ' ' I, ,.,. 4 , v- -f7": ; °- Photo 10looking southeast: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 4 of 8 . �✓ t I ' <a N.^.' _ r 1....,,,,,,e- f ,....404.1,144 . . - le.,,.._.,_.,,,,_ ,_ ..:__;..._. ,,.*.i ---_..-7,64,77, 1' f.:.-11frfn:A:-.141 1.71-:/....-/ '": — - - -- 4111, Al y- Photo 12 looking south: March 24,2017 ,. x 4 ...„.„., yam:. - ii s a,° .r „ .',,,,-.-:4. -„,--,,..,Yr ' � w --.. , - ---------- . $ ' :-. , , 1.. 1 ',. .- ..- :,,,-,--,--z . -, s i • s s. � ;;4is, '` I' +e .._ +. to (' '''���fl. '� Photo 12 looking south: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 5 of 8 ' +� s�� �� s - r 4X �� " ' " 4 ! �- c 4- ,F . , -" OM1 } w 1 J) { - — , - ,A.... ...,, -i-t ---.-,iti-e- )t l' 4 4 ° I, 4, 1 't. ,. , 4., 4,-1- -`,= t ‘ .„ 4.,-.0...C.1 — _ -.S:Ni '', 4" 'II L*,*', ,... ‘; . , ..1- -.."‘ ,,,,‘,-,..- "4-- ,....4 i \ i ", .i.. I •:. Se pp , 44'.0,e, ,.., , , , ,. 444 f � � y, 4.- ��1 -1 4"' ,i ';. Photo 18 looking northeast: March 24, 2017 4,. ,,,.,,,,A. .,-,v,--,:ivrst,-,,,,,,,,,,41.0-itir ' ,.; 1,1 , °':ii,, T , , „ , . ,... L .:*.., 4i, ;444,.4;z,„1,7„;,,`..f„, - ; 6 fr A . may , ;v4 x' f �a iri r „,,-.vr--... ..,, t ip,1 —._,,,t,-,-1 .,,,i1,. - ...,L,‘,1,..zi,A 4,, v .„ ilk., k- IA'1 -1. 4:-4,,,,,r _ '..” ,1.4 ,, ''''-`k'l, , ( ...14, ,,,,,,a,, k,,,,, . , ,„„ , , . ,,,„,,......; r.,..0100, " ...44,,,v., s, *.,.... ......‘-‘k,„.11110,,,i ,, \,,i;.2„ 1/,., 4,. ,k4-. 40 .,,, it NA"e t ki s "'' Photo 18 looking northeast: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 6 of 8 t sxw°.G 4....,,,..,.. s .a . R -.-::*'''''',:i47.4—;-`.--,-7;''''' '''''.;;;:-' s# syy 'w 1 -Ntr. , „ .r' kyr r„�-e # i ' ' �. ° ' 1. , '"arm >'A.' �` !C, .�.�. 4 \‘..'-i- ti _ , 4 t , t Photo 22 looking north: March 24,2017 ' '.1.,. .•- '-''. .1.! ',-i, $%'''„,•;,°!-A Al , i .4*. ; 't,. ,,,,/1 ta •k7:,,,,.. ,:,..-, .*:'-',;;'L'''''''''."\\:.'-.4;'''' •':!ei.''S:;.' ,.. IC:,-,..,„..'' ..` .•,',k "°, Al * 'i';*4'4,"' ;.:':--4 ':',-' 7.-„. ..* 1, '! ,.......,*,' p 1 ii;,, z . 10` � i:.1,. ' is 44, � _ Photo 22 looking north: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 7 of 8 a- A > - '-` , V ' 4.1- 311.' # ....erpvlillie-.0°-=' '''''i• rs s 4 3t S , 410 { ,r „.. . . ..„... , , - - gig .--7.00:4-- 1 ' 1," ' "- .4.- . ... — t` Photo 27 looking south: March 24, 2017 , . * ) - -/t,.,;„ .-7,:.fri. 2.-„ .11.;.:-.,i':',„.. ... ;"- ; ;I i ;'' 1 . 4 4, .. „). ..,,,,,,,, ,,.,...,,,i.,,, . tt rAk., 4:l'-'.fg '.4",,' ,4,: „:. ../ a ;moi f „Al,_ii .„..,.Pt .101.* 'oen i -.4 ' 1 »zit ., h l , e , i. :,� ray s t< i • I y ,. A .' .. mac . r Nf' s t .. fo s t F l .. a '4 Photo 27 looking south: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#5c Page 8 of 8 3 i 1 t, ,, ,A` .; 1 7` R, , ti b aa, 1,4 , 1 Si: 4, ' k . . . . .. r .',: '- -.-?Ziol ,i,)*•( -2'...,:,-,-.1..t. ,... I ' '. � n Photo 31 looking northwest: March 24, 2017 t o '4 r 1�,5 � .• 10 CNi • ,41 -',1,----,:.-1m;:„-:;;!;:-,' 1 yfk"...4:,,:.; ,. ::----.,:'''.,"', 'Ft,"*.:4.'"-:,:,"‘,. . ,,, r.'''r ,ft;.•'', ,,, I � • fr • r ,1:40'2 y--- .'1;:•.:',.. ,,•' ::-.1;',- . '.'‘'*., \ '-''''' .V.4;,-, ' ' `•'-• --' -''' ''''!';',,.? '''. .:-;:i4k;'-- ''.,.' **1.),:,‘- . 4 /:—=',.14 - :, \ '''''-' ' - '-i't-Vti: ''" '‘• -''•fr"--*,--;': • -1' -`:'7•• lit )8:,,...;,..,,,,_,_, _,,;,,,, ,:„,, )\\\‘5,...... .',A,:)...,,...-° ' X'stir� )� f'��3 '3. tl+ {,� � -:•,,,;.;;;„,,t....,,,. .:„., . tai mw � A`� # t € 0.104, e •. .•,,,--,,,,..:',,,.,-..s _ F k x • t. rye - '1441,7<l! .{.:— #� Photo 31 looking northwest: June 22,2017 Agenda Item#6a Page 1 of 1 SheaBarbara Subject: FW: Clam Pass Attachments: image3,jpg; image2.jpg Original Message From: Mohamed Dabees [mailto:md@humistonandmoore.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 8:21 PM To: James Hoppensteadt Cc: Trent Waterhouse; John Chandler; Charles F. Bodo (charlesfbodo@hotmail.com); David Cook; Mary McLean Johnson; Tim Corcoran; Dave Doern (davedoern62(algmail.com); Arlene Harper; NeilDorrill; JacobLisa Subject: Re: Update Clam Pass looks good overall. The storm surge topped the dune levels and pushed sand further east than typical storm throughout the region. This sand over-wash also pushed significant amount of sand into section B or the immediate flood shoal area that we just cleared in July. We are very fortunate that we have cleared enough space in this section to increase the capacity of the inlet resiliency and absorb a storm of hurricane Irma's magnitude and the inlet remains open with good flow rate through the inlet channel. One of the Attached photos shows the straight channel at section A at low tide yesterday which is a good indication on inlet stability. The other attached photo show the sand accumulation in section B. While it is impressive to see the amount of sand transported in one event to section B, it is also impressive to see enough flow area through section B and the inlet channel that maintains the inlet open. We will further assess the inlet conditions in the coming weeks to evaluate the recovery and adjustments post storm. Mohamed 1 Agenda Item#6a-1 Page 1 of 1 s ;:as .:.. � ,;•z�- �«: nx E e ''..''',:':''''•I''.,,':i':'''''''}'11.!7:11:,,:1:.1'14:1: +r fi .„ Uzi ' -',a -F" 'Eg'1::'1't .:'f'1-''''4'':''-'-'''!.-. ,,..::'''.''''''':'.:-'':'''''''''' ''''''';1''''':'1::ltI.- i.. :i4:42A1:: i 41. 4411 } Humiston & Moore Engineers I ClainPass-I'IDE Agenda Item#6b Page 1 of 1 CLam Pass Tide Monitoring-ClickhereforMaintenanceDredgingProjectdetails ,'3�� Gv fo'AtexxJ ! #�ti�� "te -.e 2ti"" � e lc = it_1 i1b1G"-K�, , \ . `4 �. . rr � r qt �_: ide Gages Locationl'` . t ' d l'{J: ' r,`",,, a1,•<:,:€ ;v111, , _'�� `` .+.t~i,«t __... ..K rte' ._-,�?, -� �, Monthly Time Series 2017(Click on Tbumbnoils to Expend) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec I t It 1 t J t ' Lit t t i Mean Low TideTirne Lad -2017 300.0 Tropcat s orm Marker*Oma rorty ; 250.0 t .1 1 200.0 { 1 t NMarker 4 150.0 111 1 '' 1 # t3 Marker 14 g. � t f m i nMarker 26 100.0 I $ 4 3 u Marker 32 il- Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Gage/Gulf Mean Tide Ratios-2017 0.9 0.8 T.ep.td Stem forty 0.7 -8D6 ...ir. t........ • .,,...,... ........ .._...._..... 1 to Vic nMarker 4 ,OS t ttMarker 14 c 0A nMarker 26 2 0.3 I 4 1 1:.1 reMarker32 r 0.2 uacu r j rum 0.1 at �. � � for i Li: 1611. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Gape/Gulf Mean Tide Ratios-2016 0.9 PASS T.S. 0.8 DREDGING - T.S.CO11N HERMINE 0.7 - 4, 4.] ,4, y -. r' .S2 _ ..Ii r a...,. 0.6 r- s' 1`......, I HMarker4 d 0.5 - ttMarker 14 0.4nMarker26 n to rMarker 32coca', k `. Suaete[( a htor Matfett 4611. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 9/28/2017 https://www.htunistonandmoore.com/clampass-tide fa so 13 I I 14 I I I I " I I I I �, mart. ._.._cs. — _ — f._._ _ N _,..._ a mart - .. . ... A . -•....;.ill Q :. - mart. mart.- -� . - Q6 -- - — • --'1 - -n -!-- nv `...... .. - fc'i _--- _g -...... ....:..N _.•--'..... ...., �.- _,•. _& mart.. .. mart...,. - p • ------ ---._Fi --_- - -R' ...»._. E g -... -- - - "' mart_ _}- . ..Of -mama__ ____-_CO mama...--.._._m —... .._.. CO -4 co _.. ; m ,W mart _,.. F. ..._ea► �... t.... mob•.me" . "mina ca 4 _cQ r. •- R --.- _ —' Y _._. . ._.—r r J ------.....—C.1 ................—C.1 _......• Com! ...•:- - 0'3 .-..._• -- VI ei r Q E io . mart. _N iiimaf ma.. ...-..— V N ,.... CV ^-.. ...if M. C:, _._. _Ce mart - g -• g - ....t —‘ ._ .—,8 mart.. ...fg _g .. — tin o ucsE' in o trQ in o arP .- r i o c; o 4z N Cr nt o Rae 4+��Nelel f Ot imitsU 3'L JcPew i£ra';,ey't F'iCollieA3OO-Cla-l-Pas02017-D-.;. ',7G12O17-OL23' --C:4anr2O17.6c Pard Jun 2' (.21w N �Z 0 O A -1 c) m >> o oo o rg0 Onmr:4 _,r�t � �DDm� oco" � $ N � X * < C1 CnmA � Oz 3r T. (- - x0 nm D ) co p -- m �D SO rr it>(O PjZC 3cmco -o- -JOo --<xi 00+17- ❑ O -o Z m 1- >> I -O Q Z W D OC roomc� Nr*ini�Z C D O C O p w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w Z CA K-I (O V)D '� O co 07 co au N b N W O� au W W w w w w w w m co w ao w m w m m G] poZ� tiooao� co� coco� � w co co �� wwwoowo0w _CO CO wV T � (� XimC_ �ZCa0� 2_1r'r 01 _ rnnNio - 0301c(0 <00)) 0'7 (C N303 N)) V a Co C.) CO wo jwCCOO rn NMC) m _ O ;n Z Z 0 N O-<Z7 ,y .-.---- A W N W O O M A N Q) (T O CO O Q7 O O O V (A CO CO O A Z O D = Z Z z D I a _--- CO CO N cn Cr A W m W A CO N V --� Cn O cn A co (P O O W W O A co G7 �3ZK�7D mZDr- 1 r O moon _mr0m^D'o= 00+ - �0� `` /f Z + c 8° Zxi7O rna coo) a a rna 0) a o 0) 0) rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrnrncornrn0) Z m (1) ti Q*--Dm--1 r > co a, co co woo03 Woo CO 03 CO CO CO W CO CO 070303o00o0o W CO,_!. ww « 00 LI 73 O D N Z O -N O ._- y co rn co rn rn co rn rn rn co rn co co co co rn rn co rn rn rn rn rn rn rn co rn T > C7 (0 S 03 Z.Tml o' r co co -co W A A cn m N N co J V V CO CO CO CO CO V O U1 cT A A A A A m '�O rrI C71 Z rr'1 Y`" z 01 CT j V pp V W W W (P A co a1 oo V -, W N C) -� N 00 W O O m 2 > O W W A OJ W N W W Ut O) W (T Q) -� (?7 (O -, C.3 (9 N W W O Z D o 0 z.'.: r•'r' -9 > Rl A N W co N O O - N Co cn A W V CT O 0) O) A 01 CO 0) O) W O CO W O G7 O- CAI 3 C K D ,.-1 O -1 O 3 m_`-T'' 00 00+Z- 0 0_ ,O CC--O C7 Z..._,_ .._. i 'i( cW D m Z O Z + � 73 N 3 -1 z z -•-cm --a X --i O o- N r m = N D D p Di Z m m z I m0 oa __- o� comm -1 O m X00+L— ❑ --oD00oO = Orrn I -IZ > -_. NO ZDO =O, D 71_D m 3 Q, �- m =v) Z r-) O I ~O O^ D D r Z r N �a �. --1 m o m 00+0 m191 o I�` f' J f m =O -4 Dto Z N D 3 72 OD r , 0Q i J Z Cr) e J 9 �. /K( j Ori -Im n X15•�•L r Z D �� D UC+Z I / t, &h. . J y t ..a t Fh n /� ,ib4r."Af . i IAN z j Ammosseimmok r-- A Wg g / ._ N > Q 0 m (0 rT1 C 0 > 0 co D 2 •� w m 7) 0 y op 'U w O N n -r O -a) m I M „----------------"-- L:1 ui\z rim I :. !!fi11VYrD� (7 :\__rii._7:11,-,i,in:___ 1� o ztn �f > m� IC/1 r .._ C •• m K 3 M D :- ZDmn- I 1 C z u! =...2 rn D „ L`� i--� rl 000 0 =Z r�rr V. ( or" rC > 0 m 0 xix-0 m o a IT cn o -o m z D0 > D O—1 v) e \ '` ►. a'v . / - (^,T) CTDrD N"rO -ITI Lr0 CQ/ 1mI1Dr1GDZDZ --IP• � 72 *'24 i 4'.'4 1 1\ i 'A 1 4-- • rn z 1 r1 1� 0 -r1 o Et S CZ g`} A q — . 3 F�m Z(34 c a • 4;04� �P— " :,t 4.4% :w � J \ CD 7_,Ir ,,,,, /' , / ( il, lt,:-.0 4.' ,, .4%*, = c,71.1(''''''7.' 1 z> 0 t", ,, 44 .4 0,,,: , ,,,\ -0 c- ,,,,,______1 \ ANO5 ',-,744*". '44 ,4a 0,,tilVir o • .,..,\_\,,,_ \\\°,'-_,,\,,c) _.,(1) 36 0 ii.12,cs, _I 7e,:,2i.t. _--,a,1007-7,,,,..,„,,,,, ,Iiik ______---------_____--- 4_ \ _, b-- k ,.. .„. N. ‘,..__ , 3 F Collier13o0-Clam-Pass\2017-Dredge\DWG\2017-O6-28\2-CrossSections-DredgeStn-28June17.dwq Print:Jun L' W N1 Z 0 CT .P .P W W Ca N N N) N.) -t -1 -1 ->• O O O O r 1v 6 -1 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + o (/1-Dom m O) -I. 0') W O V CT N O V CT N O V CT N O -I - xl-1- (n 0 0 0 � CT CT. 0 0 0 CT 0 CT o 0 CT CT 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ zno- Z (MLA mz Li I m (n + NNvI Z x 0)o g o 0) 0) O) O) 0) O) 0) o) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) O) 0) 0) 0) O) ,.I O Co Co Co Co Co Co CO Co 0o co CO CO Do Co 0 0 0 0 0 Cu o Co XI - ozzo) a) o) 0) O) O) O) O) o) O) O) a) O) a) 0) O) O) 0) 0) 0) o) 0) m - =z- � w w N N N N N N N N N N N) N N N N) N N N N m I XI Z D O CO V CO (0 CO (0 (O CO CO CO (0 CO CO CO CO CO CO CO CO (0 CO -I 0(/) XI 0) CO N CO V V V V �l 0) 0) CT) O (n (n 01 to co W N Z c C m m ()I w -, w 0 O v . N O CO O) Cu) - (O V - N O O) - Co :A G) =m-IZ -1 -<'I m 0 W n m z _ [n +O OZrn O COCoCOO CO CO r cota _I Co Co Co Co Co CoCoOwo Owo 003 CO Owo Owo COCoOwo COCCO COCoCo TI () o o Co Co Co CO - Co CO CO CO CO 03 CO CO V �I V -4 V V V 4 V V m -I C m > Cu) Cu) N) N D -, -• -• -, O O o o (0 CO CO CO CO CO �l 0) 01 � Ill - (n n N I- V N V N — > I- CO 0) Cu) CO 0) -P. -, CO 0) Cu) -,. CO 0) 0) 0) 0) 0) -I z Cr) w O) CO (fl D X () P CO C0 +� O O CO CO .P C1'I (n (1'I cm o m 0 •• iv iv 4 2 D •• CO CO CO 6 C0 (o -- (o (o i0 0 CO 0 CO O 0 O O zm 0 01- -< Z x 0- 0 -I D k 0 y �� m mD G) CD xiz p < M < m0 o , , , , mom 1 , , , , , , , , , , , -1 , , , , , m -I -I z 0 = 0) 0) 0) o O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0I z > < o N m -I O m to (nom D �c p gym - �m > 0 + mocmiz Z- m 0101 0 V (0 z 0 (n 0No ((51 01 01 (01 01 01 ((.1 (Nn (41 (1111 (1 Cu) 0 0 0 < 0 0 PO --Iz O M -I C) n -I + 0 >I- -‹ O m (no < - > O O z O m < m c 01 C 0 o - -, -P. CO Cu) 2 co C.) -' N - N W w -A ? � � (W N O J C G) O CO 0 0 0 m 1 Cu) CO Co CO �I � -P N 01 (0 CO m C Om C V V cm 0 co co co -, CO V w (O C) CO 0 O n m Z C Z O 0 0 Cu) in m 0 CO . 