Item R15=.ing Date: July 15, 2015
Bulk Item. Yes No x
I I I D16 Wt Piz I %TJ El It
one #. 292-4444
on the Monroe County website at www.monroecounty-fl.gov.
ITEM BACKGROUND: Per RESTORE Act regulations, a Multi -Year Implementation Plan ("MYIP") is
required before funds can be distributed to any eligible entity. The MYIP must include, and these are attached
in the backup, the following.
1) The required Matrix, a Treasury Department spreadsheet outlining projects, budgets, and dates;
2) The required Narrative, a Treasury Department Adobe fillablc form; and
3) An additional Plan Document (this is not technically required, but is invited.)
Additionally, the regulations require that the MYIP be posted and available for public review and input for a
comment through August 31, 2015. This agenda item contributes to public notice.
The Y)%ftie4w" r4iti-ft aw c sir- e iA, a (-�7, 1 I
projects as ranked by Monroe County's RESTORE Act Local Advisory Committee and approved by the
Monroe County Board of County Commissioners:
• Coral Restoration, $550,000;
• Canal Restoration Monroe County, $450,000; and
• Canal Restoration Islamorada, $100,000.
'Rk31oc--.irnsw.t �� ke zwxlvlc�rLl a
and a revised final MYIP is developed and formally adopted by the Monroe County BOCC. We hope to bring
that to the BOCC for the September agenda.
The Final MYIP will then be sent to the Treasury Department which will review it for completeness and
conformity with the Act and Treasury regulations. After its review and, pending approval, Treasury will then
notify the County that it may begin submitting grant applications for the three (3) projects and activities
consistent with this MYIP.
P_.ffi 1104S RELEVANT BOCC ACTION: February 18, 2015, BOCC approved and awarded
funding from the RESTORE Act Local Pot rect Component') to the three projects listed above.
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES: NA
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: NA
TOTAL COST: INDIRECT COST: BUDGETED: Yes No
DIFFERENTIAL OF LOCAL PREFERENCE: N/A
COST TO COUNTY:— SOURCE OF FUNDS:
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes — No — AMOUNT PER MONTH Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty/42�MB/Purchasing Risk Management
DOCUMENTATION: Included X Not Required
DISPOSITION: AGENDA ITEM #
E AC? 64 Cam Went uttfyear an atria =ePa nt of the Treasury
,� pltnt Name:
Monroe County, Florida
oms Awaval a. noview
overseas, SIA67,644 everopown UUIIFUMIIMIMIVI L treat ALLOrATWM "an KNOW" Araft NOT ver PpounDMTAUR FUNanar tracer
$1,167,644
CAdk*lMmW�-dAnM"TWa Warren L
napiew
It wearl ber
M
Wd Pas Beft, tang.
now
Dan 2L owevre Ran ores mmftw—
.w.h.d.on —abuse
"wKfn" prove wanted A AppkWt§M
Louis now
spers
ran* ouldl
a.m."Wismarsit
0.09.91- C.-Amum. Coveted. !iowl
Restoration and Imbection of the
natural resources, systems,
Throughout Florida Keys
Permit Review and Updating,
fisheries, marine and wildlife
1, Carol Reef Restoration for (Monroe County) Low
Nursery Maintenance, Site
habitats, beaches, and coastal
Environmental and Economic attached map In
Selection, Outplanflog,
weHands of the Gulf Coast R ion
Enhancement of the Florida K s A andUA-lothinfart _—As—soom Dec-17
Monittearl Requartipig, Project
Closeout
Restoration and protection of the
Throughout Florida Keys,
natural resources, ecosystems,
2. Canal Water Quality in unincorporated areas
Design, Permitting
fisheries, marine and wildlife
Improvements and Restoration for of Monroe County (see
=Jon-11
Construction, Reporting,
habitats, tyesxhes, and coastal
Canals in Unincorporated Monroe attached map in
Project Closeout, Post-Profect
wetlands of the Gulf Coast Region
County Appendix A-2 of MY1M $450,000 $0 $5,DDODW $5,450,GM Apr-17
Water Quality Analysis
o`
blamomda, Village of
Islands Including
Plantation Key, Windley
Restoration and protection of the
Key, Upper Ideflecumbe
natural resources, eciewsposse,
3, Canal Water Quality Key and Lower
Design, Pectioning,
fisheries, marine and Ankfiffe
Improvements and Restoration for fressicumbe Key Isee
habitats, beaches, and coastal
Canals Across 'All Entities' In attached map In
Construction, Reporting,
wetlands of the mGulf Coast Region
Monroe County (Islamoredid, Appendix A-3 of MVIP) $100,WD SO $100,000 $200�000 her-16 Feb-17
Project Clarence, Post -Project
Water Quality Analysis
U, TOtALKMUM MR DOOM even to lowkwavel $1,1 $Q $5.300,000
'Inywoo-Arvoccares
RESTORE ACT Direct Component Multiyear Plan Narrative
rose Approval No, 1505-0250
Eligible Applicant Name: i�i
hameaniifontactln�orrrpsi7on tffe0esonto-b�,contac�tecflP—DZ50,matters concen,,gthis Multiyear l-mpT,,entati,�,Plana,
POC Title: Director of Legislative Affairs, Office of the County Administrator
_
POC Email: Ten nyson-lisa@monroecounty-fl,gov
POC Phone:
B. P600ilit A MIEF NARRATIVE THAT REMON5TRATESa
I The creed, purpose, and objectives bar each activity, including a detailed description of each a6vity.
County will conduct three activities,
ACTIVITY I - Coral Reef Restoration for Environmental and Economic Enhancement of the Florida Keys
Description. The Coral Reef Restoration project will grow staghorn coral in undersea nurseries located throughout the Florida Keys and
boulder coral in land -based nurseries. The coral will then be out -planted on reefs where they will kick start reproduction and reef
recovery for the future. Approximately 20,000 staghorn corals of varying sizes will be planted on reefs between Key Largo and Key
West. A subset of these will be part of value-added scientific research help increase the pace and efficiency of future restoration
activities. An additional 10,000 small boulder corals will repair 1,000 dead coral heads using an innovative 'reskinning' technology.
Staghorn and boulder coral restoration efforts will be designed to encourage the restored corals to reproduce on their own and reseed
both restored and adjacent reefs. The out -planted corals will begin to spawn and contribute to the reseeding of surrounding reefs.
Need: The reef system in the Florida Keys is the largest living coral reef in the Continental United States, and third largest barrier reef in
the world. Coral reef areas provide critical nursery and feeding habitat for an abundance of ecologically and economically valuable sea
life Coral reefs buffer adjacent shorelines from wave action and prevent erosion, property damage and loss of life. Reefs also protect
the highly productive wetlands along the coast. The reef system in the Florida Keys have been in decline for decades, and requires on-
going preservation and restoration efforts to save it. Despite efforts to protect the reefs and decrease existing threats, no significant
improvements In live coral cover or health have been observed. Active restoration Is a proven technique to help jump-start recovery of
the reefs,
Purpose, The primary purpose of this project is to restore degraded reefs in the Florida Keys through the out -planting of nursery -reared
corals. A healthy, vibrant reef is critical to the continuation of the unique ecosystem of the Florida Keys,
RESTORE objectives to be addressed by this project include environmental improvements and tourism promotion.
- Environmental: Increased live coral cover; restoration of important habitat for fish, invertebrates, sea turtles; long-term Impacts as out -
planted corals contribute to reproductive potential of the species.
- Economic Development, Improved recreational and tourism value of Monroe County's reefs.
-Community Resilience: Healthy reefs serve as a natural first line of defense for the shoreline by breaking waves offshore, which is
particularly important during storms,
- Education: The Nature Conservancy and its partners on this project do a significant amount of outreach within the community to help
educate the public about the importance of this work.
ACTIVITY 2 - Canal Water Quality Improvements and Restoration for Canals in Unincorporated Monroe County
Description: Canal water restoration projects will be constructed and implemented in canals throughout unincorporated Monroe
County in order to improve the poor quality of canal waters and prevent the continued discharge of their poor quality water into the
nearshore waters of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary which threatens the Sanctuary's unique and fragile coral reef and
ecosystem. Improving water quality in the Florida Keys canal system will improve and protect the near shore water quality of the
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. The health of the Florida Keys' ecosystem -- and its local tourism -based economy -- is reliant
Upon a pristine �marme environment,
ME
Objectives: RESTORE objectives addressed by this project include environmental improvements, economic development, and
community resilience. Specifically:
- Environmental: The project area, Islamorada, Village of Islands, is surrounded by the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. The
health of the Sanctuary's coral reef and massive seagrass beds — and all of the species that rely on these for habitat — are directly linked
to near shore water quality. Both corals and seagrasses thrive in areas where water is clear (low turbidity), low in nutrients, and high in
dissolved oxygen (DO). High levels of nutrients and low DO have been directly linked to extensive die -off in coral reefs in the coastal
waters,
- Economic Development: The socioeconomic importance of the reef to Monroe County was documented In study by the FKNMS
which concluded that more than 33,000jobs and $2.3 billion dollars in annual added revenue are directly attributed to Florida Reef
Tract (Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuaries, 2013). Islamorada is geographically centered in Monroe County and supports a large
tourism and charter fishing industry which are dependent on the health of the Sanctuary and good water quality.
- Community Resilience: Restoration of canal water will lead to a healthier reef system, greater protection of natural resources, and a
stronger economy all of which contribute to the community resilience of the all of the communities of the Florida Keys. The reef
contributes to resilience by serving as natural first line of defense for the shoreline by breaking waves offshore, which Is particularly
important during storms. Improved water quality also ensures a healthy natural environment, which in turn, ensures a healthy
economy. Economic vibrancy is integral to community resilience,
additional information and detail please refer to the Monroe County MYIP Plan Document, attached.
