The URL can be used to link to this page

CAC Agenda 01/14/2010 R Collier County: January 14,2010 Page 1 of2 January 14, 2010 MEETING AGENDA &. NOTICE MEETING AGENDA 8r. NOTICE COASTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CAC) THURSDAY, JANUARY 14, 2010 - 1:00 P.M. City of Naples City Hall, 735 8th Street South, Naples PUBLIC NOTICE I. Call to Order II. Pledge of Allegiance III. Roll Call IV. Changes and Approval of Agenda V. Public Comments VI. Approval of CAC Minutes 1. December 10. 2009 VII. Staff Reports 1. Expanded Revenue Report - Garv McAlpin 2. Proiect Cost Report - Garv McAlpin VIII. New Business 1. Sea Turtle Monitorina Report - Maura Kraus 2. Establishment of a Wiaains Pass Sub-Committee of the CAC 3. Establishment of a Clam Pass Sub-Committee of the CAC 4. Direction and Recommendations to the CAC a. SummarY of December 18. 2009 BCC Direction b. Suaaestions and follow-up from Previous CBAC Board Members 5. Clam Bay Background and Update a. Marker Update b. Water Oualitv Monitorina Proaram c. Toxicoloav and Sediment Aaina d. Peer Review e. Other Clam Bav Work Items 6. FEMA Oualitv Justification Report 7. Wiaains Pass Inlet Manaaement Plan Update. Critical Erosion Area Analvsis for Barefoot Beach. and Enaineerina Report for Pass Improvements. IX. Old Business IX. Old Business X. Announcements ~ XI. Committee Member Discussion * Wanless review of PBS8r.J Report http://www.colliergov.netlIndex. aspx?page=283 8 2/14/2011 Collier County : January 14, 2010 Page 2 of2 XII. Next Meeting Date/Location February 11, 2010 - Collier County Commission Chambers XIII. Adjournment All interested parties are invited to attend, and to register to speak and to submit their objections, if any, in writing, to the board prior to the meeting if applicable. For more information, please contact Gail D. Hambright at (239) 252-2966. If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please contact the Collier County Facilities Management Department located at 3301 East Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, (239) 252-8380. Public comments will be limited to 3 minutes unless the Chairman grants permission for additional time. Collier County Ordinance No. 99-22 requires that all lobbyists shall, before engaging in any lobbying activities (including, but not limited to, addressing the Board of County Commissioners) before the Board of County Commissioners and its advisory boards, register with the Clerk to the Board at the Board Minutes and Records Department. http://www.colliergov.netlIndex.aspx?page=283 8 2/14/2011 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-1 New Business 1 of5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Share with the CAC the results of the 2009 Sea Turtle Monitoring Program within Collier County OBJECTIVE: Share with the CAC the results of the 2009 Sea Turtle Monitoring Program within Collier County. CONSIDERATIONS: FDEP permit regulations require yearly Sea Turtle Monitoring. Attached are the results of the 2009 season. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A. RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director COLLIER COUNTY PUBLIC SERVICES DIVISION PUBLICATION SERIES PR-09-02 .~ PLJJ; COIIJUlrJ" (} Distul.""- COLLIER COUNTY SEA TURTLE PROTECTION PLAN ANNUAL REPORT SUMMARY - 2009 Principal Investigators Maura C. Kraus, Principal Environmental Specialist Mary K. Toro, Environmental Specialist Markus Hennig, Environmental Specialist Sonja Gonzales, Intern Cofffer County ~ Prepared by Parks and Recreation Department Naples, Florida CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-1 New Business 20f5 CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-1 New Business 30f5 Sea turtles have inhabited the earth for millions of years. They are believed to have evolved from marsh dwelling species that existed between the Upper Triassic and the Jurassic periods (190 -135 million years ago). Fossil records indicate an early transition from the marsh into the marine environment. By the Cretaceous period (65 million years ago) four families of sea turtles were distributed throughout the oceans of the world (Pritchard, 1979). Today marine tUltles are limited to two families: Cheloniidae (six species) and Dermochelyidae (one species) (National Research Council, 1990). Sea turtles are air-breathing reptiles that emerge from the sea and deposit their eggs on tropical and subtropical beaches around the world. The loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) is the most abundant nesting sea turtle species in Collier County. Loggerheads, named for their disproportionately large head, emerge on Florida's beaches from May through August to lay their eggs. Clutches, containing an average of 100 eggs, incubate for approximately two months before hatchlings, less than two inches in length, emerge and head to the water. Within 12 to 30 years loggerhead turtles reach sexual maturity and return to the beach to lay eggs every two to four years. It is estimated that only one hatchling in 1,000 will survive to repeat this cycle. Collier County is responsible for surveying 23.7 miles (38.1 km) of beach for sea turtle activities. The Sea Turtle Protection Program within the Collier County Parks and Recreation Department (CCPRD) monitored 16.9 miles (27.2 km) of shoreline on Barefoot, Vanderbilt, Park Shore, and Marco Island. The remaining 5.6 miles (9.0 km) of beach in the City of Naples is subcontracted to the Conservancy of Southwest Florida (CSWF). Delnor-Wiggins Pass SRA surveys 1.2 miles (1.9 km) of beach within the park boundary. The surveyed beaches not included in this report are Keewaydin Island (monitored by the CSWF), Cape Romano Complex (monitored by the CCPRD and Rookery Bay NERR). CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-1 New Business 40f5 This report is a summary of the findings for this season. The methods for the data collected were established by the CCPRD with updates based on the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Sea Turtle Conservation Guidelines (FWC, 2002). These methods are available upon request. Adult loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) emergences were recorded on Collier l County beaches from May 9th through August 6th, 2009. A total of297 nests and 330 false crawls were identified on Barefoot Beach, Delnor-Wiggins Pass State Park, Vanderbilt Beach, Park Shore Beach, City of Naples Beach, and City of Marco Island. Summary of All Monitored Beaches, 2009. Delnor Park Marco Barefoot Wiggins Vanderbilt Shore Naples Island Total Pass Beach Length 3.1 1.2 3.5 3.2 5.6 7.1 23.7 (miles) Nests 59 22 62 50 50 54 297 Nests / Mile 19.0 18.3 17.7 15.6 8.9 7.6 12.5 False Crawls 50 36 65 43 42 94 330 False Crawls! Mile 16.1 30.0 18.6 13.4 7.5 13.2 13.9 Mean Clutch Depth 20.3 19.1 20.4 20.1 19.9 19.2 19.8 (in) Nests Depredated 3 0 2 0 3 5 13 Nests Inundated 7 6 6 7 11 20 57 Nest Washed Out 7 0 13 10 12 3 45 Mean Incubation 58.5 59.9 56.7 56.9 55.4 61 58.1 (davs) Disoriented Nests 0 0 2 2 4 7 15 Mean Hatching 81% 76% 85% 82% 76% 74% 79.3% Success Mean Emergence 76% 74% 83% 80% 72% 72% 77.1% Success Eggs Deposited 5,280 2,261 4,735 4,125 3,604 5,297 25,302 Hatchlings Emerged 4,172 1,667 3,951 3,282 2,585 3,840 19,497 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-1 New Business 50f5 Strandings in 2009 included 34 loggerheads, two (2) Kemp's ridleys, three (3) green sea turtles, and one (1) unknown species. Six of the 40 sea turtles were alive at the time of stranding. One was returned to the Gulf immediately and five were transported to a rehabilitation facility. Of noted importance, eleven of the 40 strandings had boat strike injuries, two were entangled in crab traps and two were entangled together in fishing line. Summary of Natural Versus Renourished Beach Areas, 2009. Natural Beaches Renourished Beaches All Beaches Beach Length (mile) 12.2 11.5 23.7 Nests 144 153 297 Nests Per Mile (mean) 11.8 13.3 12.5 False Crawls 190 140 330 False Crawls Per Mile 15.6 12.2 13.9 (mean) Mean Clutch Depth (in) 19.1 20.15 19.8 Mean Incubation (days) 59.2 57.8 58.1 Disoriented Nests 4 11 15 Mean Hatching Success 76% 83% 79% CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-2 New Business 1 of 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommend that the CAC establish a Wiggins Pass Three-Member Subcommittee to direct Navigational Improvements, Inlet Management Plan Updates and the Critical Erosion Analysis for Barefoot Beach. OBJECTIVE: For the CAC to establish a Wiggins Pass three-member subcommittee to direct navigational improvements, inlet management plan updates and the critical erosion analysis for Barefoot Beach. CONSIDERATIONS: Community input of all associated stakeholders is critical to the success of the Wiggins Pass navigational improvements, inlet management plan revision and identification/resolution of the critical erosion area of Barefoot Beach. A three-member subcommittee is recommended to accomplish this. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the CAC establish a Wiggins Pass three-member subcommittee to direct navigational improvements, inlet management plan updates and the critical erosion analysis for Barefoot Beach. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: For the CAC to establish a Wiggins Pass three-member subcommittee to direct navigational improvements, inlet management plan updates and the critical erosion analysis for Barefoot Beach. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-3 New Business 1 of 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommend that the CAC establish a Clam Bay Three-Member Subcommittee of the CAC to direct efforts to the development of a Master Plan for the Clam Bay Estuary. OBJECTIVE: Recommend that the CAC establish a Clam Bay Three-Member Subcommittee of the CAC to direct efforts to the development of a Master Plan for the Clam Bay Estuary. CONSIDERATIONS: Community input of all associated stakeholders is critical to the success and acceptance of the Clam Bay Estuary System. A three-member subcommittee of the CAC is recommended to direct this effort. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the CAC approve the establishment of a Clam Bay three-member subcommittee to develop a Master Plan for the Clam Bay Estuary. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There is no impact to the Growth Management Plan related to this action. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: Recommend that the CAC establish a Clam Bay Three-Member Subcommittee of the CAC to direct efforts to the development of a Master Plan for the Clam Bay Estuary. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-4a New Business 1 of 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Review Direction to the CAC from the December 18, 2009 Board of County Commission Meeting. OBJECTIVE: Review direction to the CAC from the December 18, 2009 Board of County Commission (BCC) meeting. CONSIDERATIONS: The BCC approved the following: · The Clam Bay Advisory Committee will sunset on December 31,2009. · All work associated with Clam Bay will now come under the direction of the CAC. · The budget was approved as recommended in the executive summary. · The PBS&J report and the three recommendations were approved, mainly; the water quality monitoring program, additional soil sediment testing and the circulation model. · Peer review was approved as outlined in the executive summary. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-4b New Business 1of3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Clam Bay Advisory Committee Recommendations for Mangrove Maintenance and Biological Assessment of Clam Bay for CAC Consideration. OBJECTIVE: For the CAC to review and approve the attached recommendations related to the Mangrove Maintenance and Biological Assessment of the Clam Bay Estuary. CONSIDERATIONS: The Clam Bay Advisory Committee was unable to complete recommendations relative to Mangrove Maintenance and a Biological Assessment of the Clam Bay Estuary. Attached are recommendations in these areas for your consideration. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: To approve the attached recommendations related to the Mangrove Maintenance and Biological Assessment of the Clam Bay Estuary. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-4b New Business 2of3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CAC ON CLAM BAY As you know the Clam Bay Advisory Committee was sunset by the Board of County Commissioners on December 31, 2009. Although many of the physical components of a final management plan have been completed or approved (i.e. hydrology study, water quality and sediment coring, permits for circulation dredging, etc.) there are a number of other tasks that the CAC will have to work on to complete the mission the BCC gave to the CBAC. Having spent a full year working on the Clam Bay issues we felt it would be helpful if we highlighted the major tasks that need to be completed. ManQrove Maintenance: The CBAC reviewed the present maintenance program being managed by Turrell, Hall and Associates for the Pelican Bay Services Division. Our Committee recommended adopting the same program as part of the future final management plan for the mangroves in Clam Bay. It is also our opinion that the PBSD has done a very good job in restoring and maintaining the mangroves and should be considered by the CAC to continue with this responsibility. In addition, final assurances have to be made as to the permit ability to do all required mangrove maintenance (particularly in regard to the practice of broadcasting sediment when clearing existing hand dug channels). Bioloaical Assessment: One of the major areas of work required for the development of a management plan is an assessment of wildlife, plant life and benthic (below surface) life. This is an area that the CBAC spent very little time on. The assessment would consist of three major parts: 1. Historical overview - like was done with the water quality and circulation work just completed, the first step here would be to review all prior biological and ecological studies and to document what were their implications and recommendations. 2. Wildlife Assessment - This can be accomplished by determining the diversity and abundance of wildlife populations relative to the distribution and condition of the vegetative habitat and physical characteristic constraints such as water quality and hydrology. The results of this assessment along with management considerations can be used to maintain and increase wildlife diversity and abundance within the Clam Bay system. This biological assessment should include such wildlife as birds, fish, manatees and top predators. The results will provide an analysis of what is missing for a healthy estuary, what needs and can to be done to restore missing life and highlight various options needed to finalize a plan for the estuary life. 3. Benthic Assessment- research and document the life of bottom dwelling life such as tunicates, clams, oysters, shrimp etc. Similar to the biological study this research will document what is found and what should exist in a healthy estuary. CAe January 14, 2010 VIII-4b New Business 3of3 Plans can then be developed, if practical and feasible, to restore and maintain missing life. It is also recommended that consideration be given to the use of not-for-profit organizations (Audubon, Conservancy, etc.) in this part of the research effort. In addition to possibly providing a better cost-effective method of completing the tasks, these organizations have high levels of expertise in these areas. Finally, it is suggested that the biological reviews be done prior to and after any form of significant circulation dredging. Sincerely yours, John Arceri - past Chair, CBAC Tahlman Krumm - past Vice Chair, CBAC Kathy Worley - past Scientist member, CBAC January 11, 2010 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-Sa New Business 1 of 12 Executive SUmmary Request a recommendation and authorization from the Coastal Advisory Committee on how to proceed with the Clam Bay Navigational Markers for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners. Obiective: Request direction and authorization from the Coastal Advisory Committee on how to precede with the Clam Bay Navigational markers. Considerations: At the July 2009 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to proceed with permitting and installing the Clam Bay Navigational markers. FDEP has twice issued staff Consent by Rule based on Administrative Code to install navigational markers and has dismissed the Pelican Bay Foundation request for hearings based on this rule. Recently however, FDEP has changed direction indicating that Consent by Rule was improperly issued. A concern based on water depth has arisen over this being a navigational route instead of a navigational channel. The navigational route declaration is based on water depth information that we recently provided them. FDEP is firm on the issue and as such, Consent by Rule does not apply and the permit application based on Consent by Rule has been denied. A copy of the denial is attached. Another avenue exists with FDEP to obtain navigational marker permits within Clam Bay and may be considered so as to exhaust all possibility of coming into compliance with the Board's direction. Collier County can re-file for a Letter of Consent for this work. This requires Board of Trustee (BOT) Approval and appearance in front of the governor and cabinet. FDEP staff has indicated their support in this request. This would require a public meeting and would have objectors and supporters. The application consists of seven (7) items. An administrative challenge to the BOT could happen but a decision from the BOT may carry more weight than agency action. u.s. Coast Guard approved the Navigational markers in writing on 9/14/09. This approval is conditional based on Final USCG Environmental review. Florida Fish and Wildlife (FWC) do not have jurisdictional approval for navigational markers so their approval is not required. Two options exist at this time. They are: a. Since FDEP has denied the permit based on the fact that the Consent by Rule does not apply, staff can provide this ruling to the Army Corps of Engineers (US ACE) indicating that our permit request has been denied by FDEP and we can't comply to the USACE permit conditi~n and please close out the USACE permit. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 2 of 12 b. Re-file for a Letter of Consent for this work. As stated above, this will require a Board of Trustee Approval and appearance in front of the governor and cabinet. This would completely exhaust all avenues to come into compliance with the BCC direction to come into compliance with the USACE permit by installing Navigational markers within Clam Bay. This item will also be presented to the Board of County CorriInissioners on February 9, , 2010 to seek direction from the Board on how to proceed. Advisorv Committee Recommendations: No Advisory Committees have reviewed or contributed to this proposal. Fiscal Impact: Travel expenses to Tallahassee, FL by two staff members can be expected. Staff time to prepare and monitor this request is expected to be less than 40 hours. Out of pocket expenses by the County can be expected to be less than $3,000. With Staff time expenses can be expected to be less than $8,000. Funding is available from the Coastal Zone Management Operating Fund 111-110409. Growth Manaeement Impact: No impact to the growth management plan would result from this board action. Countv Attornev Findines: - Staff is seeking direction on how to proceed. The County Attorney has been party to all legal issues concerning this item. - CMG Staff Recommendations: Request that the Coastal Advisory Committee provide staff recommendation and authorization on how to proceed with the Clam Bay Navigational markers to review with the Board of County Commissioners. Prepared by: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 3 of 12 Charlie Crist Governor Florida Department of Environmental Protection Jeff Kottkamp Lt. Governor South District Office P.O. Box 2549 Fort Myers, FL 33902-2549 Michael W. Sole Secretary - Designee CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 7005 3110 0002 9314 3478 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED In the matter of notification: by: Collier County attn: Coastal Zone Management Department 3300 Santa Barbara Boulevard Naples, FL 34106 DEP File No. 11-0295193-001 Collier County - ERP CONSOLIDATED NOTICE OF DENIAL NOTICE OF DENIAL OF USE OF EXEMPTION AND CONSENT OF USE TO USE SOVEREIGN SUBMERGED LANDS This notice pertains to the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department), South Regulatory District Office, Submerged Lands and Environmental Resource Program's verification of regulatory exemption issued on June 11,2009, the Consent by Rule authorization to use sovereign submerged lands issued on August 7, 2009, and a corrected letter for the Consent by Rule authorization issued on August 12, 2009. These notices authorized the installation of one (1) navigation pole marker: idle speed no wake, eight (8) navigation buoys, one (1) idle speed no wake sign attached to an existing bridge, one (1) informational pole marker: caution swimmers, one (1) navigational pole marker/ informational message: (local knowledge required, caution swimmers, shallow shoals), and two (2) informational pole markers: idle speed no wake, in Clam Pass. "ll'Iore Protection, Less Process" 1IJww.dep.state.fl. us Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-00 I Page 2 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 4 of 12 However, upon reviewing