0) C)O . J - . 0) 01 OO C) 0 0 y m N) oco 73 D - co E n O - < p D O m 0 0 n r p N (n 1? A - N N N 1v w W W W W w N Co � m v D C o O) N C O) co V o O O -, O O -- O V O 0 (n m --1 - O CO N O 0) 0 -• V 01 -, 01 0) O CO V 0 IP. V O O m MO Z DOO N . w G) - N) N - . ? ? ? A . N C D N) n U1 41. w 0) D0) V 0) CO N 0) g I- V O 00 (n o N w 0 0 Co o CO N O oC • C m 0 Co N Cu) - O -, N --, 0 (0 W - Co :A O) N O O O z zO < G) 0O O r • Cv_ 1 CO o (n W N V N O 033 W 1M1.1 Z oD0 � w �1 � � iv � rnoo rn - O Z ==4 . O G) CDG) ° Zz4x z - 0 < r~ r 0 r N (!1 CJ (0 -, (n i- .. C 1- 17•r (n 0) .A C.11 Cu) C)0 (O 0) (.O CO D M 1- a :rJ Cr o m w w 00 N CO � O) (n N 0 m X Co LP. CO CO CO Cu) -, 0) O -, 0 X CA o m cm D xi ELEVATIO FEET, (NAVD) ELEVA ION FEET, NAVD .. 1 I 1 1 (NAVD) 1 I EL ATION FEL?, (NAVD) + - I I I I - p 1 I 1 I p Iii I p W CO m n O N , 01 CO Oi . A II , 01 , Al , A. , T CO A 10 I OI m I , I3 , I u (I . AI , 0 . co I h' Oi m 0 A N I ti' , Ai , at , CO 0 I \ C Xi 0 Z 0 Z 0 Z 0 tv n Or- o co co D U)D - y - - (JI \ Z in Kx x x 1 I I V CO ()-0 N N N- D mD 0 0 0 o m -< 2,U) -i m N O - c •• m ZK I 1 _ nA C.,)D w- I _o 0 z 0 zD m I P1 0 - 0 < Z N mZ UI y - 0 o n Z Z N_ Z N_ N_ co G fn'"I m 0 m 0 - C -I v1 D -n _ s _ > a x n Z 0 xi X 1 1-• L I N W m 0D Z O N_ O NCO 0_ 0 W- 0 71 m Dm N 0 0 y 0 0 0 O mn r., m r+-I-( C - m C - m - -I Cr) x D m 1 �z rn 1 z I 0 - oo tr.1 - O '^o mi O mo O mo z . 0 0° O o I Z0 I z0 zZ A-si C A� o os 00 a> *-0TIZU1 A= m? �x .,OX-0V mU AN a Z• rrico I_ zn I =a I Zy CmN(nN N mo is mo (n- �ti 3_(''I" 1 0 z 0 z I 5 0 0= f2oD to NJ‘4'-'1 D _ _ Z • z (D JuN W oo co (V o (0 0- (f A-.C) O- O- 0- co0CD o_OD 1 -.O 3 A N O C N 3 o I O z - O 01 9,N N m o O CPN u) u) N n m N N_ O N_ 0 _ n+ 0 C 0 C O O -1 -i O C x Agenda Item#6d Page 1 of 4 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN Pelican Bay Services Division October 2014 Ver. 6.5 5.0 Clam Pass Dredging A. Dredging Policy • • . There are two circumstances that could necessitate dredging Clam Pass: j _ • 1. Clam Pass closes oris in imminent danger of closure following.�,•w athgr driven event. In this situation the inlet should be dredged as soon as possible. • 2. The inlet has lost hydraulic efficiency and is jeopardizing the longterm health offloi•al and faunal communities of the Clam Bay NRPA. The scope and timing of:any proposed dredging - activity will be determined by reviewing and comparing current-ai1d:paat:liydraulic, bathymetric and ecological monitoring data. In both cases the PBSD Board would, after consultation with and advice froin`quo-lifed coastal engineers and biologists, approve and recommend an appropriate set of cotIsti tioifdrawings for the dredging event to the BCC for its approval prior to the submittal to the-reg4tltotry::agencies. Dredging will only be done for the health of the Clam Bay NRPA,not for navigation or beach renourishment. Beach-compatible sand removed as part of the dredging event will be spread on • adjacent area beaches,as required by the permitting agencies. B. Hydraulic and Bathymetric Dredging Criteria The purpose of regular hydraulic and physical monitoring is to evaluate inlet characteristics on a comprehensive long term basis with less emphasis on short term or seasonal changes. To monitor the stability of Clam Pass,data on the variables listed below will be regularly collected and reviewed by qualified engineers. If data are not within the identified target ranges for the variables, further monitoring and/or intervention will be considered in conjunction with current ecological data. See Appendix 5 for additional information on the dredging criteria. 1. Bay Tide Range - • Tidal range data have been collected annually since 1999 and will conflate to:be collected and • - reported to the consulting engineer at least quarterly. An annual tidal analysis report will be included with the annual report. - _ Data are collected from gauges at four locations(Clam Pass Park Boardwalk,Pelicap Bay South Boardwalk, Pelican Bay North Boardwalk,-and Upper Clam Bay). .These gauges.provide aarecord.of the tidal range within Clam Bay and are one-indication of the tidal prism of volume of water flowing` through Clam Pass at each tidal cycle. 43 Agenda Item#6d Page 2 of 4 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN Pelican Bay Services Division October 2014 Ver. 6.5 Based on an analysis of data from the gauges at the South Boardwalk and Clam Pass Park Boardwalk from 1998 to the present when the inlet was hydraulically stable,the ratio between Clam Bay and Gulf' tide was between 0.6 and 0.7 over 90%of the time. Therefore, if the ratio between Clam Bay and the Gulf tide falls below 0.6, but above 0.5, further monitoring will be considered once it has been established that other types of blockage are not causing the problem. If the tidal range ratio falls below 0.5, physical monitoring of, or interventions to, potential shoaling areas that could be impeding flow will be considered. 2. Cross Section of Flow Area and Volume of Shoaled Material Annual bathymetric surveys and reports were completed from 1999 to 2008. Bathymetric surveys provide data on the physical conditions of the inlet channel,ebb shoal and flood shoal. Post-dredging bathymetric surveys and reports were completed at 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals following the opening of Clam Pass in April 2013. Beginning in 2014, bathymetric surveys and reports will be issued at least annually. Additional surveys will be considered if the hydraulic efficiency falls below target levels. To establish benchmarks or targets for flow area and volume of shoaled materials,the data analysis included evaluation of the flow cross-section areas in the three main sections of the dredging region. Section A represents the inlet channel, Section B the seaward part of the flood shoal,and Section C the bay side part of the flood shoal. . , Section C I IC t Sect on A t-7 0.- Tit ee rP (r v t r , Figure 20:Sections A,13 and C of Clara Pass The analysis included evaluation of the cross-section of flow between mean high water and the volume of sand within each segment. The cross-section of flow was computed at each survey station spaced approximately 50 feet apart. The average and minimum cross-section areas were used as indicators of 44 Agenda Item#6d • Page 3 of 4 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN Pelican Bay Services Division October 2014 Ver. 6.5 the physical condition of the flow area of the three segments. The cross-sections were compared to the design cross-section area of the 2013 dredging and the inlet conditions in 2004 and 2008 when inlet conditions were near equilibrium 24 months and 16 months, respectively,following dredging events. Targets for the average cross-section of flow areas below MHW: Section A greater than 300 sq. ft. Section B greater than 450 sq.ft. Section C greater than 450 sq. ft. Targets for the minimum cross-section of flow areas below MHW: Section A greater than 250 sq.ft. Section B greater than 350 sq.ft. Section C greater than 350 sq. ft. Targets for volume of shoaled materials: Section A less than 3000 cu.yds. Section B less than 2500 cu.yds. Section C less than 4000 cu.yds. Therefore, if the average cross-section of flow area falls below these numbers or the volume of shoaled material exceeds these numbers,further monitoring or intervention may be needed. 3. Inlet Channel Length The channel length is an important factor in inlet stability. A longer inlet channel will provide greater resistance to flow. Higher flow resistance will reduce the tidal range and increase the phase lag with the Gulf tide that reduces the tidal prism and flow through Clam Pass. To establish a benchmark for channel length a selection of aerial photos of Clam Pass from 2004 to 2013 was studied as well as data on the approximate length of the channel following dredging events in 2002,2007,and 2013. Based on this analysis,the benchmark for inlet channel is to stay under 400 feet in length. Inlet channel length will be recorded at least annually and included in the annual report. 4. Ebb Shoal The size and shape of the ebb shoal is a key factor to the stability of the inlet that, in turn, supports the stability of Clam Pass. The ebb shoal helps to keep the inlet open when facing storms and big wave events. The ebb shoal provides sheltering to the channel and a sand bypass pathway around the inlet without filling in the Pass. The shape and volume of the ebb shoal are additional indicators of the stability of the inlet. Critical conditions include onshore collapse of the ebb shoal that can be indicated by significant change in ebb shoal offshore distance,volume,and increase in dry beach areas adjacent to the inlet. 45 Agenda Item#6d Page 4 of 4 CLAM BAY NRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN Pelican Bay Services Division October 2014 Ver.6.5 • To determine a target for the ebb shoal delta,data from April 2013 to April 2014 were reviewed. The ebb shoal position offshore is measured from a line connecting the north and south channel banks at mean high water out to the-4.0 foot contour line. The recommended length of the seaward extent of the ebb shoal is at least than 250 feet. The ebb shoal distance from shore will be recorded at least annually and included in the annual report. A summary of criteria for dredging is presented in the table below. Dredging Criteria Parameter Summary Location Target Description >0.6 ratio comparison of the interior and Gulf Bay Tide Range Ratio tidal ranges A Average>300 sq fl Not less than 250 sq ft Cross Sectional Area B Average>450 sq ft area in different locations of the Pass Not less than 350 sq ft through which water can flow Average>450 sq ft Not less than 350 sq ft A <3400 cu yds • quantity of sand and sediments within Volume of Shoaled Material B <2500 cu yds channel that can restrict flow C <4000 cu yds <400 feet distance water must flow through the Inlet Channel Length beach and ebb shoal areas Ebb Shoal >250 feet distance from shore to the outer ebb• shoal limits C. Ecological Considerations A critical consideration in all dredging decisions is to ensure the ecological health of the Clam Bay NRPA. Before any dredging event,the direct and indirect impacts on the flora and fauna of the NRPA including mangroves,benthic communities(including seagrass), and other important species,such as fish and birds,will be considered. Every effort will be made to minimize any negative impact to the flora and fauna. The pros and cons of dredging will be weighed in regards to both hydrologic and ecological consequences. D. Dredging Construction 1. Typical Cross-Sections for Dredging Typical cross-sections for the suggested dredge design are provided below. When dredging is deemed necessary,the design cross-section area as stated in the design range,with consideration to existing conditions,will be followed. Minor modifications to this dredging template may be needed for future permitting. Typical cross-sections are shown for open areas in Sections B and C where the waterway 46 Agenda Item#7 Page 1 of 3 SheaBarbara Subject: FW: Pelican Bay sampling From:JacobLisa<Lisalacob c+colliergov.net> Date:September 20,2017 at 16:40:57 EDT To: PerezNosbel<NosbelPerez@colliergov.net> Cc: BolickMarion<MarionBolick@colliergov.net>,NeilDorrill<neil@dmgfl.com>,SheaBarbara <BarbaraShea@colliergov.net>,"dee@dmgfl,com"<dee@dmgfl.com> Subject:FW:Pelican Bay sampling Good Afternoon Nosbel, Per Marion,due to hurricane Irma clean-up activities, PBS17 staff will NOT be collecting Clam Bay water samples in September. Lisa From: PerezNosbel<NosbelPerez@colliergov.net> Date:September 19,2017 at 9:32:54 AM EDT To: BolickMarion<MarionBolick@colliergov.net> Subject: Pelican Bay sampling Hi Marion, Just a heads up that Clam Bay can be sampled on the 27th and Pelican Bay berm on the 28th or 26`h. Please confirm if these dates will be scheduled. Hope all