,i'kowthe applicant made An mAyearni-in avaTia-bTe Tor 45 jays Tor pubic review and commani, in a manner calculated to obtain lbreacTlaseg
1participation from individuals, businesses, Indian tribes, and non-profit organizations, such as through public meetings, presentations in languages other
Ithan English, and postings on the Internet. The applicant will need -to submit documentation (e.g., a copy of public notices) to demonstrate that it made its
multiyear plan available to the public for at least 45 days, In addition, describe how each activity in the plan was adopted after consideration of all
pmearningful input from the public.
(This is a draft section intended to describe the approximate process and dates for complying with the MYIP public input requirement.
It will be completed as part of final MYIP,)
All MYlPs must be available for public review and comment for a minimum of forty-five (45) days in a manner that will obtain broad,
meaningful participation from individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations and others. Building upon the broad public input
process facilitated by the County to date, and to satisfy the requirement to ensure meaningful public comment on the MYIP, the County
conducted the following activities:
July 9,2015: Monroe County's draft MYIP was publicly noticed and posted on the County's website.
July 9,2015 through August 30, 2015: The draft MYIP remained posted on the County's website for 52 days. (A screen shot of the
County's website Illustrating the MYIP posting is included In Appendix C of the attached Plan),
- July 9,2015: Notification was given to all Committee members and the BOCC of the MYIP's availability for review and comment via
email,
- July 9,2015: Notification was given to the public of the MYIP's availability for review and comment via a press release on to all media
outlets in Monroe County (a copy of the press release is included in Appendix C of attached Plan); and public notices placed in local
newspapers (copies of the public notices are included in Appendix Q.
- Posting Period: The draft MYIP was covered in a press article in the two (2) major Florida Keys newspapers: The Citizen and the
Keynoter (copies of the articles printed are included in Appendix Q.
- July 10, 2015: For additional public notice, the draft MYIP was placed an the published revised agenda for the Monroe County BOCC
July 15, 2015 meeting and discussed at that publicly noticed and televised Commission meeting,
'. August 30,2015: During the 52-day period, Monroe County received a total of won public commenti Monroe County addressed
comments received through MYIP revisions and additional clarification.
- September 16, 201S:The final MYIP, after revision and consideration of all received public comment, was presented to the BOCC at its
regularly scheduled, publicly noticed and televised monthly meeting.
- September 16,2015: Resolution xx-2015, formally adopting the final MOP after consideration of meaningful public comment was
approved by the BOCC (included in Appendix Q. (Or, alternatively, a letter on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners certifying
that the final MYIP was adopted after consideration of meaningful public comment (a copy of this letter is included in Appendix Q,
;3.How each activity incl4ded in the applicants multiyear plan matrix is elijkla, for Tuning and meets all requirements under the REST ORE Act.
this MYIP, three (3) activities are being submitted for funding. These activities are eligible activities under the RESTORE Act as follows:
Activity 1: Coral Reef Restoration for Environmental and Economic Enhancement of the Florida Kaye targets
(1) Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal
(11) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, and natural resources,
(111) implementation of a Federally -approved marine, coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan, including fisheries
monitoring,
0/i1) Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure.
(b)(II) Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast region, including recreational fishing.
tivity 2: Canal Water Quality Improvements and Restoration for Canals In Unincorporated Areas targets:
(1) Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal
wetlands of the Gulf Coast region.
(111) implementation of a federally approved marine/coastal management plan, including fisheries monitoring.
(11/) Workforce development and job creation,
(flit infrastructure projects benefiting economy or ecological resources, including port infrastructure,
Activity 3: Canal Water Quality Improvements and Restoration in Canals Across "All Entities" in Monroe County (Islamorada) targets:
(1) Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches, and coastal
wetlands of the Gulf Coast region.
(ill) Implementation of a federal approved marine/coast management plan, including fisheries monitoring,
(lid Workforce development and job creation.
c4, How the applicant wilt evaluate success of the ach% itles in udegTm the matrix.
:ach project will be carefully tracked so that project success can be gauged at select intervals during the course of project
mplementation.
General measures of milestones and success include the following:
• Projects are completed within projected timeframes and within budgets.
• Projects further the goals and objectives of the Florida Key National Marine Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program and its
federal and state regulatory requirements and mandates.
• The Coral Restoration Project will result In additional coral plantings/nurseries, strengthening and restoring the fragile reef system;
improving habitat for important reef fish species; and preserving a marine -based local economy.
• The Canal Water Quality Improvement Projects will result in reduced nutrient and pollutant loading to the nearshore waters,
improving water quality in the Sanctuary; protecting the Sanctuary's fragile marine ecosystem; and preserving a marine -based local
economy.
• Additional information re: milestones is provided In the project information sheets included in Appendix A of attached Plan.
(5, How the atowFies-Inchnisil in the srsu hwar plats matrix were prm tuw and the anwria uses to estaYllih the priorities.
oe County conducted a highly transparent and participatory process to determine the projects it ultimately selected for award
its Direct Component funding. Below are the various elements of the County's process.
Local Advisory Committee:
To ensure public participation, a local advisory committee, The Monroe County RESTORE Act Local Advisory Committee, was created by
the Monroe County BOCC on February 20, 2013 with its adoption of Resolution 094-2013 (and later Resolution 129-2013 for
clarifications) . The Committee was and remains tasked with making recommendations to the BOCC for projects that are in the best
interest of the County that will be funded through the Direct Component of the RESTORE Act.
BOCC gave careful consideration to the Committee's membership to ensure broad stakeholder representation, requiring that the
en 01) members represent each of the Monroe County Commission districts and each of the municipalities within Monroe County.
BOCC empowered the Committee to:
• Gain an understanding of the RESTORE project authorization and funds distribution process;
Develop specific project evaluation criteria for the ranking of projects based on direction and Guiding Principles from the BOCC;
• Solicit projects for evaluation;
• Score and rank submitted projects; and
• Make recommendations to the BOCC for projects to be awarded with funding from the first distribution of RESTORE Act Direct
Component funds.
To date, the Committee has held seven (7) meetings that were all publicly noticed: May 16, 2013; June 12, 2013; June 28, 2013;
November 8, 2013; September 26, 2014, December 11, 2014; December 12, 2014.
In May 2013, the BOCC developed Guiding Principles for Direct Component fund allocations and a set of Ranking Criteria to be used by
the Committee in selecting projects to receive Direct Component funds. The BOCC intended that the Committee consider the Guiding
Principles as threshold eligibility criteria for project proposals,
The Guiding Principles are:
Project must meet the eligible uses and funding conditions in the Act, and any Treasury requirements;
Projects provide positive direct environmental and/or economic benefit to Man roe County,
Projects are consistent with local government comprehensive plans and community priorities;
Projects incorporate other funding partners to fully leverage RESTORE funds;
No project can encumber all of the available funds in the local pot.
Evaluation Criteria:
Similarly, the BOCC developed a set of Evaluation Criteria for the Committee to consider in its project evaluation process. The
Evaluation Criteria included-
I . Feasibility (Financial, technical, administrative)/Probability of Success (Are there obstacles? Can they be reasonably overcome? Does 1
require permits? Will It be able to qualify for necessary permits?)
2. Readiness to Implement/Timeframe for Completion (is it already permitted? How long before implementation? How long to
complete?)
3. Benefits are Direct and Measurable (Are the benefits clear, measurable? Are they Economic? Environmental? Roth?)
4. Benefits are Keys -wide (Do the benefits accrue Keys -wide or are they localized?)
5. Cost-effective/Return on Investment (is it worth it? What is the funding/leverage ratio?)
6. Public Support (Can the project demonstrate support from the public? Is it part of an already approved Comprehensive plan? State
plan? Federal plan?)
7. Clear Ability to Demonstrate, Monitor and Report on both Results and Expenditure of Funds (Requirements for project compliance
with monitoring, reporting, compliance, outcomes will be very rigorous, will the project/applicant be able to meet/manage these
requirements?)
R. Applicant is Able to Demonstrate Experience/Expertise Related to Project, Ability to Manage Project Type/Size, and Ability to Manage
Government Grant/Contracts,
Project Solicitation Process:
The Committee then established a Project Funding Submittal Form (application) and application procedure. The Project Funding
ISubmittal Form was designed to reflect both the Guiding Principles and Evaluation Criteria. Once approved by the BOCC, the
!Committee solicited and accepted applications for projects In compliance with RESTORE Act eligibility criteria,
!Monroe County's Project Funding Submittal Form was released on July 19,2013, with applications due by December 20,2013 (after one
deadline extension). Forty-six (46) applications were received in response.
All project submissions were posted, in their entirety, an the County's website, The County also made numerous public
announcements that project submissions were posted for public review.
Project Evaluation, Ranking and Award Process:
The Committee evaluated, scored and ranked all project submissions during its December 11 and 12, 2014 meetings, within the course
of one and a half days - one full day for presentations and another half day for Committee discussion, scoring, and compiling.
The Committee's project evaluation meetings were publicly noticed with announcements on the County's website, announcements at
County Commission meetings, email blasts, and notices in local newspapers. The meeting materials- agenda, presentation schedule,
and Committee members' scores and rankings, and video -recording of the meeting were (and remain) posted on the County's website.
The Committee heard thirty-seven (37) presentations In total, The presentations enabled proposers to discuss projects with the
Committee and provided an opportunity to Committee members to ask follow-up questions on the written submissions. After hearing
jail presentations, the Committee members finalized their individual scores.
i
!The members' individual scores were then compiled and tallied. Submissions with the highest total scores were ranked the highest.