additional information received following the final agency action, the Department has determined that the activity does not qualify for an exemption tmder Section 403.813(1)(k), Florida Statue (F.S) and does not qualify for consent to use sovereign submerged lands under Chapter18-21.005(b) Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C). Therefore, the letter of exemption dated June 11, 2009, the Consent by Rule letter issued August 7, 2009, and the Consent by Rule corrected letter issued August 12,2009, are all hereby revoked. The Department hereby gives consolidated notice of denial of the use of an exemption and the authorization to use sovereign submerged land to install one (1) navigation pole marker: idle speed no wake, eight (8) navigation buoys, one (1) idle speed no wake sign attached to an existing bridge, one (1) informational pole marker: caution swimmers, one (1) navigational pole marker / informational message: (local knowledge required, caution swimmers, shallow shoals), and two (2) informational pole markers: idle speed no wake, in Clam Pass, Class II Waters, Section 8,9, Township 49 South, Range 25 East, Collier Cotmty pursuant to Section 403.813(1)(k), F.S. and Chapter18-21.005(b), F .A.C. This denial of the use of an exemption and the authorization to use sovereign submerged land also constitutes a finding of inconsistency with Florida's Coastal Zone Management Program, as required by Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act. Pursuant to 15 CFR part 930, subpart H, and within 30 days from receipt of this letter, you may request that the Secretary of Commerce override this objection. In order to Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 3 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-Sa New Business S of 12 grant an override request, the Secretary must find that the activity is consistent with the objectives or purposes of the Coastal Zone Management Act, or is necessary in the interest of national security. A copy of the request and supporting information must be sent to the Florida Coastal Management Program and the federal permitting or licensing agency. The Secretary may collect fees from YOll for administering and processing your request This Consolidated Notice of Denial is based on the reasons stated below. · On October 27,2009, The Deparhnent received a letter from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC), Boating and Waterways Section; stating that FWC is rescinding the temporary authorization for placement of markers within Clam Bay and Pass. As a result, the activity is no longer being marked pursuant to Section 327.40 F.S., and is now inconsistent with Section 403.813(1)(k), F.S. · On November 11, 2009, the Collier County Coastal Zone Management Section submitted to the Department a bathymetric survey of Clam Bay, which was completed by Morgan & Ecklund, Inc. on October 13,2009. The provided survey does not document an existing navigable channel through Clam Bay. The installation of the navigational markers is inconsistent with Chapter lS-=-2I-:-mJS(1)(5[F.A.C., wl:liCfi states that any channel markers delineate existing and authorized or permitted navigational channels. Applicant: Comer County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 4 of to CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-Sa New Business 6 of 12 The Department has determined that the following changes to the project may enable the Department to verify an exemption and grant authorization to use sovereign submerged lands: · Provide a valid Florida Fish and Wildlife authorization, showing that the proposed navigation markers are marked in accordance with Section 327.40 F.S. · Submit an application requesting a Letter of Consent authorization to use sovereign submerged lands. The application shall include all necessary information listed in Chapter 18-21.007, F.A.C. Modification of the project as specified above may enable the Department to determine that the activity is consistent with Florida's Coastal Management Plan. This denial is final and effective on the date filed with the Clerk of the Department unless a sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is timely filed under sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes as provided below. If a sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is timely filed, this action automatically becomes only proposed agency action on the application, subject to the result of the administrative review process. Therefore, on the filing of a timely and sufficient petition, this action will not be final and effective until further order of the Department. Because the administrative hearin8-Rl"Ocess is designed to redetermine final agency action on the application, the filing of a petition for an administrative hearing may result in granting the application. Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 5 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 7 of 12 Mediation is not available. A person whose substantial interests are affected by the Department's action may petition for an administrative proceeding (hearing) under sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes must contain the information set forth below and must be filed (received by the clerk) in the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000. In accordance with rules 28-106.111(2) and 62-110.106(3)(a)(4), petitions for an administrative hearing by the applicant must be filed within 21 days of receipt of this written notice. The failure to file a petition for an administrative hearing within the appropriate time period shall constitute a waiver of that right. Under rule 62-110.106(4) of the Florida Administrative Code, a person whose substantial interests are affected by the Department's action may also request an extension of time to file a petition for an administrative hearing. The Department may, for good cause shown, grant the request for an extension of time. Requests for extension of time must be filed with the Office of General Counsel of the Department at 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000 prior to the applicable deadline. A timely request for extension of time shall toll the running of the time period for filing a petition until the request is acted upon. Upon motion by the requestmg party showing tnat llie failure to file a request for an extension of time before the deadline was the result of excusable neglect, the Department may also grant the requested extension of time. Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-00 I Page 6 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 8 of 12 A person subject to regulation has a right to apply for a variance from or waiver of the requirements of particular rules, on certain conditions, under section 120.542 of the Florida Statutes. The relief provided by section 120.542 applies only to regulatory rules. It does not apply to proprietary rules of the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund. Nor does it apply to statutes or federal regulatory requirements. Applying for a variance or waiver does not substitute or extend the time for filing a petition for an administrative hearing or exercising any other right that a person may have in relation to the Deparhnent's action or proposed action. The application for a variance of waiver is made by filing a petition with the Department of Environmental Protection, Office of General Cotmsel, Mail Station 35, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000. The petition must specify the following information: (a) The name, address, telephone number, and any facsimile number of the petitioner; (b) The name, address, and telephone number, and any facsimile number of the attorney or qualified representative of the petitioner, if any; (c) The applicable rule or portion of a rule from which a variance or waiver is requested; (d) The citation to the statute underlying_~J2lemented by) the rule identified in (c) above; (e) The type of action requested; Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 7 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 9 of 12 (f) TIle specific facts that demonstrate a financial hardship or a violation of principles of fairness that would justify a variance or waiver for the petitioner; (g) The reason why the variance or waiver would serve the purposes of the underlying statute (implemented by the rule); and (h) A statement whether the variance or waiver is permanent or temporary and, if temporary, a statement of the dates showing the duration of the variance or waiver requested. The Department will grant a variance or waiver when the petition demonstrates both that the application of the rule would create a substantial hardship or violate principles of fairness, as each of those terms is defined in section 120.542(2) of the Florida Statutes, and that the purpose of the underlying statute will be or has been achieved by other means by the petitioner. If a timely and sufficient petition for an administrative hearing is filed, other persons whose substantial interests will be affected by the outcome of the administrative process have the right to petition to intervene in the proceeding. Intervention will be permitted only at the discretion of the presiding officer upon the filing of a motion in compliance with rule 28-106.205 of the Florida Administrative Code. A ]2etition that disp-utes the material facts on which the De]2artment's action is based must contain the following information: Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 8 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-Sa New Business 10 of 12 (a) The name and address of each agency affected and each agency's file or identification number, if known; (b) The name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner; the name, address, and telephone number of the petitioner's representative, if any, which shall be the address for service purposes during the course of the proceeding; and an explanation of how the petitioner's substantial interests are or will be affected by the agency determination; (c) A statement of when and how the petitioner received notice of the agency decision; (d) A statement of all disputed issues of material fact. If there are none, the petition must so indicate; (e) A concise statement of the ultimate facts alleged, including the specific facts that the petitioner contends warrant reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; (f) A statement of the specific rules or statutes that the petitioner contends require reversal or modification of the agency's proposed action; and (g) A statement of the relief sought by the petitioner, stating precisely the action that the petitioner wishes the agency to take with respect to the agency's }2ro}2osed action. Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 9 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-Sa New Business 11 of 12 A petition that does not dispute the material facts on which the Department's action is based shall state that no such facts are in dispute and otherwise shall contain the same information as set forth above, as required by rule 28-106.301. Under sections 120.569(2)(c) and (d) of the Florida Statutes, a petition for administrative hearing must be dismissed by the agency if the petition does not substantially comply with the above requirements or is untimely filed. This determination constitutes an order of the Department. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 120.68(7)(a) of the Florida Statutes, which may require a remand for an administrative hearing, the applicant has the right to seek judicial review of the order under section 120.68 of the Florida Statutes, by the filing of a notice of appeal under rule 9.110 of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure with the Clerk of the Department in the Office of General Counsel, 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35, Tallahassee, Florida, 32399-3000; and by filing a copy of the notice of appeal accompanied by the applicable filing fees with the appropriate dish'iet court of appeal. The notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days from the date when the final order is filed with the Clerk of the Department. The applicant, or any party within the meaning of section 373.114(1)(a) or 373.4275 of the Florida Statutes, may also seek appellate review of the order before the Land and Water Adjudicatory COlmnission under section 373,-lL4C1LQL3Z3A2Z5_oLtlH:~_ElQX.Ldi,LS.taIDJ~s._._R~qJ.Le.sls_f.QLr~yie~b..eJm~_tbe_Land and Water Adjudicatory Commission must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission Applicant: Collier County File No. 11-0295193-001 Page 10 of 10 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5a New Business 12 of 12 and served on the Department within 20 days from the date when the order is filed with the Clerk of the Department. Executed in Lee County, Florida. STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION -/1,Jr- Jon M. Iglehart Director of District Management South Florida District P.O. Box 2549 Fort Myers, Florida 33902 Telephone: (239) 332-6975 JMI/rs Copies furnished to: Collier County Property Appraiser U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, ACOE Application No, log # 11729 DEP, Office of General Counsel:. Tallahassee DEP, Florida Coastal Man.agement Program, Danny Clayton Director, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, NOAA, 1305 East- West Highway, SSMC4, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE TIle undersigned duly designated deputy clerk hereby certifies that this NOTICE OF DENIAL including all copies, was mailed before the close of business onq(1 t'lI M._!'v'j Il, 2010, to the above listed persons. FILING AND ACKNOWLEDGMENT mea, on tlus Cl:ate, pursuant W9120~59;ES" wul1tne Cl:esignatea-Deparfinent clerK, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. ~f"\ OJ'\..UL, \J In(;~\JL) \ - \ \ - \ D Clerk Date " " Co18:r County ~ +--- Collier County CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 1 of 27 COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FIELD SAMPLING QUALITY MANUAL Effective Date: October, 2008 Prepared by: Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department 3301 East Tamiami Trail . W. Harmon Turner Bldg. Suite 103 Naples, FL 34112 Telephone: 239-252-2980 Fax: 239-252-2950 JrfAr2f""-~ McAlpin Director, Coastal Zone Management ~~\;L--. Pamela Keyes Environmental Specialist CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 2 of 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page # Revision Date 1 Title Page 1 09/1 0108 2 Table of Contents 2 09/10/08 List of Tables 2 09/10/08 List of Figures 2 09/1 0/08 List of Appendices 2 09/1 0/08 3 Policy Statement 3 09/1 0/08 4 Ethics Statement 3 09/1 0/08 . 5 Organizational Topics 3-4 09/10/08 6 Documentation 4-5 09/1 0/08 7 Capabilities 5-11 09/10/08 8 Equipment and Instruments 11 09/1 0/08 9 Review and Assessment 11-14 09/10/08 10 Consumer Relations 14-15 09/10/08 & 'References 15 09/1 0108 LIST OF TABLES Table # Title Page # Revision Date 7.2 FDEP Sampling SOPs being used by 6 09/10/08 Collier County, Coastal Zone Management 7.3 Field Parameters collected for Cocohatchee 7 12/20109 River and Clam Bay 7.31 Parameters collected for laboratory 7 09/10108 analyses 7.4 Sampling Equipment, Field Instruments and Supplies 7-9 09/1 0108 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendices A B C Title Environmental Specialist Classification Field Data Sheet Maps of Station Locations Revision Date 09/1 0/08 09/1 0108 09/10/08 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 3 of 27 SECTION 3: POLICY STATEMENT It is the policy of Collier County's, Coastal Zone Management Department, to execute and produce sound quality assurance and quality control management practices when conducting field saIDple collection and measurements. This Field Sampling Quality Manual dictates the methods and materials necessary to achieve our goal of producing reproducible, high-quality data. These methods are in accordance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Quality Assurance Rille, Chapter 62-160. SECTION 4: ETIDCS STATEMENT All Collier County Government employees are required to adhere by the Collier County Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct. These documents are provided to each County employee and distributed through the Board of County Commissioner'sAdministrative Procedure CMA Instruction 5311. During the hiring process all employees must read and sign a statement of understanding at that time. Violations of this procedure are subject to disciplinary action, up to and including discharge. . Any employee conducting work under the direction of this Manual must follow the methods and procedures outlined within this document. Deviating from the below mentioned protocols, falsifying information or deliberately reporting data of unacceptable quality is in direct violation of the County's Code of Ethics. SECTION 5: ORGANIZATIONAL TOPICS 5.1 Ore:anizational Structure The two (2) principle samplers are: .1) Environmental Specialist, Pamela Keyes (also the Quality Assurance Officer) 2) Heavy Equipment Operator, Eddie Chesser There may be volunteers filling in for both the Environmental Specialist and Heavy Equipment Operator on sampling days. The Environmental Specialist will remain as the Quality Assurance Officer and will oversee all sampling events. Training for other staff members assisting with the field sampling will occur on site by the QA Officer (Environmental Specialist). . 5.2 Job Descriotions A Job description for the Envirorunental Specialist can be found in Appendix A. 5.3 Aporoved Sie:natories The Quality Assurance Officer is the approved signatory. They will be responsible for: 1) Coordinating sampling with Collier County Lab 2) Conducting or assisting field sampling 3) Training of secondary samplers CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-5b 4 of 27 4) Data entry and management 5) Data verification, QAlQC of data 6) Upload of data into STORET or similar DEP approved'database ,7) Data analysis 5.4 Emplovee Credentials and Trainin2 All employees and volunteers are required to have been trained and taken the DEP Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) at the TREEO center in Gainesville or a DEP equivalent. The primary sampler, the Environmental Specialist (ES), must have prior experience with water quality sampling and the associated techniques and protocols. Familiarity With the FDEP Standard Operating 'Procedures (SOPs) is essential. For techniques used that the ES is unfamiliar with, training will be obtained from the Collier County Pollution Control Lab. The Environmental Specialist and Heavy Equipment Operator completed the "certified DEP SOP training" in October 2007 at the TREEO center at the University of Florida in Gainesville, has been approved by the Collier County Lab to take samples and has recently completed taking samples for the five (5) Clam Bay sampling sites for six months. For any secondary samplers, they will be trained on site by the ES who is proficient in field sampling techniques, safety protocols, equipment maintenance and troubleshooting, polices, and procedures. SECTION 6: DOCUMENTATION 6.1 Record Generation. Retention and Stora2e Field data sheets (Appendix B) are completed for each sampling activity. Information recorded on these sheets includes project name, name of samplers, station identification, date and time the samples was collected, all field measurements, any quality control samples which were collected, weather conditions, and equipment identification. All original field data sheets remain in the project file. Copies of the chain of custody documents remain with the original data sheet in the project file. Any hard copies of data reports from the lab will be retained in a separate data file for that project These files will be kept in a three ring birider in the ES office. 6.2 Document Control and Maintenance All original documents are controlled and maintained by the Quality Assurance Officer. Any revisions made to field data, sampling documentation, and SOPS will be done only by the Quality Assurance Officer. All filing of documents will be done by the Quality Assurance Officer as well as data entry into an electronic database. The electronic database will be stored on the Quality Assurance Officer's computer and/or the department's server accessible only within the Coastal Zone Management Department. Any changes or alterations to the database will be made only by the Quality Assurance Officer. This data will be turned into a PDF and posted on a monthly basis on the CZM website for public viewing. The link to the CZM website to access this data is http://www.colliergov.net/Index.aspx?page=2545 . CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 5 of 27 All water quality data collected by Collier County's Coastal Zone Management Department will be uploaded to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) STORET (STOrage and RETrieval) database or an equivalent database determined by the Department of Environmental Protection. 6.3 Document Tvoes The Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department generates the following types of documents: Field sampling standard operating procedures (SOPs) Field data sheets Chain of custody documents (generated by Collier County Pollution Control & Prevention Department Lab), Calibration and equipment maintenance logs 6.4 Sample Identification and Data Intee:ritv Every bottle within a sample kit is labeled with a unique number that identifies the date and time the sample was collected. A unique number on each bottle within a kit corresponds with a letter on the Chain of Custody provided by Collier County Lab which identifies which parameters are to be analyzed from which bottles and what preservative is being used. Each sample number is recorded on the sample bottles, field data sheet, chain of custody form, laboratory bench sheet, and fmal data report (the last 2 being recorded by Collier County Lab staff once the bottles are dropped off). 