is well with you and your family. Thanks Nosbel Perez, Laboratory Supervisor Pollution Control Laboratory 3339 Tamiami Trail East Suite 304 Naples,F134112 Office: (239)252-6079 Lab: (239)252-6071 Email:nosbclpercz@collicrgov.nct Agenda Item#7 Page 2 of 3 SheaBarbara Subject: Sample preservation From:Tim Hall<Tim@thanaples.com> Date:September 18,2017 at 11:45:00 EDT To:JacobLisa<LisaJacob@collieraov.net> Cc:Marielle Kitchener<Marielle@thanaples.com>, BolickMarion<MarionBolick@colliergov.net>, McCaughtryMary<MaryMcCaughtry@colliergov.net>,SheaBarbara<BarbaraShea@colliergov.net>, "dee@dmgfLcom" <dee@dmgfl.com> Subject:Re:Sample preservation Lisa, based on the issues we had last year when we resampled,it would be best to just not use the samples that were not preserved. The metals are still OK so we can get the Copper data but nutrients could be wonky and it would be easier to just not have samples tested. Tim Sent from my iPhone On Sep 18,2017,at 10:54 AM,JacobLisa<LisaJacob@colliergov.net>wrote: Please advise. From: PerezNosbel Sent: Saturday, September 16, 2017 1:39 PM To: WatkinsRhonda; Katie Laakkonen; WoodsElizabeth; Lauren Griffiths; Chadd Chustz; JacobLisa; GosselinLiz Cc: Danette Kinaszczuk; WatkinsRhonda; McDanielRandall Subject: Sample preservation Good afternoon, During hurricane Irma the laboratory experienced an interruption in power to the sample refrigerators that could have lasted approximately 5 days. Therefore,August and September samples(with the exception of metals)that have not been analyzed will possibly either need to be disposed of OR analyzed and reported with a "Y" qualifier understood as"Improperly preserved". Please indicate which option you would like for us to take. If you prefer additional information,such as parameters pending analyses for each sample before making a decision please feel free to ask, however this will take some time to sort through. I apologize for the inconvenience. Projects affected: Pelican Bay CCWQ Naples Bay STORMWATER LASIP Moorings Bay DW-Nitrification Agenda Item#7 Page 3 of 3 MARCO FGCU Nosbel Perez Laboratory Supervisor Pollution Control Laboratory 3339 Tamiami Trail East Suite 304 Naples,Fl 34112 Office: (239)252-6079 Lab: (239)252-6071 Email:nosbelperez@ colliergov.net <image001..Jpg> How Are We Doing? Under Florida Law, e-mail addresses are public records. If you do not want your e-mail address released in response to a public records request, do not send electronic mail to this entity. Instead, contact this office by telephone or in writing. 2 Agenda Item#7a Page 1 of 30 CLAM BAY SEDIMENT & SURFACE WATER COPPER ANALYSIS APRIL 2017 PREPARED FOR: PELICAN BAY SERVICES DIVISION 801 LAUREL OAK DRIVE, SUITE 302 NAPLES, FL 34108 PREPARED BY: mow. TURRELL, HALL&ASSOCIATES, INC. 3584 EXCHANGE AVENUE NAPLES, FL 34104 L Agenda Item#7a Page 2 of 30 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 BACKGROUND 3 1.2 PURPOSE 3 1.3 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS 4 2.0 METHODOLOGY 5 3.0 RESULTS 6 4.0 DISCUSSION 8 4.1 SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS 8 4.2 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING 8 4.3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING 10 5.0 COMMENTS 14 TABLES 1-SEDIMENT SAMPLING RESULTS 6 2-SURFACE WATER SAMPLING RESULTS 7 3-PHOSPHORUS COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SAMPLING STATIONS TO 7 CORRESPONDING MONTHLY WATER QUALITY SAMPLING STATIONS 4-COMPARISON OF COPPER LEVELS TO STATE STANDARDS 9 FIGURES 1- GRAPH OF SEDIMENT COPPER SAMPLES AS NORMALIZED BY ALUMINUM 11 EXHIBITS 1- SAMPLING STATION LOCATION MAP APPENDICES A- BENCHMARK SEDIMENT LAB DATA AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY SHEETS B- BENCHMARK WATER QUALITY LAB DATA AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY SHEETS APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 2 7/3/2017 9:57:26 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 3 of 30 1.0 INTRODUCTION Turrell, Hall, and Associates (THA) was tasked by the Pelican Bay Services Division (PBSD) to collect sediment and surface water samples from the Clam Bay estuary system for analysis of copper concentrations. The Clam Bay estuary system is located in Collier County west of the Pelican development, south of the Bay Colony development, and north of the Seagate and Naples Cay developments. The system is bound on the west by the Gulf of Mexico. 1.1 BACKGROUND In October 2012, The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) classified Clam Bay as "impaired for copper". Immediately, the PBSD started looking for potential sources of copper in the system and implementing changes within the Pelican Bay community to try and reduce copper concentrations from reaching the Clam Bay estuarine waters. In August 2013, PB SD stopped using copper based algaecides to treat algal growth in its stormwater lakes. Subsequent testing has shown that copper levels in these lakes are dropping; however, elevated copper levels are still a concern to the community. Traditionally, management of aquatic resources in Florida has focused primarily on surface water quality. However, sediments are also viewed as important because many substances that are found within the water column can accumulate to elevated levels in sediments. As such, sediments can serve as both a reservoir and as a potential source of contaminants to the water column once those reservoirs have reached or are approaching their capacity. Several mechanisms contribute to metal remobilization from contaminated sediment. First, sediment and associated contaminants may be re-suspended by agitation from storms, floods, runoff, and activities of bottom dwelling creatures. Second, changes in physicochemical conditions, such as pH or dissolved oxygen, can dissolve sediment bound trace metals and make them available to re-enter the water column ' r 1.2 PURPOSE The purpose of this sampling effort is to provide data relative to the copper concentrations in APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 3 7/3/2017 9:57:26.AM Agenda Item#7a Page 4 of 30 both sediments and within the water column for comparison to past sampling efforts. 1.3 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The sampling effort for this analysis included: o Collection of sediment and surface water samples from twelve locations scattered throughout the Clam Bay estuary system. o Measurements of water depth and silt depth at each location. o Analysis of samples by a Florida certified laboratory. o Preparation of this written interim summary report outlining the findings. t � APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 4 7/3/2017 9:57:26 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 5 of 30 2.0 METHODOLOGY Sediment and surface water samples were collected on April 28, 2017 by THA biologists.At each of the 12 sampling stations, data collection included; o a sediment grab sample to be tested for copper,aluminum, and total phosphorus, o a water quality sample to be tested for copper and hardness, o a measurement of water depth, o a measurement of the silt depth, o and field measurements of Specific conductivity and temperature. The water quality sample was taken from approximately 6 inches beneath the surface and collected into pre-labeled bottles from the lab. Sediment samples were collected following the surface water collection to safeguard against accidental contamination of the water column. Sediment samples were collected by pushing a soil collection probe into the bottom of the bay. Upon transfer to the surface, the top 2 inches of material was kept and transferred to the pre-labeled containers from the lab. Silt depth at the sample location was then assessed using a push pole marked with a measuring tape. All samples were kept on ice in coolers until transferred to the lab for analysis. Chain of custody forms were filled out and provided to the lab along with the samples (See Appendices A&B for Lab Data and Chain of Custody Forms). All samples were labeled to record sample location, date, and time. The attached Exhibit 1 shows the locations that sediment and surface water samples were taken. Lab analyses of the sediment and water quality samples was conducted by Benchmark EnviroAnalytical Inc. (NELAC Certification #E84167). APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 5 7/3/2017 9:57:26 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 6 of 30 3.0 RESULTS Benchmark performed the following procedures on the samples provided: o Copper- sediments (EPA 6010) o Aluminum -sediments (EPA 6010) o Total P -sediments (365.3) o Total Solids -sediments (SM2540G) o Copper-surface water (SM3113BMIBK) o Hardness -surface water (SM2340C) Results of the analysis are summarized in the following tables and graphs. Copies of the laboratory results and chain of custody forms are provided in Appendix A of this Summary Report. Tables are provided for both sediment samples as well as water quality samples for ease of comparison. Table 1: Sediment Sampling Results (See Appendix A) Sample Sediment Parameters Copper Aluminum Total P Total Solids Silt depth Location SQAGs o (% (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (/o Dry wt) Dry wt) (feet) CB 1 5.05 below TEL 2230 0.060 65.7 0.4 CB 2 6.95 below TEL 2762 0.110 51.4 0.5 CB 3 1.32 below TEL 720 0.034 69.7 0.45 CB 4 2.19 below TEL 1010 0.029 63.7 0.2 CB 5 14.90 below TEL 1931 0.048 48.6 0.4 CB 6 17.20 below TEL 1418 0.037 61.9 0.5 CB 7 62.00 btw TEL&PEL 2491 0.065 44.0 0.6 CB 8 30.70 btw TEL&PEL 742 0.027 67.4 0.4 CB 9 22.10 btw TEL&PEL 2199 0.045 61.3 0.7 CB 10 14.00 below TEL 2767 0.061 55.0 0.8 CB 11 1017.00 above PEL 6758 0.093 15.7 1.4 CB 12 52.50 not marine 1201 0.016 60.0 0.3 *TEL (Threshold Level Effect is 18.7mg/kg),PEL (Possible Effect Level is 108 mg/kg) APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 6 7/3/2017 9:57:26 AM I Agenda Item#7a r Page 7 of 30 f i i I Table 2: Surface Water Sampling Results (See Appendix B) Sample Surface Water Parameters 1 Location Water Depth Specific Copper Hardness (feet) Conductivity (ug/1) (mg/1 CaCO3) CB 1 4.5 53320 0.272 4510 CB 2 3.4 53670 3.3 2652 CB 3 3.1 54180 0.272 6120 CB 4 5.4 54150 0.767 5566 i I CB 5 4.5 54000 0.929 3856 CB 6 5.1 51560 1.72 6456 CB 7 5.8 49500 3.25 2098 CB 8 4.0 47370 3.78 2642 CB 9 5.2 47400 4.32 3260 CB 10 4.8 43440 1.81 2364 CB 11 4.5 44320 5.73 4380 CB 12 5.7 617 48.3 166 Table 3: Phosphorus Comparison of Sediment Sampling Stations to Corresponding Monthly Water Quality Sampling Stations Marine Sediment&Marine Water Phosphorus Sediment Comparison Sample Sediment Total Monthly Corresponding April Location Water Quality Station Phosphorus I Phosphorus (% dry wt) (mg/L) j CB 1 0.06 CB 8- 0.055 CB 2 0.110 CB 6- 0.069 I CB 3 0.034 CB 5- 0.038 CB 4 0.029 no nearby CB station I CB 5 0.048 CB 4- 0.045 CB 6 0.037 CB 3- 0.050 CB 7 0.065 no nearby CB station CB 8 0.027 no nearby CB station CB 9 0.045 CB 1- 0.128 1 CB 10 0.061 no nearby CB station j 1CB 11 0.093 no nearby CB station I CB 12 0.016 no nearby CB station 1 I 1 APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 7 7/3/2017 9:5726 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 8 of 30 4.0 DISCUSSION This study was conducted primarily to investigate the copper concentrations of the sediments within the Clam Bay Estuarine system. Various associated parameters were also evaluated, as described in Section 3.0, to allow for interpretation of the data and provide a little better overview of the system. 4.1 SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS Eleven of the twelve sites sampled were marine waters within the estuary system. Site #12 was located within the stormwater management lake of the Vizcaya neighborhood of Bay Colony. Water depths ranged from 3.1-5.8 feet within the estuary waters and 5.7+ feet in the Vizcaya pond. At the time of the survey, the Vizcaya pond was a blue color,which most likely can be attributed to an applied lake sun blocker to reduce algal growth. Silt depths ranged from 0.2 to 1.2 feet at the different locations and do not seem to indicate any problems with excessive sedimentation. The highest value was within the isolated area near the bird rookery at Station 11. 