Ind lvidua I scores, total project scores, and project rankings were all presented at the meeting. Members of the public, officials from the
various municipalities, and the proposers were all In attendance and given opportunity for Input.
The final ranking was a Committee recommendation forwarded to the BOCC for final approval of the projects. The Committee's
recommended project ranking was presented to the BOCC for discussion and formal selection at their February 2015 monthly meeting.
letter presentation ion an a Discussion, the BQU-L approved the thrise(3) t-o-p:r-a-n-ke-d-p-r-ol-e-c-t-s,-7gain, -m--e-m-6-er-s-o7-tFe--p-uUic -were in
attendance and there were no objections or comments expressedregarding the BOCC's final awards.
�.fhe rJatkcn5ii1p1 Tany, —between fhecoin cities the applicant indutletd in the mukiyearplats rnator: an of erac6ijtoes Tun(Tejunder the hffOURE Act.
At this time, there are no coordinated activities between the three (3) restoration activities submitted and other activities funded under
the RESTORE Act. However, Monroe County will continue seeking leveraging opportunities for RESTORE Act funds.
According to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, no persons are required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a vafidoMe control number, The valid
Over control number for this information collection is 1505-0250, Comments concerning the time required to complete this information collection, including the time to review
Instructions, search existing data resources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection ofinformation, should be directed to the
Department of the Treasury, RESTORE Act Program, 1500 Pennsylvania Ave.: NW, Washington, DC20220,
�.,.,........ ......
,,,,,,...................
.....
�m marrmm „......, ,,,.........
rrr»„.. mmmm....
,uuuu. ,,,,,,,,u ..............
...
MONROE COUNTY
I
r
e
V
MULTI-YEAR
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
RESTORE Act
Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund
DRAFT
,duly 6, 2015
Contact:
Lisa Tennyson,Director of Legislative Affairs
Office of the County Administrator
igMnyson-lisaLmmonroec2ggty-fl.gov
(305)292-4444
,,,,,,,,, .,.rvnn- ......__ww ..... .,,,,.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. GENERAL BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. 1
II. THREE ACTIVITIES IN THE MULTI-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ..................................................... 2
III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION.................................................................... 3
A. Local Committee................................................................................................................................ 3
B. Public Information Sharing..........................................................................................................................4
C. Guiding Principles for Project Selection............................................................................................4
D. Project Evaluation Criteria................................................................................................................. 5
E. Project Application and Solicitation.................................................................................................. 5
F. Project Evaluation, Ranking and Award Process.............................................................................. 6
G. All Public Activity (BOCC and Local Advisory Committee Meetings and Actions).......................... 6
H. MYIP Public Comment Solicitation Process...................................................................................... 7
(This is a draft section intended to describe the process and dates far complying with the MYIP
public input requirement. It will be completed as part of final MY/P.)
IV. BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE.......... ......................................................................................................... 9
V. MEASURES OF MILESTONES AND SUCCESS... .............a.................................................................... 13
VI. OVERALL MYIP BUDGET AND JUSTIFICATION............. ..................................................................... 14
VII. APPENDICES.............................. .......................,.............................................................................. .. 15
Appendix A-1: Project Information Sheet.............................................................................................. 16
Appendix A-2: Project Information Sheet,...................................................................................................... 19
Appendix A-3: Project Information Sheet.............................................................................................. 26
REFERENCES............................................................... ................................................................................ 33
ENDNOTES...................................... ............. ................ ........................................................................... 34
f
r
...............................
I. GENERAL BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
On April 20, 2010, the largest offshore oil spill in the United States ("U.S.") occurred after the explosion
of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Before the well was capped, millions of
barrels of crude oil were released, closing tens of thousands of square miles of federal, state and
protected waters to fishing, and causing extensive damage to marine and wildlife habitats, and tourism
across five (5) Gulf states, including Florida.
In July 2012, Congress passed the Resources and Ecosystems Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and
Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States Act ("RESTORE Act" or "the Act')." The Act established the
Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund ("Trust Fund") within the U.S. Department of the Treasury
("Treasury").
The Act also requires that 80% of the civil penalties paid after July 6, 2012, under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, in connection with the spill, must be deposited into the Trust Fund and invested.
Amounts in the Trust Fund will be available
for programs, projects, and activities to
restore and protect the environment and '°� "
economy of the Gulf Coast region. ww-w . � $
ea%t
Coat RestmflonTrwd Fund
Treasury is responsible for issuing r 2 3, 4 s
compliance and auditing procedures for the
entire Act and substantive procedures for
two grant programs (Direct Component and n P AdiNe:L
Centers of Excellence Research Program) "
which it did on October 14, 20142 through its wu ma a »
Poro
Interim Final Rule ("IFR"),
u « w as v a� fie.,
' Ilu iuYmre imgvAwinou PiW '
Treasury also published the RESTORE Act a U 5
Direct Component Guidance and Application � � �
to Receive Federal Financial Assistance �l y
u, �a �; �J Il ,J
("Guidance"
)3 and a list of fund balances that j
t �
provides further direction to recipients on
the scope of their initial distributions.
The only funds obligated to the Trust Fund to date are from the Transocean civil settlement for $1
billion, 80% (or $800 million) of which will go toward RESTORE Act implementation. The Direct
Component sets aside 35% of penalties paid into the Trust Fund for eligible activities proposed by the
States of Alabama, Mississippi,Texas, Louisiana and 20 Louisiana parishes, and 23 Florida counties.
Monroe County will receive 8.297% of those funds which is $1,167,643.80 as of March 2015. Final
amounts are subject to new deposits into the Trust Fund, interest from investments being credited, and
amounts withdrawn by grant recipients for eligible programs, projects, and activities under the Act.
Funds for each component are available through grants and will be subject to all applicable Federal and
State law.
A Multi-Year Implementation Plan ("MYIP")4 is required Before funds can be distributed to any eligible
entity. The MYIP must:
• Describe each program, project and activity for which it seeks funding;
• Include a description of the project's need, purpose,and objectives;
• Identify the eligible activities'"'the project will undertake; and
• Include the project location, budget, milestones and projected completion dates, and criteria to
evaluate the success of each activity in helping to restore and protect the Gulf Coast region.
1
i" .,..,:...:.. ....... .... ...... .. ',, .........
Prior to receiving Direct Component funds, Treasury requires submission of an Operational Self-
Assessment ("OSA") as part of its compliance process. The County submitted its OSA to Treasury in
October 2014;and an updated OSA in July 2015.
This MYIP has been created pursuant to the Act and Treasury's IFR. The scope of this MYIP tracks the
funds available to Monroe County and consists of three (3) projects as ranked by Monroe County's
RESTORE Act Local Advisory Committee ("Committee") and approved by the Monroe County Board of
County Commissioners ("BOCC"). This MYIP also includes administrative and planning assistance costs
to comply with the Act, Guidance and regulations.
This document is to be considered a Draft MYIP until such time that public input is received and
incorporated, and a revised final MYIP is formally adopted by the Monroe County BOCC.
Treasury will review the Flnol MYIP for completeness and conformity with the Act and Treasury
regulations. Treasury may request additional information after its review and, pending approval, will
notify the County (in writing) that it may begin submitting grant applications for the three (3) projects
and activities consistent with this MYIP.
II. THREE ACTIVITIES IN THE MULTI-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
After a thorough public review and selection process, the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners ("BOCC") formally approved Direct Component funding for the three (3) projects
included in this MYIP,as follows:
PROJECTS SELECTED FOR FUNDING
�.. .. ........ ...... mm„. . ...................................
Project Name BOCCAPProved Funds
Coral�Re�±f;Restorationfor;l�nvironmental� �//////,,, �i � i , /i /,,/,,,,
antl;ECo11�m iC; ✓„�//iiiiiiiiiir/ii / /%%%/�%!i �5� %ia//� /iii%%%///�/a.
/
/
. .,.. rr .....��✓w+rl u�m'.,w�uw,awd' „� . r/�rr�R,..,,r��taa�l.��; �1//.6�.xr,r� /..� ��r r,:.mG/ f/��r/,�� �r i��/l riir�/
Canal Water Quali#y Improvements and Restoration for Canals $450,000
in Unincorporated Monroe County
Proposer: Monroe County
Canal'Water Qua1i Im` rovements and�Restoratian;farCanals�����//!,%/r/ %////!% ���//�/�!'� �/
.,across ,Ail Entities",rin,Manroe,Coun undin Awarded; � �� i / /
2
III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
Monroe County conducted a highly transparent and participatory process to determine the projects it
ultimately selected for award from its Direct Component funding. Below are the various elements of the
County's process.
A. Local Committee
To ensure public participation, a local advisory committee, The Monroe County RESTORE Act Local
Advisory Committee, was created by the Monroe County BOCC on February 20, 2013 with its
adoption of Resolution 094-20136 (and later Resolution 129-2013 for clarifications)'. The
Committee was and remains tasked with making recommendations to the BOCC for projects that
are in the best interest of the County that will be funded through the Direct Component of the
RESTORE Act,
The BOCC gave careful consideration to the Committee's membership to ensure broad stakeholder
representation, requiring that the eleven (11) members represent each of the Monroe County
Commission districts and each of the municipalities within Monroe County.
The BOCC empowered the Committee to:
• Gain an understanding of the RESTORE project authorization and funds distribution process;
• Develop specific project evaluation criteria for the ranking of projects based on direction
and Guiding Principles from the BOCC;
• Solicit projects for evaluation;
• Score and rank submitted projects;and
• Make recommendations to the BOCC for projects to be awarded with funding from the first
distribution of RESTORE Act Direct Component funds.
