Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-031I_ J I 1 j o 02/06/01 agrPW D(TOB;IRT)l 0/ ' 0J/ INDIAN RIVER COUNTY BEACH PRESERVATION PLAN ENGINEERING DESIGN Si PERMITTING AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT, INC., AND INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA. This is an amendment to the existing Professional Services Agreement(AGREEMENT) dated April 27, 1999, between Applied Technology and Management, Inc. (CONSULTANT) and Indian River County (COUNTY). This amendment addresses changes in "Section III - Scope of Services and "Section V - Compensation of the Agreement. Amendment Description This Amendment includes the following changes to "Section III - Scope of Service and "Section V - Compensation of the Amendment: SECTION III 1. The CONSULTANT shall complete the additional scope of service items in accordance with tasks described in Exhibit "A". 2. The CONSULTANT shall assist in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) for County's joint coastal permit application in accordance with Exhibit "A". 3. The CONSULTANT shall complete an alternatives analysis including a structural evaluation for shoreline restoration in accordance with Exhibit "A". SECTION V is being revised in response to the Section III changes. The charges associated with the change in project scope are in accordance with Exhibit "A". The section of the original AGREEMENT entitled "Section V - Compensation" shall be revised to include compensation due the CONSULTANT in the amount not -to -exceed of $ 439,730. This AGREEMENT is hereby amended as specifically set forth herein. AU other sections of the AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect, and are incorporated herein. CAW INDO W S\TEMPWTM2adm.doc 40 40 This Amendment No. 2 to the AGREEMENT regardless of where executed, shall be governed by and construed by the laws of the State of Florida. In witness whereof the parties have executed this Amendment this 13th day of February 2001. Applied Technology & Management, Inc. 2770 NW 43'd Street, Suite B Gainesville, FI 32606 Thomas Schanze, President & CEO ,n �i Witness:'il v " ` ` of L WITNESS: (Corporate seal is acceptable in place of witnesses) C AW INDO W SST EMP1ATM2 admdoc Indian River County, Florida Board of County Commissioners By �—C Caroline 13. Ginn, dai[man BCC Approved: 02-13-2001 Attest:_ C JefferyK��on, Clerk of Co EXHIBIT "A" Scope of Service and Project Costing • • • SCOPE OF WORK Indian River County Beach Preservation Projects Environmental Document Preparation & Permit Authorizations for Planning Sectors 1 and 2 & Design Alternatives for Sector 7 Introduction: Following submittal of the Joint Coastal Permit Application for the Indian River County Beach Preservation Plan implementation in February 2000, the state and federal regulatory agencies have determined that the proposed project initiatives require separation and treatment as individual projects. This process will further require, at the insistence of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, the preparation of Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Statement documents for one of the four beach restoration project areas currently being considered by Indian River County. This area is referred to as Sector 1 & 2 (Sebastian Inlet State Recreation Area and Arnbersand). Preliminary investigation of viable alternatives will be investigated for the Sector 7 (South County) project. These Sector designations will be referenced throughout the remainder of the herein -proposed Scope of Work. The diversity and structure of the nearshore hardbottom resources in each of these project areas requires the individual (by project area) assessment of impact, from which alternatives analyses will be conducted to minimize such impacts and result in the most environmentally and economically viable projects. Efforts detailed herein will allow for the additional procedural and processing elements associated with preparation of a separate permit application for the Sector 1 & 2 beach restoration project in order to expedite individual project initiative progress through regulatory review and approval. The proposed scope of work allows for the completion of 1. Permit modification and processing of individual Joint Coastal Permits for the Sectors 1 & 2 project initiative, (includes responses to Requests for Additional Information, sea turtle protection, pipeline access corridor, mitigation, and biological & physical monitoring plans, computation of adjacent project area and secondary impact hardbottom acreages, borrow area composite mean grain size revised computations, Erosion Control Line establishment, and preparation of a summary videotape of each of the hardbottom communities mapped in summer 1999); 2. determination of secondary and cumulative impacts associated with project implementation for all Indian River County beach restoration project initiatives; 3. analysis of a structural component (groin field) to optimize sand placement and retention in Sector 7; 4. preparation of Environmental document for Sectors 1 and 2 beach restoration project initiative; and, 5. project progress meetings with County staff, advisory committees, the Board of County Commissioners, and regulatory agency personnel to review status of Sectors 1 and 2 project permitting and environmental documents, and Sector 7 alternatives analysis. I> 40 ® Scope of Work Page 2 TASK 1 MODIFICATION PROCESSING AND ACQUISITION OF PROJECT JOINT COASTAL CONSTRUCTION PERMITS FOR SECTORS 1 & 2 ATM will assemble and maintain, in chronological order, all letters and reports applicable to the Project(s) Permit Correspondence for the County. ATM shall establish telephone and written communication with the State of Florida, Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), USACE Jacksonville District and County sufficient to coordinate agency review of the Permit Application. Our understanding in meeting with the DEP and the County in late August 2000 is that the permit file for Indian River County will be modified to allow each of the Project Sectors to be reviewed and approved individually by assignment of distinct tracking numbers. Task 1A Processing and Acquisition of Sectors 1 & 2 Joint Coastal Permit - DEP Task 1.A.1 Permit Processing — Continued Coordination with County and DEP ATM will conduct and coordinate a