4.2 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING The DEP state standards for copper within regulated marine waters is 3.7 ug/l. The standard for regulated freshwater bodies (stormwater ponds are not regulated) is computed as a relationship with the hardness of the water.The acceptable limits for the specific metals vary based on the water hardness. In presenting this data, the water hardness level at Station #12 (Vizcaya pond) was used to calculate the limits for copper in relation to its specific hardness, expressed as Cu <_ e(0.8545[1nH]-1.702). APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 8 7/3/2017 9:57:26 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 9 of 30 Table 4: Comparison of Copper levels to State Standard Sample Copper Hardness State Standard Compliant with Location (ug/1) (mg/1 CaCO3) (ug/1) State Standard CB 1 0.272 4510 3.7 YES CB 2 3.3 2652 3.7 YES CB 3 0.272 6120 3.7 YES CB 4 0.767 5566 3.7 YES CB 5 0.929 3856 3.7 YES CB 6 1.72 6456 3.7 YES CB 7 3.25 2098 3.7 YES CB 8 3.78 2642 3.7 NO CB 9 4.32 3260 3.7 NO CB 10 1.81 1 2364 3.7 YES CB 11 5.73 4380 3.7 NO CB 12 48.3 166 14.38 NO Three of the stations within the estuary waters showed copper levels higher than the State standards or natural regulated marine water bodies. All of these stations are at the upper end of the Clam Bay system where flushing and water exchange is lowest. The values at locations #8 and 9 were also compared to the monthly water quality data collection results from the past 3 years. The current sampling Station #9 is in roughly the same location as the monthly #1 sampling site. Copper levels in this area were above State Standards from about March to July 2015 then dropped below the State standard until March of this year. The last two readings from March and April were 7.97 and 6.48 respectively. The current reading of 4.32 is lower than these past results though still above the standard. As seen in the discussion below, these same areas also had elevated copper levels within the sediments and are susceptible to copper going back into solution whenever sediments may be disturbed. Station #12 also had copper concentrations higher than the State standards for regulated fresh waters but it is important to remember that as a stormwater pond,this water body is not subject to these standards. The elevated copper concentrations in this lake may be an indication that there is too much copper present for the organics in the lake to bind into the sediments and APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 9 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 10 of 30 therefore, the copper still in solution is more susceptible to passage through the water management system and into the waters of the estuary. This lake outfalls into the general area of Station #11 which in turn passes through to Station #9 and #8. All three of these stations showed copper levels above the State standards. 4.3 SEDIMENT SAMPLING The tool for interpreting copper concentrations in sediments in based on a demonstrated and scientifically backed, naturally occurring relationship between copper and aluminum. Aluminum has become the preferred reference element to normalize sediment copper concentrations because it is the most abundant naturally occurring metal, it is highly refractory, and its concentration is generally not influenced by anthropogenic sources. This approach to the interpretation copper and other metals data was initially described and adopted in 1986 "Geochemical and Statistical Approach for Assessing Metals Pollution in Estuarine Sediments" (FDER/OCM 1986a&b). In 2002 "Development of an Interpretive Tool for Assessment of Metal Enrichment in Florida Freshwater Sediment" was published and further refined the tool to be used within freshwater environments. This interpretive tool allows results of sediment chemical analyses to distinguish natural versus enriched copper concentrations in sediments as well as the degree of enrichment. Sediment samples are analyzed and metal concentrations are plotted against aluminum with regression lines and confidence limits clearly depicted. This information is capable of indicating copper concentrations at elevated levels and shows the distinction between natural and anthropogenic sources. The concentration is considered natural if the data point falls within the prediction limits. If a data point is plotted above the upper prediction limit,which 8 of the 12 samples are,then the sample is considered to be enriched.Also, the greater the distance above the prediction limit to a data point,the greater the degree of enrichment is identified. There is a pretty clear trend in the samples that were tested. It appears that the further away from the Pass the sample site was located, the higher the relative concentrations APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 10 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 11 of 30 ( of copper become. Figure 1- Graph of Sediment Copper Samples as Normalized by Aluminum Sediment Copper Samples as Normalized by Aluminum 1000 CB 11 • 100 0812 • C87 CB8 • CB 9 • Upper Limit C8 e65C810 • 10 C 1• • B • Regression Line a Upper Limit a CB 4 Ca3ia u 1 Bottom Limit Regression Line s 0.1 Bottom Limit 0.01 10 I00 1000 10000 Aluminum(ppm) The results for Station #12 are also shown on this graph though the regression limits for freshwater systems are slightly different, the location is still above the threshold as well so is simply included on this graph for simplicity. The above analysis alone however, only shows the degree of enrichment, it is incapable of evaluating the potential hazards posed by sediment copper to aquatic organisms. Further tools are required to help determine if copper is present in the sediments at concentrations which could harm or impair the aquatic environment and associated biological processes. This approach has since been further refined and elaborated upon for the FDEP in numerous studies and documents using ever more stringent statistical standards. The documents include: "Approach to the Assessment of Sediment Quality in Florida Coastal APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 11 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 12 of 30 Waters" (MacDonald, 1994 Volumes 1 & 2) and "Development and Evaluation of Numerical Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines for Florida Inland Waters" (MacDonald & USGS 2003). These documents developed an additional interpretive tool to better assess the potential for biological effects associated with sediment concentrations in Coastal/Estuary waters called Sediment Quality Assessment Guidelines (SQAGs). These SQAGs define three distinct ranges of contaminant (copper) concentrations that are described as; a no effects or minimal effects range, a possible effects range (threshold effects level (TEL)), and a probable effects range (probable effects level (PEL)). The threshold effects level (TEL) represents the upper limit of the range of sediment contaminant concentrations within which biological effects are rarely or never observed (no effects or minimal effects range < TEL). Within this range, concentrations are not considered to represent significant hazards to aquatic organisms. The probable effects level (PEL) defines the lower limit of the range of concentrations that are usually or always associated with adverse biological effects. The range of concentrations that could, potentially, be associated with biological effects (the possible effects range) is delineated by the values which fall between the TEL and the PEL. Within this range of concentrations, adverse biological effects are possible; however, it is difficult to predict the occurrence, nature, and/or severity of these effects. The numerical SQAGs for copper within estuary sediment are presented in MacDonald 1994, as a TEL of 18.7 mg/kg and a PEL of 108 mg/kg and they are offered with a moderate degree of confidence according to the author. Seven of the eleven marine sampling sites had sediment copper levels below the 18.7 TEL threshold. Three of the sites had levels between the TEL and PEL thresholds which means that adverse biological effects are possible. The final marine site (#11) had a level far above the PEL threshold. This means that adverse biological effects would be expected within this APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 12 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 13 of 30 area. It is not clear what those effects might be, though less fish and invertebrate presence would be an indicator. No information was present at the time of this report to say whether any adverse effects were realized. The follow-up sampling to be done in October will offer more information as to whether or not these levels are sustained or simply aberrations at the time of the testing. APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 13 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 14 of 30 5.0 COMMENTS It is likely that the elevated sediment copper levels within the Clam Bay estuarine system are human induced. Restricted flows and limited flushing of the upper reaches of Clam Bay's mangroves and bays coupled with a continued influx of copper from the stormwater system inputs will lead to higher concentrations of copper in the estuarine system and potential adverse impacts to fish,invertebrates,plants, etc. Without the flushing activity as is seen in Outer Clam Bay and the Pass, any copper within the water column is likely to remain in the system. When bound to organic matter in the sediments, it is still susceptible to re-dissolving into the water column when those sediments are disturbed (such as through wind, storms, boat wakes, etc.). The copper in the upper reaches of the Bay could be in a repeating loop of solution to sediment to solution because there is inadequate turnover of the waters to help removed it from the system. Under this scenario, it is possible that copper levels could continue to increase within the upper reaches of the system as long as additional copper is coming into the system via the stormwater outfalls of the surrounding developments. This brief study of the Clam Bay sediments and the interpretation of those results is derived from a solitary sampling event using single non-replicated samples. No definitive statements of long term trend or future conditions can be made without further monitoring or study. APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 14 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda Item#7a Page 15 of 30 E XHIBIT 1 SAMPLING LOCATION MAP 11 77 { APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 15 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM ' t , 'N < 44?;A. 4: ,ii:N.* * -7.. A. P:,_ 0 500 1,0010 2,000 • ``CO , UPPER ::' �° .F ova t a-, ,•- CLAM e=- - 'P;, k it BAY s • e '" {�,a`4l� ie ' ' $ r '"'" 11' sr� x. se !*0 `` ... 'la •a• ii++ 41* 'C' da € -xi- S, i. ,:k t m1 r I* 4 f x .. r ` tx s :1'1;2,1'1 INNER •� 2 ; . , R r, CLAM { �, BAY ages ' rye. , f^ f .. :4:1-.—.4.:044',., . ' fit K t 0 GULF OF'ME.X!G0 • ' .. r 3 t x '4; w x' II 4 d T t ,v 0 •,. 4 4t CLAM PAS Legend ' *+ ' .tT E a r ' 0 COPPER SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS CLAM PASS PARK -A, gg ^ '4 f y • � `fit ID LATITUDE LONGTIUDEF0 dapx � r 26.21094548380 81.$1350572420 7� � � , 2 26.21332467840 81.814433800(10 ., 444 15- a � " A 26.21588687110 81.81414079460 •� g,e Y r 26.22153483430 -81.81547426180 �' �, ,a ,q,F- - 26.22897253880 :81.81728083071 OUTER ' • 26.23113257190 81.816010 CLAM 7 26.23488094510 -81.81609601100 BAY 0 °, _ 8 26.24071519880 -.81.81646490170 "=", • _ e > a 0,.. ,.,� - wog 9 26.24370495480 -81.81688687440 "' " - .t. ra r t 4 ,^a �__ . 10 26.24683965680 81.81783859740y f s 11 26.24323406610 -81.81465786600 C N S." <,-` ,rt n,,a s 7�" 12 26.24512216250 $1.81395681340 _ . "- 1 „ a.. Turrell Hall&Associates,Inc. CLAM BAY1013 o FlS.;E Marine&Environmental Consulting `O ns . u n,u aa swae.