To date, the Committee has held seven (7) meetings that were all publicly noticed: May 16, 2013;
June 12, 2013; June 28, 2013; November 8, 2013; September 26, 2014; December 11, 2014;
December 12,2014.
.Monroe"County RESTORE Act Local Advisory Commlttee`Members:
✓ Patrick H.' Rice,'PhDn �- Monroe County, District 1 Appointee; Marine Scientist
✓ Capt. Bill Kelly-Monroexounty,District 2 Appointee„Executive Director of the Florlda,Keys
Commercial Fishermen's Association
t
✓ ToddGerman MonroeCounty,'District 3 Appointee,,Local businessperson,
✓ David Makepecce-Monroe County, District 4 Appointee, Marine Biology Educator
✓ John Halas-Monroe County, District 5 Appointee, Marine`Biologist
✓ Edwin Swift 111- Monroe Count G
f y ulf Consortium Director Appointee, Local-businessperson �
Sarah'Spurlock Representative far the City of Key.West,Assistant City'Manager y
✓ Mayor Chris But! Elected official'of the City of Marathon
✓ Councilman Mike Forster-- Elected official of lslaihorada, Village oflslands
✓ Councilman William MurchieElected official;of the City of Layton
✓ Commissioner Ryan Schraffenberger- Elected official of the City of Key Colony Beach j
r✓i ram, i ir,,rrr rr r�'r��%J/'Y,ry"i�J i �%N"' l r J,�,�rr, J, imi'�" "r r"�",r�"�r*���rr�/ l�rlY'`�i'��IY,r� 1'�"J),� rJ."r r�,""`I$"�`rrr�"ilr %"7P�°r�iiriiirur�rJ�liY'raY�lr"�"r�"i�ri °r %�i`�1,7°�J,JIJi,rI
1
B. Public Notice and Information Sharing
To ensure broad public notice and information sharing, the County developed an informational
webpage dedicated to the RESTORE Act,on its official website.
The RESTORE Act page on the County website was
developed on February 5, 1011, and has been -
actively maintained and updated continually since.
Ot dFa#i0•nwmWlq•w
From the start and throughout the entire process,
the Committee's by-laws, membership, meeting
dates, and meeting agendas and minutes were (and
remain) posted on the County's website.
w
m .0
The page contains information related to the
various "pots" of funding, detailed information on
the Direct Component funding pot, the Local
Committee, Committee meeting information, video °
recordings of Committee meetings, project „� ��� ������ �� '°
submission forms and deadlines, completed project "'"'°""°"
submissions, project scores and rankings, Treasury rules and information, BOCC actions,
informational links,contact information,etc.
In addition to the County's RESTORE webpage, this information was regularly discussed at BOCC
meetings, which are public and televised. Notifications of Committee meetings were advertised in
local newspapers and announced on the County's website.Availability of Direct Component funding
and deadlines were also advertised in local papers and announced on the County's website.
We also coordinated closely with the local media to keep the public informed. As a result, there was
also a great deal of press and radio coverage related to the County's RESTORE Act activities, the
Committee's activities, the availability of Direct Component funding, the various submissions for
funding, scores and rankings, and the BOCC's project selection.
C. Guidine Principles for Protect Selection
In May 2013, the BOCC developed Guiding Principles for Direct Component fund allocations and a
set of Ranking Criteria to be used by the Committee in selecting projects to receive Direct
Component funds. The BOCC intended that the Committee consider the Guiding Principles as
threshold eligibility criteria for project proposals.
............................ , „Y
Guiding'Princfples:
'Project must meet,the eligible uses�and funding conditions In the Act, and any,Treasury
requirements j
✓ Projects provide positive direct environmental and/or economic,beneflt to Monroe county
! Projects are consistent with local government comprehensive plans and community-priorities
Projects lncorp orate,ather funding,partners to fully leverage'RE5TORE funds
✓ No project can encumber all of the availgble funds in the locaFpot
�'",'w,'�y"""'w"'"'"iw""'"'17`"•*�`,';"�,i,Wig;i' m ;''�i,ri, "N'Jyy/µid„�r�h"'*,i,""`" w"t, "�" ii;i„ lyy lyr°,w,„�yf�';",q""l 'H"i"y,�,� '"i;'"`w�,.Jli�,'N,w
4
D. Project Evaluation Criteria
Similarly, the BOCC developed a set of Evaluation Criteria for the Committee to consider in its
project evaluation process. The Evaluation Criteria included:
1. Feasibility (Financial, technical, administrative)/Probability of Success (Are there obstacles? Can
they be reasonably overcome? Does it require permits? Will it be able to qualify for necessary
permits?)
2. Readiness to Implement/Timeframe for Completion (Is it designed/already permitted? How long
before implementation? How long to complete?)
3. Benefits are Direct and Measurable (Are the benefits clear, measurable? Are they Economical?
Environmental? Both?)
4. Benefits are Keys-wide (Do the benefits accrue Keys-wide or are they localized?)
5. Cost-effective/Return on Investment(Is it worth it?What is the funding/leverage ratio?)
6. Public Support (Can the project demonstrate support from the public? Is it part of an already
approved Master plan, Comprehensive plan?State plan? Federal plan?)
7. Clear Ability to Demonstrate, Monitor and Report on both Results and Expenditure of Funds
(Requirements for project compliance with monitoring, reporting, compliance, outcomes will be
very rigorous,will the project/applicant be able to meet/manage these requirements?)
8. Applicant is Able to Demonstrate Experience/Expertise Related to Project, Ability to Manage
Project Type/Size, and Ability to Manage Government Grant/Contracts.
E. Prolect Application and Solicitation
The Committee then established a Project Funding Submittal Form (application) and application
procedure. The Project Funding Submittal Form was designed to reflect both the Guiding Principles
and Evaluation Criteria. Once approved by the BOCC, the Committee solicited and accepted
applications for projects in compliance with RESTORE Act eligibility criteria.
Monroe County's Project Funding Submittal Form was released on July 19, 2013, with applications
due by December 20, 2013 (after one deadline extension). Forty-six (46) applications were received
in response.
All project submissions were posted, in their entirety, on the County's website. The County also
made numerous public announcements that project submissions were posted for public review.
Application Sectfons'and:PotntAllocatlons: �
y
✓ Pra ect'Deserlo tion Need ,Feasibilit , Probabili o :Success .,20 points
1 P ( � y 5v f 1
✓ Project Budget(Match, Financial Feasibility, Cost•effectiveness): 15 points A
Technical Feasibility; 5 points
✓ Readiness for'lmplementotion (Permitting, Obstacles): 10 points,
��r
✓ Completion Timetable, 10 points
✓ Environmental Benefits:(Cleur, measurable)„ 10tpoints
✓ Economic Benefits;(Clear,-measurable).'10 points
�j
✓ Community Resilience:5 points r
✓ Complements Existing Effort and PlanslNblic Support. 5 points
✓ Compliance with.Federal, State and.Local Regulations,-No paints(required for all projects) `
✓ Project MahboemenC Capacity 10 points
"' ''"5jr+�wr"wr,,i,/)'";")rr„;r"f'ii�i�y r�,,,;:eJ,if,iiri:,, yr;Wl.,i,.,; 997�J�""a;'�f',1 � ,r�rf,�'"'�' ia,ii ,rr...r, i�..-,..,rrrrr ,h���v,!.,�✓f�'+� V✓,,�irriirrir,a„i„ e>,,,,r,<,,,irr�/
5
F.
The Committee evaluated, scored and ranked all project submissions during its December 11 and
12, 2014 meetings, over the course of one and a half as — one full day for presentations and
another half day for Committee discussion,scoring,and compiling.
The Committee's project evaluation meetings were publicly noticed with announcements on the
County's website, announcements at County Commission meetings,email blasts,and notices in local
newspapers. The meeting materials-- agenda, presentation schedule, and Committee members'
scores and rankings, and video-recording of the meeting were (and remain) posted on the County's
website.
The Committee heard thirty-seven (37) verbal presentations in total. The presentations enabled
proposers to discuss projects with the Committee and provided an opportunity to Committee
members to ask follow-up questions on the written submissions. After hearing all presentations,
the Committee members independently finalized their individual scores.
The members' individual scores were then collected and tallied. Submissions with the highest total
scores were ranked the highest. Individual committee member scores, total project scores, and
project rankings were all presented at the meeting. Members of the public, officials from the
various municipalities, and the proposers were all in attendance and given opportunity for input.
The final ranking was a Committee recommendation forwarded tots BOCC for final approval oft e
projects. The Committee's recommended project ranking was presented to the BOCC for discussion
and formal selection at its regularly scheduled February 2015 monthly meeting.
After presentation and discussion, the BOCC approved the three (3) top-ranked projects (as listed in
the chart on page 2 of this document) and decided upon funding amounts for each.9 Again,
members of the public were in attendance and there were no objections or comments expressed
regarding the BOCC's final awards.
G. All Public Activitv (BOCC and Local AdvilM Committee Meetings and Actions)
A complete list of RESTORE Act program-related activities, public meetings, discussions, Committee
meetings, and formal BOCC actions is provided as follows:
• February 18, 2015: BOCC approved three (3) projects (and funding amounts) for RESTORE Act Direct Component ("Local Pot")
funding: Coral Reef Restoration Program (ranked #1) for $550,000, Monroe County (Unincorporated) Canal Restoration Program
(ranked#2)for$450,000 and part of Monroe County JAH Entities)Canal Restoration Program(ranked#3)-for Islamorada's Canal
Restoration Projects for Sioo,000.