meeting with County and DEP staff in Tallahassee to review the existing Joint Coastal Permit application and how to best treat separation of the four proposed project sector initiatives into individual files for agency review, comment, and approval. Specific attention will be focused on Sectors 1 & 2 for the purposes of schedule adherence and desired Winter 2001 construction timeframes. For task costing purposes, an estimate of the permitting budget has been developed for Tasks 1.A.1 through 1.A.4. Cost estimates for these tasks are based on an expected labor hour level of effort, as it is not possible at this juncture to ascertain how many questions will be asked, or the in-depth nature of the information requests contained in the RAI's. The level of comment by federal and state agencies may be excessive due to unforeseen issues and changes in the rules and policies of these agencies and the resulting need for additional information. This budget represents a significant level of labor effort cost estimate based on past experience in permitting large scale dredge and fill projects for beach nourishment projects. If cost savings beyond the expected budget are realized, the excess budget for this task will not be expended on other tasks unless approved by the County in writing. Task 1.A.2 Preparation and Submittal of Revised FDEP Joint Coastal Permit Application for Sectors 1 and 2 ATM shall prepare and submit to the County (in draft form) the appropriate documentation required in association with the individual "Joint Application for Joint Coastal Permit/Authorization to Use Sovereign Submerged Lands/Federal Dredge and Fill Permit" for County review and approval prior to formal submittal to the Department. ATM shall utilize all existing data and information previously developed for each Sector in the initial permit application's preparation and processing. Upon receipt of County approval, ATM shall submit five hard copies and one electronic copy of the individual applications to the DEP. The County shall be furnished with a CD containing the submitted application files for County internal use. C 1WIND0M%TEMP11iC Sedan 12 7 AGQd-1 S— 01-18-001 0O 1r_'701 40 ®M Scope of Work Page 3 ATM shall confirm the Joint Coastal Pen -nit Application processing fee amount with the DEP prior to check issuance by the County. ATM shall establish voice or electronic communication with the DEP within seven days of submittal to determine the Application Number assigned to each Sector Permit. Weekly contact will be maintained by ATM with both DEP and County staff from Application Number assignment until receipt of the first DEP Request for Additional Information (RAI). Task 1.A.3 Review and Respond to Sector 1 and 2 Second Agency Request for Additional Information (RAI) ATM shall expeditiously review and respond to the second RAI, which we are in receipt thereof, and process a separate response for Sectors 1 and 2 by reviewing the RAI items with County staff. Thereafter, the items will be discussed with DEP technical staff as necessary, item priority will be established, and the necessary written and/or graphical information to adequately respond to the RAI on a by -Project Sector basis will be prepared. Assuming no additional field data acquisition is required and no numerical or analytical model simulations are necessary to prepare the response, ATM shall respond to this Request for Additional Information (RAI) within 30 days of Notice to Proceed. This timeframe shall include preparation of a draft response and review/modification of the draft with County staff prior to submittal to the DEP. Included in the initial RAI response will be a topographic and hydrographic survey monitoring program, sedimentation monitoring plan (pre- and post -project) to be referred to as the Project Performance Monitoring Plan for DEP review and consideration. Additional field data and/or numerical model simulations are not considered as a component of the scope of work associated with this task unless otherwise specifically stated herein. Such services will be dependent upon agency requirements and will require that ATM prepare a separate scope of work and fee proposal for County approval prior to initiating such work. Task 1.A.4 Review and Respond to Sectors 1 and 2 Third Agency Request for Additional Information (RAI) Communication will be established with the DEP within 14 calendar days following transmittal of the second RAI to verify receipt and to obtain preliminary agency response to the submitted information. It is anticipated that the substantive permit issues will have been addressed for the new "Projects" at the Permit Applications Meeting, to revise the structure of the original application submittal, and response to the second RAI. ATM shall expeditiously pursue receipt of agency requests for information prior to formal response in the form of subsequent RAI's in an attempt to expedite the permitting process. As with response to the second RAI, ATM shall expedite processing of the third such agency request within 30 calendar days of receipt. C \W WOOWS TEMNRC Saari 12 7 Addd-1 Servitor 0118.00 d..IM 2/01 • 40 Scope of Work Page d Task 1.A.6 Review of Intent to Issue and Negotiate Final Sector 1 and 2 Draft Permit Conditions Following agency (DEP) processing of the Joint Coastal Permit Application, an Intent to Issue a permit will be furnished. The Department's Intent to Issue will be carefully reviewed by ATM to ensure that all aspects of the permit instrument (General and Special Permit Conditions by the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems, and Special Easement Conditions related to the use of sovereignty submerged lands) are technically and economically viable. ATM will review and advise the County on all permit conditions that appear unreasonable, and will assist the County in negotiating such conditions with the DEP. Assuming all conditions are acceptable, ATM will provide the County with a written proposal to comply with those conditions requiring action. Due to the nature of permit processing, regulatory agency review, and enforcement of policy, actual permit conditions cannot be reasonably anticipated at this time. ATM review and preparation of a written proposal for permit compliance services shall be completed within 10 calendar days of receipt of the Intent to Issue a Permit from the