� i rT i a;nz COPPER SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS SHEET. >:S ea,.�es oivr F.nosrw-un-, SECTION- TOWNSHIP- Agenda Item#7a Page 17 of 30 A I i PPENDIX BENCHMARK SEDIMENT LAB REPORT & CHAIN OF CUSTODY APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 17 7/3/2017 9:57:27 AM Agenda em#7a BENCHMARK Pap 18o 0 ' EnviroAnalytical Inc. L., NELAC Certification#E84167 ANALYTICAL TEST REPORT THESE RESULTS MEET NELAC STANDARDS Submission Number : 17050083 Turrell,Hall &Asso.,Inc. Project Name : CLAM BAY SEMI-ANNUAL SEDIMENT 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B Date Received : 05/02/2017 Naples,FL 34104-3732 Time Received : 1410 Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 001 Sample Time: 1457 Sample Description: CB 1 Sample Method: Grab Parameter - Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AS P 0.060 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 14:16 BLB ALUMINUM 2230 MG/KG 0.880 6010 05/09/2017 10:26 KP C* COPPER 5.05 MG/KG 0.153 6010 05/09/2017 10:26 KP - TOTAL SOLIDS 65.7 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 002 Sample Time: 1446 Sample Description: CB 2 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.110 %DRY WT 0.002 365.3 05/12/2017 14:36 BLB ALUMINUM 2762 MG/KG 1.22 6010 05/09/2017 10:36 KP COPPER 6.95 MG/KG 0.213 6010 05/09/2017 10:36 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 51.4 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 003 Sample Time: 1441 Sample Description: CB 3 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time - TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.034 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:28 BLB ALUMINUM 720 MG/KG 1.23 6010 05/09/2017 10:39 KP COPPER 1.32 MG/KG 0.214 6010 05/09/2017 10:39 KP 17050083 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 1 OF 6 Agenda e #7a BENCHMARK Pag: EnviroAnalytical Inc. NELAC Certification#E84167 TOTAL SOLIDS 69.7 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 004 Sample Time: 1423 Sample Description: CB 4 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0,029 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:29 BLB ALUMINUM 1010 MG/KG 1.17 6010 05/09/2017 10:43 KP COPPER 2.19 MG/KG 0.204 6010 05/09/2017 10:43 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 63.7 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 005 Sample Time: 1407 Sample Description: CB 5 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AS P 0.048 %DRY WT 0.002 365.3 05/12/2017 13:30 BLB ALUMINUM 1931 MG/KG 1.20 6010 05/09/2017 10:46 KP COPPER 14.9 MG/KG 0.208 6010 05/09/2017 10:46 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 48.6 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 006 Sample Time: 1354 Sample Description: CB 6 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.037 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:31 BLB ALUMINUM 1418 MG/KG 0.948 6010 05/09/2017 10:50 KP COPPER 17.2 MG/KG 0.165 6010 05/09/2017 10:50 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 61.9 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis 17050083 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 2 OF 6 Agenda I em#7a BENCHMARK Pag: 20 0 En viroA n alytical Inc. NELACCertification#E84167 Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 007 Sample Time: 1343 Sample Description: CB 7 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AS P 0.065 %DRY WT 0.002 365.3 05/12/2017 13:32 BLB ALUMINUM 2491 MG/KG 0.954 6010 05/09/2017 10:53 KP COPPER 62.0 MG/KG 0.166 6010 05/09/2017 10:53 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 44.0 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 008 Sample Time: 1315 Sample Description: CB 8 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.027 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:33 BLB ALUMINUM 742 MG/KG 0.711 6010 05/09/2017 10:57 KP COPPER 30.7 MG/KG 0.124 6010 05/09/2017 10:57 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 67.4 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 009 Sample Time: 1258 Sample Description: CB 9 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.045 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:34 BLB ALUMINUM 2199 MG/KG 1.41 6010 05/09/2017 11:00 KP COPPER 22.1 MG/KG 0.245 6010 05/09/2017 11:00 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 61.3 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 010 Sample Time: 1246 Sample Description: CB 10 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AS P 0.061 %DRY WT 0.001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:35 BLB ALUMINUM 2767 MG/KG 113 6010 05/09/2017 11:04 KP 17050083 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 3 OF 6 N Agenda em#7a B ■ 'HT 11 \ MARK Pa 0 EnviroAnalytical Inc. - NELAC Certification#E84167 COPPER 14.0 MG/KG 0.197 6010 05/09/2017 11:04 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 55.0 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 011 Sample Time: 1236 Sample Description: CB 11 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS AS P 0.093 %DRY WT 0.005 365.3 05/12/2017 13:37 BLB ALUMINUM 6758 MG/KG 4.33 6010 05/09/2017 11:19 KP COPPER 1017 MG/KG 0.754 6010 05/09/2017 11:19 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 15.7 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis Submission Number: 17050083 Sample Date: .04/28/2017 Sample Number: 012 Sample Time: 1538 Sample Description: CB 12 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL PHOSPHORUS ASP 0.016 %DRY WT 0,001 365.3 05/12/2017 13:38 BLB ALUMINUM 1201 MG/KG 0.875 6010 05/09/2017 11:22 KP COPPER 52.5 MG/KG 0.152 6010 05/09/2017 11:22 KP TOTAL SOLIDS 60.0 %DRY WT 0.1 SM2540G 05/03/2017 15:16 FM/CF All values reported in UG/KG or MG/KG are on a dry weight basis 17050083 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 4 OF 6 Agenda I em#7a BENCHMARK M Pa.:22 O 111 EnviroAnalY ticalInc. • NELAC Certification#E84167 ate37, 05/15/2017 Dale D.Dixo Laboratory Director Date Tulay Tanrisever/QC Officer Deborah A.Murphy/Project Manager DATA QUALIFIERS THAT MAY APPLY: NOTES: 1=Reported value is between the laboratory MDL and the PQL. PQL=4xMDL. J2=Estimated value.No control criteria exists for this component. X=Value exceeds MCL. J3=Estimated value.Quality control criteria for precision or accuracy not met. 2:SOUR calculations are based on Total Solids. J4=Estimated value.Sample matrix interference suspected. J2:Per client request,analysis conducted without method blank. L=Off-scale high.Value is known to be>the value reported. Q=Sample held beyond accepted hold time. U=Analyte analyzed but not detected at the value indicated.. V=Analyte detected in sample and method blank. Y=Analysis performed on an improperly preserved sample.Data may be inaccurate. Z=Too many colonies were present(TNTC).The numeric value represents the filtration volume. For questions and comments regarding these results,please contact us at(941)723-9986. Results relate only to the samples. 17050083 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 5 OF 6 Agenda Item#7a Page 23 of 30 �I ! moi 1 cam{ _ ~7 �— p I I (3•T of 0 6 6 . 0 61 0. a " 6 y ! g I I e e Lg y� v .-1,- e Q v U i. 11I, N N N L Vii i. '±' V±V/ Vvl Vel O�l 4•v9 U \~` vl CII Cr) to V- Cl Cl) v/ H � z, ! I � [ N H H H H E_ H H H H H H ' *� o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H vi .O Qa a a o 0 0 0 c " o o c i c • -- d.+ en 5: " c _ v o q g M O V m o = o o ? o = o o D •c d M M GI 1/4.0 /1 U U U '•.� U U U U ' U U U U 4 I Q > a 7\j 1 ¢ Q ¢ ' 4 Q ¢ d d ¢ - o "- pp',. ppa,, pp,, pp,, ppa, pp° pp^ ?..,, I p7, � p p^, ! pp„.., 0 , •,.- E FSE- E- E- H H E• i F H ! [-� F L. � Ix IVD rMZiNH 0 .1 al ate m at an '5.m I 'm a "m "aa �a .N m A. a a P. i s a I a a a a l a a I �` 1 i E j, 1 E , a a a a a. I a. a., a a I a a a. F Ic IY _ `d i I ! es E rV iV N lV IV �E N itV N N: A .) 0 U t-, — mm' m ' ,/ M • m L'-': � 'I ' ' , i I • R : ' !CtC1 :1 , ,'s' >, o r- I r c—' r 1= t—',s-- c- r , I ! 0 _ c ami I . t. j I I�� -a � e N �` aps( a I a I •g I a I E I E a -a I a I ;� !__"t_a$ a i i I col v"0-.,a 1 m i m l m ! ti -. h l v j m y - v i�u g 3 gE 8 i� n 10 I v . a ( ci 0 i 0 0 0 a cz 0 i� 177,'w gnC 6 Z ,_-s s I mt6tx, .g; ; U Q i I l a s 9 s y y £I �U v i ;g,'Avl gig tli-Ok O W N r -t �E�l __r�iFx aF-i { =i R E �) E �/i�' a 5a' 414 7,11 -i W ef)_ ., .0 '!1 �!I VV E 1 4'i 0 t c E j , sem.. 0 I ss5os .a�:a yi'.�'. _�, m x! CG.0 a I 1 e:U " ai I s �i >ti v V I I I 3c 1 , Ilri 1 9 i I i 0 4. ta r c" _ _ y a ,f-A 4. r. S ti" i VJ�t ` ... ,r,,,... . gm* _ 1-- ‘54 " �5 "3 Page 6 of 6 V% { Agenda Item#7a Page 24 of 30 A PPENDIX BENCHMARK WATER QUALITY LAB REPORT & CHAIN OF CUSTODY APRIL 2017 Sediment&Surface Water Copper Analysis.pdf 24 7/3/2017 9:57:28 AM Agenda -•• ,7a Page '5 . 30 BENCHMARK EnviroAnalytical Inc. _ - NELAC Certification 4E84167 ANALYTICAL TEST REPORT THESE RESULTS MEET NELAC STANDARDS Submission Number : 17050082 Turrell, Hall &Asso., Inc. Project Name : CLAM BAY SEMI-ANNUAL WATER ANALY 3584 Exchange Avenue, Suite B Date Received : 05/02/2017 Naples, FL 34104-3732 Time Received : 1410 • Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 001 Sample Time: 1459 Sample Description: CB 1 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 4510 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 0.272 U UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 15:48 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 002 Sample Time: 1444 Sample Description: CB 2 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) , 2652 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 3.30 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 15:52 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 003 Sample Time: 1443 Sample Description: CB 3 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 6120 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 0.272 U UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 15:57 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 004 Sample Time: 1424 Sample Description: CB 4 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time 17050082 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 1 OF 6 Agenda '- •7a Page '6. 1 BENCHMARK EnviroAnalytical Inc. NELAC Certification 4E84167 TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 5566 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 0.7671 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:02 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 005 Sample Time: 1409 Sample Description: CB 5 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 3856 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 0.9291 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:07 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 006 Sample Time: 1402 Sample Description: CB 6 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 6456 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 1.72 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:11 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 007 Sample Time: 1350 Sample Description: CB 7 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 2098 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 3.25 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:16 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 008 Sample Time: 1335 Sample Description: CB 8 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 2642 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 3.78 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:30 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 009 Sample Time: 1311 Sample Description: CB 9 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time 17050082 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL.34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 2 OF 6 Agenda ,- •7a Page P BENCHMARK EnviroAnalytical Inc. NELAC Certification#E84167 TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 3260 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 4.32 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:44 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 010 Sample Time: 