• December 11 & 12, 2014: committee meetings to hear final presentations, score and rank applications. (All meetings of the
Committee were publicly noticed with date, time and place In the local paper and on the County's website. Agendas, meeting
materials,minutes and video-recordings of each meeting are posted on the County's website.)
• October 17, 2014: BOCC presentation and discussion on RESTORE Act and Final Treasury Rule, including discussion of County's
requirement to develop a MYIP,gravity of federal grant requirements and grant management costs and risks to County related to
sub-awards;BOCC gave direction to staff to draft MYIP in-house with outside technical support.
• September 26, 2014: Committee Meeting with update on the Final Treasury Rule, federal grant requirements, Importance of
project management capacity.
• February 2014:BOCC ratified submission(in December 2013)of an additional County request to Local Pot application process for a
multi-jurisdictional Canal project.
• January 16,2014:SOCC approved Commissioner Neugent's nomination of appointment to Gulf Consortium Executive Committee.
• December 27,2013:All new/additional project application submissions posted to County's website.
6
• December 20, 2013: Extended closing date for Local Pot application cycle (extension was publicly noticed in local papers, on
County's website and via press release).
• November 20, 2013: BOCC approved recommendation of the Committee to extend the deadline for submitting project proposals
for the RESTORE Act Local Pot funding until December 20, 2013.
• November 20, 2013: BOCC ratified County's comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Department of Treasury, concerning
the RESTORE Act program, which were submitted to U.S. Treasury on November 5, 2013.
• November 8, 2013: Committee Meeting included discussion and approval of re -opening cycle and extensio9n through December
20, 2013. Also heard presentation on U.S. Treasury regulations regarding RESTORE Act funding.
• September 6, 2013: All project submittal applications posted on the County's website and public notified of the posting via email,
announcements, and media.
• August30, 2013: Original closing date for Local Pot funding application cycle.
• July 18, 2013: Opening date for Local Pot funding application cycle (opening was publicly noticed in local newspapers, on County's
website, and via a press release; opening was also covered by media).
• July 17, 1013: BOCC approved Committee recommendations for the Local Pot funding application process including a Project
Funding Submittal Form (project evaluation criteria and points), submission process, and application opening and closing dates for
RESTORE Act Local Pot funding.
• June 28, 2013: Committee Meeting to discussed draft project submittal form, application of points to reflect Evaluation Criteria,
ranking list of allowable uses, and development of application process timetable.
• June 12, 2013: Committee Meeting with update on RESTORE Act, initial discussion of project selection process, the BOCC's Guiding
Principles and Evaluation Criteria, and direction to staff to develop draft application.
• May 16, 2013: First Committee Meeting with introductions, overview of RESTORE Act, overview of Local Pot and role of Committee
in devising a process for selecting projects for award, and election of officers.
• May 15, 2013: BOCC discussed and determined Guiding Principles and Evaluation Criteria for project award process for Local Pot
funding for the Committee. BOCC directed Committee to review/consider these criteria and bring back recommended Evaluation
Criteria to Board. (Committee reflected this in project application questions/point system.)
• April 17, 2013: BOCC approved clarifications to voting requirements for Committee members, adopted Resolution 129-2013
amending Resolution 094-2013 to prohibit all Committee members, including government agency members, from voting on
projects that benefit their agencies.
• March 20, 2013: BOCC approved its six (6) appointees to the Committee; the five (5) municipalities also appointed their
representatives to the Committee. BOCC ratified two (2) project submissions for Federal Council funding.
• February 10, 2013: BOCC approved creation of the Committee, adopting Resolution 094-2013 creating the Committee and its
purpose, membership, and responsibilities.
• January 16, 2013: BOCC approved Committee membership model consisting of appointments by each municipality and six (6) BOCC
appointments (one (1) by each Commissioner and an additional appointment by Commissioner also serving as the Director to Gulf
Consortium).
• December 11, 2012: BOCC held a Special Meeting to discuss RESTORE Act, creation and membership makeup of a local RESTORE Act
committee and an application process. BOCC adopted Resolution 364-2012 supporting candidacy of Commissioner Neugent's
nomination of appointment to the RESTORE Act Gulf Consortium Executive Committee.
• September 21, 2012: BOCC adopted Resolution 25OA-2012 appointing Mayor Neugent to serve as representative, and
Commissioner Rice as the alternate representative, to the RESTORE Act Gulf Consortium. BOCC approves Monroe County's joining
of the Gulf Consortium, adopting Resolution 246-2012 approving an Inter -local agreement to join the RESTORE Act Gulf
Consortium.
H. MYiP Public Comment Solicitation Process
(This is a draft section intended to describe the approximate Process and dates for cornolyina with the MYIP
public input requirement It will be completed as part of final MYIP )
All MYIPs must be available for public review and comment for a minimum of forty-five (45) days in
a manner that will obtain broad, meaningful participation from individuals, businesses, non-profit
organizations and others.10 Building upon the broad public input process facilitated by the County
to date, and to satisfy the requirement to ensure meaningful public comment on the MYRP, the
County conducted the following activities:
• July9,2015:Monroe County's draft MYIP was publicly noticed and posted on the County's website.
• July 9, 2015 through August 30, 2015:The draft MYIP remained posted on the County's website for 52 days (a screen shot of the
County's website illustrating the MYIP posting is Included In Appendix C).
• July 9, 2015:Notification was given via email to Committee members,various stakeholders, and the BOCC of the MYIP's availability
for review and comment.
• July 9,2015:Notification was given to the public of the MYIP's availability for review and comment via a press release on to all media
outlets in Monroe County (a copy of the press release is included in Appendix C); and public notices placed In local newspapers
(copies of the public notices are included in Appendix C).
• Posting Period:The draft MYIP was covered In a press article in the two (2) major Florida Keys newspapers:The Citizen and the
Keynoter(copies of the articles printed are included In Appendix C).
• July 10,2015:For additional public notice,the draft MYIP was placed on the published revised agenda for the Monroe County BOCC
July 2015 meeting and discussed at that publicly noticed and televised Commission meeting.
• August 30, 2015: During the 52-day period, Monroe County received a total of xxxx public comments. Monroe County addressed
comments received through MYIP revisions and additional clarification.
• September 16,2015:The final MYIP,after revision and consideration of all received public comments,was presented to the BOCC at
its regularly scheduled,publicly noticed and televised monthly meeting.
• September 16, 2015: Resolution xx-2015, formally adopting the final MYIP after consideration of meaningful public comment was
approved by the BOCC(included In Appendix C). (Or,alternatively,a letter on behalf of the Board of County Commissioners certifying
that the final MYIP was adopted after consideration of meaningful public comment(a copy of this letter is included In Appendix C).
Public involvement in Project Selection:
✓ A representative Committee of local stakeholders was convened and empowered to advise the BOCC on the selection
and award of Direct Component (Local Pot) RESTORE Act funds (ie. developing the scoring criteria, overseeing the
project application process, and scoring, ranking and recommending projects for award).
✓ A broad public solicitation for project applications was conducted The solicitation for projects was publicly noticed
via email blasts, advertisements in local newspapers, posting on the County's website, announcements at BOCC
meetings, press releases and independent media coverage.
✓ Forty-six (46) applications were received. All project applications were posted on the County's website for public
review. The fist of project submissions were presented to the BOCC and also covered extensively in the local media.
✓ Meetings of the advisory Committee were open, public meetings that were publicly noticed via email blasts,postings on
the County's website, advertisements In focal newspapers, and announcements at BOCC meetings. All meeting agendas,
materials and presentations, and minutes were posted for public review.
✓ The scoring and ranking of ail projects took place in an open public meeting that was publicly noticed via
advertisements In the local newspapers, notice on the County's website, announcements at BOCC meeting, and
independent media coverage
✓ The advisory Committee's scores and ranking of projects were posted on the County's website for public review. The
scores and ranking were also placed on the BOCC's published agenda for two (2)weeks prior to the BOCC meeting.
✓ At a regularly scheduled BOCC meeting, there was a public presentation and discussion of the Committee's ranking,
after which the County Commission approved the ranking and awarded Local Pot funding to the Committee's top three
(3) ranked projects.
✓ Monroe County drafted a Multi-Year implementation Plan setting forth its projects for Direct Component(Local Pot)
Funding, and posted the plan for public review and Input for a minimum of 45 days.
✓ After incorporating meaningful public input, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the BOCC, the MYIP was formally
approved by the Board of County Commissioners
8
I
IV. BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE
II
A. Background and Context for Projects
Monroe County is steward of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary ("Sanctuary"), one of the
largest marine protected areas in the U.S., one of two in the Gulf Region, encompassing 2,896 square
nautical miles. It was designated by --------
Congress pursuant to federal law, and f= - -- " OOP ..
became effective in state waters with the r1"..• --•- • 7 FLORIDA
consent of the State of Florida. N..w..,._...w.».._,N.,._.... E -
we r...e.............�..... w.rw
W er......U......A.raw—A..N ; ,=. ..
t
Home to one of the rarest and most n=` .••--�- '
::: :'ter.
unique marine ecosystems in the world, 1— �•�
the Sanctuary was designated to protect
the continental U.S.'s largest living coral Gulf of Mexico ,
reef (and third largest barrier reef in the ,, „�,M„ J.
_.
world), one of the largest seagrass +,. ,�� r 4:
communities in this hemisphere, and the F `` 0 1
ra
more than 6,000 species of marine life ; n ®�"" '-:;:�. w
that rely on the reef and seagrass � �'
environment. A'•" ......-. Florida Straits
1 N N M,/�..
Water quality has been a focus of ,„ .. t* •111, ._
extensive scientific research since the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Sanctuary's federal designation.