6.5 Client Confidentiality Any data generated by the Coastal Zone Management Department and analyzed by Collier County Lab, is considered public information under Florida Statute Title X. Chapter 119 (Florida Sunshine Law) and are open for review by any interested parties. This data will uploaded onto the Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department websites. SECTION 7: CAPABILITIES 7.1 Organizational Capabilities The Coastal Zone Management Department, began conducting montWy surface water sampling in Wiggins Pass (Estuarine) in October 2008 and Clam Bay in November 2009 (see Appendix C for map oflocations). The CZM Department will begin conducting monthly surface water sampling at other estuarine sites as needed. Pm:ameters collected include organics, inorganics, microbiological, aggregate organics, biological, physical and aggregate properties, and trace metals. 7.2 Specific Sampline Procedures The Coastal Zone Management Department, performs monthly sampling according to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Standard Operation Procedures (FDEP CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 6 of 27 APPENDIX A Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department Environmental Specialist CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 7 of 27 REFERENCES Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department Field Sampling Quality Manual, Collier County Pollution Control & Prevention Dept. FDEP Quality Assurance Rule. 62-160. F.A.C., and DEP-SQP-001l01 Title X. Chapter 119 Florida Statutes--Florida Sunshine Law CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 8 of 27 9.4 Deviations from Documented Policies and Procedures Field sampling operations will be conducted according to the procedures outlined in this Field Quality Manual and FDEP SOPs. Any deviation from these procedures . must be documented on the field data sheet by the ES. The ES in cooperation with Collier County Lab will assess the significance of the deviation in procedure and determine if any corrective actions are necessary. 9.5 Performance. Systems. and Manae:ement Audits The Environmental Specialist (ES), or Field Quality Assurance Officer, will remain informed ofFDEP SOPS and any changes that may be made to the FDEP SOPs. The ES will be diligent with record keeping and documentation. The ES will essentially perform an internal audit which will consist of reviewing the "Audit Checklisf' in Appendix F Al 000 located in F Al 000 Administrative FDEP SOPs. Any procedures not in compliance with the audit checklist will be noted and corrected. Audits may be preformed on an annual basis by FDEP personnel. Also, the Collier County Pollution Control Lab will be conduct audits during field collection. These audits will be written up and if any problems are noted immediate action will be taken by the ES. SECTION 10: CONSUMER RELATIONS 10.1 Review of Proposed Work The Coastal Zone Management Director and/or the Environmental Specialist are responsible for reviewing proposed work and determining if the work is within the scope of the Coastal Zone Management Department. If the project is within the scope of the Department, then it will be determined what training and equipment is needed, if any. 10.2 Handline: Complaints If concerns or complaints are brought to the attention of the ES regarding procedures or data management, the ES will investigate the complaint and evaluate what action needs to be taken. If the complaint is from an agency or from the public, the ES will document the subject of concern and work cooperatively with that person/agency to resolve any concern. This will entail determining if any corrective actions need to be taken, if any. A plan of action will be put in place if there is something that needs correcting. This plan will be provided to the complainant for review and will be implemented upon agreement. Any correspondence and corrective actions taken will be documented and retained in the project files. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 90f27 F AC 62-160; and checks several other criteria that can be found in the Florida DEP ADaPT User Manual. "The Field QA Officer is responsible for overall review of the field and laboratory data and final review of the electronic data deliverable generated by the ADaPT software. " 9.2.3 Data Validation From the CCPC manual: "The Project Manager is responsible for the final review of all reports." The ES will review the data once it is forwarded on from the lab, import the necessary data columns into the Access database, and ensure all information required by STORET is present. 9.2.4 Yearlv Renorts Coastal Zone Management is currently conducting water quality sampling in Cocohatchee and Clam Bay Estuaries to identify the water quality health of these estuarine systems. On a yearly basis, an analysis of this water quality data will occur and a report will be issued to the Coastal Advisory Committee (CAe) and Board of County Commissioners (BCe). These reports will'summarize the results of the data collected outline any issues and have staff recommendations for any corrective action needed to ensure the health of the estuaries. 9.3 Corrective Actions Corrective action may be needed when quality control criteria are exceeded. The following lists the criteria and corrective actions taken by the ES for: I) Field Blank-analytes must be less than the method detection limit. If not, the corrective action consists oftroubleshooting field-cleaning methods or checking the source water, preservatives, or sample container for contamination. 2) Field Duplicate-when the results are greater than the practical quantitation limit, they should agree within 20% of the Relative Percent Difference. Troubleshooting will be initiated if values are beyond the 20% range. 3) Conductivity Meter--monthly calibration following FDEP SOP FTIOOO & FTl200,. reading must be:t5 % of the standard value. If it is not, the probe and the ports are cleaned, and then it is recalibrated. May need to be sent in for repair. 4) Dissolved Oxygen Meter-monthly calibration following FDEP SOP FTl 000 & FT1500. Reading must be:t 5% of saturation, otherwise, the membrane will be replaced or it will be sent in for service. 5) pH-monthly calibration folloWing FDEP SOP FTlOOO & FTlIOO. Readings must be :to.2. If not, probes will be cleaned and fresh solution will be placed in the probe before recalibration. 6) Temperature-monthly calibration following FDEP SOP FTlOOO & FTl400. Readings must be :to.2 oC. If not, clean probes and ports and recalibrate. May have to be sent in for service. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 100f27 inclusion into a national database." "The Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Laboratory currently participates in the South Florida Water Management District's performance evaluation study semiannually and the FDEP's total phosphorus Round Robin study. Other laboratories participating in these studies include local county governments, private laboratories, State and Water Management District laboratories. Results are compared between laboratories. If discrepancies are noted as a result of the studies, corrective action is implemented and documented.~' 9.2 Data Review and Assessment 9.2.1 Data Reduction From the CCPC manual: "Laboratory data are reviewed by the Laboratory Quality Assurance Officer according to the procedures provided in the Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Laboratory Quality Manual." . 9.2.2 Data Verification The Environmental Specialist, reviews all field sheets prior to entering the data into the Access database for the following: * completeness and accuracy. * comments that may be indicative of problems. * field measurements are within realistic ranges (e.g., is pH<14?). Once an electronic report is received from the Collier County lab showing the results, the ES: *reviews the field blank data to check for any potential contamination. *initiates an investigation if contamination is found to isolate the problem. *reviews other quality control samples (field duplicates) for violation ofQA criteria. *checks for outliers in the data. Regarding electronic data provided to the Coastal Zone Management Department by the County, the following is from the CCPC manual: "All electronic data are processed using the ADaPT (Automated Data Processing Tool) developed by Laboratory Data Consultants, Inc. This data processing software performs quality control checks with respect to the quality assurance elements required to assess water bodies under Florida Administrative Code 62-303, Identification ofItnpaired Surface Waters, document DEP EAS-OIOI. These data quality assurance elements are provided in Appendix E and are presented as the required format for all ADaPT electronic data deliverables. In addition, the ADaPT software performs quality assurance checks for holding times; matrix spikes and laboratory control sample recoveries; laboratory/field duplicate and blank results; compares dissolved/filtered constituents to total (e.g. ortho-phosphate < total phosphorus); applies FDEP data qualifiers to results when applicable as referenced in CAe January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 11 of 27 where chemical analyses will be perfonned. Samples that are to remain in-house for analysis by the Collier County Lab are submitted immediately to lab personnel with the completed chain of custodies, SECTION 8: EQUIPMENT AND INSTRUMENTS 8.1 Instrument Calibration and Standards Instrument calibration follows FDEP SOPs FT1 OOO-FT1500 and FT1700. A calibration log is kept and a new calibration sheet is completed each time the YSI is calibrated. Post sampling verification checks are also recorded on this sheet. The standards used in calibration are logged on a separate sheet and a running log of the standards is kept on file as well. 8.2 Instrument and Equipment Maintenance All instruments and equipment maintenance are perfonned according to the manufacturer's specifications. Records of routine and repair servicing are kept in the maintenance log. Any paperwork received from a manufacturer regarding a repair is kept on file. Any equipment which is not working properly is removed from service until it is repaired or replaced. SECTION9: REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT 9.1 Oualitv Control Measures 9.1.1 Field Qualitv Control Field blank will be collected on a monthly basis. Field duplicate samples will be collected on a quarterly sampling trip as referenced in FQ1214 and FQ1220. Since nothing but the sampling container is used to collect the water sample, a field blank is sufficient. 9.1.2 Laboratory Data Qualitv Control 9.1.3 Collier County Lab has a rigorous quality control programin place ensuring the accuracy oflaboratory data. These procedures are referenced in the "Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department's Field Sampling Quality Manua!." For convenience, paragraphs from that document are presented below. From Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Department's Field Sampling Quality Manual (CCPC manual): "In addition, all field staff members participate in the National Field Quality Assurance (NFQA) program operated by the USGS. Each staff member is required to analyze unknown pH and specific conductance st~dards annually and submit the results for CAC January 14, 2010 VlIl-5b 120f27 Table 7.4: Sampling Equipment, Field Instruments and Supplies (cont.) ,H' ~1~{ii~~t,' ~B~lt(li1{i!ft41t,lit.~,';&~JiI Preservation Nitric Acid Sulfuric Acid Ice Hydrochloric acid Calibration Standards Specific conductance Standard pH buffer solution 8afetVt& . . : Na\'ii' ition Sunscreen GPS Cellular phone Reagent grade, Sample preservation All Metals 69%-71 % conc. Reagent grade, Sample preservation All Inorganic, 95.8% conc. nutrients Tap water Sample preservation All All analyte groups Reagent grade, 1: 1 Sample preservation All Organics conc. YSI 3169; 50,000 microsiemens/cm Calibration of conductivity probes Surface water Specific conductance Fisher Scientific Ran e: 7 & 10 Calibration of pH robes All pH SPF 15 or higher Trimble, VV)\)\S enabled Sprint Skin protection Location of sampling sites Communication nJa n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 7.5 Sample Handline: and Transport Sample bottles are labeled with a unique sample identification nwnber which identifies the date and time the sample is collected. The type of preservative used, ifany, is identified by a unique letter on the cap of the bottle. Sample containers are pre-preserved by Collier County Lab with the appropriate aliquot of preservative. Sample bottles that are pre- preserved are not rinsed with sample water prior to sample collection. All non-preserved bottles are rinsed with sample water prior to filling with the exception of sterilized microbiological bags. To prevent contamination, samples preserved with nitric acid are separated from all other sample bottles during transport and sampling. They may be placed in a sealed plastic bag to separate the nitric bottles from other sampling bottles, or they may be placed in a completely separate cooler. Once samples are collected, they are placed in coolers containing wet ice and transported to the Collier County Lab. Chain of custody is completed for each station and they are turned over with the samples to Collier County Lab personnel. Copies of the chain of c.ustodies are given to the Collier County Staff or volunteers where they are retained with the field data sheets and hard copies of the lab reports. Samples are then reviewed by lab staff for accurate and complete identification and then sorted according to the laboratory destination CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 13 of 27 Table 7.4: Sampling Equipment, Field Instruments and Supplies (cont.) : '.....::.' .;~. ., ..~.i.,n;;~~~ ;~~:~~f.~~j~~~~8~;:: ~"~;~;~;:~;~~r~<~~;;~;,~t;t';i~;t:~~s~~ji;tr~~~~1~ f~~tii Plastic Plastic Labeling sample Surface bottles water/Stormwater Plastic Field data sheets Surface Water/Stormwater Plastic Sample Surface stora e/ reservation Water/Stormwater Clipboard Aluminum Secure field notes All Hach Potassium chloride Replace dissolved Surface Dissolved solution, plastic oxygen probe water/Stormwater Oxygen membranes membrane membrane re lacement kit pH probe Silver/Silver pH probe , Surface water pH fillin solution chloride maintenance SOPs, site Reference nJa nJa ma s Chain of Sample tracking nJa nJa Custod Forms Analyte- free Deionized, filtered Equipment Surface water water water decontamination Liquino Phosphate-fee Equipment Surface water deter ent decontamination Plastic, disposable . Wrapping pre- Surface Water cleaned e ui ment Natural bristles, Removing Surface Water plastic handle particulates and equipment decontamination CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 14 of 27 7.4 Field Instruments Surface water sampling at Cocohatcheeand Clam Bay will involve the following field equipment: Table 7.4: Sampling Equipment, Field Instruments and Supplies; Surface grab sam 1in Surface grab sampling Micro biological Field ;. :- '~....\'. 'FlItiition.. . : BD 60 ml Syringe, Luer- . Lok Ti Disposable syringe filter 'Fle~.dit:::{...' , . .....: . 'Measurements' YSI/ Probe : . ~ . : . -'~ ....:.. ,: ~.~~. ~. .r~~~if:.:',~:.':' ~;~ '". . ~ "...". :'~':-'-~ ". .~..~~4~;.~ ::~-:'_..~'.>'~ Surface water Nutrients, Orthophosphorous 25mm diameter, 0.45 urn pore size Surface water Nutrients, Orthophosphorous Hand-held instrument :';',. ,~.:';:;; \;\.~:t:::~.~:;,,~:X:, " .,.. In-situ field measurements Surface water Salinity, pH, Specific Conductance, Dissolved oxygen, Tern erature, Water transparency Secchi Acrylic, black and white In-situ field measurements Surface water CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 15 of 27 Table 7.3: Field Parameters collected for Coastal Zone Management Department's sampling sites. Dissolved Ox en pH Salinity Surface conditions (waves) Wind Speed/direction Secchi Tern erature Specific Conductivity Water Depth Cloud cover (%) Tide stage Conductivity . Parameters collected for Wiggins Pass which undergo analyses at the Collier County Laboratory are: Table 7.31: Parameters collected for laboratory analyses at Wiggins Pass Arsenic'" Chromium'" Co er'" Lead'" Cadmium'" Zinc.... Iron'" Aluminum'" Ortho has hate BOD Turbidit * Will be tested on a quarterly basis. Parameters collected for Clam Bay which undergo analyses at the Collier County Laboratory are: en CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 16 of 27 SOPs) found in DEP-SOP-001/01 Quality Assurance Rule, 62-160 F.A.C. These SOPs can be found electronically at FDEP's web site http://www.floridadep.org/labs. Samples for both Cocohatchee and Clam Bay estuaries will be taken monthly and on an outgoing tide. This will ensure that the samples being taken are representative or the waters flowing out of both estuaries. Table 7.2: FDEP Sampling SOPs being used by Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department. . FDEPSOP Description FA 1000 Administrative FC 1000 Field Decontamination FD 1000 Documentation EM 1000 Field Mobilization FQ 1000 Quality Control FS 1000. General Sampling FS 2000 General Water Sampling FS 2100 Surface Water Sampling FT 1000 Field Testing General FT 11 00 Field pH FT 1200 Field Specific Conductance . FT 1300 Field Salinity FT 1400 Field Temperature . FT 1500 Field Dissolved Oxygen FT 1700 Field Light Penetration All surface samples collected in Wiggins Pass and Clam Bay Area, are surface grab samples. If bottom samples are ever collected in future sites, a Van Dorn sampler will be used. 7.3 Field and Laboratory Test Methods Below is a list of the field test methods performed by Collier County, Coastal Zone Management Department. These field testing methods follow FDEP SOPs. Laboratory analytical test methods can be found in the Collier County Pollution Control and Prevention Laboratory Quality Manual and follow approved methods accepted by the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) and the Florida Department of Healt4 (FDOH). . . . CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 17 of 27 Class Code: 25340 Pay Grade: 18 COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA CLASSIFICATION SPECIFICATION CLASSIFICATION TITLE: ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST PURPOSE OF CLASSIFICATION The purpose of this classification is to perform environmental monitoring, inspection, or code enforcement in a department or specialized program involving pollution control, hazardous waste management, planning/development, natural resources, or related area. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS The following duties are normal for this position. The omission of specific statements of the duties does not exclude them from the classification if the work is similar, related, or a logical assignment for this classification. Other duties may be required and assigned. Interprets, applies, and enforces the provisions of environmental regulations and other applicable federal, state, and local codes, laws, rules, regulations, specifications, standards, policies and procedures; researches codes/regulations issues as needed; initiates any actions necessary to correct deviations or violations. Provides information and technical assistance concerning environmental regulations, hazardous waste management, waste disposal procedures, pollution control/prevention, storage tanks, small quantity hazard waste generation, natural resources, site development plans, regulatory violations, or other issues; meets with and discusses problem areas with property owners, contractors, developers, and the public; recommends solutions to problems. Coordinates environmental activities relating to pollution control, pollution prevention, environmental planning, conservation, land development, stonnwater management, or related issues; provides a contact to County residents for environmental and pollution concerns. Investigates complaints regarding pollution, hazardous waste, natural resources, conservation, or other environmental issues; documents findings of investigations and makes corrective recommendations; updates complainant with information regarding complaint; monitors status of complaints to ensure resolution; notifies appropriate authorities of case problems or incidents as appropriate. Performs inspections of sludge disposal sites and sludge transportation vehicles; notities sludge transporters of violations; prepares certified warning letters for non-compliance; reviews sludge transportation licenses and notifies license-holders of expiration. Performs inspections of wastewater treatment plant facilities to ensure compliance with applicable regulations; colIects effluent samples at wastewater treatment plants; assists with collection of surface water samples; makes recommendations to plant operators concerning needed plant improvements. Performs inspections of above-ground storage tanks and underground storage tanks; conducts inspections of small quantity hazardous waste generators as needed; pert:onns waste assessment computations; perfonns air quality monitoring. @ DMG-MAXlMUS, INC. Page 1 Last Revised: July, 2001 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 18 of 27 Collier, County, Florida · Environmental Specialist 25340 Performs inspections of businesses to review hazardous waste management/disposal; monitors household hazardous waste fucilities; conducts on-site visits to household hazardous waste facilities to pick up receipts of hazardous wastes; converts amounts of hazardous wastes to pounds; prepares reports for calculation of reviewed receipts of hazardous wastes from businesses; picks up and transports household hazardous wastes from residents' homes to waste site as needed. Performs inspections of commercial landscape projects and stormwater management plans; reviews landscape plans and stonn management plans; inspects irrigation systems; inspects drainage areas and verifies flow paths; negotiates use of landscape materials with landscape architects; ensures compliance with right-of-way ordinance requirements. Conducts inspections of conservation/preservation areas; evaluates condition of land and habitat; assesses value and quality of habitat; prepares environmental mitigation plans. Reviews zoning petitions and site development plans for compliance with applicable codes and regulations; performs site inspections relating to permit applications and petitions; evaluates compliance of plans and projects with parking and handicapped access regulations; reviews and issues clearing permits for vegetation removal; reviews and issues pennits for coastal activities/construction; reviews for variances structures seaward of coastal construction setback line; reviews and issues pennits for site alternation in environmentally sensitive areas; reviews environmental impact statements; reviews boat dock variance petitions; reviews protected species management plans and exotic vegetation management plans; accepts or rejects on-site deviations from approved plans; prepares staff reports, executive summaries, and resolutions; makes presentations to County Commissioners, Environmental Advisory Board, and Planning Commission; perfonns plant/animal identifications for staff as needed. Provides support for development of County natural resource management policy; acquires and analyzes data to assess impact on natural resources; produces geographic data to facilitate analysis; converts geographic coordinate systems in data sets; collects GPS coordinate to locate data and converts GPS data to analyzable fonnats; edits computerized. mapping drawings for use in geographical infonnation system (GIS); prepares data in wide variety offonnats. Perfonns environmental monitoring on County-managed property; collects water samples for sulfide analysis; measures salinity and pH in surface and pore water; measures extreme stonn effects on Clam Bay NRPA; applies herbicides to maintain exotic plant control in Clam Bay; aSsists with wetland delineation for permitting. Performs follow-up inspections to ensure proper response to non-compliance problems and correction of deficiencies. Conducts environmental code enforcement to protect County resources; investigates complaints and violations; conducts inspections of property; gathers evidence of violations and makes photographs of violations; researches property ownership; issues violation notices and citations to violators; posts notices on site or at courthouse; reviews violations with violators and negotiates resolution of problems; reviews mitigation plans; detennines whether to prosecute code violations; prosecutes cases before Boards or in court as needed; presents evidence and provides testimony; coordinates enforcement activities with other agencies/departments as needed. . Compiles and provides to the public guidelines on hazardous waste management, applicable federal, state and local regulations, and requirements to meet compliance. Writes/drafts amendments to local codes as appropriate; assists with development of environmental ordinances, amendments, policies, and procedures. Prepares inspection reports, non-compliance reports, violation notices, and other records; submits required reports to regulatory agencies or other individuals. Maintains computer database of department data; enters infonnation regarding environmental complaints, non- compliance issues, or other data; locates and plots complaints on topographic maps; generates reports and graphs of department data @ DMG-MAXIMUS, INC. Page 2 Last Revised: July, 2001 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 19 of 27 Collier, County, Florida · Environmental Specialist 25340 Conducts research of department files, legal/property records, database records, electronic data sources, Internet sites, hardcopy materials, or other sources as needed. . Compiles and/or monitors various administrative and/or statistical data; makes applicable calculations; analyzes data and identifies trends; summarizes data and prepares reports, charts, or presentations. Prepares or completes various fonns, reports, correspondence, chain of custody fonns, activity reports, inspection/re- . inspection reports, complaint reports, incident notification fonns, violation notices, citations, project summaries, data summaries, sludge transportation reports, wastewater treatment plant reports, storage tank registration forms, household hazardous waste receipt reports, petition reviews, staff reports, executive summaries, resolutions, code amenqments, penn its, vehicle maintenance reports, maps, or other documents. Receives various fonns, reports, correspondence, chain of custody fonns, activity reports, complaint reports, sludge transportation reports, transportation manifests, inspection reports, laboratory reports, wastewater treatment plant pennits, site assessments, closure assessments, storage tank records, hazardous waste receipts, statistical data, environmental impact statements, site development plans, landscape plans, pennit applications, petitions, variances, mitigation plans, property cards, deeds, plats, maps, photographs, surveys, material safety data sheets, hazardous materials guides, scientific/technical reports, textbooks, professional publications, laws, codes, ordinances, policies, procedures, manuals, reference materials, or other documentation; reviews, completes, processes, forwards or retains as appropriate. Operates a personal computer, general office equipment, or other equipment as necessary to complete essential functions, to include the use of word processing, spreadsheet, database, photography, graphics, computerized mapping, geographical infonnation system (GIS), e-mail, Internet, or other computer programs; provides current infonnation for publication at County web sites. Operates/utilizes and maintains specialized equipment or tools associated with work activities, which may include a motor vehicle, global positioning system (GPS), digital camera, chlorine meter, multi-probe, level, architectural scale, binoculars, herbicide sprayer, water sampler, measuring devices, testing instruments, shovel, auger, or two-way radio. Monitors inventory of department equipment and supplies; ensures availability of adequate materials to conduct work activities; initiates requisitions for new/replacement materials; obtains product infonnation and competitive price quotes for prospective purchases. Communicates with supervisor, County boards/officials, employees, other departments, sludge transportation companies, contractors, developers, landscape architects, engineers, consultants, attorneys, court personnel, customers, the public, community organizations, regulatory agencies, outside agencies, and other individuals as needed to coordinate work activities, review status of work, exchange infonnation, or resolve problems. Attends meetings, serves on committees, and makes presentations as needed; participates in workshops and County exhibits; prepares displays for presentations and displays. Assists with coordination of County hazardous waste collection events; transports and sets up barricades for events. Maintains a comprehensive, current Imowledge of applicable laws/regulations; maintains an awareness of new methods, trends, and advances in the profession; reads professional literature; maintains professional affiliations; attends workshops and training sessions as appropriate. ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONS Perfonns generaVclerical tasks, which may include answering telephone calls, typing documents, making copies, sending/receiving faxes, filing documentation, or processing incoming/outgoing mail. @ DMG-MAXIMUS, INC. Page 3 Last Revised: July, 2001 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 20 of 27 Collier, County, Florida · Environmental Specialist 25340 Provides assistance to other employees or departments as needed. Performs other related duties as required. In the event of a declared state of emergency, employees in this classification may be called to work during days or hours other than those for which they are regularly scheduled. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS Bachelor's degree in Environmental Science, Natural Sciences, Chemistry, Biology, Geology, or closely related field; supplemented by one (1) year previous experience and/or training involving pollution control, water quality monitoring, environmental assessment, ecological impact analysis, wetland permitting, environmental permitting, environmental code enforcement. chemistry, computerized mapping, anellor personal computer operations; or any equivalent combination of education, training, and experience which provides the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities for this job. May require possession and maintenance of valid OSHA Certified Hazardous Material Operations certification. May require possession and maintenance of valid Limited Lawn & Ornamental Pest Control Applicator's License. Must possess and maintain a valid Florida driver's license. Fingerprinting required. PERFORMANCE APTITUDES Data Utilization: Requires the ability to evaluate, audit, deduce, anellor assess data using established criteria. Includes exercising discretion in determining actual or probable consequences and in referencing such evaluation to identify and select alternatives. Human Interaction: Requires the ability to provide guidance, assistance, and/or interpretation to others regarding the application of procedures and standards to specific situations. Eauivment. Machinerv. Tools. and Materials Utilization: Requires the ability to operate, maneuver and/or control the actions of equipment, machinery, tools, and/or materials used in performing essential functions. Verbal Avtitude: Requires the ability to utilize a wide variety of reference, descriptive, advisory and/or design data and information. Mathematical Avtitude: Requires the ability to perform addition, subtraction, multiplication and division; ability to calculate decimals and percentages; may include ability to perform mathematical operations with fractions; may include ability to compute discount, interest, and ratios; may include ability to calculate surface areas, volumes, weights, and measures. Functional Reasoninl!: Requires the ability to apply principles of influence systems, such as motivation, incentive, and leadership, and to exercise independent judgment to apply facts and principles for developing approaches and techniques to resolve problems. Situational Reasoninl!: Requires the ability to exercise judgment, decisiveness and creativity in situations involving the evaluation of infonnation against sensory, judgmental, or subjective criteria, as opposed to that which is clearly measurable or verifiable. Leadershiv: Customer Service: Financial Accountabilitv: @ DMG-MAXIMUS, INC. Page 4 Last Revised: July, 2001 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 21 of 27 Collier, County, Florida. Environmental Specialist 25340 ADA COMPLIANCE Phvsical Abilitv: Tasks require the ability to exert very moderate physical effort in light work, typically involving some combination of stooping, kneeling, crouching and crawling, and which may involve some lifting, carrying, pushing and/or pulling of objects and materials of moderate weight (12-20 pounds). Sensory Requirements: Some tasks require the ability to perceive and discriminate colors or shades of colors, sounds, odor, depth, texture. and visual cues or signals. Some tasks require the ability to communicate orally. Environmental Factors: Performance of essential functions may reqUITe exposure to adverse environmental conditions, such as dirt, dust, pollen, odors, wetness, hwnidity, rain. temperature extremes, hazardous materials, traffic hazards, water hazards, bright/dim light, toxic agents, disease, pathogenic substances, animaVwildlife attacks, or animal bites. Collier County is an Equal Opportunity Employer. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the County will provide reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals with disabilities and encourages both prospective and current employees to discuss potential accommodations with the employer. @ DMG:-MAXlMUS. INC. Page 5 Last Revised: July, 2001 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 22 of 27 APPENDIX B Field Data Sheet 0 J .... 0 01 N -.i .... ~ '" :J W l:: ~ '" I"- ..cN uU?'O 1 <(=M >It U>N -g :J .. D .. ;g ~ .r. ~ Ji. 1 :J i" 1 t ~ ii! VI ~ - Q) CD .c fJ) J! C'lS C "C a; u: - c CI) it; E ~ W 1:: -l Q. C\S ~ Q. Q) C e .... c 0 U c 0 :to ~ ~ - "6 ~ c. ,a.o C) 0 C a= Q. :3 0 U L. .! (5 u ... "C c tV 'iil" ! S ~ uwe:: aa.::<::! II.~"!'Q .. ~ 5:j!: ! - . - . - " - . - Ua. ~ -4 -4 ~ ... -4 -4 -4 .- ... ... Uw ~c .s - - - . - - - - Hi j!: 'W - - . - - - - - - - t- a. J!l ... -4 ... ... ... ... -4 ... ... ... ~~! - - e - - e - - e " - e - . l! .. .. .. e c <:: .6 .. S S S s c u.W - - c - - c - - c - - c - - s u.~ ;:- 8 8 8 8 c ~~ .! ... ... '0 ... ... l ... ... E ... ... il ... .. 8 .. ~ c: c: CI) C) - - - .. - - ~ - - .. 0" - .. - - .. ~ e co f f f f 2! ~X 'F - - p. - - := - - Q. - - Q. .- - ~ a.t- 0 'l; 0 '0 0'0 Q. ~lb -; ... ... J: ... ... J: ... ... :a ... ... J: ... ... 0 Q. Q. P. ::J: (/) c .5- - - ] - - ~ - - ~ - - Oi - - Q. c ii "- Ii: Ii: u:: .s u. - - - - - - - - . - X ... .. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... a. - - - - - - - . - - -. -. ... ... ... c WZ - - - - " - - - - - - - - - - ~w E" o~ Cl ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... (/) E x :z: J: J: :I: ~o- - - - - . . - " - - c C) C) C) C) C) ~~ - - c; - - t - a. - - c; - - ~ .E c ,,\; za. ... ... Q. ... ... Co ... ... ~ ... ... Q. ... ... "a ~.E: E E ~ ~ E - - :I - - .. - - - - - - ~ (/) .. II II II .! OJ "" '" "" '" u~ .. .. .. It .. E j ~ ." 'il il - - - - - - 51 - - - - u:~ ~ ~ OJ " . :J - - :J - - - :J ug Ie - - ~ - "8 ~ ~ ~ 0 - - - - - - - - - - we .c ~ a.z E - - e - - - - e - - e - - e (/)0 .; ll.. ll.. ll.. Q. (.l co Dl Dl '" ~ c c .5 c i: C c C <:: ~- j = .. j J .c .!l! ::!!u .. .. (J ... ... 0 ... (J .. ... (J ... .. (.l W. Jl Jl "CJ :s! ." ~- - . .. - .. - - ~ - - ~ - - :i u:: U::O. LL . - - - - - - - - Z 0 - - - - - - . - - - Z~ - . - - - - - - Ou ~u: - - - - - - - - - - ~~ - - : . - II . ~ - - ~ - - ~ .. :g :; w - - 0 - - - - - - 0 - - 0 e - - .: - - ;;j - - .: - .: - - ;;j .. .. .. c 5 c c c 8. 0 8- 0 Q. Q. Q. - - E - - E - - If - - - w E- If ::!: .. ., 0 .. .. 8 .. .. 8 .. .. 8 .. .. 8 ~ c - . c - - <:: - - ~ - - c - - c :!: ~ ~ ~ wI!: .: ;;j .: .: .: - - OJ . - - - llJ - .. - - .. -lW ~ c c ~ a.m ii S Os ::!!::!! - - . c - - c - - c - - c 0 B' 8 8 8 <(;:) u (/)2 - - .. - - .. - - .!l! - - .!l! - .!l! "a Q. Q. 0. Q. Ii E ~ E ~ ~ :: It .. III III OJ - - - - - - - - - c ii ~ B ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;;: "> 0 -8 z 1Il ffi 2 OJ 2 . .. 2 - - - ... - - - ... - "C :E c W c c W c W c W :B :::i ~ :! ~ :::i 0 :::i .2 :! :::i :! :::i 'il :::i 'tl :! I!: .!! lD OJ .!l! >- - - "0 0 - ~ 0 - . "0 0 - - .8 0 - - ~ 0 (J U . U u U U U i VI :J Q. o en Cl .E C. E ~ ! (.!) ~ a. .ii .!!! ~ jg c 8 s "5l a. a. :c VI Cl C Qj .c II ~ E .8 - c ... .. .c c; E :J Z Z ::i Q. :! 1:5 ~ oS a= 0 'iij ii: .z:: u a.. m ~ iil .z:: ~ ~ it; en 2 2 .!!! 0 0 "8 E ~ III 0 i3 Cll Z 2 E 0 0 c U U .c a= 0:: '0 w w .8 :z: :I: E ~ ~ ::J 3: 3: z o ~ ;>: 1 II ~ ~ .!! ill .!1 ~.J5 "'1 ~ i~f ~ ~ a~ ~ t I i j I; II 'ii ... I ! ; III I~~ ~fili... 3 J! ! ~~ Ii III H a~ I .. ~ 8::\ 0 ~; I ~~~ 8/1 I ~ ~ :J!~.~ u i ~ :!! ~~I '3PI~rl ~ u .~- 8 ~ hi LIl1 J, II' : ~;l"'!l Hllllin~ ~ lljr ~f 1111" J 1 ~ ~ 01 f~ I ~ III ~rt ~ 11l ~ !.3 .~~ . d ~ ~ l ~ S 8' So . S o B 0 ~1l.1:[ I < .ti -] ~ a 1 . -: El ~ '" ~~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ! ;!l :i! = ~ R U)4O')":' a.......... t' - = . o ..- o N -i ..- IiIoc o ~ '" :J :ii l'- ....,.eN uU?'O <l:=v U>N s :: ~ ~ ~ u E' ~ 8 "'"' ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! i I G .~ ~'Ii ] J~ l:n . 11 ~ I a~ ~~ ~ G) ] o rn ~~~gmmm~~~~lm~~~~~mm~~~lmmmmm~ggm~m ::. :', lc:i:'; ;".....1::'-;.;.; ....... j;,,;;: rli'll>;: : 1:';:'\;i-;;,,~,i ~~~~a~~g~ga ~~m~~~~~~~~I~s.~g~i~~~i~ )~...,! .'f, :,,':.;, .,. kl';\:,::,::' ..:;.};:t/ ):-I.~>;::;.: :~t1;~[;,~L:: ~mm~mm;~~~~I~~gg~~~g~ggl~~~~m~~g;m~ ':. :..:;:H; " :~I~::::~;i,.I'{f"', ':~'~.';'~i~:'. :~:;~,~'Ii;..,_:::,: :jl;";.:;:,~t';]i.!~; ~gb~~mm~~~s.lm~mg~gamm~gl~m~~~~~~g~~ A\7:;i/!;:'~I;'~:.ti/I1.:'::~li~ii::::j: ::o:kt'l,g';c.D: i-<:,,~~j;: ~~~~~~~~~~.~I~~~~~.~...~.,~~ ~~~~.:.'~..;'~~~~ 'c" ,. . .....1..: .. ,:. ..1- '., .....,.c.l... ';'. .'.,.,' ':.'" ......... ...,.;,..1....,..,;, G~~m~~~~m~~lm~~mm;~mmmmlgm~mm~~mmm; '\c, ':~: ,),: t :.,/~~II:; :, /.ii;:tJ .::. '.::r.l~i~:: {;iiX:;; }~~:RL ~m~~~~ag~~gIGg~mmmm~~~~I~~~~m~;Qmm~ '<:"~ :. ,>) '1:', ;'11'~~';, ';"': :':):;, X::':r::I~;J'!::{ <i~;:;}}J,k ., -I '. '..-1.<. - ~ ...... ,. . '. ....i'. . .H." '~'. . _, _ . '.'_,~. m~wm~~~~m~~I~~mmggg~mmglmg~~m~mg~gg ...., '-.;' :;;';, ~L:~":" ::: ::.~.;14~~,;; .~;d~t\:.:,:.il~{::;;1/:~';~i:;g0!~:;~; i III 11111 1 ~ ~ ~ll II J! ! ~ a 9 1;; ~:H! 8 ~ !:In I ,g ~ ~:l!:! ~ II u li~1 ~P!-'. !. iil J ~ ~ ~ nlllliHi ~f ,'/./ :~II J u ~ t I~ III JH ~ ~~ _ <> <> ~~.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ g is ~ ~ . l . "" M .0 l! '" I. ~ ~1l ll'S: "';< ~ u",""" Ei... g e r:: .. a8~ "u"3 "'10'" .~ e :( 8.:z: rnl>o J.llIQ;) AlmqnlOS ua3.cxo paAIOUJa 00 zz 1l ~ ., .0 B :p Ii: ~ ..J c:> c:> ... .... 8 ~ iii e o .u -a o .~ ~ ] o ~ a :5 l; ~~ <I) ~ ~ .., B ~ 'c EI o .u oS ... o rn S ;,; o .~ B !S 1- ~'f . ::r r:: ~12 <' lS'i! ~.~ 0'...1 :i c: u S s a .. ~ o ... i .:3 i:lI :s o . =, CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5b 25 of 27 APPENDIX C Maps of sampling sites within the Cocohatchee River and Clam Bay Estuaries with Latitude and Longitude '.- Clam Bay \!~fer'aualit) Sampling Locations ,', Legend . Clam Bay Water Quality Stations ,tocOhatchee'WaterQu~Ji~ Sit~: "" , Sit~ ,1Q.:a'::'" ':',: ,";oo#g-,-:,:, ,".-'". . ,.... . .'-. . Tufkb~: ":2'6"1~:74tri8i'" 'S149.45~29:: t!ocdR,i: .:i6 17:43S2tf' ,"81.,49<~902:'; , iBfBS,~ ~:: 26181$928i3, :';,.", ..8i sciifXJC)71;' :,C0c62:,: :' '261.7:!~:':",>;:;'8i4B.~9~-~ cooo'R\(w,.2Sii;i47s04'.. 'siaas371$.t,' CAC January 14, 2010 VIIl-5c New Business 1 of 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Review and Approve Clam Bay Toxicology and Sediment Aging Proposal by PBS&J. OBJECTIVE: For the CAC to approve Clam Bay Toxicology and Sediment Aging Proposal by PBS&J. CONSIDERATIONS: The CBAC, CAC and BCC have individually approved this item in the past and established a budget of $30,000 to provide funds for this activity. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending approval of this item. FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from the General Revenue Unincorporated Tax Fund 111. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the county Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: For the CAC to approve Clam Bay Toxicology and Sediment Aging Proposal by PBS&J. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5c New Business 2 of 5 Additional Work Request Contract # 07-4153 January 6, 2010 CLAM PASSIBAY ESTUARY PBS&J is pleased to provide a scope of work for Clam Bay Estuary Soil Sampling. The intention of this Work Assignment is to provide a soil report on sediments sampled in Clam Bay, Moorings Bay & Seagate Canals. In accordance with Collier County Contract Number 07- 4153 "Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone Management Projects" the following scope of work is presented herein. SCOPE OF WORK Task 1.1 - Sediment Samoline and Field Data Collection PBS&J will obtain at total of thirteen (13) sediment cores including: One (1) sample in Upper Clam Bay, one (1) sample in Inner Clam Bay, six (6) sediment core samples in Outer Clam Bay, four (4) samples in Seagate Canals, and one (1) sample from the north end of Moorings Bay (see attached figure). Samples will be collected at locations where the results will provide a reasonable representation of the sediments for the entire project area. Samples will be taken for sediment characterization and chemical (pollutant) analysis. Regulatory procedures for sample collection will be followed during the operation. Push core and/or hammer core samples will be collected at key locations throughout the project area dependent upon soil types encountered. A description of the testing methodology is provided below. Task 1.2 - Phvsical Analvsis All thirteen (13) sediment samples will be visually inspected, and logged in detail in accordance with FDEP & USACE standards. Results of the logging will be reported on USACE Engineering Form 1836. Textural classification during logging will be prepared in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System, described in ASTM Standard D-2487. Color photographs of the samples will be taken to record visual characteristics. Samples will be analyzed for grain size, percent mud and gravel. Grain size analysis will adhere to ASTM Standard D-422 for mechanical particle size analysis of the soils. Analyses will be conducted by mechanical sieving utilizing a set of nested screens dividing sediments at phi intervals from -4 to +3.5 phi, with the +3.75 phi (#200 mesh screen). Laboratory quality assurance procedures dictate that a replicate of approximately 5% of all samples taken for grain size analyses be taken. Grain size distribution of samples processed in accordance with the above procedures will be analyzed using the method of moments and graphic methods as described by Folk (1974). Tabular summaries of each sample will be generated and will report sieve size, phi size, mesh opening size in millimeters, weight of sediment retained in grams, cumulative percent retained, and cumulative percent passing. Sample statistics (e.g., mean, standard deviation, skewness and kurtosis) may also be displayed in the summary tables. A frequency plot of grain size distribution will be provided for each sample in accordance with USACE Form 2087. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5c New Business 30f5 Task 1.3 - Chemical Analysis (to be completed by others) Chemical analyses will be performed according to EPA methodology. Of the thirteen (13) sediment samples obtained a predetermined number of samples shall be used for chemical analysis/toxicology. The number of samples used for chemical testing will be determined by the County based upon the available budget. The chemical testing shall include twelve (12) total pollutant metals, the synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP), and Elutriate testing as per FDEP's Sediment Testing Requirements and Usage Criteria. The samples shall be tested for the following priority pollutant metals including arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, silver, barium, selenium, mercury, aluminum, copper, nickel, zinc, and the semi-volatile organic compounds listed in EPA Method 8270D. The synthetic precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP) analysis shall be conducted on the samples following EP A Method 1312. Testing will be performed by a Florida DEP certified environmental laboratory. If hot spots are identified, additional samples may be required to determine the source of contamination imd to define the boundaries ofthe contaminated sediment. Task 1.4 - Sediment Aeine Analysis The sediments would be dated by detennining the downcore distribution of 21 OPb activity. The disequilibrium between 225Ra and its long-lived decay product 210Pb (half-life of22.3 yr) is widely used to date aquatic and wetland sediments. The background, with an empty Petri dish, would be counted every 6 d for 24 h. The excess (unsupported) 210Pb would be calculated by subtracting the supported 21 OPb activity from the total 210Pb activity. Supported 210Pb would be estimated from the activity of 214Pb. Sediment accretion rates would be calculated using the constant initial concentration model (Robbins 1978). This model uses the cumulative sedimentation rate down core, a decay constant of 21 OPb, and the change of excess 210Pb activities with depth to estimate sediment accretion rates. A linear regression of the excess 21 OPb activity and the cumulative mass is used to estimate an annual sedimentation rate. PBS&J will prepare for, travel to and attend two (2) meetings. The meetings will be held to coordinate the project, and to provide project updates to the County Project Manager and other stakeholder representatives as deemed necessary and appropriate. One PBS&J senior scientist or engineer will attend each of these meetings, again as deemed appropriate. SCHEDULE The above scope is based on an estimated six (6) month schedule of participation. The work assignment may be amended ifthe schedule is extended beyond the six months. PBS&J will update County staff on the schedule, task and present budget of the project at project milestones. BUDGET CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5c New Business 40f5 In accordance with Collier County Contract Number 07-4153 "Professional Engineering Services for Coastal Zone Management Projects" compensation for the above scope of work will be based as noted below not to exceed the amount listed below without authorization from the County. Task 1 Summary Task 1.1 - Sediment Sampling $8,084.00 Lump Sum Task 1.2 - Physical Analysis $2,192.00 Lump Sum Task 1.3 - Chemical Analysis (to be completed by others) 1.31-12 Metals, VOC/SVOC 1.32 - SPLP 12 Metals, VOC/SVOC 1.33 - Elutriate 15 Metals, VOC/SVOC Task 1.4 - Sediment Aging Analysis 1.41 - One sample Task 1.5 - Core Report Total (with 1 Aging Sample) $10,000.00 $6.000.00 $26,276.00 Lump Sum Lump Sum Lump Sum January 6, 2010 Jeff~ . Tabar ProJec{Director PBS&J Date N \l .... u Uc> ~C> C> -.:E C> C> C> ...r C> C> C> N C> C> C> ~ C> C> If1 C> 7J1 Z 0 ~ ~ U 0 ~ ~ 0 U ~ ~ 7J1 0 ~ ~ ~ al'J 00 ~ l:Q ~ I E-c ~ Z r;;;"l ~ < 00 ~ 00 r;;;"l ~ r;;;"l 00 00 E-c -< - -< 00 ><: 00 >c 0 ~ ~ E-c Q - ~ 0 U ~ u -< ::J 00 Q 01 00 r;;;"l ~ 00 ~ 0 ., r;;;"l C-' ll.c ~ ~ -< ~ ~ r;;;"l 00 0 0 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-5d New Business 1 of 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Review and approve the approach and timing for Clam Bay Peer review. OBJECTIVE: review. For the CAC to approve the approach and timing for Clam Bay Peer CONSIDERATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners (BCC) approved peer review for the Clam Bay Data Collection and Analysis Report along with the modeling program at the December 18, 2009 BCC meeting. Selection of the review was to be a recognized expert in coastal system and water quality from academicia with no ties to consulting or Collier County. This individual was also to be jointly approved by the Pelican Bay Services Division and .coastal Zone Management with the PBSD contributing half of the cost of the review. . A total of $13,000 has been approved by the BCC for Coastal Zone Management to spend on this peer review. Additional funds may be available if navigational markers are not installed this year and monies can be reallocated by approving boards. With PBSD matching funds, $26,000 at a minimum is available for peer review. The following approach to peer review is outlined for consideration: Item Bv Date Due 1. Develop scope of work for peer review JGM 1/21/2010 2. Review/approve scope/approach CAC 2/11/2010 3. Letter of Interest Solicitation through County Purchasing 3/1/2010 Purchasing 4. Select peer review individual CZM/PBSD 3/11/2010 5. Award contract Purchasing 4/1/2010 ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending approval of this item. FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from unincorporated Collier County Tax Fund 111. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: For the CAC to approve the approach and timing for Clam Bay Peer Review outlined in this Executive Summary. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIlI-5e New Business 10f1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Status Summary of additional Clam Bay work items OBJECTIVE: Status Summary of additional Clam Bay work items CONSIDERATIONS: 1. 10 yr JCP Application - the Clam Pass morphology analysis task is complete; we are currently compiling the RAI response to FDEP and ACOE. A draft will be submitted to the County for review by end of this week. Two weeks are planned for County and stakeholder review. We anticipate submittal of the RAls to the agencies the week of February 1, 2010. 2. PBS&J will submit a scope and budget for the Clam Bay Biological Assessment for the County to review by the end of this week. 3. Jeff Tabar and Todd DeMunda will be meeting with Steve Keene (CP&E) Wednesday or Thursday this week to define CP&E's role in the Clam Bay Estuary modeling effort and develop a detailed scope of work for this activity. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: None -Information Sharing only FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from Category "A" Tourist Development Tax fund 195. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Information sharing only. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 1 of 45 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Recommend approval by the CAC for the Final FEMA Quality Justification Report Prepared by Coastal Planning & Engineering Dated January 2010 for Beach Losses from Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma. OBJECTIVE: Recommend approval by the CAC for the Final FEMA Quality Justification Report Prepared by Coastal Planning & Engineering Dated January 2010 for Beach Losses from Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma. CONSIDERATIONS: The attached report analyzes the overall storm impacts from Federal Disasters between 2000 and 2006 on Collier County Beaches. It is a comprehensive analysis that justifies reimbursement for beach renourishment fund to reestablish beach profiles and widths to the 1996 permit conditions. Profile difference between the 2000 pre-storm survey and the 2006 before dredge survey justifies 553,000 cy of sand. The June 2006 survey recorded 588,000 cy in place after renourishment. This report all established quantities that can be contributed to each storm which is necessary for cost reimbursement. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Recommend approval by the CAC for the Final FEMA Quality Justification Report Prepared by Coastal Planning & Engineering Dated January 2010 for Beach Losses from Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval by the CAC for the Final FEMA Quality Justification Report Prepared by Coastal Planning & Engineering Dated January 2010 for Beach Losses from Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Busin,ess 20f45 TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE, HURRICANES KATRINA & WILMA STORM IMP ACT RE-ASSESSMENT REPORT 1995-1996 COLLIER COUNTY BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT Prepared for: Collier County Coastal Zone Management Prepared by: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. January 2010 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 30f45 TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE, HURRICANES KATRINA & WILMA STORM IMPACT RE-ASSESSMENT REPORT 1995-1996 COLLIER COUNTY BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT Table of Contents Introduction....................................................................................................................................... .1 Methods for Re-Assessment ..............................................................................................................1 Damages............................................................................................................................................ .3 Re-establ ishment of the Design Template.........................................................................................3 Storm Contribution ...........................................................................................................................4 Conclusions...................................................................................................................................... ..4 References........ ............... .... ............ ............ ..................... ... ... ....................................... ... ..................7 List of Figures Figure No. 1 Project Area History and Location Map ............................................................................2 List of Tables Table No. 1 Mean-High Water Shoreline & Berm Changes 2000-2006..............................................5 2 V olumetric Change and Fill Summary 2000-2006...........................................................6 List of Appendices Appendix No. 1 Comparative Profiles of Storm loss 2000-2006 2 Comparative Construction Profiles 1996 vs. 2006 i COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 40f45 TROPICAL STORM GABRIELLE, HURRICANES KATRINA & WILMA STORM IMPACT RE-ASSESSMENT REPORT 1995-1996 COLLIER COUNTY BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECT I. INTRODUCTION This report re-assesses the 2001 and 2005 storm losses experienced along the Collier County shoreline within the 1995-1996 beach nourishment project area (Figure 1). The losses were caused by Tropical Storm Gabrielle, Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Wilma. The project area met Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) criteria defining a beach nourishment project's eligibility for Public Assistance of permanent work, and the damages were summarized and approved in FEMA Project Work Sheet for the three storms: Tropical Storm Gabrielle Hurricane Katrina Hurricane Wilma FEMA-1393-DR-FL September 11,2001 FEMA-FL-DR-1602 August 25,2005 FEMA-FL-DR-1609 October 24,2005 The study area encompasses approximately 17 miles of coast from the Lee County line to Gordon Pass (Figure 1). The 1995-96 project area covers approximately 6 miles of shoreline within that region. Collier County is approximately 115 miles south of the entrance of Tampa Bay and about 100 miles west of Miami, Florida. The County is bordered to the west and southwest by the Gulf of Mexico, to the south by Monroe County, to the east by Dade and Broward Counties, and to the north by Lee and Hendry Counties. The three reaches making up the project area are Vanderbilt Beach (R23-R30), Park Shore (R51-R53) and Naples Beach (R58-R77). Collier County's restored beaches were struck by three (3) major tropical storms and hurricanes between 2001 and 2005 that caused erosion and profile degradation. These storms caused losses eligible for FEMA category G funding based on an immediate post storm analysis. This report re-examine the cumulative impact of volumetric and profile losses to these beaches from the three storms. The 5-foot NGVD (3.72 ft-NA VD) design beach elevation was degraded by these storms, and had not fully recovered by the time of construction of the 2006 beach nourishment projects. The 2006 project re-established the 1996 permit design elevation. n. METHODS FOR RE-ASSESSMENT The earlier storm damage assessments were based on surveys available at the time, and in hindsight, these have proven to be unsuitable as discussed below. A reassessment of all three storms is made based upon the shoreline changes between the survey of June 2000 and the 1 st Quarter of2006 (February). The latter survey is the before dredge (BD) survey of the 2006 beach nourishment project. This study reevaluated the surveyed profile data between 1995 and 2006 for the purpose of measuring the cumulative storm impacts to the design beach berm, the volume of sand on the beach and whether the design berm is re-established. Surveys evaluated include the 2006 before dredge (BD) surveys, which show the greater belated impacts ofthe 2005 hurricanes. 1 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. '\~;>.~;f .>!~. , .-: \ \i~...'(:....I= I R1\tif~,...: \ '~~\1! [lr II '~2~'j\ Ii I "t1~.'t! BA~FOOT -.),s\ .. R10~-:1i B CH I I \~j~,. \ f J,"~ -" HENDRY CO. '$:!p~_1 ,{ 0 ~v~J0 ~ 0::- WIGGINS PASS"fj{!.,\ -t~,<<~,f.1 ~ MAINTAINED "I' i-"/r~~S' 00 ~(/, 0:: SINCE 1984 R20'tol,/ i V1-l'1~~ lD -.Ji r ~~' .. DERB1LT GULF MONROE CO. ~ 1996 FILL \r~EACH OF Cl SEGMENT &~ MEXICO \'" '''i I t'S "-- R30\~PE:,d;-" -r- l ~;,J\ BA'f \ I' ~) 11 iii, R40\'- I ; i r,l CLAM PASS~~) ) I ,!\ I MAINTAINED 'r\ SR 8961 i'~ SINCE 1995 ~:ffi\1 \ n! 'T I. I ;('~{ I I' I I \ 1996 FILL ,J\'~I \ I) , . SEGMENT~50 ;!~'...l 1,\ ' I I :n.., ' 1996 Cf..~'.).l wf-RK SHORE I NORTH JETTY _ "?S') \ EXTENSION ~1\ \S~86 // DOCTORS PASS '6~ , PILE \. t=; '1 STABILIZED AND ~~e-r-I..CLUSTER NAPLES '., . ... MAINTAINED ~~ _, SINCE 1960 ~'t=~' /1~~~!~8-1 i SR 856 ,.--t 1996 STRUCTURE MODIFICATIONS ~I./l' REPAIRED. / i - 36 GROINS REMOVED ~-r II I - 6 ROCK GROINS RESTORED A~7G-l' ", d-l I SR B4 ! - 10 OUTFALLS EXTENDED ~ ~ "',...L, I h (-'" I, ! ~~. :.~.....',~',.....~...APLEjTI~:E? . I' I ~ ~1~\:.:V' f-'\ Ii. i EXISTING I =;:'.PORT ". ; GROIN en"""" us 41 " i FIELD ~~;11J~~L '. T GORDON PASS ~~.~ " STABILIZED AND \~R90 MAINTAINED '." ~ SINCE 1962 '\rtf\\)-r \:'\>. GULF OF MEXICO CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 5 of 45 1 1 ORLANDO ATlANTIC OCEAN o BOCA . RATON MIAMI o 6000 12000 I I GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT NOTE: J~ FILLS WIDTHS NOT TO SCALE. FIGURE 1. PROJECT AREA HISTORY AND LOCATION MAP 2 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 6 of 45 The survey data used for this analysis was converted from its original FDEP xyz data set using the same conversion methods for each survey set available from 2000 to 2006. Each was converted to the NA VD 1988 datum. This eliminated any variations in conversion methods that may have occurred over the years. The closure and correlation between annual surveys was evaluated and the survey set with the least variability in closure and reasonableness of calculations was selected. Closure is the quiescence part of the profile landward or seaward of the active profiles or beyond the depth of closure. In addition, the survey pair that most clearly reached a static or equilibrated state was favored to avoid anomalous results. The best surveys from the evaluated set were the 2000 and the 2006 data sets. Using these sets, the cumulative erosion losses and profile degradation were reevaluated due to the impact of the three storms. Profile degradation evaluated the lack of design beach berm recovery experienced by the project since TS Gabriella in 2001. The 2001 survey was not used for analysis, and it was especially problematic because it was conducted by PDEP over a few month time frame and near the occurrence of one of the major truck haul nourishment events. The truck haul occurred in April 2001. The on- and off-shore portions of the May 2001 survey were conducted a few months apart. This practice leads to double counting of either erosion or accretion, which makes the measurement uncertain. In the Collier County case, the sand was measured on the beach and again after it moved into the near shore. The equilibration ofthe placed truck haul sand adds to the uncertainty, since it compacts with time due to natural process. The May 2000 surveys proved more reliable based on all measurement and criteria. The November 2005 survey proved to have one major flaw; the beach had not reached an acceptable level of equilibration. This was discovered at the start of the 2006 beach construction when the new BD survey show much greater losses from the 2005 hurricane season than those indicted in the November 2005 survey. Further equilibration occurred between November 2005 anq the start of construction in late February 2006 probably due to shift of sand cross- and along- shore, along with post-storm compaction of the sand in the active profile. Storms often decrease the density (increases the fluffiness) of the displaced sand initially, which create the appearance of more sand. The June 2000 and 1 st Quarter (BD) 2006 surveys were selected for the final evaluation because they represented the most equilibrated and realistic surveys, while the other two surveys (May 2001 and November 2005) were too close to events that overwhelmed their usefulness. Comparative profiles are attached at the end of this report (Appendix 1). Even though the 2006 profiles are shorter than the other, they best show the cumulative impact of the three storms. This evaluation also considered the effect of supplemental fill added directly to the project area. The fill history was taken from CPE's 2003 engineering report and 2006 Doctors Pass post- construction report. The full degradation of the beach profile caused by the storms was mitigated by the truck haul sand in many areas, especially Park Shore, but the storms effects are more readily apparent where supplemental sand was small. 