1254 Sample Description: CB 10 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 2364 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 1.81 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:49 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 011 Sample Time: 1539 Sample Description: CB 12 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 166 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 48.3 UG/L 0.346 1.384 SM3113B 05/11/2017 14:46 KP Submission Number: 17050082 Sample Date: 04/28/2017 Sample Number: 012 Sample Time: 1238 Sample Description: CB 11 Sample Method: Grab Parameter Result Units MDL PQL Procedure Analysis Analyst Date/Time TOTAL HARDNESS(CAC03) 4380 MG/L 0.682 2.728 SM2340C 05/08/2017 14:30 MD COPPER 5.73 UG/L 0.272 1.088 SM3113BMIBK 05/23/2017 16:54 KP 17050082 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 3 OF 6 Agenda - .7a Page '8 •f 30 BENT EnviroAnalytical Inc. - NELAC Certification#E84167 a40/r6kA 05/24/2017 Dale . Dix Laboratory Director Date TUlay Tanrisever/QC Officer Deborah A.Murphy/Project Manager DATA QUALIFIERS THAT MAY APPLY: A=Value reported is an average of two or more determinations. Q=Sample held beyond accepted hold time. B=Results based upon colony counts outside the ideal range. T=Value reported is<MDL.Reported for informational purposes only and shall not be used H=Value based on field kit determination.Results may not be accurate. in statistical analysis. I=Reported value is between the laboratory MDL and the PQL. U=Analyte analyzed but not detected at the value indicated. J1=Estimated value.Surrogate recovery limits exceeded. V=Analyte detected in sample and method blank.Results for this analyte in associated J2=Estimated value.No quality control criteria exists for component. samples may be biased high.Standard,Duplicate and Spike values are within control limits. J3=Estimated value.Quality control criteria for precision or accuracy not met. Reported data are usable. J4=Estimated value.Sample matrix interference suspected. Y=Analysis performed on an improperly preserved sample.Data may be inaccurate. J5=Estimated value.Data questionable due to improper lab or field protocols. Z=Too many colonies were present(TNTC).The numeric value represents the filtration volume. K=Off-scale low.Value is known to be<the value reported. !=Data deviate from historically established concentration ranges. L=Off-scale high.Value is known to be>the value reported. 7=Data rejected and should not be used.Some or all of QC data were outside criteria,and N=Presumptive evidence of presence of material. the presence or absence of the analyte cannot be determined from the data. 0=Sampled,but analysis lost or not performed. *=Not reported due to interference. NOTES: COMMENTS: MBAS calculated as LAS;molecular weight=340. PQL=4xMDL. ND=Not detected at or above the adjusted reporting limit. X=Value exceeds MCL. Gt=Accuracy standard does not meet method control limits,but does meet lab control limits that are in agreement with USEPA generated data.USEPA letter available upon request. For questions or comments regarding these results,please contact us at(941)723-9986. Results relate only to the samples. 17050082 1711 12th Street East*Palmetto,FL 34221 *Phone(941)723-9986*Fax(941)723-6061 PAGE 4 OF 6 I- — — —. -- J—-- — i ge da I m 7a S' :. �, • �i �..) P ge9 of 0 0 03 P'. ckr,4,9 § C---- N...) ,%,. O v � � �, 40At � � r"^ Mif � kii. �; � � eqi �I i`` ofd kr- i • _ (--1-- -- tj NI - � , MI • by ( k I i • O N 41 (V S • r f / $ • • • p a Q M Lta O sem-, 0 I'e. ----- \ \V �� ,�•� .• ooE=• F' • . - 1 ‘ 7,0• ' -'-6,-,d, S , 5 H cnZNH I Ili I 111 � O 1. + �". I Q 'N N t i w n 6 v 6 6 6 N 16 s g= i♦s¢ I 8 3 13 3 A 3 a 3 6' 1 G D Qi_ E.--- I n a ti . IE-,, CEJ 6 6 6 6 C7 CEJ CEJ 6 C7 6 g 1 = E o ;;^^ 7. a• i 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 N ;6t5... 3 P 0 cn cn C4 V) rn rn m rn cn ;x 7....—I= _ vz CA 2 sv Eg @ ° gig Td ° F g Aw y° o s Q ,=a• oaa= o` ` "i % uQ ( I � � � � CS_£co - •. • • R =iF1 o : SI'' �rr • It- C, ON c .. >- I �vaviti o 1., .5 .. 01 O f,°, C% `� w °; `? U U EgoEq =§ a • 3 M M '' 4- .0 . 1 =cG A' ,CI " ( p . ' S a i& .= F., -, N N •Q I - 3 z z z °'• N `° S 3 U U� a L Pe 5'of 6 o , _ ` 1 . ._, , ( Agenda Item#7a i I � a lV�--- 1 r- - I 0 E ( I I .s ov P•ge30of30 �� 4 3 ^, U 0 ,..4‘.4 s 1 V E3 .J `lj E a �I t-- _ E y I I 'N tl E `N ,1 ‘.(\ I Pi F a �' g NI m L ( 3 ..l 0. I•_. a+ 3 �f 1 -. CI N N 0 U N N U M y v 0 r0, y N �� Q M En N I H > '-' eXd a 10 y at . • X23 rn w h s el xc � � E hi I 9 a 6 a JO I _ 1• z z x I z GO = (y s -t U 1 a. a' 6 .. i‘; ° - m 6 E 6 i u u 6 3 ,-. .g' 5 v ! gig 0 . 23 2! dl 43 41 23 23 23 23 23 .8 2 r- i- is u 2 g « u u u u d u u 3 a SE o 6 3 3 3 A A 3 A 3 3 3 v. C v €� u` 2 $8 - , w 3 .4 q o 6- 67 � 7 � U 7 -HI 1' - 11" • g mrn - gm cd E 3 „i n 01 °iI 2 3 cn 3 iiiiicncnini 'je' E ' v€vvvvvvi - = : Ti eel ' LOEv 2Ea a'y 0. m O a ✓ ' r“- 3.5Ev6 A 3 ° VE° R3 —rp L°'C S s U 0 1 I - u .C d 6 Q u y o O R oE iA i _ Eg2` 5 avE;1111111111-- _,02 ,,,, ,,,A I L W �O n \ o -ec_ a'w C N N nx tri i �. =' sivg od o W"�i � M 00 � g YO { F=g cTS� vacdA 6. -0 w 01 © '.6" n ?a v a E::Es E `� U U EEgE.o °F° G� N O M M = 4_, enwUc . L c.. -� s A ° NCSI 2 =I E3 V N t` pa O 2.s# c 8 r-o . ��// • .� c a -- a, .°`." El.. 3 U I --3=a3= - '' x �m� _ of6 Agenda Item#7b Page 1 of 1 Clam Bay Copper ug/L Collection Date CBI. CB2 CB3 CB4 CB5 CB6 CB7 CB8 CB9 Report Date 6/22/2016 0.862 0.700 0.700 0.700 1.640 2.100 0.700 3.520 1.510 9/8/2016 7/20/2016 0.924 5.330 5.110 5.660 2.470 3.960 4.950 5.710 10.500 9/12/2016 7/20/2016 0.924 6.160 4.700 1.690 2.470 1.830 1.980 1.870 8.360 9/21/2016 8/25/2016 2.000 1.850 1.680 1.470 1.240 1.520 2.250 1.280 8.060 10/4/2016 9/20/2016 1.690 2.280 1.280 1.760 0.751 0.700 0.700 1.030 0.700 11/22/2016 10/12/2016 2.760 2.200 2.130 1.190 2.900 1.860 1.060 0.954 1.310 12/7/2016 11/9/2016 2.340 3.390 2.300 2.250 1.630 1.500 1.180 2.030 1.300 1/16/2017 12/6/2016 2.330 2.930 5.100 2.450 2.390 1.780 1.270 1.880 1.720 3/14/2017 1/19/2017 2.570 3.560 2.110 1.990 0.818 0.800 0.961 1.110 2.020 4/4/2017 2/23/2017 2.510 3.350 1.600 1.120 0.851 0.848 1.500 2.570 2.600 4/24/2017 3/21/2017 7.970 4.080 1.710 1.120 0.894 0.846 1.080 1.090 0.957 6/1/2017 4/18/2017 6.480 8.160 1.620 1.240 0.800 0.956 1.280 1.010 1.100 6/14/2017 5/24/2017 2.840 4.060 4.990 0.800 0.800 0.959 0.800 0.920 0.946 7/6/2017 6/21/2017 3.840 4.240 3.850 0.906 1.200 1.140 1.260 1.110 0.760 8/8/2017 7/13/2017 4.700 2.950 3.800 4.080 2.500 2.440 2.370 2.380 2.210 8/29/2017 Agenda Item#7c 4350 West Cypress Street Page 1,,a6 ccr- Suite 950 Tampa,FL 33607 813.207.7200 r.",:e 813.207.7201 fa:. memorandum date July 28, 2017 to Tim Hall, Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc. from David Tomasko, Ph.D. Emily Keenan, M.S. subject Quarter 2: Clam Bay NNC SSAC evaluation Background The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Florida Department of Environmental Protection Agency (FDEP) adopted site specific alternative nutrient criteria (SSAC) for Clam Bay, as listed in Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 62-302.531. The SSAC were derived based upon a nutrient: salinity relationship from the Estero Bay Wetlands, a reference waterbody for water quality, as established by FDEP in prior TMDLs. The SSAC for Clam Bay is considered in the context of salinity due to the variability in nutrient concentrations that can be due to changes in freshwater inflow, rather than changes in nutrient concentrations alone. Therefore, the appropriate management response associated with any impairment determination is based upon the magnitude and duration of any exceedances. Based on prior work that showed that phytoplankton growth in Clam Bay was likely stimulated by both Total Nitrogen (TN) and Total Phosphorous (TP), both TN and TP are used to determine the degree of nutrient enrichment of Clam Bay's waters. As outlined in FAC 62- 302.531, water quality status is determined on an annual basis, preferably within a calendar year. Within a calendar year, each individual TN and TP value collected within the waterbody is compared to the nutrient: conductivity 90th percentile prediction limit (Figure 1), and an annual percent exceedance is calculated to determine the magnitude of exceedances per year. To be consistent with the method currently implemented by FDEP to identify impaired water bodies, if 13 percent or more of the TN or TP values in a calendar year exceed the 90th percentile prediction limit (after being normalized for conductivity) the duration of exceedance would then be determined. Based on the duration of exceedance (one year or greater than one year), the outcome designation is assigned. If fewer than 13 percent of the values exceed the 90th percent prediction limit, then the outcome is "0". If the magnitude (i.e., 13 percent) and duration (i.e., less than 1 year) of the exceedances are deemed small, the outcome is "1". If the magnitude or duration of the exceedances is large, then the outcome is "2". If both the magnitude and duration of the exceedances are large, then the outcome is "3". The Agenda Item#7c Page 2 of 6 management response for Clam Bay would be determined based on the outcomes assigned to both the TN and TP evaluations for the magnitude and duration of exceedance (Figure 2). The water quality status of Clam Bay would be assigned a green, yellow, or red designation annually based on the magnitude and duration of exceedances of the 90th percent prediction limit. The color designation is then used to determine what level(s) of management actions are appropriate. Annual management response actions are based on the response to nutrient concentrations of phytoplankton and dissolved oxygen (DO) as well as impacts on water clarity (Figure 3). If the outcome of the TN and TP evaluation is green, then no management actions are required. However, if the outcomes are yellow or red then further evaluation of the effect of elevated nutrient concentrations on both phytoplankton biomass and DO concentrations need to be reviewed. If there is no relationship between nutrients and chlorophyll-a or DO, then no management actions are required. If there is a signification relationship, then the impact of chlorophyll-a on the water clarity (Secchi disk depth) would be evaluated. If there is no relationship between chlorophyll-a and water clarity, then no management actions are required. If there is a significant relationship between chlorophyll-a concentrations and water clarity, an outcome designation of"yellow" (indicative of small magnitude or duration of exceedances) identifies that management actions should be taken to identify the potential causes and responses for the elevated nutrient levels. It the outcome designation is "red" (indicative of a large magnitude or duration of exceedances), management actions should be taken to implement recommended response tactics to reduce nutrient concentrations. In this manner, the "health" of Clam Bay is to be assessed annually. Figure 1. Clam Bay water quality flow chart. Do>13%of all TN&/orTP valuesfrom a calendar year N I exceedthe 90%prediction limit I from the reference WBID? Outcome 0 Yes =.1% Magnitude of >_15°le exceedance Duration of Duration of exceedance exceedance 1 year >1 year 1 year >1 year Outcome 7_ Outcome2 Outcome 2 Outcome3 2 Agenda Item#7c Page 3 of 6 Figure 2. Management response matrix using outcomes from both TN and TP evaluation. Total Phosphorus Total Nitrogen Outcome 0 Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Outcome 0 Outcome I Outcome 2 Outcome 3 Figure 3. Management response actions in response to various outcomes. Greenresponse Yellow or Red evaluation rr �- Evaluate phytoplankton/ Significant dissolved oxygen (p<a.as) Not significant response to nutrient (v0.05) concentrations Evaluate water clarity Not significant response to chlorophyll-a (p,0.05) Significant(p4.05) Small difference or short duration Identify potential causes Identify potential and implement — recommended response Large difference or causes and long duration responses 3 Agenda Item#7c Page 4 of 6 Data Analysis The analysis conducted