Per direction from Congress, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration ("NOAA") and Florida Department of Environmental Protection ("DEP")
developed a comprehensive, scientifically-supported Water Quality Protection Plan ("WQPP") that
focuses extensively on improving the Sanctuary's water quality and recommending corrective actions.
Part of the WQPP includes two (2) specialized monitoring programs that have been collecting, tracking,
and analyzing water quality and reef ecology and health in the Sanctuary and nearshore waters for the
past 20 years:
1. Water Quality Monitoring Program; and
2. Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program("CREMP").
Each of the projects in the MYIP is rooted in these federal/state science-based plans and programs:
➢ US EPA's Water Quality Protection Plan(WQPP) (1994)"
➢ Water Quality Monitoring Program (1995)12
➢ Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program(CREMP)(1996)1"
D. US Army Corp of Engineers'Florida Keys Water Quality Improvement Program (2006)10
> DEP's Outstanding Florida Waters(OFW)Program15
> DEP's Florida Keys Reasonable Assurance Document(FKRAD)(2008,2011)16
The environmental value of the Sanctuary's unique marine ecosystem is matched by its economic value.
Eco-tourism and commercial and recreational fishing are the main sources of income to the Florida Keys,
evidence that a healthy economy is linked to a healthy marine ecosystem. Marine-based activities
provide more than$1B to Monroe County's economy and provide 58%of all jobs.17
9
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary:
✓ Congressionally designated on Nov. 16, 1990 as a national marine sanctuary.
I 2,896 square nautical miles (9,933 square kilometers).
✓ Shares boundaries with three national parks (Everglades, Biscayne,and Dry Tortugas).
✓ Overlaps four national wildlife refuges,six stare parks and three state aquatic preserves.
I Includes mangrove,seagrass, hardbottam, and coral reef habitats in coastal and oceanic waters
(largest living coral reef in the continental U.S. and largest seagrass bed in the hemisphere).
I Home to more than 6,000 species of marine life.
I Approximately 1,700 islands with a combined shoreline length of 1,815 miles(2,920 kilometers)
✓ Approximately 60% of the Sanctuary is State of Florida waters and 4096 fs Federal waters.
I Administered by NOAA, in partnership with FDEP and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation
Commission.
✓ The Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program was created in 1994 by the US EPA to track the
status of the natural resources in the Sanctuary and to provide recommendations for restoring and
preserving water quality necessary for a thriving reef ecosystem.
I The focus of extensive scientific research;since 1995 the Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection
Program has included Water Quality and Coral Reef Monitoring Programs to track and analyze water
quality and reef ecology and health.-- _.-..-_ lhttp:J/flortdoktys.rwao.povl I
B. Coral Reef Restoration Project
A healthy, vibrant reef is critical to the continuation of the ecosystem. The MYIP's Coral Reef
Restoration Project's goal Is to help re-build a threatened,fragile reef.
Monitoring of the coral reef over the past twenty (20) years in the Sanctuary shows a documented and
quantified decline of stony coral cover and species diversity within the Sanctuary. From 1996 to 2011,
CREMP recorded a 47%decline in stony coral."
Coral reef areas provide critical nursery and feeding habitat for an abundance of ecologically and
economically valuable sea life." Coral reefs buffer adjacent shorelines from wave action and prevent
erosion, property damage and loss of life. Reefs also protect the highly productive wetlands along the
coast.
The Coral Reef Restoration project will grow staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis) in undersea nurseries
located throughout the Keys and star corals (a type of
boulder coral) in land-based nurseries on Summerland Key.
The coral will then be planted on reefs where they will kick
start reproduction and reef recovery for the future.
The approach entails taking small fragments of live tissue
s- from healthy coral colonies of known genetic stock, growing
"t` them out in nurseries over time to create multiple colonies of
AO `... each genetic type, and then outplanting genetically distinct
individuals in proximity to one another so they spawn and
.,::..,► - ,- , ;; help reseed surrounding reefs.
,._ Staghorn coral and boulder corals from the genus Montastrea
- .� . *`"i'ic. (star corals) were chosen as they are very important to the
reef system. Staghorn coral was listed as threatened under
Scientist Outplanting Staghorn Coral the Endangered Species Act in 2006, and several species of
10
boulder coral, including star coral,were added in 2014.
This project has been through an extensive"feasibility study"
period beginning in 2004. NOAA funded scientists with The 0:1.-:
Nature Conservancy and partner organizations including
Mote Marine Laboratory, Florida Fish and Wildlife ,'
Conservation Commission, and Coral Restoration Foundation ,�✓
to begin growing staghorn corals at eight (8) underwater - -'.
nurseries located in the South Florida reef track through thetr. -1_ si-•• -
Keys. •
.
Over the past 6 years, scientists at Mote have been _
developing techniques for propagating and outplanting
boulder corals. The most recent development is to create '` `
'microfra ments'to be used to reskin dead coral heads. Scientist Measuring Newly Outplanted
g staghorn Coral
This proposed project has demonstrated success. Over the
past ten(10) years, this program has scaled up from one (1) nursery with a few hundred corals to forty-
six (46) individual restoration sites, with the nurseries housing over 30,000 corals, many of which are
large enough to be split into multiple outplant-sized colonies. Mote is now able to create upwards of
10,000 microfragments each year.
Additionally, an over 70% survivorship rate has been achieved
at all sites,with many sites showing much higher survival rates.
The propagation of Acropora cervicornis via a coral gardening
approach implemented within in-water nurseries using low-
�, ` cost materials can provide an effective method to expand
.' declining stocks of the threatened staghorn coral in Florida and
; . • 7,--� •,"- *;fi t elsewhere in the region, according to the University of Miami's
_ `'�Agg
Rosentiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science.20
of� �� -=� The expertise and knowledge gained to date has been
?,\ formalized into a "Practitioner's Guide to Acropora
�� �
IIv
• 4 4^ RestorationIl (Johnson et al., 2011)that provides science-based
Year-Old Outplantlng Restoration Site guidelines for the activities to be undertaken as part of this
expansion project.
C. Canal Restoration Projects:
The coral reef is, in turn, directly linked to nearshore water quality. The goal of the two (2) MYIP
Canal Water Restoration projects is to improve the poor quality of canal waters that are discharged
into the nearshore waters of the Sanctuary and threaten the reef and ecosystem.
The County's canal waters have been found to be high in nutrients and low in dissolved oxygen ("DO").
A healthy coral reef and marine ecosystem requires clear water that is low in nutrients and high in 0O.21
Since the canals discharge their poor quality waters directly into nearshore Federally-designated
Sanctuary waters and State-designated Outstanding Florida Waters, addressing on-going canal water
quality impairment is of utmost importance.
The Sanctuary's WQPP's Action Plan22 which identifies priorities and corrective actions to restore
healthy water quality in Sanctuary waters, specifically identifies the need to implement technologies
designed to improve canal water quality(Strategy W.10, Activities 1-7),and states "the sources of the
11
loadings in canals and nearshore waters are known, and
these problems should be addressed as soon as possible
using best available technology." - •,.
As part of the 2003 Monroe County Residential Canal _-.
Inventory and Assessment, water quality conditions in '•' .;y .. `>
canals were evaluated and found to be significantly poorer Jo ..I...
J
than the baseline reference for total nitrogen and total `
phosphorus for all canal types.
In 2008, in response to documented water quality issues in
the Keys' residential canals, the Department of
Environmental Protection (DEP) developed the Florida
Keys Reasonable Assurance Document (FKRAD) for the Poor Water Quality Canal
purpose of addressing the impaired waters in the canals.
In a 2011 FKRAD update, DEP stated that canals will likely not achieve the State's Class III Marine
Surface Water DO standards, required for waters that discharge into nearshore Outstanding Florida
Waters and Sanctuary waters without addressing poor circulation, weed wrack, organic sediments, and
DO concentrations.
The Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program's most recent Biennial Report to Congress in 2013
states:
"Addressing the complexities of canal restoration is a high,
47, - priority future activity. Planning has been initiated to
- develop a Canal Management Master Plan (CMMP) that
will provide an ecologically sound and economically feasible
implementation strategy for improving and managing the
{ environmental quality of canal systems in the Florida Keys.
.4 I.' Once completed, funding for a pilot canal restoration
project will be sought to demonstrate methods to improve
canal water quality by remedying canal depth, geometry,
seagrass wrack, and flushing characteristics." 23
The CMMP 2° was subsequently completed, prioritizing the
Good Water Quality Canal need for water quality improvement, and identifying
— appropriate restoration options for each canal. A Phase
CMMP completed in June 2012 initiated the canal restoration process. The final CMMP was finished in
August 2013.
The CMMP's development and on-going implementation is charged to members of the WQPP Steering
Committee and its Canal Restoration Advisory Subcommittee,which include the following partners:
• US EPA
• US National Park Service
• US Fish and Wildlife Service
• US Army Corps of Engineers
• NOAA
• Florida Department of Environmental Protection
• South Florida Water Management District
• Monroe County
• Every municipality in Monroe County (Key West, Marathon, Key Colony Beach, Layton and
Islamorada)
12
The CMMP identifies three (3) significant contributors of impaired canal water: accumulated organics,
seaweed loading, and poor flushing and circulation. The canal restoration technologies to be
implemented are those identified in the CIAMP that address these specific causes of impaired waters.