DEP. Task 1.A.6 Protected Species Protection Plan for Sectors 1 and 2 County will prepare and transmit copies of Protected Species Protection Plans for Sectors 1 and 2 to the DEP. The County shall furnish marine turtle nesting data by Sector (or monitoring station kilometer) as compiled by the County in development of the Habitat Conservation Plan. The County shall contact the Florida Marine Research Institute in St. Petersburg and obtain current records of sea turtle nesting data in the County through the 2000 nesting season, and this data shall be utilized to determine 'baseline' (pre -project) conditions. Distribution maps, or alternatively the approximate known beachfront habitat boundary limits, of the Southeastern beach mouse (assumed to exist only in Sectors 1 and 2) shall be acquired in consultation with the Division of Recreation & Parks, Ecological Associates, Inc., USFWS, and others with pertinent habitat information. The submitted draft plan shall include provisions for sea turtle nesting surveys in the season prior to and subsequent to completion of dredging, construction specifications that will minimize or eliminate potential impacts to nesting, escarpment measurement and leveling, and proposed transect locations for sand compaction measurements following beach restoration activities in each sector. Appropriate monitoring protocols for the Southeastern beach mouse habitat shall be determined in discussion with state and federal agency (USFWS) personnel. Task 1.A.7 Pipeline Access Corridor Plans for Sectors 1 and 2 ATM shall review nearshore and offshore bathymetry and hardbottom resource distribution between each of the respective proposed borrow areas and the beach fill Project Sector, from which proposed dredge pipeline, transfer station pumpout, and/or hopper dredge scow approach corridors will be prepared. Areas adjacent to the borrow and discharge sites shall additionally carry a proposed lighted buoy designation for quality assurance during nighttime dredging operations. These respective areas will be rendered in AutoCAD with the 1999 (or later if County elects to perform) post - c 1w1NDDWS1TEMPISic Sedan 1 2 7 AddA-1 Serve 01-10-00dadl(12J01 • 40 ® Scope of Work Page 5 processed, rectified nearshore aerial as an overlay schematic for DEP review and approval. As with the Protected Species Protection Plan, the Pipeline Access Corridor Plan shall be prepared for Sectors 1 and 2, and is dependent upon the respective borrow areas that are designated to serve the Project. Task 1.A.8 Project Mitigation Plan for Sectors 1 and 2 Subsequent to final determination of anticipated nearshore hardbottom impacts and appropriate mitigative measures deemed mutually acceptable to the DEP and the County, a mitigation plan will be prepared by the County. The plan shall detail the respective means of mitigation (e.g., spoil island restoration, restoration of upland dune vegetation habitats, exotic vegetation removal, nearshore artificial reef construction). For nearshore artificial reef construction, the location of potential sites, material sources, costs and timeframe of availability for acquisition and transportation to the construction site, depths or approximate range of depths for material placement, geometric configuration (volumetric yield) of reef components, and the anticipated project construction methods, costs, and schedule to build each mitigation site. The Florida Department of Transportation is one potential source provider of clean concrete pile caps, decking, culverts, pipes, etc. (associated with demolition or replacement of existing transportation infrastructure) that may be available for use. The County will investigate and prepare plan components associated with spoil island restoration, upland dune revegetation, and exotic vegetation removal. The draft plan will be submitted to DEP for review and comment, and will be finalized and resubmitted to the DEP following comment incorporation. ATM will provide consultation and document review/oversight only in association with this task, and will not be preparing the text or the submittals. The County will prepare and transmit the draft and final plans to the DEP. Task 1.A.9 Biological and Physical Monitoring Plans for Sectors 1 & 2 ATM will coordinate and conduct one meeting with the County and the DEP to discuss desired components of the Sectors 1 and 2 biological and physical monitoring plans. Following the meeting, ATM will prepare and transmit draft Physical Monitoring Plans for Sectors 1 & 2 to the County for review and comment. The County shall prepare biological monitoring plans for the project area. Following County comment incorporation, the documents will be forwarded to the Department for similar review and comment. It is anticipated that the final documents will be prepared and accepted by all parties following ATM incorporation of the DEP's comments and subsequent transmittal to the DEP. The Biological Monitoring Plan will propose photoquadrat series at six months, immediately prior, immediately following, and six months, one year and two years post - construction of the Sectors 1 and 2 restoration project at the stations established in summer 1999. Stations for the photoquadrats will be established based on the accepted design equilibrium toe of fill. The Plan will further propose a limited series of benthic grab samples and subsequent identification/enumeration. CAWNDOWSUEMPIRC Sectary 1 2 7 AWrtlanet Servcey 01.19-00 dodl 22101 L7 F—I ® Scope of Work Page 6 Diver -towed video transects (four shore -perpendicular transects per Sector, and one parallel transect per Sector at the equilibrium toe of fill to document toe of fill adjustment) will be proposed. Likely intervals for the video series are at six months prior to construction and at six and eighteen months after project construction. A twelve-month post -construction event may additionally be proposed with the understanding that such an event might be difficult to accomplish with winter sea states and water column visibility. Physical Monitoring Plans for each sector will be prepared and subjected to the same review and comment procedures as those indicated above. Each individual Plan will propose beach profile interval spacing and time series surveys for each of the beach fill segments and adjacent shorelines and the sedimentation monitoring