3 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 70f45 III. DAMAGES The damages caused by the three storms can be measured in three ways: measured volume, measured shoreline loss, and elevation and width degradation of the beach berm. The 2000 monitoring and 2006 BD surveys proved to be the most representative of the conditions before and after the passage of this storm series. The comparative profiles (Appendix 1) attached to the end of this report show the condition of the beach at 31 FDEP R-monument locations within the project area between 2000 and 2006. The profile locations are marked on Figure 1. What is most noticeable about the profiles is the degradation of the beach berm elevation and width. The design beach elevation is 5.0 ft NGVD, which is 3.72 ft NA VD based on the latest elevation datum used in the comparative profiles. Almost 60% of the profiles show a significant loss of the dry beach berm in both width and elevation. Profiles R24 to R29 and R70 to R77 show the most significant degradation and receded an average of 36 feet at the design berm elevation. Another third showed smaller beach width or elevation degradation. The profiles with the least degradation received the largest volume of supplemental sand between 2000 and 2006. These profiles were within Park Shore (R51-R53) and the Doctors Pass disposal area at R60 and R61, which showed a negligible berm change between 2000 and 2006. The berm receded an average of 18 feet at all 31 profile locations (Table 1). Even with supplemental fill and recovery time, most of the profiles remain sub-optimal. The greatest berm recession was 49 feet. The second method is to analyze mean high water shoreline changes. From 2000 to 2006, the average shoreline change was -16.1 feet (Table 1). Between December 1996 and July 2000, shorelines changed an average of -4.6 feet in the project area. The recent period's recession was 3.5 times higher than the earlier period. Both periods of time had supplemental sand added to the beach, with the latest period receiving 2.3 times as much sand as the earlier period, and still showed a larger average loss. Half the profiles lost an average of 35 feet since 2000 and the largest loss was over 50 feet, which illustrates the severity of the problem. The net effect is that storm damage caused greater erosion in the recent period (2000-2006) compared to the initial period after the 1996 construction, even with more supplemental fill added. The volume change calculation best illustrate the storm impacts since 2000, because we can clearly account for the benefit of supplemental sand fill. The 2000-2006 volumetric losses based on the comparative profiles is 369,000 CY, including the supplemental sand. The volumetric losses ifno supplemental sand was placed would be 553,455 CY. This accounts for 184,000 CY added by truck haul and deposited down drift of Doctor Pass during maintenance dredging. All of the profiles would be erosional if no supplement fill sand was placed. The cumulative impact for the period between 2000 and 2006 is above half a million CY, which is a measure of the cumulative impacts for the three storms. IV. RE-ESTABLISHEMENT OF THE DESIGN TEMPLATE The 2006 beach nourishment project re-established the design berm elevation and width within the 1996 project limits, with a few small exceptions. A comparison between the pre- and post 4 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 8 of 45 construction 1996 profiles and the 2006 post-dredge and post-construction conditions is provided in Appendix 2. Visual inspections and comparison of the 1996 versus 2006 post-construction profiles (Appendix 2) show very similar constructed berm conditions. The 2006 design berm locations are only 6 feet on average seaward of the 1996 condition, a strong measure of their similarity. See profiles R29 and R30 for a good illustration. The 2006 project was designed to duplicate the 1996 project objectives, as described in the nourishment engineering report prepared by CPE in 2003. The 2003 design called for a volume of 673,000, which was the volume permitted by the Corps and State. The as-built volume was 668,000 cy in 2006. The permit required survey in June 2006 measured a volume of 588.000 in the project area since November 2005. The difference in volume was primarily due to unrealized storm losses that occurred after November 2005 and natural settlement in the constructed project. V. STORM CONTRIBUTION The losses measured by immediate post-storm surveys were distributed 58%, 19% and 23% for Gabrielle, Katrina and Wilma respectively in Collier County. Given the severity of Hurricane Wilma, this distribution does not appear realistic. The before dredge (BD) survey for the 2006 project showed that the losses due to the 2005 hurricane were much greater than directly measurement in November 2005. The additional losses measure from 2000 thru 2006 compare to Nov 2005 was sufficient to explain the difference up to 553,000 cy. This will shift the distribution to 34%, 11 % and 55% for Gabrielle, Katrina and Wilma respectively. VI. CONCLUSIONS The available survey data was reduced to a common datum and re-evaluated, and the 2000 and 2006 pair provided the most reliable assessment of the cumulative storm impacts to the project areas for the three storms. Berm elevation and width were significantly degraded in almost 60% of the profiles, with another third showing permanent width or elevation losses. Permanent berm retreat averaged 35 feet on the worst half of the profiles. This means that the 35 feet on the design berm elevation was missing before the 2006 project. The shoreline retreat has accelerated since 2000, even with the' increased mitigation by supplemental fill placement. The cumulative losses caused by storms between 2000 and 2006 are 553,000 CY. This is the quantity needed to mitigate for the storm losses and re-establish the design berm. The 2006 renourishment project re-established the 1996 berm design. 5 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. Table 1. Mean-High-Water Shoreline & Berm Changes 2000-2006 Measured Changes Profile MHW Berm Jul.2000 Jul.2000 Q 1 2006 Q 1 2006 R-23 11.8 -12.2 R-24 -5.0 -23.2 R-25 -25.3 -40.2 R-26 -30.4 -41.5 R-27 -33.2 -45.4 R-28 -32.8 -36.5 R-29 -33.4 -29.9 R-30 -9.8 -14.0 R-51 -3.7 -7.3 R-52 27.4 0.4 R-53 18.0 -6.0 R-58 -11.2 3.5 R-59 2.2 -0.7 R-60 -7.2 7.6 R-61 -1.4 4.8 R-62 -37.2 -6.5 R-63 -45.5 -29.4 R-64 -31.0 -16.9 R-65 -11.7 -10.3 R-66 -7.3 10.3 R-67 9.9 26.2 R-68 -4.6 9.9 R-69 -29.2 -16.7 R-70 -28.1 -40.7 R-71 -31. 7 -44.9 R-72 -52.0 -49.2 R-73 -17.7 -38.1 R-74 -23.0 -44.9 R-75 -10.0 -24.9 R-76 -21.7 -32.1 R-77 -25.8 -18.3 Vanderbilt Avg. -19.8 -30.4 Park Shores A vg. 13.9 -4.3 Naples Avg. -19.2 -15.6 TOTAL -16.1 -18.3 6 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 9 of 45 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 10 of 45 T bl VI Ch FII o a e 2. o umetric anQe and i Summary 2000-2 06 Measured Fill Added Gross Profile t-- Cha'.!K~___ Erosion -_____ _ ___u~_ "..___ Jul.2000 2000-3 2005 Jul.2000 Q 1 2006 By Truck By Dredging Q 1 2006 R-23 -1,639 0 -1,639 R-24 -9,994 3,406 -13,400 R-25 -17,594 3,406 -21,000 R-26 -15,356 3,406 -18,762 R-27 -23,022 3,406 -26,428 R-28 -21,902 3,406 -25,308 R-29 -10,526 3,406 -13,932 R-30 -8,374 1,703 -10,077 R-51 -7,253 23,627 -30,880 R-52 4,122 23,627 -19,505 R-53 -6,460 18,243 -24,703 R-58 119 9,188 -9,069 R-59 4,065 4,133 -68 R-60 -2,637 4,133 22,176 -28,946 R-61 -6,536 4,133 22,176 -32,845 R-62 -16,155 4,133 -20,288 R-63 -19,569 6,811 -26,380 R-64 -16,485 5,472 -21,957 R-65 -14,741 4,133 -18,874 R-66 -13,031 4,133 -17,164 R-67 -8,054 4,133 -12,187 R-68 -13,989 2,066 -16,055 R-69 -15,890 0 -15,890 R-70 -24,411 0 -24,411 R-71 -17,325 0 -17,325 R-72 -23,439 0 -23,439 R-73 -11 ,906 0 -11,906 R-74 -14,216 0 -14,216 R-75 -14,274 0 -14,274 R-76 -12,696 0 -12,696 R-77 -9,833 0 -9,833 Vanderbilt Avg. -108,407 22,138 -130,545 Park Shores Avg. -9,591 65,497 -75,088 Naples A vg. -251,003 52,467 -347,822 TOTAL -369,001 140,102 -553,455 7 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 11 of 45 V. REFERENCES Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Collier County Beach Restoration Project, 6- Year Monitoring Report, October 2002. Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., North Collier County Renourishment Engineering Report, September 2003. Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Collier County Beach Restoration Project, 8- Year Monitoring Report, November 2004. Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Collier County Beach Restoration Project, Post Hurricanes Katrina & Wilma Storm Report, January 2006 Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc., Wiggins and Doctors passes 2009 Maintenance Dredging Post-Construction Report. Collier County Beach Restoration Project, 8- Year Monitoring Report, November 2004. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., Collier County Beach Restoration Project, Post- Construction Monitoring Report, File No. 96.001, November 1996. Coastal Engineering Consultants, Inc., Collier County Beach Restoration Project, Fourth Annual Monitoring Report, File No. 00.001, July 2001. 8 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. APPENDIX 1 COMPARATIVE PROFILES OF STORM LOSS 2000-2006 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 12 of 45 ~on o ~ Z I- W W ~ on PROFILE LINE: R-23 LOCATION: Collier o ~on o ~ z ~ w ~ o :> "::l w ..'~.. .' on I - .; o 'I on '1 .............00_. JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------ - NOV,05 80 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: : N = 704B92 FEET . , E =' 3B5137 FE!'T AZ, ; = 270 OEG,: ....... _.:-_~ ::--~"'-"'-:-:.=- :'-,,:::=_-.-C:- . -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIS1. (FEET) 500 600 on PROFILE LINE: R-24 LOCATION: Collier o o fJ. ...~~, ~ \,~~ ':V-' '. I ~ :> w -' w on I o 'I on 'I ..._000000__._... JUN 2000 DEP2001 ---- --- NOV,05 80 OIST;ANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 703B72 FEET , , E =' 3B541 7 FE!:T AZ, : = 260 OEG,: -100 o 100 200 300 400 OIST, (FEET) 500 600 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 13 of 45 700 BOO .., '. 700 800 of) PROFILE LINE: R-25 o ~of) a ~ z I- W W ~ o :> w -' w of) I o "I on "I _nmmnnn_. JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SO -100 o 100 of) PROFILE LINE: R-26 o ~of) a ~ z I- W W ~ o :> w -' w of) I o "I of) "I _'.'mmm_n_ JUN 2000 OEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SO -100 o 100 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 702814 FEET E ,,; 385648 FEET AZ,;= 270 OEG" 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 LOCATION: Collier CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 14 of 45 ~,- -:~=.--::::--. 700 800 , , , , ............................................ , , , , , , DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N = 701851 FEET E ,,; 385847 FEET AZ, : = 270 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 ~1l) o ~ Z 1- W w !::- ~1l) o ~ z 1- W W ~ o o :> w -' w 1l) 1 o 'I 1l) 'I 1l) o o :> w -' w 1l) I o 'I 1l) 'I ~ .-.', :\~\\ ' ... -...: '\.." , , , .. , \, \ , \ \ : \', .. \:'\; ',-:~;: ,,- .', . '. \. . ---"'-..... . J~"","", ~- ..:;';-'"_....~ '. '. . .... ......' . .'.. ... ..... ........-.. DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: ' . N ,,; 699684 FEET . , E ~ 386162 FEP AZ, : = 275 DEG,: , , 1l) PROFILE LINE: R-27 mU"U'mm. JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 PROFILE LINE: R-28 -, "". -- 'i JUN 2000 DEP2001 NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII.6 New Business 15 of 45 LOCATION: Collier , , , , ................... . .'--"', ~.~._".. >.\;. DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 700867 FEET E =' 385990 FEET AZ, : = 260 OEG,~ 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 a .... . ..............~.. ......... ......... . . . . . . . . .. ' . .. ~. ... S on ~ Z t;; w !:=.. a :> w --' W on I ....-, a 'I .-....._--------- JUN 2000 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: DEP2DD1 N 698847 FEET ------- NOV,05 E - 386342 FEET on SD A2, ;= 270 DEG,: 'I -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DIST, (FEET) a .. : 1. --4, , ~ ~on a ~ z t- W w !:=.. a :> w --' w on I a 'I ----------------- JUN 2000 OEP2001 ------- NOV,05 on SD 'I -100 0 100 on on CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 16 of 45 PROFILE LINE: R-29 LOCATION: Collier PROFILE LINE: R-30 LOCATION: Collier ;.. DIS1ANC:ES" R'EFE~ENCED ' TO'; .:' , , N ,,; 697837 FEET , , E =' 386538 FEET A2, : = 270 DEG,' 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 17 of 45 '" PROFILE LINE: R-51 LOCATION: Collier a /- ',' / , DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N =i 676170 FEn E =' 388714 FEtT AZ,:= 270 DEG,: ~'" Cl ~ Z I- W W ~ a :> w -' w '" I a Onm_mmm_ JUN 2000 DEP2001 -- ----- NOV,05 8D '" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST. (FEET) 500 600 700 800 '" PROFILE LINE: R-52 LOCATION: Collier a ,., ,., ", , ~ a '" . . .. ': . . ~,~, ~ Z I- W W ~ a :> w -' w '" I ...., ~... .. . a ~~ ,', REFERENCED ----------------- JUN 2000 DISTANCES TO: DEP2001 N 675292 FEET ------- NOV,05 E = 388834 FEET '" 8D AZ, := 270 DEG, I" -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 DIST, (FEET) I- W W -'=- <fl PROFILE LINE: R-53 o ~'" a ;:r z I- W W -'=- o :> w --' w '" I a 'I '" 'I Om____mn__n JUN 2000 DEP200l ------- NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 <fl PROFILE LINE: R-58 o ~<fl a ;:r z a :> w --' w '" I o 'I <fl 'I _____mnn__.., JUN 2000 DEP200l - - - - - - - NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N =; 674248 FED E = 388930 FE!:T AZ, : = 270 DEG,; 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N = 668694 FEET E =: 389669 FEET AZ, ,= 270 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 18 of 45 LOCATION: Collier 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier -......._--- ..~_#~'~"'#-~"""~~ ....:, '-'-", .-....--.. 500 600 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 19 of 45 <t) PROFILE LINE: R-59 LOCATION: Collier o o ~' , , ~~. <~?l, -\~: \ " 05-"" ' ~. ";..~ .....~ ....~~~ . . "'''~''~~~'''''''' '~".. . ~<t) o ~ Z I- W W ~ :> w --' w <t) I h__m__mm__ JUN 2000 DEP2001 - -- -- - - - - NOV,05 SO DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: , , N =; 667729 FEET E ; 389847 FEET AZ, :; 270 DEG,: o I" <t) I" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 <t) PROFILE LINE: R-60 LOCATION: Collier 0 .~ ~<t) 0 ~ Z I- W W ~ 0 :> w --' w <t) I 0 I" ..............--. JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 <t) SO I" -100 0 100 , , ........................................... , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ...................................... , , --,..... DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: .. - N ; 666685 FEET ---.:-.- - E ; 3901 45 FEET AZ, :; 270 DEG,: 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 D1ST. (FEET) CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 20 of 45 <tl PROFILE LINE: R-61 LOCATION: Collier a , , . . .. .. ~.. ... .. . .. .. . .. '" . . . .. . .. . . . . . . ~<tl C ~ Z <tl I ;, . .:....-. ..,.....- -":-:;:f-.:-:\:::-.~:-t",; .:...: ......... l- LU LU ~ a :> LU ...J LU a I" m____...um__ JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 BD DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N .; 665649 FEn , , E ,: 390438 FEET AZ,:= 270 DEG,: '" I" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 <tl PROFILE LINE: R-62 LOCATION: Collier a ;.. a , '\ , t" :~ ~~.,.: \\ ',,\ \\ '" \:~"" ',\,- '-'::< /....,...., = : "~ "--: ,..,..<:.:.A, "... "'. '--~~:~-~j)':t-:~,~... ~ '~\.......-... ~<tl C ~ Z l- LU LU ~ :> LU ...J LU <tl I <tl I" JUN 2000 DEP2001 NOV,05 BD DIS-fANCES' 'R'E:FE:~E:NCED TO: , , N ~ 664628 FEn , , E ,: 390432 FEET AZ, == 270 DEG,: .-- --- a I" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST. (FEET) 500 600 700 800 ~Ill Cl ~ Z l- W W ~ :> w --' w III PROFILE LINE: R-63 o \ : ~:_'''' ~Ill Cl ~ Z tJ w ~ o :> w --' w III I o 'I III 'I u____mumm JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 BO -100 o 100 III PROFILE LINE: R-64 o o ; .lA : .-..... , - . , - , - . . . ," . ", ..,..., , ,:\ ~\.... " III I o 'I III 'I _mu__mmm JUN 2000 DEP2001 -- ------ NOV,05 BD -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 21 of 45 LOCATION: Collier ",. ............................... DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: : N =i 663642 FEET , , E ~ 390642 FEET AZ,:= 270 OEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) , '\ .............. . ....~, ......:.... . ."........,.,. ..~.......:...:.~.......':................ -- ....- ':"- 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N = 662732 FEET E = 390B14 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) ..,...... 500 600 700 BOO ~tll ~ z I- W W ~ tll PROFILE LINE: R-65 o ~tll o ~ z /..;\ -, : /' ,,-\.-:\ ; ..\~_... , : \ : : ,.~\ I- W W ~ o ::> w -' w tll I o 'I tll 'I ,'mm.mmn JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 tll PROFILE LINE: R-66 o LOCATION: Collier " " ":""'~~~Lm_./m'<~'?t.." ., , ~----~{I -'~'~:'\.,.___ ,.. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 22 of 45 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 661954 FEET , , E =' 390899 FEET AZ, : = 260 OEG, 200 300 400 DIST. (FEET) LOCATION: Collier '~"\I::k;;...'..'" ,..", :,,~, ~ ~: , "~\, \.~ o ::> w -' w on I o 'I on mmnn___._n JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 500 600 700 800 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 661148 FEET E = 391078 FEET AZ,:= 260 DEG" 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 -, 700 800 oil a CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 23 of 45 PROFILE LINE: R-67 LOCATION: Collier ~oIl 0 ~ Z I- W w !:=.. a :> w --' w .~: oil ", ~~.:~\, I ~.. .. ,., .',' ''\ \ \ '- "- ,- a 'I ----..-...._----- JUN 2000 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: DEP2001 N '" 660351 FEET ---_._-- NOV,05 E ~ 3911 4B FE~T oil SO AZ, ;= 260 DEG,; 'I -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 BOD DIST, (FEET) oil a ~OIl o ~ z I- W w !:=.. a :> w --' w oil I a 'I oil 'I PROFILE LINE: R-6B LOCATION: Collier .m........._h. JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SO DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 659545 FEET E = 391220 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,. , -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 BOO ~'" Cl :it z I- W w !:=. ~'" Cl :it z I- W w !:=. :> w -' w :> w -' w '" PROFilE LINE: R-69 lOCATION: Collier a a ~' / ' ' . , "\~",: \" " \~ "'. '-'" . \ ~f-~., ... \ ...-\~ '" I . ..;.. a 'I '" 'I mmm"h'm JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 BD DISTANCES REFERENCED N ,,; 658736 FEET , , E =' 391275 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: , , -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 '" PROFilE LINE: R-70 lOCATION: Collier a , ---~/\ " . .....- I a '" I a 'I '" 'I ,.....,,'......., JUN 2000 DEP2001 - - - - - - - NOV,05 BD DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N = 657941 FEET E - 391351 FEET AZ, . = 260 DEG" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST. (FEET) 500 600 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 24 of 45 ... ... '-, ~, .." ,.' ....",.., : ... '. 700 800 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 25 of 45 of) PROFILE LINE: R-71 LOCATION: Collier o o ... ....... ..........}.\":- - ~~.~~~~<,~-~~~>"........... ...... DISTANCES REFEikENCED'Tii~~""" "-.~. "- N ,,; 657147 FEET ' , : : "... E ~ 391470 FEET '...... AZ,:= 260 DEG,: - . , ~of) o :;r z I- W W ~ :> ~ w of) I o I" _______uu.m__ JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SD '" I" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 of) PROFILE LINE: R- 72 LOCATION: Collier 0 .... . .....~.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........-. ..... ............... ,..---~ 8 of) :;r Z I- W W ~ 0 :> w ....J W of) I --..... ...... 0 I" .--.._----------- JUN 2000 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: DEP2001 N - 656356 FEET ------- NOV,05 E 391609 FEET of) SD AZ, := 260 DEG" I" -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 6DO 700 800 DIST, (FEET) on PROFILE LINE: R-73 0 I ~on 0 ::t z >-- w w ~ 0 :> w --' w on I ~on o ::t z >-- w w ~ :> w --' w o "I on I" on o o on I o I" on I" mnn.......m JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------ - NOV,05 SD -10D o 100 PROFILE LINE: R-74 omowOO'mm JUN 2000 DEP2001 -------- NOV,05 SD -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 26 of 45 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ~ 655544 FEET E = 391594 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG, ":," '.. ':' , ,. " >"..... , , ~.~..~ ............. 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 LOCATION: Collier \fOO'O'<:-~~"'" , _ ;/" ,,'0", -..', ~ ' \, \ ~~""'::'''''"' , \.'. .'. " ' " ~:.. '-'_.-.'-~. . . DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ~ 654741 FEET , , E = 391736 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 700 600 BOO Il) PROFILE LINE: R- 75 a ~Il) o ~ z ,: ...t ~ :\ ~\r:'?1 .;'/"\.'t\ : \\ I- W W ~ a ,; w --' w Il) I a 'I Il) 'I _____________nn JUN 2000 OEP2001 -- ---- - NOV,05 BD -100 o 100 Il) PROFILE LINE: R-76 LOCATION: Collier " , \"',--'-,: ~\. :--, , " , ,.. ~~:' . ...." : "-. . " ..... ~".'.: . '- - 00, ,', "~. "-_. '..' . --- : .--: DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N .; 653966 FEET E =' 391889 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) LOCATION: Collier CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 27 of 45 . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . - . .'. . , , 500 700 600 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 28 of 45 U1 PROFILE LINE: R-77 LOCATION: Collier o , " . . . . . ... ... .. ... ... ~. . ........ . . . .. .. - .. .... ... .. ... ',' . .. . . . .. .. . .... ,.... .. . .. ...... . ~U1 o :it z ....................................... ....\. , , , , , , , , t- W w t:. o :> w --' w U1 I o 'I on 'I ----------------- JUN 2000 DEP2001 ------- NOV,05 SD DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: , , N ~ 652.385 FEET E =' .392074 FEET AZ,:= 260 DEG,: , . -100 o 100 200 .300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 APPENDIX 2 COMPARATIVE CONSTRUCTION PROFILES 1996 VS 2006 COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 29 of 45 '" PROFILE LINE: R-23 a ~'" a ~ z I- W W ~ a ::> w --' w '" I a 'I '" 'I m__mO__h____ PRE-CON POSTCON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 '" PROFILE LINE: R-24 a 0 '" ~ Z I- W W ~ a ~ --' w '" I a 'I _______O......m PRE-CON POSTCON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 '" 'I -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 30 of 45 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N = 704886 FEET , , E =' 385273 FE~ AZ, = 270 DEG" '~.--.'~-- -.-.--.... 200 .300 400 DIST. (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED N '" 703872 FEET E =' .385417 FEET AZ, ; = 260 DEG,; 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 ~Ii) Cl :i( Z I- W W ~ ~Ii) Cl :i( Z I- W W ~ :> w --' w :> w --' w '~~. - _1;\ : '\ , \' \ \" \\ . \ , \ \."",.oo<-~-~-;\-.}\ 0_,,< ' Ii) PROFILE LINE: T - 25 o o J\ : .'1"'0' ;'''<-, \ \\~ '\" o Ii) I o I' Ii) I' nmn"'Omm PRE-CON POSTCON ------- AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o 100 Ii) PROFILE LINE: R-26 o 1'4, : '.~ " , , --, ~, , .>--~ - : \_, . '\ o Ii) I o I' Ii) I' ____mm_mn_ PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 " '.. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 31 of 45 LOCATION: Collier DIST:ANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 702829 FEn E '" 385836 FEET AZ, :; 270 DEG,: ,Oh_",~ : '. ....~ ' o. . --.-. . , 0' . . '--._- . . . . , , , 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier DIST:ANCES REFERENCED N ,,; 701851 FEn , , E '" 385847 FEfT AZ,:; 270 OEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 </} PROFILE LINE: R-27 o ."- ~</} Cl ~ Z >- w w !:=. o :> w --' w </} I o 'I </} 'I m.....m_mn PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 </} PROFILE LINE: R-28 o ~</} Cl ~ Z ~. !~-- ~\.. >- W w !:=. o :> w --' w </} I o 'I </} 'I _..___n____mn PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 32 of 45 LOCATION: Collier , '''-~''-~-' .......-..........:-.-....-..,:.. .................. DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: .-.-......0000.. : N ,,; 700867 FEtT ..,.- , , E ~ 385990 FE~ AZ, : = 260 OEG,: , , '.. ."-.. 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: , , N ,,; 699684 FEET E =' 3861 62 FE~T AZ, : = 275 DEG,: 200 300 400 DI5T, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 33 of 45 '" PROFILE LINE: R-29 LOCATION: Collier a .. ...;. a .....i.....\ '~<'~..+--;:_.,.. ~'" a ~ z I- W W ~ :> w -' w '" J a (" mm_noh'm_ PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 P05T-2006 DISTANCES REFEikENCED TO: N =i 69BB47 FEET , , E =' 386342 FE~ AZ, : = 270 DEG,; , , .~ '" (" -100 o 100 200 300 400 DI5T, (FEET) 500 600 700 BOO '" PROFILE LINE: R-30 LOCATION: Collier a mm..,..,_..., PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST - 2006 . . ~-.. . . ~'" a ~ z I- W W ~ a :> w -' w '" I o 'I DIS-fANCE5 REFERENCED TO: N = 697B37 FEET , , E = 3B6538 FEET AZ, = 270 DEG,: '" 'I -100 o 100 200 300 400 DI5T, (FEET) 500 600 700 BOO CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 34 of 45 on PROFILE LINE: R-5 I LOCATION: Collier a ~on o ~ Z I- W W ~ '~'-~ a :> w -' w on I a '1 on '1 mn......n.m PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 .... ...,.'.....-.. -100 o lOa 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 on PROFILE LINE: R-52 LOCATION: Collier a ~on o ~ z ~..\~ . .....' , , \"',.," -, ~~\'- i "'" : \ I \, \ I I- W W ~ a :> w -' w .................... ... "".- ~''''''', on I a '1 on '1 mnn___n..." PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N ,,; 675292 FEET E = 388834 FEET AZ, ,= 270 OEG, -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 35 of 45 ';2 PROFILE LINE: R-53 LOCATION: Collier o -,~, 0'''' ../' ..;----\\ ~ z >-- w w ~ o '" I <--~~ ; ~~ DISTANCES REFERENCED TO; "", -:--.-.~_ N ,,; 674248 FEET E '" 388930 FEET AZ, : = 270 OEG,: ---.~ - ".-._~ :> w -' w o "I mmu_umm PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 '" "I -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 '" PROFILE LINE: R-58 LOCATION: Collier o .....;. o ~/--ii ~-r. .1. ......~ '\/\ ~'" Cl ~ Z >-- w w 6 :> w -' w '" I o "I -- .....---, . ....-.. 'mu__uuu___ PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 .......................-... ...... ........ ..... ........................... - . . . DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: ' , , , N ~ 668694 FEET E '" 389669 FEIOT AZ, : = 270 DEG,: , , ..-.....~.:.:-:... '" "I -100 o 100 200 300 400 D15T, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 ~II) Cl ~ Z I- w w ~ :> w --' w II) PROFILE LINE: R-59 LOCATION: Collier o , , , , ........................ o II) I '", ' '~~ "~, '<'~ "---'. .....~~. ..\_~ .....--'. : ~ DISTANCES REFERENCED TO>:'-'"" N '" 667729 FEET ',-.,\ ;.., : , E ~ 389847 FEET "': "~nO AZ, : = 270 DEG,: . , o 'I CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 36 of 45 II) 'I mnmmmu_ PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 II) PROFILE LINE: R-60 LOCATION: Collier o a II) ~ z W w ~ 0 :> w --' w II) I ., 0 I" II) 'I n__'mnnmn PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2D06 POST-200S ". t \ : ........... \~.\ ,....~ : "''''~\ -/: '~,.. , ":.;",.."..",...,. ..,,~~~ : , , .n;''-'-'-'~:'''n~:-----'' DISTANCESiiEFERENCED TO: N ~ 666685 FEET , , E =' 390145 FEiOT AZ,:= 270 DEG,: -100 o 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 600 700 800 ~"" o ~ Z I- W W ~ :> w -' w ~on o ~ Z I- W W ~ o :> w -' w on I o " I on 'I on o o on I o 'I on 'I on PROFILE LINE: R-61 o , 11 -C \ . 4 L : y.:/" ,'~;' '..m...~ \.\\''''_ .m"U'mmn PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o PROFILE LINE: R-62 . .~~.\ ,....,'~",L. ~~~~~~ : \. ':"\ . " CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 37 of 45 LOCATION: Collier '\ .,~'>.,~,<.~...~,~~' . ~-~ '~'. -..................... DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: ~ N =; 665649 FEET ' E =: 390438 FE!'l" AZ,:= 270 DEG,: 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) m.n...,._..,.. PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-20D6 POST-2006 -100 o DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N =; 664628 FEET E = 390432 FEIOT AZ, : = 270 DEG,: 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) ;, "~'" 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier , , ................................... , , -".'.. --........----.. ......._-. 500 600 700 800 ~'" o ~ z t;:; w ~ :> w -' w ~'" 0 ~ Z I- W W ~ a :> w -' w '" I a I" '" a a '" I a I" '" I" '" a '" I" -100 PROFILE LINE: R-63 h .~. " -"...... , ' ,.:'...."\-,,<:. _m_hnnmm PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 PROFILE LINE: R-64 ,c'V\ mmnnn__n' PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 38 of 45 LOCATION: Collier .;... / / : .~~::..-<"'" :', : '--00, ,~, TO::'.-......-.,-.,;.~'<'-._n...t~....,.. . ;---._-....~ DISTANCES REFERENCED N ~ 663642 FEET E ~ 390642 FEET AZ,,~ 270 DEG" 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier , , .. .. . . . . ...... ~.. ... .. . . - .. ... ... . - . '\. " \, '>, \\ \~ \ .;:r'~ .. ...,..-.":~~~:;:.,..,~J) '-. '. '. " DISTANCES REFE~ENCED N ,,; 662732 FEET E '" 390814 FEET AZ,:~ 260 DEG,: , . TO: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 I- W W ~ ~on Cl ~ Z I- W W ~ :> w ...J W ~on Cl ~ Z :> w ...J W on PROFILE LINE: R-65 o o on I o 'I on 'I .mm.......m PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 on PROFILE LINE: R-66 o ~-, ',. " o on I o 'I on 'I ..mmmmh, PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 39 of 45 LOCATION: Collier \:.... X\ ......,... "-_:-'~~~i~., . /---- . ,~:~ . . .., '".. .., ~ ,....,.." DISTA. NCES REFERENCED TO:, ""'"'' : :. ~: N ~ 661954 FEET .'..m..,........ , ~ E ~ 390899 FEET : .>..... : AZ,;= 260 DEG,: ;; ---'......+.... \__:~, 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier , , ................................- DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: N =i 661148 FEET , , E ,,; 391078 FE~ AZ, ~ = 260 DEG,~ , , 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 tl) PROFILE LINE: R-67 o ~tl) o ~ Z I- W w !::. ,(~/\\ ' ;.....1': ' . ." o :> w --' w tl) I o I" tl) I" m.m......____ PRE-CON POST-CON -- - -- - - AD-2006 POST-2006 , , ........... ...,.........................1 DISTANCES REFEikENCED TO: : , , N =i 660351 FEET E =' 391148 FE!'T AZ,:= 260 OEG,: , , -100 o 300 400 DIST. (FEET) tl) PROFILE LINE: R-68 o ~tl) o ~ Z I- W w !::. o :> w --' w tl) I o I" tl) I" ..mmnnmn PRE-CON POST -CON - - - - - - - AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 200 100 200 300 400 DIST. (FEET) CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 40 of 45 LOCATION: Collier 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier .............;... . 500 600 700 800 ~Ill o ~ z I- W W ~ ~Ill 0 ~ Z I- W W ~ a :> w --' W III I a I" III 1 III a o :> w --' w III I a I" III I" III PROFILE LINE: R-69 o : _~ A : ~j'\\ fl : h \t1; I ~-, \. -,' :\ ..mm"_hm_ PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 PROFILE LINE: R-70 ~/O .....~.".......~.. .~.ru. , \ \ ' ..~.......:;;..- -,\ LOCATION: Collier ......;.H '~: ,: \: :\ " \ ,.....'.<~,~.~~~\ ""'; ~""'~" / ...., '.. '~~'....~~~<"o-_._.. , DIST:ANCES REFERENCED TO: : : "'---, N = 658736 FEET E = 391275 FEiOT AZ, . = 260 DEG,' CAC January 14. 2010 VIII-6 New Business 41 of 45 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 .."..... 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier m'nnnnnn' PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o 100 " : ....._:-~~.. ........ '\\,.. DIST:ANCES REFERENCED N ,,; 657941 FEET E =' 391351 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 I- W W ~ on PROFILE LINE: R-71 o ~ on a ~ z I- W W ~ o :> w --' w on I o I on I" m__m_mm__ PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o 100 on PROFILE LINE: R- 72 o ~on a ~ Z o ::> w --' w on I o I" on I" ________m"...' PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o lOa CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 42 of 45 LOCATION: Collier .....:.,'. :........\...,........ DISTANCES REFERENCED N ,,; 657147 FEET , , E ;; 391470 FE!'T AZ, : = 260 DEG,: , . 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATiON: Collier \ ~\: ~: "\".... ':~,., : """""'-':":":"~~~' :.'" DISTANCES REFERENCED TO: ~. ""'''' <.: ..: . ~' N = 656356 FEET ,: ..:,..'..___.. ~.. E =' 391 609 FEET , , AZ, . = 260 DEG" "'& 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 BOO on PROFILE LINE: R-73 o ~on a ~ z I- W w !::. -~ .., \~, :\\ o ~ --' w -----..~--..- on I o 'I on 'I ---0000-------... PRE-CON POST-CON - - - - - - - AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o on PROFILE LINE: R-74 o ./-V~ , ~, ~on a ~ z I- W w !::. o :> w --' W on 1 o 'I on 'I --------00----00' PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-2006 POST -2006 -100 o CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 43 of 45 LOCATION: Collier . ~~.. ; - . .. . . . . . "".-'-" . - . '::::::~;/,,:--"'~--, DISTANCES .REFERENCiD TO': -,. , ..-..',' .~ N ~ 655544 FEn "-.., E = 391594 FEET AZ, : = 260 DEG,: 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier , ' \:~o1._1 ':'., ~\ . -~. -... \ .... '\ DIS-fANCES REFERENC'ED TO: N = 654741 FEn E =' 391736 FE!:T AZ,;= 260 DEG.. 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 oil PROFILE LINE: R-75 o :~' " , , ; : ~OIl Cl :i( Z l- W W ~ o :> w -' w oil I o I oil 'I omommnnn PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-Z006 POST-Z006 -100 o 100 oil PROFILE LINE: R-76 o ~OIl Cl :i( Z I- W W ~ , ,.,..,0- ~,.\ , ' , \"\\-... o :> w ...J W oil I o I oil 'I nnunoomom PRE-CON POST -CON ------- AD-Z006 POST-Z006 -100 o 100 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 44 of 45 LOCATION: Collier --"- -'-. \'\:~~~ TO';; ,':':": '0,:, ::'~~F~;::/"'T~ DISTANCES REFERENCED N = 653966 FEn E =' 391889 FE~ AZ, : = Z60 DEG,: zoo 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 LOCATION: Collier , '. .'" ""', : \!..-..,......., ......: , . ' DIST:ANCES" REFE~E:NCED TO: N =i 653166 FEn , , E ~ 391909 FE~ AZ. : = 260 DEG,: , ' 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 , ' , r.\' , , , , , . , .' y'/\tj,.,. /: ~" \'" '~ ' , , , .. -- '" PROFILE LINE: R-77 a ~'" o ~ Z I- W w !::=. a :> w --' w '" I a I '" 'I m....nmmn PRE-CON POST-CON ------- AD-2006 POST-2006 -100 o ....;.. CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-6 New Business 45 of 45 LOCATION: Collier \",,,,.,\~'" \, .'< ~~ ~~#". '. .J' -.,.,. y~_.... 7.7, : DIStANCES REFERENCED To':" --- ~. "..n~_;-,--,<:....:,,~, N ,,; 652385 FEET : "'-'-. E ~ 392074 FEET AZ, : = 260 OEG,: 100 200 300 400 DIST, (FEET) 500 600 700 800 CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-7 New Business 10f2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Review and Approve the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan Update, Critical Erosion Area Analysis for Barefoot Beach, and Engineering Report for Pass Improvements OBJECTIVE: To approve the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan Update, Critical Erosion Area Analysis for Barefoot beach, and Engineering Report for Pass Improvements. CONSIDERATIONS: FDEP has requested an update to the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan and an analysis of the erosion areas of Barefoot beach as a submitted condition for the permit application for the Wiggins Pass Improvements. The following link accesses the files: ftp.coastalplanninO.net Username: colliercounty Password: coastal ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff is recommending approval of this item. FISCAL IMPACT: The Source of funds is from Category "A" Tourist Development Tax fund 195. GROWTH MANAGEMENT IMPACT: There are no Growth Management Impacts resulting from this study. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: This item has been reviewed and approved by the County Attorney's Office and is legally sufficient for Board action. - CMG RECOMMENDATION: To approve the Wiggins Pass Inlet Management Plan Update, Critical Erosion Area Analysis for Barefoot beach, and Engineering Report for Pass Improvements. PREPARED BY: Gary McAlpin, CZM Director CAC January 14, 2010 VIII-7 New Business 20f2 -SUGGESTED DRAFT LETTER- 8500.63 January 7,2010 Mr. Martin Seeling Environmental Administrator Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems Mail Station 310 3900 Commonwealth Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 Re: Wiggins Pass Maintenance Dredging and Navigation Improvement Project Joint Coastal Permit Application Dear Mr. Seeling: TIlls is a Florida Department of Environmental Protection JCP permit application for continued maintenance dredging of the Wiggins Pass channels. TIlls permit includes improvements to the maintenance dredging and adjacent disposal operations which should decrease annual dredging amounts, frequency of dredging and impacts to adjacent shoreline. The permit includes a modeling report (previously provides to FDEP BBCS and Florida Park Service), and an engineering report (Attachment No. 33a) that updates the 1995 inlet management plan and provides analysis supporting designation of Barefoot Beach as a critically eroded beach. The last two are provided as suggestion by FDEP staff. The County requests a full critical erosion designation be made for Barefoot Beach. Enclosed are one original, two hardcopies and two electronic copies of the JCP application and supporting documentation. A modeling report and minutes from the Wiggins Pass Evaluation Work Group who represents broad local interest are included on the accompanied CD. Wiggins Pass has been maintained on a continual basis under two previous maintenance dredging permits since 1984. Sections of the navigation channel shoal rapidly to a depth of 3 feet or less making navigation dangerous, and erosion on Barefoot Beach Park has been a major concern in recent years. Collier County desires the next dredging operation to occur during 2010-11 non-sea turtle nesting season. Please tell us what the permit fee will be, and we will provide it. If you or other cooperating agencies should require additional copies of the application or supporting information, or have any questions, please contact me. Very truly yours, Review of Clam Bay System Data Collection and Analysis by PBS&J, October, 2009, and Response to Comments RE: Clam Bay System Data Collection & Analysis Report (October 2009) by PBS&J on November 17, 2009. Harold R. Wanless, Ph.D., Registered Florida Professional Geologist #985. Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Submitted January 4, 2010 Having reviewed the report and response, I find the efforts misleading and many of the conclusions unwarranted. Sand versus mud; high versus low oxygen Although the 'response' says it is not so, the executive summary paints a picture of Clam Bay being bad and Moorings Bay as being better. Sand and gravel may have better pore water oxygen levels and have less oxygen demand on the overlying water, but they provide little to eat for depOSit feeders. Sand and gravel, having much less surface area, will always have less pollutants, less contaminants, less organic matter, and less food value than mud. Grainier, cleaner and more oxygenated does not make it better. This was well established back in the Marco/Rookery Bay years and should be restudied now. Dr. Bernard Yokel pointed out that the black mangroves were a fermenting ground for organic decay and high spring and seasonal tides would reach into the black mangrove forests and release this rich nutrient soup to the coastal waters. These releases would trigger blooms and a dispersing food pyramid bonanza that a hierarchy from fish to mammals would time their reproduction around. What is to us this black, rotting disgusting muck is, to many other organisms, the essence of life. These benefitting organisms may not be living right there, but in adjacent waters waiting for the dispersal. In evaluating the water and bottom nutrients, texture, redox and such, there is no assessment of the role of nutrient drainage input from the adjacent developed upland. It is also important to know the amount of historical erosion (or growth) of mangrove swamps and release (or uptake) of organic detritus and sediment as the result of the accelerated rise in sea level since 1930 or in response to recent hurricanes or recent human activity (such as dredging). The report implies it is bad when muddy sediment has come in to an area that was artificially dredged to deeper depth. This is a severely poor conclusion. There is lots of fine grained particulate material in the natural system and it will fill in any area where there is insufficient energy to move it on. This results in shallowing and usually an improvement in desirable ecological functionality. The whole section on redox and anoxia in the sediment seems most meaningless. The muddy sediment beneath the clear, well-oxygenated waters of Biscayne Bay and Florida Bay is normally anoxic within a centimeter of the surface. This will always be the case for muds which contain organic matter which produce significant oxygen demand. And most striking are the mud deltas forming in Lake Ingraham, in Cape Sable. They are building at as much as 15 centimeters a year, contain as much as 35 per cent organic matter, have only a few millimeters of oxidized sediment at the top - and are intensely burrowed by an abundant benthic community, covered by a dense algal mat, and used by a great diversity of wading and water birds for feeding and resting (Wanless and Vlaswinkel, 2005). Mangroves and Seagrasses The fundamental value of the Clam Bay systems is the abundant mangrove wetland community and the seagrass and algal mat estuarine community and the immense service that these provide to the benthic and bird communities within the system and in the adjacent nearshore marine. A pre-development report by Lugo (1976) stressed the need to preserve majority of Clam Pass system in its natural state, highlighting the mature and valuable black mangrove basin forest of this system. Even in a setting with ephemeral connection with the sea through Clam Pass, the mangrove forest had found a way to thrive using groundwater flow through the barrier island to maintain flushing and drainage of elevated flood waters. There is no comparison between a bulkheaded sea wall and a mangrove wetland with respect to environmental value, yet this report seems to ignore the uselessness of seawalls, and fails to mention that there have been ongoing attempts to rim or replace them with rip rap as an improvement. I should point out that the mangrove systems on the Vanderbilt Bay area was doing fine until the flow through the sandy island barrier was cut off. The mangrove die off then produced accelerating decay products that overwhelmed the system forcing a need for stronger flushing via surface flow. In my occasional visits to the Clam Bay system, I recall much more sea grass than described in this report. In fact I there is a 2007 PBSJ report of "Clam Bay Seagrass Assessment" which found 43 per cent occurrence of seagrass in random sample sites in Outer Clam Bay (probably the same report that is referenced as PBS&J, 2008, in the 'report'. Since that report, there was further documentation of more species and coverage of seagrass in the Clam Pass estuarine system along transects done in 2007 for the annual biologic monitoring done by Turrell, Hall & Assoc. The apparent resurgence of seagrasses continued to be reported in the 2008 Biologic Monitoring Report of the Clam Pass System by Turrell, Hall & Assoc. -Why are these recent results not mentioned in this report, and why is the amount of seagrass observed in this report so diminished? The report notes that the sea grass cover is even diminished over observations in a '2008' PBS&J report (Is this the same as the 2007 draft report of observations made in 20077). It is irresponsible science to ignore important literature results such as these. The current report paints a very different picture of the Clam Bay system than is documented in previous reports. That difference is cursorily dismissed as something to do with the ephemeral nature or reproductive problems of the main species (Halophila). Other reports document a fairly widespread occurrence of Halidule and a persistence of Thalassia in some areas. It is wrong to so casually dismiss these other more rigorous reports. If these changes are real, then it is critical to assess the timing of loss so as to determine the causes (I am aware that there have been recent dredging events). If these changes are not real but the result of too 'general' field observations, then the quality of this research project should be called into question. Ecology This report presents data on aspects of the environment (the physical and chemical characteristics of the coastal bay system). It provides no information of substance on the organisms in these environments and no information