Depending upon the specific canal(s) selected, one or a combination of these restoration technologies26
will be applied:
1. Installation of weed barriers/air bubble curtains to minimize additional organic accumulation in
the canals;
2. Removal of accumulated organics from canal bottoms;
3. Culvert installation to facilitate flushing and enhance natural tidal flow; and
4. Pumping systems to enhance circulation; and
S. Backfilling of too -deep canals to achieve a depth that enables natural tidal flow/flushing.
The technologies selected have been shown to be effective at other canal locations for improving these
identified water quality issues. Some example restoration projects include organic removal at Lake
Griffin, Florida 26 and the Eau Gallie River, Florida27; flushing culverts at Jolly Rogers Estates, Little Torch,
Florida Key; Gowanus New York canal flushing tunnel 28 and South Bethany, Delaware tidal pumping. 29
Air bubble curtains are commercially available and used for these types of projects quite commonly.
V. MEASURES OF MILESTONES AND SUCCESS
Each project will be carefully tracked so that project success can be gauged at select intervals during the
course of project implementation. General measures of milestones and success include the following:
V Projects are completed within projected timeframes and within budgets.
V Projects further the goals and objectives of the Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection
Program and its federal and state regulatory requirements and mandates.
The Coral Restoration Project will result in additional coral plantings/nurseries,
strengthening and restoring the fragile reef systern; improving habitat for important reef
fish species; and preserving a marine -based local economy.
The Canal Water Quality Improvement Projects will result in reduced nutrient and pollutant
loading to the nearshore waters, improving water quality in the Sanctuary; protecting the
Sanctuary's fragile marine ecosystem; and preserving a marine -based local economy.
,/ Additional information regarding milestones is provided in the project information sheell
included in Appendix A.
13
r
VI. OVERALL MYIP BUDGET AND JUSTIFICATION
The project budget includes the three (3) projects at the funding levels approved by the BOCC.
Project Name I BOCC Approved Eligible Activity" 1
Funds
Coral Reef Restoration for $550,000 (I) Restoration and protection of the natural resources,
Environmental and Economic ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches,
Enhancement of the Florida Keys and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region,
(II) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, and natural
Proposer: The Nature resources
conservancy (Ill) Implementation of a Federally-approved marine, coastal,
or comprehensive conservation management plan, including
fisheries monitoring.
(VII)Coastal flood protection and related Infrastructure
(6)(II)Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast region,including
recreational fishing.
Canal Water Quality Restoration $450,000 (I) Restoration and protection of the natural resources,
In Monroe County for Canals In ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches,
Unincorporated Areas) and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region.
(III) Implementation of a federally approved marine/coastal
Proposer: Monroe County management plan,Including fisheries monitoring.
(IV)Workforce development and Job creation.
(V1) Infrastructure projects benefitting economy or ecological
resources,including port infrastructure.
Canal Water Quality Restoration $100,000 (I) Restoration and protection of the natural resources,
In Monroe County for Canals ecosystems,fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches,
Across All Entities in Monroe and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region.
County.(Funding awarded to fill) implementation of a federal approved marine/coast
management plan,including fisheries monitoring.
Islamorada's Canals.) (Al Workforce development and Job creation.
Proposer: Monroe County
Administrative Cost $35,029.31 (IX)Administrative costs of complying with this subsection.
Planning Assistance $32,614.49 (ViII)Planning assistance.
Total: $1,167,643.80
I I
The County is authorized to utilize up to 3%of the award amount for administrative costs. To date, the
County has spent approximately $100,000 for its RESTORE Act efforts but has chosen to not seek
reimbursement for costs to date.
From this point forward, the County will utilize administrative and planning assistance funds in order to
develop project grant applications and administer its RESTORE program.
14
VIL, APPENDICES
0 Appendix A: Project Information Sheets for three (3) Activities
> A-1: Coral Reef Restoration Project
A-2: Canal Water Quality Restoration in Unincorporated Monroe County
® Appendix B: Map of Project Locations (where all work will be performed)
a Appendix C: Documentation of Formal Adoption of MYIP (to be included in the Final MY1M
15
Appendix A-1: Project Information Sheet
1) PROJECT TITLE: CORAL REEF RESTORATION
RMON
Coral reefs in the Keys have been in declining health since the 1970s due to coral bleaching, disease
outbreaks, hurricanes, cold snaps, acute damage such as chip groundings, and nearshore water quality
issues. Reefs are vital habitat for rare species as well as commercially and recreationally important fish
and invertebrates. They buffer our islands from the impacts of storms and attract divers and snorkelers
from around the world. Prior to coral reef decline, many reefs were dominated by two (2) types of hard
corals: staghorn coral (Acropora sorvicorros) and several massive boulder corals of the genus
Montsistrea.
grown in undersea nurseries located throughout the Keys, while boulder star corals are produced in
land -based facilities. These corals will then be planted on reefs where they will create habitat for
marine life, improve the aesthetics of degraded reefs and most importantly, kick start coral
reproduction and reef recovery for the future.
Approximately 20,000 staghom corals of varying sizes will be planted on reefs between Key Largo and
Key West. A subset of these will be part of value-added scientific research to help increase the pace and
efficiency of future restoration activities, An additional 10,000 small boulder corals will repair 1,000
dead coral heads using an innovative
will be designed to encourage the restored corals to reproduce on their own and reseed both restored
and adjacent reefs.
The Florida Keys Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project (CREMP), started in 1995, has recorded a
decline in both species richness and coral cover, and no significant recruitment of juvenile corals since
1996 (Ruzicka at al., 2010). Populations of elkhorn and staghorn coral underwent a region -wide decline
starting in the 1980s, with losses of up to 97% in some areas, due mainly to increased prevalence of
bleaching and disease. These two (2) species were listed as threatened under the Endangered Species
Act (ESA) in 2006. A more recent decline in the massive star corals has also led to a decline in live coral
cover in the Florida Keys (Ruzicka, 2010). As a result, the boulder star coral (Montastrea annufaris),
mountainous star coral (Montastreafaveolato), and star coral (Montastreafranksi) were added to the
ESA threatened species list in 2014.
The loss of reproductively active coral colonies, increased distance between these colonies and low
rates of juvenile coral colaxiessurviving to sexual maturity have combined to create a situation in which
it is unlikely that corals in the Florida Keys will repopulate the reefs naturally. This contributes to
decreased resilience of our reef system and depresses natural restorative processes. Habitat protection
and threat abatement may not be enough to stop the decline of reefs and active restoration of coral
populations is a proven and cost-effective way to reestablish live corals to reefs.
The first staghorn nursery was established in 2004 as part of a partnership between The Nature
Conservancy and Coral Restoration Foundation (CRF) and funded by the TNC-NOAA Community -Based
Restoration Program (CRP). In 2006, under the same funding source, the concept was replicated in
Braward County, Biscayne National Park, and the Lower Keys, Each nursery and outplanting operation
-- i
was managed by a new partner; Nova Southeastern University, University of Miami, and Mote Marine
Laboratory.
In 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act scaled the project up from proof-of-concept to
production level. New nurseries were established in the Middle Keys (managed by Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute's Florida Keys Lab), Dry Tortugas
National Park (managed by The Nature Conservancy's Florida Keys office)and St.Thomas and St.Croix in
the U.S.Virgin Islands (managed by The Nature Conservancy's U.S. Virgin Island's office). The project is
currently being supported by another TNC-NOAA CRP grant. Over 15,000 corals have been outplanted
to reefs throughout Florida and the U.S.Virgin Islands, with average survival rates within the first six (6)
months after outplanting of over 75%.
Over the past six(6)years, Mote Marine Lab scientists have been developing techniques for propagating
and outplanting boulder corals. Outplanting in 2010 and 2011 of large boulder coral fragments showed
close to 90% survivorship after three (3) years. The most recent development, which has been honed
over the past four(4)years, is to create 'microfragments' to be used to reskin dead coral heads.A proof
of concept outplanting was performed in May 2013. A total of 192 microfragments were outplanted at
two reefs. Within one (1) month, many of the corals had already begun sheeting over the nearby
available substrate. After eight(8)months,survivorship remained above 75%.
LOCATI ON
The project, coral restoration outplantings, will occur in various locations on the reef track along the
Florida Keys. The map below indicates sites for restoration outplantings.
4
Monroe County , r,
Coral Resoration Project •
,�..,,•
4)4711411.
i•Jg
ttiahrl:
• r
17, t
Krytarl.. •�!
Y:
J x •
3 I Conk Restraom Ste
—�--t —�-. ♦is/_.:1-t....:.LLV�_:11:_.: A 1t..VA...Ym:.:...C.,..I.<.1rPi�s... ..
u1(
17
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
• Increase live coral cover at outplanting sites
• Increase the chances of successful sexual reproduction, thereby helping to reseed Keys reefs
• Improve habitat for important reef fish species
• Provide it tourism benefits by helping to combat the decline of Monroe County reefs
PROJECT NEED, PURPOSE, BENEFITS, AND RESTORE APPLICABILITY
NEED
Reefs in the Keys have been in decline for decades. Despite efforts to protect the reefs and decrease
existing threats, no significant improvements in live coral cover or health have been observed. Active
restoration is a proven technique to help jump-start recovery of the reefs.
PURPOSE
The primary purpose of this project is to restore degraded reefs in Monroe County through the
outplanting of nursery -reared corals. Within a few years, the outplanted corals will begin to spawn and
contribute to the reseeding of surrounding reefs.
BENEFITS
Reefs provide essential habitat to commercially and recreationally important fish and invertebra
species as well as thousands of other species. They also are frequented by larger marine predators an
as sharks, sea turtles and dolphins. Because of their high diversity and abundance of marine life, as w
as their beauty, reefs attract people for fishing, snorkeling and diving, More than 33,000 jobs in t
Keys are supported by ocean recreation and tourism, accounting for more than half of the loc
econom�. Intact reefs alZLgrovide a barrier against ocean
than on our shoreline. Without active restoration efforts Florida Keys reefs are likely to continue to lo
live coral cover, and reefs without live coral eventually erode away. The benefits that our reefs a
currently providing will be degraded if actions are not taken now to reverse this downward trend.