site(s) locations along transects adjacent to each beach nourishment area. Analysis of profile data, utilizing average end -area techniques, will enable ATM to document beach fill performance by determining sand volume changes over time. Task 1.A.10 Determine Revised Composite Grain Size Characteristics in North and South Borrow Areas Owing to modifications to the north and central borrow areas associated with optimal sand quality and fiber optic cable obstructions, respectively, the bounded areas will require modified geometric configurations which will influence the composite mean grain size. Alternative cut configurations will be established for the north borrow area pending analysis of ten additional vibracores that were acquired in late October 2000. Due to the uncertainty of material suitability and usable sand quantities in the north borrow area, it is recommended that the south borrow area be reconfigured to allow for adequate (dredge pass) line lengths to optimize material excavation. This latter effort will assume that insufficient material volumes exist in the north borrow area, thereby requiring cuts from the south borrow area to be utilized to construct the Sectors 1 and 2 initial beach restoration project. Two magnetic anomaly clusters in the south borrow area will require a radial buffer, plus side -slope sloughing allowances, thereby dictating a reconfiguration of the cut boundaries and, hence, the composite grain size characteristics. The procedure for the work will be to refine the plan view (horizontal) boundary of proposed cut, and to compute a revised composite mean grain size (and material statistics) data sheet for each respective borrow area/sub-area as appropriate. This will be accomplished by computation of horizontal and vertical areas of influence of individual cores on the overall sites. The Terramodel software package will be utilized to expedite this effort. Mechanical composite sand samples will be extracted from the archived cores in the central, south and (if deemed acceptable) north borrow areas. This center channel sample extraction will be performed on only a sampling of those cores that serve to 'represent' the horizontal and vertical cut boundaries established in the further development of each of the three borrow areas. Each of the extracted samples will be subjected to grain size distribution, percent silt/clay content, and percent calcium carbonate content analyses. For budgeting purposes, it is assumed that a total of six samples will be extracted from the north borrow area, seven samples will be extracted from the central borrow area, and twelve samples from the south borrow area, for a total of twenty-five mechanical composites. The 'representative' sample locations (from O IWNOOWS\7EMPVRC setas 12 7 Add4-IW S-- 01-1600 da11r12A1 40 Scope of Work Page 7 the vibracores collected in 1999) will be determined subsequent to the refinement of 0 the cut boundaries of each of the borrow areas. Task 1.A.11 Establish Erosion Control Line for Sectors 1 and 2 Prior to the placement of beachfill acquired from sovereignty submerged lands in the state of Florida, the FDEP requires that local interests establish on Erosion Control Line, or ECL, for the shoreline fronting the anticipated limits of sand placement. The line is established in accordance with the provisions Chapter 161.161, Florida Statues. Technical (field) procedures are governed by Chapter 177, Part ll, Florida Statutes, and 18-5 and Chapter 21 HH -6, Florida Administrative Code. The field procedure utilized essentially establishes the position of the pre -project Mean High Water shoreline over the entire project construction boundary, within each sector and along the adjacent non -project shorelines. Timing of the survey is extremely important, as statutory limitations with respect to the elapsed time between field determination of the ECL and project construction are typically enforced by the state of Florida. Based on the above, meetings with the FDEP and the USACE, and proposed construction schedules, the ECL survey of Sectors 1 and 2 should be conducted in late February 2001. This shoreline was surveyed in February 2000, and the initial field effort will be to ascertain whether modifications to the February 2000 Mean High Water Line are necessary. By scheduling in this timeframe, adequate time should exist for processing, approvals by the FDEP Division of State Lands, Bureau of Surveying and Mapping, and the Public Hearing and adoption procedures. The state will require the Erosion Control Line position to be transposed onto recent vertical aerial photographs of the respective project site. ATM will coordinate this activity closely with Indian River County. The County's 1999 controlled vertical aerial photography will be utilized to convey the Mean High Water position onto mylar for submittal to the state of Florida. Upon submittal of the ECL documentation of the FDEP Bureau of Surveying and Mapping, ATM will conduct frequent telephone follow-up with the Title and Land Records Division to ensure that processing delays are minimized. ATM shall contact the FDEP to confirm: • Technical sufficiency of the submitted line as surveyed; • Procedural timeframes for approval; • Public notification, scheduling and conduct of the Public Workshop/Hearing; and, • Hearing findings and Report recommending establishment of the ECL (The Hearing Officer's Report is prepared within thirty days and is based on public input at and subsequent to the Hearing). Immediately following acceptance of the ECL position (and establishment procedures) by the FDEP, ATM will aggressively pursue and assist the County and the State with preparation, scheduling, pubic notification and presentation of exhibits for the Public Workshop and Hearing for the proposed ECL. The state permit(s) processing for the project should be nearly completed and anticipated for issuance by the FDEP prior to r, IWHOOWSITEMP,RC S.a— 1 2 7 Add.. a W serves 01-184)0 tla /l r22M1 !