below was used to assess the water quality status of Clam Bay during the months of February 2017 to April 2017. Since the SSAC developed for Clam Bay is to be evaluated on an annual time step, this analysis provides insight into current water quality conditions within the Bay, but it does not substitute for the more comprehensive annual assessment required. Clam Bay surface water quality data were provided by Turrell, Hall and Associates, Inc. for comparison with the FDEP adopted SSAC established for Clam Bay and found within FAC. 62-302-532 -1-j. The NNC SSAC states the following; "No more than 10 percent of the individual Total Phosphorus (TP) or Total Nitrogen (TN) measurements shall exceed the respective TP Upper Limit or TN Upper Limit." The TP and TN upper limits are calculated using equations 1 and 2: Equation 1: TP Upper Limit (mg/L)= e(-1.06256-0.0000328465'Conductivity(Ns)) Equation 2: TN Upper Limit (mg/L)= 2.3601 — 0.0000268325*Conductivity(PS) The dataset was supplemented with in situ water quality data (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity, and salinity) retrieved from the chain of custody forms for each sampling event. The corresponding TN or TP Upper Limit was calculated for each Clam Bay estuarine water quality station and sampling date in which conductivity was available using Equations 1 and 2. TN and TP concentrations were compared to the derived upper limit thresholds to ascertain if elevated concentrations were identified (Appendix A). Results Over the period analyzed in this memo (February 2017 to April 2017), there was one TN measurement from the open waters of Clam Bay (from the 9 ambient water quality stations sampled three times each) which exceeded the respective Upper Limits (Clam Bay 1 on April 18, 2017). In contrast, 13 of the 27 TP measurements (48 percent) exceeded their respective Upper Limits. It should be noted that laboratory detection limits can sometimes come into play when comparing values against criteria, as detection limits sometimes are such that values have to be "rounded up" based on minimum detection limits. Based on the results from this time period, and if the frequency of exceedance seen here was to be maintained over the course of a calendar year, Clam Bay would likely be determined to be impaired for TP. The 13 TP exceedances are illustrated in Table 1, with exceedances observed in Outer, Inner and Upper Clam Bays. Elevated TP concentrations were observed during all three sampling events (February, March and April) within the northern portion of the Bay, at sites 1 and 2. Four TP exceedances occurred within the February sampling event, 5 within March and then 4 within April. 4 Agenda Item#7c Page 5 of 6 Table 1. Observed TP Exceedance at the ambient Clam Bay surface water samples over the period of February to April 2017. Sampling Event Station February March April 1 X X X 2 X X X 3 X 4 X 5 X X 6 X 7 X 8 9 X In addition, water quality data from the four Clam Bay Outfall monitoring stations were compared to the proposed downstream protective values (DPV) for Clam Bay (PBS&J 2011). Outfall TN and TP concentrations were compared to the median and 90th percentile DPV values to determine if elevated concentrations were identified (Appendix B). The median and 90th percentile DPVs for TN are 1.31 and 1.80 mg/L, respectively (PBS&J 2011). The median and 90th percentile DPVs for TP are 0.10 and 0.25 mg/L, respectively. For TN, 44 and 22 percent of the values exceeded the median and 90th percentile DPV criteria, respectively (Table 2). It should be noted that a "median" value represents a value where 50 percent of samples would be expected to be in exceedance. Similarly, it would be expected by chance alone that 10 percent of values would exceed the 90th percentile DPV, while more than twice as many, 22 percent, exceeded the 90th percentile DPV values for TN (Table 2). For TP, 56 percent of values exceeded the median DPV criterion, while 33 percent of values exceeded the 90th percentile DPV criterion. Table 2. Percentage of TN or TP concentrations from outfall stations which exceeded the median or 90th percentile DPV values. DPV Total Nitrogen Total Phosphorus Median 90th Percentile Median 90th Percentile Percent of values below 56 78 44 67 Percent of values above 44 22 56 33 Discussion It should be noted that this data analysis is not based on a full year of water quality data, and thus while it is indicative of potential findings for a calendar year, it is not necessarily predictive of what would be found with a calendar years' worth of data. The FDEP-adopted SSAC for 5 Agenda Item#7c Page 6 of 6 Clam Bay requires data analysis on a calendar year basis (FAC 62-302.531). However, quarterly status reports can be useful as an early warning system if water quality appears to be significantly different from expected ranges. The findings displayed here suggest phosphorus concentrations in the open waters of Clam Bay are likely problematic, as 48 percent of TP values exceed a threshold criterion value meant to "hold the line" on nutrient concentrations in the bays. In addition, elevated nutrient concentrations at outfall sampling locations are indicated by the finding that 33 percent of values from sampled outfall locations exceed a criterion that is expected to be exceeded only 10 percent of the time. These findings suggest that elevated TP concentrations in Upper and Outer Clam Bay could be due to activities occurring on the watershed, although elevated TP values could also be due to natural sources within the bay, such as nutrient loads from seabirds (guano is rich with phosphorus, in particular). Such findings suggest that sampling of the watershed, such as occurs at the outfall locations, should continue. At the outfall locations, concentrations of nitrogen do not appear to be problematic, as exceedance rates for the median DPV concentration are mostly in-line with expectations. For phosphorus, the median value of stormwater runoff suggests higher values than expected (56 percent exceedance of DPV median value vs. the expected 50 percent exceedance rate). Additionally, the highest values are more common than expected, as 33 percent of values exceed the 90th percentile DPV criterion for TP, vs. the expectation that that value would be exceeded only 10 percent of the time. Taken as a whole, the water quality data collected between the months of February 2017 to April 2017 suggest that the open waters of Clam Bay have more phosphorus than would be expected, as nearly half of values collected (48%) exceeded the criteria spelled out for Clam Bay in the State of Florida's Impaired Waters Rule (FAC 62-302.531). For nitrogen, no such concern currently exists. These results come from sampling events during Southwest Florida's typical dry season weather patterns, and the mixture of freshwater runoff and tidal influences from the Gulf of Mexico that occurs during such months. The balance of fresh to saltwater will likely change as Southwest Florida enters the wet season. Maintenance of the flushing influence of Clam Pass is important to the water quality of Clam Bay, as it affects both the balance of freshwater runoff and higher salinity water from the Gulf of Mexico, but also the nutrient status as well. If Clam Pass was to close, the elevated nutrient concentrations from watershed runoff would likely result not only in the expression of eutrophication through mechanisms such as phytoplankton and/or macroalgae blooms, but the reduced tidal mixing and lowered salinities would likely result in Clam Bay exceeding its FDEP-adopted water quality standards. 6 Agenda Item#7d Page 1 of 1 CLAM BA YNRPA MANAGEMENT PLAN Pelican Bay Services Division October 2014 Ver.6.5 FDEP did determine that the Clam Bay system was impaired for copper and placed the Clam Bay system on the Everglades West Coast verified list for copper with medium TMDL priority(5 to 10 years for TMDL development). TMDL(Total Maximum Daily Load) is defined by the FDEP as the maximum amount of a given pollutant that a surface water can absorb and still meet water quality standards. Subsequent copper testing undertaken by PBSD has also shown periodic elevated levels of copper within the Clam Bay Class II waters. Beginning in 2015 PBSD's water quality monitoring program in the Clam Bay NRPA system will employ the sampling program used to establish the SSAC. Sampling locations within the open waters of the NRPA will be increased and relocated from the 5 historical locations to the 9 locations subsequently established. These 9 locations are shown on Figure 18. Sampling will continue to be collected on a monthly basis. The suite of parameters collected and analyzed from the water samples will also be amended as outlined below in order to provide the information necessary to more easily interpret the compliance with the newly established SSAC. • Field pH • Field Temperature • Field Salinity • Field Specific Conductance • Field Dissolved Oxygen(mg/1) • Field Dissolved Oxygen(%Saturation) • Ammonia • Chlorophyll a • Copper • Nitrate-Nitrite(NO3-NO2) • Nitrite(NO2) • Total Nitrogen • Orthophosphate(0PO4) • 'Pheophytin • Total Phosphorous The PBSD is developing an upland stormwater and nutrient management program that builds upon the Nutrient Management Plan previously completed for the Pelican Bay Foundation(Turrell,2013). The Foundation Plan and ongoing nutrient management efforts in process by the PBSD are designed to reduce nutrient and copper inputs into the stormwater system. Once completed,the PBSD program will be reviewed by the FDEP. If copper concentrations in the NRPA are reduced as a result of the implementation of the program,the FDEP could consider removal of the Clam Bay NRPA system from the impaired list. The information garnered from the PBSD's nutrient monitoring and management activities will be important in guiding future decision making associated with water quality concerns in the Clam Bay NRPA. PBSD will work closely with the Pelican Bay Foundation and adjacent communities on nutrient management issues to coordinate and share information that may be integrated into management decisions and activities undertaken through this Management Plan. 34 .-i 0 N 0 N . Ol ▪ 0 N 41W --I ....111 • O\1 -.rte '•-i R3 .l N .,.,, rO ei LI 0 N _ NL. CC C C C1 w u Lr) 111 •i c 2 u J W w o E Vf I I •. Cr c CD ' 01 03 to 1111110. ti.0 I- Q I oc J C 7 CU • c-I W\ J J O > _ N J 33 N E co • mni L U r s vs I t I ` • N J /' 0.0 O -- Ca W 0 J ( i T • cn Gl to 7 V f a '''''Z7 ' r•-•o 0 _ N 00 Q . N. .-i O ko CY V1 rn in N Lrl r1 111 O Ln 'ci i cn ni (no)punoig le.in;eN 2(3})uoilena13 Ja;eMpunoJ9 U J J.! = (U!)pe.4u ea J. 0 I � I LTOZ/ZZ/OT W j LTOZ/zT/oT LTOZ/Z/oT LTOZ/ZZ/6 _ LTOZ/ZT/6 LTOZ/Z/6 LTOZ/£Z/8 LTOZ/£T/8 c LTOZ/£/8 co cc LTOZ/bZ/L v _ LTOZ/bT/L 1 LTOZIbIL LTOZ/bZ/9 i"� LTOZ/bT/9 LTOZ/b/9 -I--) ( ( ( r r.... LTOZ/SZ/S d ( ( —M ^ LTOZ/ST/S o� -- LTOZ/S/S N O J ( f,.: LTOZ/SZ/b —7:- LTOZ/ST/b 0N 1 LTOZ/S/b 4: 06 1 ...- . - LTOZ/9Z/£ v _ LTOZ/9T/£ — • ( LTOZ/9/£ �" LTOZ/bZ/Z CI- - LTOZ/bT/Z vii �.. - n ,� �a--- LTOZ/VIZ CU v) o i f. LTOZ/SZ/T v LTOZ/ST/T =z r' �"'" LTOZ/S/T al 9TOZ/9Z/ZT (13 _ 9T0Z/9T/ZT o 9Ioz/9/ZT J 9TOZ/9Z/TT l0 u 9TOZ/9T/TT o i -` NI 9T0Z/9/TT CU SJ J_ 9TOZ/LZ/OT -1 1 I -4 4-0 3 — 9TOZ/LT/OT u CO L _ 9TOZ/L/OT u 9TOZ/LZ/6 ., 9TOZ/LT/6 Q -- immiii 9TOZ/L/6 ca �` $ ( AN_ ,.........,.. 910Z/8Z/8 ,- wF- �' 9TOZ/8T/8 c .�` 9T0Z/6Z/L E v 9T0Z/6T/L 9TOZ/6/L C' .. 9T0Z/6Z/9 m — 910Z/6T/9 3 91OZ/6/9 w 9T0Z/0£/S _'-`V ..... 9TOZ/OZ/S =' 9TOZ/oT/S 9TOZ/0£/b 9TOZ/OZ/b — i 9TOZ/OT/b — 9T0Z/TZ/£ 9T0Z/TT/£ • 9T0Z/T/£ . . . . . . . . . 9TOZ/OZ/Z Lrl U L En En En in V m N .--i O Si .-y (u)9N Is(4)uon.ena13.lalempuno.lo (u(}'euuet 410 7 tern' M N N N 7 O 0 TOZ Z OT LTOZ/Z/OT LTOZ/ZZ/6 �... - LTOZ/ZT/6 LTOZ/Z/6 1 L I —_ LTOZ/£Z/8 1 LTOZ/£T/8 w �^ LIOZ/E/8 LTOZW/L Ws cc LTOZ/bi/L v - ', - LTOZ/b/L '' LTOZ/bZ/9 I - �" � LTOZ/bi/9 r, auto ,i CD fammm ' LTOZ/SZ/S i--....---4...---S - LTOZ/Si/S co G N LTOZ/SZ/b -}.� LTOZ/ST/b E 4:t - LTOZ/S/b a) T ( � ,c_. - LTOZ/9Z/E 0 - � LSOZ/9T/E N N --- LSOZ/9/E 73 _ �. � Mannv . ( - LiOZ/bi/Z 1 v LiOZ/b/Z LTOZ/SZ/T m (/) m ( s — LTOZ/S/TLTOZ/ST/i 1> l'—.