of substance on the ecology (the relation of the organisms to the environment). Yet the report is constantly evaluating what is good and bad for the organism communities. All of this undocumented speculation should be deleted. It would be better to do a responsible literature evaluation of the ecological relationships that have been established and published from the abundance of research that has been done over the years in The Rookery Bay - Marco area. The vibrance of the Clam Bay system is the rich mangrove-seagrass-algal base which feeds a variety of small organisms which nurture a great abundance and diversity of juvenile to adult fish. These relations were not recognized or addressed in this report. The authors of this report have no business making value comments on the ecology of the system as they have not documented the biological components or the important relationships. Circulation and Models A report in Collier County's files by this author in the early 1990s documents that the mangrove die off in northern Clam/Vanderbilt Bay was caused by the road into the houses which cutoff an active drainage, flushing, and water exchange through the pore waters in sand of the narrow beach. This was well established with monitoring wells in which tidal fluctuation would move through the island with a time lag but nearly undampened in amplitude (except where blocked by the road structure which extended down through the sand and into the underlying less permeable mangrove soil). It is impossible to recreate a healthy environment when the causes for historical problems are not properly identified Additionally, as a major portion of the drainage, flushing, exchange and water exchange of the coastal bays along this stretch of coast is through the narrow barrier islands, any present or future modeling will be useless unless this important component of coastal circulation is accurately empirically documented so it can be properly incorporated into the models. This concern also applies to the sandy landward margin to the bays and to the underlying limestone (where its groundwater interfaces with surface flow of the bays). Adequate Associated Information of Sampling Period Only in the 'response' was some information provided as to the nature of the condition during the 2 day and 8 day sampling period in August, 2009. What was the weather and hydrographic conditions (rainfall, winds, tides, air and water temperatures, etc) for the several weeks prior to the sampling as well as during sampling? This is critical for evaluating water levels, flow, circulation, nutrient levels, and such. The 'response' that certain things are not important or were essentially normal is not for those writing the report to decide. Provide all the information so those using the report can fully evaluate the study. August can be a time of high temperatures, intense local rainfall, unique winds, and higher than normal seasonal tides that do not represent conditions at other times of the year. It is important for the reports sampling to be put in proper perspective. For example, as mentioned earlier, the higher high tides of the year reach into the black mangrove wetland soil and withdraw intensely rich organic suspensions which circulate through the coastal bays and into the nearshore marine waters. How do the tide elevations and ranges of the sampling period compare with the rest of the year? A NOAA report documents exceptional tides along a portion of the Atlantic coast during the summer of 2009 (as much as 60 centimeters above projected levels because of slowing of Gulf Stream flow) and southeast Florida had tide levels running over 30 centimeters above projected levels into October. Was any of this elevated tide occurring along the Collier County coast prior to or during the sampling interval? These kinds of information are critical to put this study's data collection interval into a meaningful perspective. Description of Field Observations The bottom of page 7 of the report says: "At each site, observations were made of the general biological community structure and health." Exactly what does this mean? Was some type of quadrants or profile lines I:lsed? How extensive an area was surveyed? How did the methods in this report compare with that in the reports mentioned in the mangrove and seagrasses section above? How was 'health' measured? How was 'community structure' measured? My copy of the report did not have anything but an algae map and sea grass map in terms of data? Where is the data? I am concerned that there is not much that is real biological information here, just fancy words. Water Quality Locations and Implications The report suggests that Moorings Bay is better than the natural Clam Bay system (Page V of Executive Summary). The logic of the report is ridiculous. The writing implies that this problem is because of a variety of things in the natural system including the decline in tidal amplitude and increased tidal lag because of 'channel meandering, constrictions and friction losses in the system.' Ridiculous logic. Then the Executive Summary states that 'Moorings Bay, although subjected to extensive urban stormwater runoff, appears to have water ecology conditions better than those found in Clam bay; this is supported by the results of the Redox layer investigation.' What are those better water ecologic conditions? Explain how Moorings Bay is better in providing a functional habitat, environment, and nutrient release of this mangrove fringed estuary system? It looks as though the sampling sites in Moorings Bay are primarily channel sites with strong flow. Why are there no sample sites in the more stagnant backwater corners of the Moorings Bay maze? What is the water depth of Moorings Bay? Summary I find that this report is at best a weak data set that is surrounded by too much environmental and ecological speculation that is not tied to the pertinent and thorough literature of southwest Florida estuarine dynamics and, ecology. At worst, it has the tone that it was written for developers to give the green light to have more sand and concrete. Since the early 1970s, southwest Florida has seen too many reports like this that attempt to diminish the value of the natural environment and put dramatically modified dredge and fill environments on an equal footing. Is it possible that this report is trying to set the stage for expanded future dredging activities to 'improve' the natural areas? It reads that way. I would recommend that the County take a reverse approach. Moorings Bay is an artificially deepened system to provide fill for bordering lots. The bottom is too deep over most of the dredged area for sea grasses to live. The quality of that Bay could be dramatically improved if those deeper areas not necessary for navigation were shallowed either with blanket fill or with localized artificial reefs. Shallowing the bays would provide conditions for increased sea grass cover (more light to the bottom and higher oxygen levels); the artificial reefs would provide habitat for oysters, sponges and such which further filter the water and improve water clarity and light penetration. Complement that with rip rap in front of seawalls, including some intertidal areas for re-establishment of mangroves and you will have greatly enhanced the desired ecological functionality of Moorings Bay. In the early 1980s, I did a study on the causes for elevated turbidity in northern Biscayne Bay in Miami-Dade County. This bay had been similarly modified by dredging and bulkheading. The recommendations were as described above (Wanless et aI., 1984). Since that time the County has been persistently following a program of installing rip rap and mangrove intertidal areas in front of sea walls and fill shorelines, shallowing up deep dredge areas so seagrass can recolonize and, installing numerous artificial reefs from clean construction debris. The Bay has persistently improved in water clarity and ecological functionality, and the artificial reefs have proved great fishing sites. Many of these recommendations were put forth in a 1981 Diagnostic/Feasibility Study for Moorings Bay which I believe was included as an appendix of the 1991 Coastal Zone Management Plan. Why is this not acknowledged and discussed here? In fact, there is a serious disregard for earlier research and recommendations on this Vanderbilt/Clam Bay/ Moorings Bay system and on similar systems of southwest Florida. The failure of this report to do a thorough literature review would save the County from redundant studies or erroneous conclusions due to missed historic data and missed scientific documentation and evaluation of ecosystem dynamics. This absence further suggests that this report is not a scientific report but more of a political-economic positioning paper. References (not cited in 'Report') Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, 1981. Diagnostic/feasibility study for Moorings Bay, Collier County, Florida, 12 p. Lugo, A.E., 1976. Role and productivity of black mangroves, 31p in Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council Report: p. 74-103 in provided 'GeneraL20080826083149.pdf' . Wanless, H.R., Cottrell, D., Parkinson, R., and Burton, E., 1984. Sources and Circulation of Turbidity, Biscayne Bay, Florida. Final report to Sea Grant and Dade County, 499 p. Wanless, H.R., and Vlaswinkel, B.M., 2005. Coastal Landscape and Channel Evolution Affecting Critical Habitats at Cape Sable, Everglades National Park, Florida. Final Report of Research Project to Everglades National Park, 197 p. (available online: http://www.nps.gov/ever/naturescience/cesires02-1.htm) From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mike Bauer [mbauer@naplesgov.com] Thursday, January 07,20108:24 AM McAlpinGary ochs_' RE: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report Unfortunately, the report by Dr. Wanless is a good example of what happens when a scientist is employed by one side of a dispute to support their position. Responding only to what he was told by his employer, he makes basic, critical assumptions about the report that are just flat wrong. He did not talk to the people who carried out the study, nor did he talk to the County to see what they were looking for when they hired PBS&J. These are fatal flaws. It is not a comparison of Moorings Bay and Outer Clam Bay as he states. It is not a biological study. It is not a year-long flow study. It is a study, limited by time and money, to determine basic water quality and hydrologic flow conditions in Outer Clam Bay and how it is affected by its connections to the Gulf of Mexico - through Clam Pass and Doctors Pass. It would be fantastic to obtain information on all the matters Dr. Wanless mentions; is he willing to gather that data for free? Of particular import to me are the comments on seagrasses. Probably unintentionally, he compares disparate geographical areas. Yes, seagrasses are more abundant in a small area outside Outer Clam Bay, but in that bay, they have continued to decline. Yes, an initial report done by Dr. Tomasko found seagrasses, but it was a different, highly ephemeral species that was responding to drought conditions and is here today, gone tomorrow. Dr. Tomasko did not find the important, pioneering seagrass species that has been monitored for the last ten years and is in serious decline. When Dr. Tomasko came back and did this study, he did not find the ephemeral seagrass he found previously, and he reported that. Michael R. Bauer, Ph.D. Natural Resources Manager City of Naples 239213-1031 From: McAlpinGary [mailto:GaryMcAlpin@colliergov.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 06,2010 1:52 PM To: Mike Bauer Subject: FW: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report From: ochs_1 Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 12:55 PM To: McAlpinGary; ramsey-m Subject: FW: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report ??????? From: ResnickL Sent: Wednesday, January 06,2010 12:18 PM To: ochs_l; SheffieldMichael; brock_m Subject: fyi - FW: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report fyi re: independent peer review of PBSJ Clam Bay Analysis Lisa Resnick Administrative Assistant Pelican Bay Services Division A Municipal Service Taxing & Benefit Unit 801 Laurel Oak Drive, Suite 605 Naples, FL 34108 239.597.1749 Tel. 239.597-4502 Fax lisaresnick@~~ http://pelic3nba~se(Ylcesdl\.isiQO.l1J~t From: teedup1@aol.com [mailto:teedup1@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:43 AM To: ResnickL Subject: Fwd: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report ----Original Message----- From: Marcia Cravens <goldandrose@mac.com> To: Teedup1@aol.com Sent: Wed, Jan 6, 2010 10:38 am Subject: Dr. Wanless's review of PBSJ report Mary Anne, Here is the review commissioned by the Mangrove Action Group by Dr. Wanless of the University of Miami. Under Florida Law. e-mail addresses are public records Ir 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. PHSJ 4030 West Boy Scout Blvd Suite 700 Tampa, FL 33607 800.477.7275 January 11, 2010 PBS&J Response to Criticisms by Dr. Harold Wanless, commissioned by Pelican Bay's Mangrove Action Group, dated January 2010. To: Gary McAlpin - Director, Collier County Coastal Zone Management From: Jeff Tabar, PE Dave Tomasko, PhD Bryan Flynn, PE Todd DeMunda, EI As in other reviews of our report, most of the comments on the PBS&J report were related to water quality and the natural systems characteristics of both Moorings Bay and Clam Bay. In particular, most comments related to the perception that the two systems were being compared to each other, particularly in terms that were unfavorable toward Clam Bay's water quality, without due consideration of its broader ecological health. The report clearly refers to the loss of natural shoreline features in Moorings Bay, and in fact includes two aerial photographs to highlight that impact. We believe that the text is very clear in noting that Clam Bay has retained most of its natural shoreline features, while Moorings Bay has not. However, the scope of work (reviewed and approved by the Clam Bay Advisory Committee) did not include an assessment of the ecology of either system. This project was focused on water quality, specifically as it relates to the Impaired Waters Rule (IWR) and the Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) program. The following text will attempt to address concerns that appear to underlie the majority of comments received. Summary points and comments are as follows: 1. Moorings Bay and Clam Bay are different systems, and their ecological values are different. It is noted in the report that Moorings Bay has none of the natural shoreline features of Clam Bay. But the focus of this report, based on a scope of work reviewed and approved by the Clam Bay Advisory Committee, did not include assessments of shellfish and finfish or bird abundance. The wording used in Section 4.0 in the PBS&J report does not suggest that Clam Bay's ecoloav is "impaired", only that existing state guidance would likely result in its water aualitv being determined to be impaired. 2. The shallow Redox layer and fine-grained sediments noted in Outer Clam Bay are to be expected from a "natural" mangrove-lined system. The authors agree that the organic-rich sediments and shallow Redox layer found throughout Upper, Inner and Outer Clam Bay could in fact be a completely natural feature, as most mangrove-lined, semi- PB51 isolated systems have thick organic layers that are associated with low levels of DO and a heterotrophy- dominated food web (note language used in Section 4.0, and bullet points in the Executive Summary). However, the fine layer of silt and silty clay found in Outer Clam Bay, in particular, mayor mav not be related to human activity. The fine-grained sediments in the Seagate Canals certainly do not appear to be an entirely natural feature. The authors do not agree with anyone's characterization that Outer Clam Bay's sediments are "natural" as that conclusion cannot be reached with the available information. As the authors have stated at numerous presentations, a sediment aging and toxics assessment study are appropriate. If no elevated toxins are found in Clam Bay, and sediments have accumulated in a natural (or near natural) rate for the past few decades, then no concerns are warranted. But if elevated levels of toxins are found, and sediment accumulation rates have been dramatically increased in recent years, then these sediments are in fact problematic. Until these questions are answered, no conclusion as to their "natural" condition can be made one way or the other; not by the authors of this report, and not by reviewers of this report. Interestingly, the 1975 EPA study on Clam Bay and Moorings Bay (called Parkshore in that study) concluded that reduced numbers of taxa (Le., species of benthic organisms) were likely associated with the increased amount of fine-grained sediments (Le., silt) in those same locations. If such sediments have unnaturally accumulated, there ~ an ecological problem with these sediments. 3. Water quality in Moorings Bay must be adverse / why wasn't the 1981 study by FDER used? This reviewer and others have made multiple references to the lack of inclusion of data from a 1981 study on Moorings Bay. That study characterized the water quality within Moorings Bay during the period of 1977 to 1980, nearly 30 years ago. That report also included references to a trend of improving water quality, suggesting that the poor water quality in Moorings Bay in the 1970s might not be relevant today. The following table summarizes the water quality data set used in the PBS&J report (as provided by the PBSD over the period of record from non-berm and non-pond locations) with Moorings Bay water quality data from 2008 to 2009 (provided by the City of Naples). Location Sample % DO < 4 Mean TN MeanTP % Chi-a> 11 size (mall) (mall) (ma/I) (Ila/I) UCBRK (Clam) 106 36 1.40 0.119 36 W-7 (Clam) 241 29 0.85 0.102 29 W-6 Clam 237 9 0.76 0.079 9 W-1 (Clam) 245 17 0.68 0.068 17 Seaaate (Clam) 99 14 0.70 0.058 14 All Moorinas Bav 47 6 0.46 0.029 0 These results are not meant to indicate that Moorings Bay is "healthier" than Clam Bay, but from a regulatory perspective, multiple locations in Clam Bay do not meet existing water quality standards, while most of Moorings Bay does. This is a central conclusion of the PBS&J report - it is highly recommended that Collier County work with FDEP to develop locally-appropriate water quality standards for its estuaries; this should not be a controversial conclusion. Existing water quality standards from FDEP are problematic, as was pointed out in several locations in the report. Staff from FDEP has confirmed that it is likely, based on data collected by the Pelican Bay Services Division, that Clam Bay would be declared "impaired" for DO. This impairment status decision could be problematic, as the report clearly states. In particular, the report cites the example PBSI 2 of R.ookery Bay, which has been listed by FDEP as "Verified Impaired" despite the fact that the authors of this report (and at least one reviewer) regard Rookery Bay as mostly an unimpaired system. An additional specific example of the unrealistic nature of IWR's default DO targets for the western Everglades is outlined in the report. While wildlife utilization by birds, fish, etc. may in fact be higher in Clam Bay, compared to Moorings Bay, the IWR and the TMDL programs do not allow for the luxury of claiming systems to be "pristine" due to an abundance of wildlife alone. Somewhat paradoxically, one of the most impacted lakes in Florida (Lake Hancock), which has incredibly poor water quality and a TMDL calling for more than 70 percent reductions in TN and TP loads, is also home to thousands of alligators, and has a significant number of bald eagles along its shoreline. Wildlife utilization and water quality do not always "match" and it would thus behoove the County to develop its own site-specific water quality standards. 4. Flow through the barrier island is a major factor in the exchange between Clam Bay and the Gulf, and must be accounted for to make any realistic assessment of circulation. In the number of reports and previous studies reviewed by PBS&J, no reference was found suggesting that flow through the barrier island was a major factor in the exchange of water between the Gulf of Mexico and Clam Bay. Tide and current data from the PBS&J effort as well as others (USEPA 1976, Tackney 1996, Humiston & Moore 2003, etc.) suggest that the meandering channels within the system account for the majority of the tidal exchange. Further, when evaluating changes to the system to increase tidal exchange (if warranted), the culprits of any inhibition of groundwater flow are fixed (roads, infrastructure, etc.), so modifications to these elements are likely not practical. 5. The August 2009 period of data collection is only representative of that time period, and cannot be used to infer circulation characteristics of the system for any other time. When conducting field studies with limited durations, there is always the concern of capturing transient or specific conditions. Several other factors are taken into consideration before deployment. including instrument access and sampling ranges. Comparing the results of the PBS&J data collection with several other studies as well as anecdotal reports shows similar circulation trends. Figure 7.14 in the report illustrates the predicted tide vs. measured tide at Doctor's Pass during the field data collection; there is no evidence of an elevated water level condition that would have caused abnormal flow within the estuary during the study period. PB51 3