_ • Scope of Work Page 8 the Public Workshop and Hearing. Noticing procedures required by the FDEP are well understood and will be strictly followed to the extent the County requires assistance in this regard. ATM will work closely with County staff in generating the mailing list of riparian owners located within 1,000 feet of the proposed line, by accessing the County property appraiser's database. Affidavit of publication in the newspaper with largest local distribution (confirming the notice has been placed for three consecutive weeks prior to the announced date of the workshop/hearing, and once in the Florida Administrative Weekly) shall be furnished to the State promptly. FDEP Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems staff, as the designated hearing Officer for the ECL Public Hearing, shall be contacted well in advance of publication by ATM to confirm scheduled availability for this important meeting. ATM will prepare exhibits for and participate in presenting the concept and implications of the ECL to the Public Workshop/Hearing attendees, and shall entertain questions prior to formal Hearing proceedings to ensure the process is understood. Audio recording equipment must be provided by the County to provide a permanent voice record of the proceedings. ATM will ensure the ECL approval schedule is expedited by confirming via frequent telephone contact with the Hearing Officer in the thirty -day comment period following the hearing, that processing is proceeding as anticipated. If it is not, ATM will ascertain whether ATM or County assistance is required, and shall report it to County immediately. Timely submittal of Affidavits and notice copies will assist the Hearing Officer in expeditious processing of the ECL and subsequent forwarding to the FDEP Bureau of Surveying and Mapping for final approval. ATM will complete ECL processing by ensuring that the approved line is properly recorded in Indian River County as a permanent record of the established boundary of state-owned lands. Task 1.A.12 Compute Adjacent Project Area and Secondary Nearshore Hardbottom Impact Acreages Utilizing the (*.tiff) images prepared by Coastal Science Associates, Inc. in January 2000, and the post -processed aerial images prepared by Morgan & Eklund, Inc. in December 1999, ATM will rectify the *.tiff images (which contain color coding by hardbottom type) and compute the nearshore hardbottom acreages in the adjacent project areas. Generally, this will be accomplished for the shoreline segments 1,000 ft north and 3,000 ft south of the Sectors 1 and 2 proposed fill limits. The computed acreages will be presented in tabular format and presented with the Sector acreages expected to be impacted by sand burial or temporary coverage. The permit drawings will be modified to include these project -adjacent shorelines and transmitted to the Department for inclusion into the digital application drawing set. An N -Line model for each nourishment project may be required by the State, although a cost for this work is not included in this budget. C 1WN00YMTEUM CShore 127Addei WSmv 01-10-006-JIWA1 J 40 Scope of Work Page 9 Task 1.A.13 Prepare Summary Nearshore Hardbottom Videotape ATM and Coastal Science Associates, Inc. will review the collected video transect information and prepare one summary videotape of the nearshore hardbottom shore - parallel and shore -perpendicular transects for Sectors 1 and 2. The tape will be narrated by the CSAi biologist that conducted the video mapping, and will be accompanied by a chronological viewing guide that will correspond to tape elapsed time. Ten copies of the summary videotape will be transmitted between the Department, USACE, and County for future reference and use. Similarly, 10 copies each of the summary videotapes for Sectors 3, 5 and 7 will be prepared. Task 1B Processing and Acquisition of Sector 1 and 2 Construction Permit - USACE Task 1.B.1 Joint Coastal Permit Processing and Coordination with Jacksonville District Preparation and transmittal of the Joint Coastal Permit (JCP) applications for the Sector 1 and 2 beach restoration project is addressed under Task 1.A.2 above. Telephone contact will be established with the appropriate DEP staff to verify that the revised JCP application was properly forwarded to the USACE and whether the Jacksonville District has had any contact with the FDEP. Communication will then be established with USACE Jacksonville District to determine the Permit (RAMS) Number and District Regulatory Division staff (names and contact information) assigned to review and processing of the application. For task costing purposes, an estimate of the permitting budget has been developed for Tasks 1.13.1 through 1.B.6. Cost estimates for these tasks are based on an expected labor hour level of effort, as it is not possible at this juncture to ascertain how many questions will be asked, or the in-depth nature of the information requests contained in the RAi's. The level of comment by federal and state agencies may be excessive due to unforeseen issues and changes in the rules and policies of these agencies and the resulting need for additional information. This budget represents a significant level of labor effort cost estimate based on past experience in permitting large scale dredge and fill projects for beach nourishment projects. If cost savings beyond the expected budget are realized, the excess budget for this task will not be expended on other tasks unless approved by the County in writing. Task 1.8.2 Review and Respond to Sectors 1 and 2 First Agency Request for Additional Information (RAI) C.\WNDOWS%TEMPURCSedan12 7Pdd&wry SaN 01-18000ocll22.O1 n s scope of Work. Page 10 ATM shall review the 1 st RAI items with County staff within 1 week of receipt, discuss items with USAGE Jacksonville District technical staff as necessary, establish item priority, and prepare the necessary written and/or graphical information to adequately respond to the RAI. Assuming no additional field data acquisition is required and no numerical or analytical model simulations are necessary to prepare the response, ATM shall respond to the first Request for Additional Information within 30 days of receipt. This timeframe shall include preparation of a draft response and review/modification of it with County staff prior to submittal to the Department. Additional field data and/or numerical model simulations are not considered as a component of the scope of work associated with this or other tasks at present. Such services will be dependent upon agency requirements and will require ATM to prepare a separate scope of work and fee proposal for County approval prior to initiating work. Task 1.B.3 Review and Respond to Sectors 1 and 2 Second Agency