----,..._ --ice ,„ 9TOZ/9Z/ZiVD : 9TOZ/9T/ZT 9i0Z/9/Zi o -' 9i0Z/9Z/TT co • - 9i0Z/9T/TT cH - 9IOZ/9/11 u _ 9T0Z/LZ/OT co CUCT3 z? • 9TOZ/LT/Oi_ .®�.. 9TOZ/L/OS 73 �a 9TOZ/LZ/6 To- 9TOZ/Li/6 3 � i - i ,_ 9TOZ/L/6 S �_�I 910Z/8Z/8 � O88 CO � 9TOZ/6Z/L _'� 9TOZ/6T/L � _ 9i0Z/6/L -- 9T0Z/6Z/9 ail U .... 910Z/61/9 ( 1 -mili 9TOZ/6/9 g .-�.a . 9TOZ/OE/S z ' 9TOZ/OT/S � 9TOZ/OE/b - 9T0Z/OZ/b 4v- 9S0Z/Oi/b 9T0Z/t£/£ 9TOZ/iZ/E - 9T0Z/TT/E - 9T0Z/T/£ M Lfl N lIl ,-I Lfl 0 Vl a-i N .--I O O (i})DN (i})uopena13 Jalempunoag 3. NOIlelutea ) 0.. V M m N N N N O O l . . . . I LIOZ/ZZ/OI w1 ( I LTOZ/ZT LOZ/Z/OT LTOZ/ZZ/6 II LIiOZ/ZI/6 �� - LTOZ/Z/6 - LTOZ/£Z/8 - LIOZ/£T/8 �� - LTOZ/E/8 I 1 - LTOZ/17Z/L - LIOZ/ } - LIOZ/V/L I I �-. zr.. 1 f —�,.� LIOZ/171/9 LiOZ/bi/9 LTOZ/b/9 L LTOZ/SZ/S �o m _— = LiOZ/Si/S z I �r LIOZ/SZ/17 `i LiOZ/Si/b 4 i 1 . _., LiOZ/S/17 E tiO LiOZ/9i/£ m ul _ ( .° - - LTOZ/9/£ 7DI w J. LTOZ/bZ/Z m E LTOZ/bT/Z v v r I LiOZ/b/Z cc —�- LIOZ/SZ/T (,. LTOZ/SZ/I Y x _ LTOZ/S/i o CU • J - 9T0Z/9Z/ZI m : 9TOZ/9i/Zi - 9i0Z/9/ZI UD CD J u i E 9IOZ/9Z/TT 000 - 9I0Z/9T/TT L 9IOZ/9/iT t 9i0Z/LZ/OIcip .�.J 1,.„..,.,w-. ----��..��.�� — 9IOZ/Li/OT 2 (13 1 ._" �"� � ..��7 9T0Z/L/OT m co 5 9i0Z/LI/6 `^ 9i0Z/L/6 _ ! 9TOZ/8Z/8 r" 9TOZ/8i/8 Ca w I � � �ti 9IO /8/8 9i0Z/6Z/L TiE L �_ ( �_ J '■ 9IOZ/6I/L r I 9i0Z/6/L 9TOZ/61/9 U g - 910Z/61/9 -mi 9I0Z/6/9 _..._.._ 9i0Z/0£/S I 1 - I, ...-- I �-7-------:#1:::::::-.1 .r,, !Ii°0000!!!!!! -I 1Lo I 1'z TO 9T0Z/TZ/£ - 9IOZ/ii/£ . . . . I . . - 9TOZ/T/£ I 9TOZ/OZ/Z M en N en , 111 0 en ci '... N e-1 O O� (u)9N'8(4)uonena13 JaleMpunaJ9 Agenda Item#10 Page 4 of 4 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS IN THE LAKES—201647* • No upward or downward trend in any of the basins** • Basin 3 is the worst,** with consistently high numbers, perhaps impacting Inner Clam Bay. • Vizcaya is consistently the worst lake, with very high numbers, • perhaps impacting Upper Clam Bay. * Five readings ** Excluding Basin 6, which has only one lake sampled (Remington) Agenda Item#10 Page 1 of 4 HIGH TOTAL PHOSPHORUS IN CLAM BAY (mg/L) 4/17 5/17 CB1 0.13* 0.11* CB 2 0.14* 0.17* CB 3 0.05 0.22* CB 4 0.05 0.08* CB 5 0.04 0.10* CB 6 0.07* 0.08* CB 7 0.07* 0.08* CB 8 0.06 0.08* CB 9 0.05 0.06 * Out of spec (FDEP) Agenda Item#10 Page 2 of 4 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS IN THE LAKES (mg/L). Basin 2/16 5/16 8/16 2/17 5/17 . 1 0.07 0.13 0.09 0.07 0.09 2 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.06 0.11 3 0.29 0.25 0.22 0.18 0.23 4 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.10 5 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.16 0.19 • 6* 0.14 0.15 0.29 0.5.4 0.28 * Only one lake sampled in Basin 6 (Remington) Agenda Item#10 Page 3 of 4 HIGHEST PHOSPHORUS READINGS IN LAKES--2016-17 2/16 5/16 8/16 2/17 5/17 Vizcaya(5-15)* X X X X X Laurel Oaks (3-2)* X X X X X Golf course(3-5) X X X X Valencia(3-9)* X X X X Remington (6-1) X X X Coco Bay (4-14)* X Golf course(4-10) X X Golf course(3-6) X X Crayton (1-6) X Golf course (2-12) X Golf course (4-11) X * Private lake Bold face= Very high reading (over 0.3 rng/L) PEUCAN BAY STORMWATER LANES WATER QUALITY M0NITORBNG PROGRAM:MAY 2017 SAMPLING EVENT DATA REVIEW FIGURE 9 Basin Average Total Nitrogen Time Series for Period of Record Pelican Bay Stormwater Lakes Water Quality Monitoring Program:May 2017 Data Review 6.0 6 5.5 5.0 5 D 4.5 4.0 4 eo 3.5 � yo 3.0 3 ro z 2.5 c ° 1.05 7.5 if � 2 i l 40 1.0 7- � f e tzi 1 0.5 Id I �,�I � � i.11� � 01i1l1 1..iiI1i . I I i � I 1 l�d0.00 —4 ry ra _ 1-4 m m m m ^t d- } to $1 :n t7 .W C v N N .-4 -i -. .•i --1 - --1 --a -1 --1 -i 1-1 o 1 rs 0 u r 0 v e u ti = 0 a y v v co Z 2 z z u- 2 < z < z 2 < z 2 < z 2 Rainfall —1 _2 ...4 3 —too-4 — —5 u— 6 Figure 10 presents a time series plot depicting the basin mean TP concentrations for the six basins for the period of record.All basins show a variable trend over time since 2011 with low TP levels in most basins during February 2014.Since August 2014,basins 1,2,4,and 5 appear to have stabilized with average TP concentrations between 0.05 to 0.20 mg/L.Basin 3 continues to exhibit elevated concentrations ranging from approximately 0.23 to 0.36 mg/L.Basin 6 exhibited an elevated TP concentration(0.28 mg/L)during May 2017 when compared with previous sampling events. The majority of phosphorus present is inorganic which is likely associated with sediment cycling Concentrations of phosphorus are elevated even during times of low rainfall and external load.In general, stormwater lakes provide little TP removal due to phosphorus solubilization of settled sediment.It is typical for settled phosphorus not to stay in the lakes,but to cycle back into the water column increasing TP in lake discharges between storm events.The levels observed within these stormwater lakes are likely in equilibrium with sediment cycling and are not expected to decrease in the near term even if loads were reduced. Figure 11 presents a time series plot depicting the basin mean copper concentrations for the period of record for the 6 basins.The significant decrease in average copper concentration after August 2013 appears to be a direct result of discontinued use of copper-based algaecides.However,the average concentration of copper has not changed significantly from August 2013 to May 2017.Similar to TP,Basins 3 and 4 show elevated copper during dry periods,likely associated with sediment cycling, During this May 2017 event,every basin decreased in average copper concentration over the previous quarter.One sampling site had a measured copper concentration of over 100µg/L. Copper levels overall appeared to have reached an equilibrium with sediments accumulated in these lakes and fluctuations in concentrations may be associated with perturbations of the sediment layer.Windy days, fountains,and general maintenance within the lakes might create some disturbance of the sediment which results in changes in copper concentrations in the water column. fl PELICAN BAY STORMWATER LANES WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM:MAY 2017 SAM DUNG EVENT DATA REVIEW Observations and Recommendations Based upon a review of the May 2017 monitoring results,the following observations were made regarding the water quality trends within the six Pelican Bay stormwater lakes. Nutrients have shown little response over the past year.The lakes continue to experience nutrient concentrations at hypereutrophic levels.While some lakes have experienced slightly lower levels since the last quarter,the improvements are norstatistically significant. Total recoverable copper concentrations remain significantly lower than those measured prior to August 2013 when copper sulfate use for algae control ceased.All lakes experienced a decrease in average total copper concentration in May 2017 compared to the preceding quarter,well below elevated historical concentrations.The data also indicate a seasonal pattern in copper concentrations,with lowest values typically noted in August and highest values in the winter(e.g.,February).This cyclic variation is attributable to annual rainfall patterns and its effect on inorganic ion concentrations.August is the peak of the normal wet season when stormwater flows dominate the water balance,thereby diluting concentrations of conservative ions.February is during the driest period,when groundwater inputs dominate with greater inorganic ion concentrations.However,copper concentrations appear to have reached an equilibrium with sediment cycling.Levels in future quarters are expected to fluctuate seasonally but remain similar if no further action is taken. While an overall decline in copper concentrations has been observed in the lakes,copper concentrations continue to be significantly above the Florida Class III water body standard:While state water quality criteria are not directly applicable to the stormwater lakes,the FDEP has expressed concern that stormwater discharges to Clam Bay may be having an effect on estuarine water quality for copper. Long-term data indicates that both phosphorus and copper are cycling from lake sediments and have reached equilibrium.In other words,the elevated concentrations of phosphorous and copper that persist in the lakes are more directly attributable to the sediment cycling rather than external loads(rainfall runoff)to the lakes.Controlling phosphorus cycling will lead to significant aesthetic improvements by reducing algal blooms.Adding littoral and in-pond vegetation cover would promote additional treatment and attachment surfaces for microbial films to enhance the nitrogen cycling and conversion to reduce the overall nitrogen load to the bay. Pilot testing of treatment systems in strategic locations within the stormwater lake system continues to warrant consideration,primarily to control nutrients and associated algae blooms in these stormwater lakes. Sequestration of nutrients will likely show a similar benefit to copper levels. One recommended treatment option is"geochemical augmentation",which consists of ultra-low dosing of alum to enhance the natural geochemical processes,sequestering phosphorus within the sediment.A relatively simple approach would involve a portable system which avoids the cost and aesthetic concern of permanent infrastructure.Geochemical augmentation could offer an effective solution at low cost to ' address regulatory concerns in Clam Bay and improve algae/scum water quality concerns within the Pelican Bay Community. Is SEDIMENT MEASUREMENTS IN CLAM BAY Tim Hall's report on copper levels in the sediment and water columns in Clam Bay gives an important insight into the disposition of copper in the estuary. Using an average of the three readings taken in each bay (e.g., 1, 2, 3 in Outer Clam Bay), one can estimate the copper in the sediment and in the corresponding water column in each bay: Upper Clam Bay — 0.11% in the water, 99.89% in the sediment Inner Clam Bay—0.06% in the water, 99.94% in the sediment Outer Clam Bay— 0.02% in the water, 99.98% in the sediment From that, one can draw several conclusions. First, there is an enormous amount of copper in the sediment. Similar readings were obtained in the upland lakes. That's where much of the copper goes — into the sediment—by occlusion, by adsorption, by chemical precipitation. Second, the ratios of water/sediment copper are very similar in the three bays —99.89% to 99.98% in the sediment. That suggests an equilibrium between sediment-bound copper and dissolved copper in the water. That too is what we found in the upland lakes. That means when the tide flushes out some copper in the water column the copper is replenished, through equilibrium, with copper from the sediment. Third, the copper in both the sediment and water column is highest in Upper Clam Bay and lowest in Outer Clam Bay. This suggests that, over time, poorer flushing in Upper Clam Bay led to a higher copper buildup in the sediment there. The bottom line, based on these admittedly limited readings, is that renewal of better flushing in Upper Clam Bay will not necessarily lower copper levels in the water there. Flushing of dissolved copper will simply free more sediment-bound copper, through equilibrium, into the water column. The enormous amount of copper bound in the sediment guarantees a continuing supply of copper in Clam Bay, likely for a long period of time. We're paying for our past sins of indiscriminate use of copper in the lakes. COPPER DISTRIBUTION IN CLAM BAY Amount of Copper In Water Column In Sediment Upper Clam Bay 0.11% 99.89% Inner Clam Bay 0.06% 99.94% Outer Clam Bay 0.02% 99.98% 7 Upland Lakes (average) 0.16% 99.84% Similar equilibrium established in lakes and Clam Bay. Water/Sediment Ratio Water Column Sediment Ratio Lake average 10.7 ft. 0.8 ft. 13.4/1 Clam Bay average 4.4 ft. 0.3 ft. 14.7/1 Very similar water/sediment ratios. Concentrations of Copper In Water In Sediment Sediment/Water Ratio Lake average 40 ug 9415 mg/kg 235 Clam Bay average 2.18 ug 19.5 mg/kg 9 More accumulation in sediment in lakes, because lakes are more static than Clam Bay, which has tidal flushing.