Request for Additional Information (RAI) ATM shall review the second RAI items with County staff within 14 calendar days of receipt, discuss items with USAGE Jacksonville District technical staff as necessary, establish item priority, and prepare the necessary written and/or graphical information to adequately respond to the RAI. Assuming no additional field data acquisition is required and no numerical or analytical model simulations are necessary to prepare the response, ATM shall respond to the second Request for Additional Information within 30 days of receipt. This timeframe shall include preparation of a draft response and review/modification of it with County staff prior to submittal to the District. Task 1.13.4 Review and Respond to Sectors 1 and 2 Third Agency Request for Additional Information (RAI) ATM shall review the third RAI items with County staff within 7 calendar days of receipt, and will thereafter discuss items with USAGE Jacksonville District technical staff as necessary, establish item priority, and prepare the necessary written and/or graphical information to adequately respond to the RAI. Again assuming no additional field data acquisition is required and no numerical or analytical model simulations are necessary to prepare the response, ATM shall respond to the third Request for Additional Information within 30 days of receipt. This timeframe shall include preparation of a draft response and review/modification of it with County staff prior to submittal to the District. Task 1.13.5 Review and Response to Sectors 1 and 2 Engineering -Related Public Notice Items Following agency (USACE) Public Noticing of the Department of the Army Permit, agency, special interest groups and individual responses will be reviewed with the County prior to discussion with USACE staff. ATM and the County shall determine an appropriate response to each item and ATM shall prepare a formal response to agency requests. At this time and in advance of formal application submittal, it is anticipated C IWNOOWSITEMPIRC Sedan 1 2 7 Addieanal S- 01-1600 dcdir22Mi CA 40 Scope of Work Page 11 that ATM will be responding to concerns over engineering and beach fill performance - related issues following placement. These concerns will likely be lodged by numerous (greater than 5) third party interests, although the EA document should provide the information necessary for reference to respond to these third party letters of concern and comment (e.g., Audubon, Caribbean Conservation Corporation, Environmental Defense Fund, ReefKeeper International). The County and the County's EC will respond to concerns related to environmental issues (e.g., nearshore hardbottom, marine turtle and manatee protection), whereas ATM will not be addressing nor asked to respond to environmental concerns. Task 1.B.6 Review USAGE Statement of Findings for Sectors 1 and 2 Upon receipt of the USACE Permit Instrument, ATM shall carefully review and comment on any discrepancies or permit language that could be of potential concern to the County in pursuit of the Project construction and subsequent performance monitoring. A list of such concerns and the affected conditions will be prepared for review with the County staff, after which a formal response to the USACE requesting corrective action will be prepared. TASK 2 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT SCOPING, PREPARATION AND PROCESSING FOR SECTORS 1 AND 2 Task 2.1 Scoping Meeting with Federal and State Regulatory Agencies ATM shall assist the County with scheduling, preparation, and conduct of one meeting of the appropriate DEP, USACE, and other state and federal agency representatives as deemed necessary to discuss the Sectors 1 and 2, and develop a preliminary outline of the environmental document components (draft table of contents). It is anticipated that this meeting will be conducted in Jacksonville and will require one business day to complete. The direction being taken following consultation with the USACE Jacksonville District on 8 November (and as represented in the Task 2 scope items below) is that the Sectors 1 and 2 shoreline restoration project can proceed with the preparation of an Environmental Assessment (EA) document. Due to the diversity of the existing nearshore hardbottorn resources in the project areas, Sectors 3 and 5 will likely require the preparation of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) documents. Preparation of such documents will be undertaken under separate authorization. Task 2.2 Sectors 1 and 2 Environmental Assessment Documentation The document sections to be prepared by the Project Team include: Project Purpose and Need for Action, Affected Environment, Alternatives, Environmental Consequences C\WNDOW517EMMRC Satan 12 7ACdd—WS-01-18M doJWMI es a Scope of Work Page 12 of Preferred Alternative, List of Preparers, and Public Involvement. Responsibilities and roles of ATM and the County's Ecological Consultant (EC) are further identified in the following sections. Document preparation, production and transmittal is not included in this scope of work. Task 2.2.1 EA Document Meetings and Coordination The County's EC will prepare the EA section describing the Project Purpose and Need. This section shall also contain details on the project goals and objectives, authority, and location. Issues relevant to the project will be evaluated in detail and an outline of the decisions to be made will be presented. ATM will participate in Team meetings to review project progress and discuss specific milestone components of the report throughout the development of the EA document. This will require the review of related environmental documents, permits, licenses, and entitlements within the project area. A total of (4) team meetings will be conducted in Jacksonville and/or Vero Beach to review this section and a detailed outline of the remaining document prior to preparation of alternatives, affected environment, and environmental consequences sections of the document. Task 2.2.2 Alternatives The alternatives to be developed and further analyzed in EA Chapter 2 for Sectors 1 and 2 — as expected at present — are: • no action (resulting in construction of revetments and seawalls), • beach fill with periodic nourishment (-55 cy/ft), • beach fill design alternatives (^20% and 35%, respectively, reduction in fill volumes and their corresponding hardbottom impact reductions), and • consideration of modifications to current inlet sand bypassing efforts An analysis of fill redistribution will be conducted utilizing predictive modeling techniques. Modeling using REF/DIF and GENESIS will be performed. A meeting will be conducted with the Project Team and the USACE in Jacksonville to review the alternatives identified prior to proceeding with the remaining document sections. ATM shall prepare all of Section 2 — Alternatives (see attached EA Table of Contents) In Section 2.3 of the EA "Comparison of Alternatives," ATM will provide a summary of the alternative tinit fill volumes (i.e., lesser unit placement volume and greater unit placement volume) evaluation criteria. These criteria include: Fill performance, economic analysis of project benefits, project costs (30 -year), and hardbottom coverage impacts. The intent is to explain the exclusion of these alternatives and the basis by which the preferred alternative was selected. CIWINOOWS1TEMRRCSed-12 iAdMwnal S•—01-1"dW1r2M1 • • scope of Work Page 73 Task 2.2.3 Affected Environment The environments affected by this project will be evaluated. The effects on the Coastal environment will be estimated by potential changes in the wind, waves, currents, tides, storm events and sea level rise. Changes to the sediment budget, littoral processes and sediment interaction with the inlet and nearshore hardbottom, and to the native beach and borrow area sediment characteristics will also be determined. The project's effects on water quality will also be evaluated, and variance requirements will be outlined. ATM will coordinate efforts with the EC to determine the project's effects on the nearshore hardbottom (hardgrounds). ATM will prepare Sections 3.1 Coastal Environment 3.2 Beach and Inlet Geology and Geomorphology 3.3 Sediment Characteristics of Borrow Area and Native Beach 3.4 Water Quality (including ambient conditions and variance requirements) The above items comprise the initial elements of Chapter 3 of the EA. ATM will also identify the effects of the project on recreational resources, navigation, and historic properties. The County and the County's EC will prepare the remaining sections of the EA, which include vegetation, threatened and endangered species, hardgrounds, fish & wildlife resources, Essential Fish Habitat, Coastal Barrier Resources issues, air quality, aesthetic, recreational and cultural resources, and navigation and noise issues. Task 2.2.4 Environmental Consequences of the Preferred Alternative ATM will analyze the Environmental Consequences of the Preferred Alternative, including preparing the no -action and preferred alternative write-ups of Sections: 4.1 Tides, Waves, Currents and Storm Events 4.2 Beach and Inlet Morphology and Geomorphology 4.3 Sediment Characteristics of the Borrow Area and Native Beach 4.4 Water Quality It is assumed that the County's EC will analyze and prepare Sections 4.4 through 4.17 of the EA, corresponding to descriptions of vegetation, threatened and endangered species, nearshore hardbottom, fish and wildlife resources (including Essential Fish Habitat), noise, coastal barrier resources, air quality, aesthetic & recreational resources, and areas of archeological or historic significance. Further, the County's EC will analyze and prepare sections 4.19 and 4.20 - Environmental Justice and Compatibility with Federal, State and Local Objectives. Sections 4.18 and 4.21 - Cumulative Impacts and Environmental Commitments (Mitigation) - will be prepared jointly by ATM and the County's EC. A meeting with the Project Team will be conducted in Jacksonville to review a draft of this critical section of the EA document and determine final changes necessary prior to submittal of a draft to the USACE. C%W1H00WSXTFMPVRC S us 127Ad&tk1"S--01.1&D0dxJ1/17/01 • • Scope of Work Page 14 The Preferred Alternative (and its environmental consequences) will be reviewed to ensure compliance with environmental regulations and requirements. Document digital files will be prepared by ATM and transmitted to the County and the County's EC. Task 2.2.4.1 Pre -Submittal Meeting/Conference with DEP ATM shall organize and attend a pre -submittal meeting in Jacksonville with USACE, DEP, the County's EC and County staff to discuss computational, procedural and submittal requirements for presentation of project construction secondary and cumulative impacts to the affected environments. For the purposes of this scope of work, secondary impacts are understood to be those temporary impacts associated with sand spreading to the adjacent beach areas north and south of the physical beach restoration project boundaries. It is expected that the limits of such influence will be north and south of the individual beach fill project areas, and will require analysis of adjacent shorelines for sand volume and shoreline changes. Due to the verification level study conducted in Sector 5, however, it will not be possible to extend the computational efforts south of DEP monument R-86. Cumulative impacts are defined herein as the net effect of beach restoration and renourishment (maintenance) sand placement events, and their physical impact (both primary and secondary) on the beach environment and resources and the nearshore hardbottom resources of Indian River County beaches. It is assumed, given the magnitude and optimal frequency of beach fill placement that the proposed activities of the Indian River County Beach Preservation Plan will not result in adverse impacts to the beaches of Brevard or St. Lucie counties. Task 2.2.4.2 Computation and Presentation of Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Following procedural guidance established at the Pre -Submittal Meeting, ATM shall determine via computational and assessment methods the anticipated secondary impacts associated with the Indian River County Project implementation. Cumulative impacts will additionally be assessed and quantified based on expected performance and maintenance intervals associated with project implementation over a thirty-year horizon. A formal document will be prepared with tabular and graphic presentation of the anticipated impacts, and transmitted to the DEP. TASK 3 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS - SECTOR 7 C"%WNOOWS%TEMPlRC Saari 12 7A6d-WW S-- 01-15W doc 1WJO1 O • O Scope of Work Page 15 Task 3.1 Analysis Of Combined Beach Fill and Structural Implementation For Sector 7 Shoreline Following discussion with Department officials at a meeting in Tallahassee on August 29, 2000, ATM will conduct a conceptual design and layout of groin field and/or nearshore breakwaters to determine the optimization of sand placement in the South County (Sector 7) project area. The USACE Coastal Engineering Manual, coastal engineering design principles, and site-specific feature understanding (topography and nearshore bathymetry) will be utilized to complete this design and layout. The wave refraction/diffraction model REF/DIF will be utilized to simulate the pre- and post- installation wave field modifications of the project shoreline, both with and without structures. This wave condition establishment will be utilized in conjunction with the GENEralized Model for Simulating Shoreline Change (GENESIS), to simulate wave - induced longshore sand transport and evolution of the shoreline. This simulation will be utilized to demonstrate the effectiveness of the coastal protection structures in modifying (reducing) beach fill placement quantities on the shoreline. Wave data will be assembled from a combination of the Wave Information Study (WIS) hindcast data and real-time wave gauging apparatus in the area. Florida Institute of Technology and Sebastian Inlet Tax Distdct wave data will additionally be acquired and reviewed to determine adequacy for use in addition to, or in lieu of, the WIS data. A gdd will be established sufficient to fully simulate the bathymetry and shoreline adjacent to and contiguous with the Sector 7 project area. Model simulations will be conducted on sufficient wave 'cases' to adequately demonstrate the wave propagation over and shoreward of the proposed structures/beach fill section to the shoreline. The gdd will encompass the entire project area and depths seaward a sufficient distance to generate the incoming wave fronts, and a distance of up to 1 -mile north and south (alongshore) of the proposed project boundaries. Gdd coverage with these dimensions should be sufficient to depict pre- and post -construction impacts to the near field, project shoreline, and project -adjacent shorelines. A report will be prepared detailing the methodology, set-up and results of the simulation. Task 3.2 Alternatives Evaluation for Sector 7 Corrective Actions The alternatives to be developed and further analyzed for Sector 7 are: • no action (resulting in further construction of revetments and seawalls), • beach fill with periodic nourishment (-63 cy/ft), • beach fill design altematives (-20% and 35%, respectively, reduction in fill volumes and their corresponding hardbottom impact reductions), • a tapered groin field of 10-12 structures in combination with beach fill, • modified taper in the central portion of the project, utilizing a lesser number of groin structures with beach fill, and • a third altemative design configuration utilizing structures and beach fill. An analysis of fill redistribution (i.e., performance over time) will be conducted utilizing predictive modeling techniques. Modeling using REF/DIF and GENESIS, as described in Task 3.1 above, will be performed. A meeting will be conducted with the Project G'.\WNDOWS\TEMMIRC Secmn 1 2 7 AdW-.W Serv-01A800d-J1QM1 r-� 40 Scope of Worst Page 16 Team, the DEP, and the USACE in Jacksonville to review the alternatives identified prior to proceeding with the remaining document sections. ATM shall prepare a write- up of the above. A summary of the alternative unit fill volumes (i.e., lesser unit placement volume and greater unit placement volume) evaluation criteria will be provided. These criteria include: Fill performance, economic analysis of project benefits, 30 -year project costs (see Task 3.3 below), and hardbottom coverage impacts. The intent is to explain the exclusion of these alternatives and the basis by which the preferred alternative was selected. Task 3.3 Determine Benefits and Costs Associated with Alternatives ATM will perform a thirty-year projection of project benefits and project costs (i.e., project horizon) for each alternative identified above. Project costs shall include initial construction, alternative maintenance intervals, lands, easements and rights of way, project monitoring, and mitigation. Task 3.4 Prepare and Transmit Report for Agency Review and Comment ATM will produce and transmit a draft copy of the document for review and comment by the DEP and USACE. It is expected that agency comments will be provided in a single review phase, following which ATM will finalize and transmit the design report to the DEP and USACE. TASK 4 MEETINGS AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT ATM will prepare for, travel to and attend two meetings in Vero Beach in November 2000, and one meeting per month from December 2000 through December 2001. In addition, this task shall allow for participation in one conference call in November 2000, and one meeting with the DEP Bureau of Beaches & Coastal Systems in Tallahassee in December 2000. The meetings will be held to coordinate the permit and Environmental document processing and acquisition process, and to provide project updates to the Board of County Commissioners, the County Public Works staff, legal staff, the Beaches & Shores Coastal Advisory Committee, and DEP and USACE Jacksonville District representatives as deemed necessary and appropriate. This determination shall be made in consultation with the designated County staff contact and Beaches & Shores Advisory Committee Chairperson. Two ATM Senior Coastal Engineers will attend up to three meetings, with one ATM Senior Coastal Engineer in attendance for the remaining meetings. C.%WNOOWMTEMPMC Sottas 12 7 Addd-1W SM— 01-18-00 doc122101 40 40 • Scope of Work Page 17 The County may reduce the total amount of the contract by the value of any reduction in work performed by subcontractors. Alternatively, if directed in writing by the County, these funds will be directed to expand the scope of work on other tasks. C.1WIN00WS1TEMPMRG sectors 12 7Adddb l Sens 01.18.00.dodIM101 C-1 do O 8 a aM`f ;;$$ 5j44 mg � 0 0 Wli a h N04 V n e W ~ v E S Z N r QQ p1 M a c z i U O 0 a EE h " 2 b tl 3 A i a rd E m a n h P. Y 4zg" n¢ m a;ag€$gi9gs m�� �� a o �o e$5 N 6�wF C a ag o t7 F a i?q sl a um ,! 6 8