RESTORE OBJECTIVES
RESTORE objectives to be addressed by this project include environmental improvements and touris
promotion.
Environmental: Increased live coral cover; restoration of important habitat for fish,
invertebrates, sea turtles; long-term impacts as outplanted corals contribute to reproductive
potential of the species
Economic D!2�evelo Improved recreational and tourism value of Monroe County's reefs
Healthy reefs serve as a natural first line of defense for the shoreline by
breaking waves offshore, which is particularly important during storms
Education: The Nature Conservancy and our partners on this project do a significant amount of
outreach within the community to help educate the public about the importance of this work.
18
PLAN OF ACTION AND MILESTONES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT
Staghorn Coral Restoration
Proposed Action
Proposes! Timeline
Updating and renewing existing permits
7/1/15, annually
Nursery Maintenance
1/1/16-12/31/17
Site Selection (from large list of permitted sites)
11/1/15
Outplanting
Annually, excluding summer months
Monitoring
4/1/16-12/31/17
Grant Reporting
1/1/16-12/31/17
Permit Reporting
Annually, based on permit issue date
Star Coral Restoration
Proposed Action
Proposed Timeline
Updating and renewing existing permits
7/1/15, annually
Raceway and Nursery Maintenance
1/1/16-12/31/17
Site Selection
11/1/15
Outplanting
Annually, excluding summer months
Monitoring
4/1/16-12/31/17
Grant Reporting
1/1/16-12/31/17
Permit Reporting
Annually, based on permit issue date
PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA
Outplanted corals will be assessed within six (6) months of outplanting for survivorship. Some minor
maintenance may be performed after outplanting to ensure success of the corals. This may include
removal of predatory snails and worms, reattachment of corals or broken fragments, and/or cleaning of
the surrounding substrate to prevent algal overgrowth.
FUNDING
Funding for this project will be provided as follows:
RESTORE Funding: $550,000
The Nature Conservancy and Partners: $200,000
Total: $750,000
The Nature Conservancy and partners anticipate contributing up to $200,000 in project costs.
19
nwaalflmw
MUMMUM
considered "Poor Water Quality" and are the highest priority for implementing water quality
improvements. Based on this assessment, the County has begun preliminary work on restoring the
canals with the poorest water quality first.
The CMMP identifies three (3) significant contributors of impaired canal water: accumulated organics,
seaweed loading, and poor flushing and circulation. The canal restoration technologies to be
implemented are those identified in the CMMP that address these specific causes of impaired waters,
Denendin ugQn1h"pecific canabs) se-1;4%�d h-%v4—rWnQ-t&2n tuss�rb�q, wis w�U=
p
be applied in this project:
1. Installation of weed barriers/air bubble curtains to minimize additional organic accumulation in
the canals;
2. Removal of accumulated organics from canal bottoms;
3. Culvert installation to facilitate flushing and enhance tidal flow; and
4. Pumpingsystems to enhance circulation,
HE
The following table outlines the number of Poor Water Quality canals in unincorporated Monroe County
and the recommended technologies as outlined in the CMMP. The technologies selected have been
shown to be effective at other locations for improving these identified water quality issues. A more
detailed description of the restoration techniques can be found in the CMMP.
CMMP ESTIMATED NUMBER OF CANAL RESTORATIONS BY SELECTED TECHNOLOGY
Technology Weed Barriers/ Organics Removal Pumping Culverts
Air Curtains in combination with
Weed Barriers and Air Curtains
No.of Poor 31 47 10 19
Water Canals
Monroe County will utilize RESTORE Act funds to construct and implement Federal and State-mandated
canal restoration projects in the Florida Keys, as specified in the Monroe County CMMP. The County
has already initiated a $5 million demonstration program that is implementing various canal restoration
technologies and evaluating the permitting issues, costs and water quality effectiveness to assist in
future restorations.
LOCATION
The Poor Water Quality canals identified for restoration in the unincorporated portions of Monroe
County are located throughout the Florida Keys.The CMMP contains the specific information concerning
the canal locations and the water quality rankings. The map below also indicates the 107 poor water
quality canal locations, a subset of which will be the recipient of the awarded funding. (Precisely which
and how many will depend on the timing of the grant funds and the types/costs of the applicable
technologies,however, they will be specifically identified in subsequent grant applications.)
•
Monroe County •A'g �',
Canal Improvement Project ,,- . '
n.rog
uaaf4n
4 ,tly M..r, ►r
..
Canal Location ILInin orporae d Worm)
.� .(,purl•-N...,.aa-•.:•.:Yl.u.w k�iMw.i.Y�..aw+•.:..•.:ti:aw�,.. ..s,-.
Wr•
21
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
• Improve the overall canal water quality conditions in the canals and thereby reduce the nutrient
and pollutant loading to nearshore waters caused by excessive amounts of weed wrack (floating
seaweed) that enter canals, stagnant water caused by non -circulating water, and decay of
nutrient rich sediments.
• Eliminate the DEP-identified impairments for dissolved oxygen in the selected canals.
• Improve the benthic habitat and native flora and fauna in the canals.
• Protect the habitat and marine environment of our near shore waters and National Marine
Sanctuary.
® Protect the local economy that is dependent on a healthy and robust marine environment.
® Support of the goals and objectives of the Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program and
comply with relevant federal and state regulatory requirements and mandates.
NEED
Many of the canals throughout Monroe County are listed as having impaired waters by the US EPA and
the State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection because they exhibit high levels of
off in coral reefs in the coastal waters. These impaired canal waters discharge directly into the
ecosystems and home to the largest living coral reef in the continental United States, the largest sea
grass bed in the western hemisphere and over 6,000 species-- all of which only thrive in clean, clear
waters that are low in nutrients and high in dissolved oxygen levels,
Monroe County has identified 107 canals in unincorporated Monroe County with "Poor Water Quality."
The 107 canals considered "Poor Water Quality" were ranked based on criteria outlined in the CMMP,
Monroe County will construct and implement restoration projects that will improve the environmental
quality of the waters in its canal system pursuant to the Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan
and the goals and objectives of the Sanctuary's Water Quality Protection Program.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the canal water restoration projects is to remedy the high nutrient loading and low
dissolved oxygen impairing the water by addressing the most significant causes of those conditions:
accumulated organics, seaweed loading ("weed wrack"), and poor flushing and tidal flow. The Monroe
Count County -wide Canal Manacement Master Plan (a Dian develoned in oartnershin with E
EMP19MITMAMMIJIF99, ",HEMS"t � U124 ArMHEIMMAMMMInt
BENEFITS
Canal restoration projects will improve water quality, aquatic and benthic habits within the canals and
also improve water quality in the surrounding nearshore Sanctuary waters, benefitting the fragile and
unique marine ecosystem of the Sanctuary. Water quality is also directly related to all aspects of our
local economy. Monroe County supports a large tourism and fishing industry, which are both dependent
22
on the Sanctuary and good water quality. The restoration of our canal systems is crucial to ensuring the
sustainability of both our environmental and economic resources. improvements in our water quality
also mitigate negative impacts from storm events as storm events can "remove" the water from within a
canal system and directly deposit it into our near shore waters.
RESTORE OBJECTIVES
RESTORE objectives addressed by this project include environmental improvements, economi-*
development, and community resilience.
x.
=-dr,[ d bb LAW Ildix am communities in our near
shore waters which provide critical nursery habitat for finfish and shellfish stocks including
snapper, grouper, pink shrimp, and spiny lobster. Recreationally targeted species such as
bonefish, permit, and tarpon will also benefit. The project will help federally listed species
including sea turtles, smalltooth sawfish, staghorn coral, and other protected species including
manatee, brown pelican and many other bird species.
Economic Development: The economic value of the coral reef to Monroe County w
documented in a 2007-2008 socioeconomic study performed by the FKNMS which conclud
Reef Tract (Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuaries, 2013). in another study, published in 20
by the University of Miami, the reef environment generates more than 70,000 jobs and
billion dollars in economic activity annually. 32
CcgOMMpjIy_flgajk=: Restoration of canal water will lead to a healthier reef system, greater
protection of natural resources, and a stronger economy all of which contribute to the
community resilience of the Florida Keys. The reef contributes to resilience by serving as natural
23
Task
Proposed Date
Consultant Notice to Proceed
1/25/16
Final Design
4/25/16
Permitting
7/25/16
Proposal Advertisement and Award
9/26/16
Contractor Notice to Proceed
10/28/16
Start Construction
11/14/16
Complete Construction
2/14/17
As -Built Survey
2/17/17
Final Report
3/17/17
Project Close Out and Contract Termination
4/3/17
The primary goal of this restoration project is water quality improvement of the selected canals and the
adjacent near shore waters. Project success will be measured over time by scientific analysis of water
quality samples primarily of dissolved oxygen and turbidity, but may also include salinity, PH, nutrients
and other factors.
�
To date the County has matched/expended approximately $4 million for canal restoration projects an..
is anticipated to expend an additional $1 million by December 31, 2015.
24
25
PROJECT TITLE: CANAL WATER RESTORATION (ISLAMORADA)
Islamorada, Village of islands (the "Village") is a small municipality that comprises four islands in t
Upper Keys: Plantation Key, Windley Key, Upper Matecumbe Key A. Lower Matecumbe Key. As
interal mart of the isig-n cfw&0he laWltzge, mVo*y"t'X- th g*wer-imev*l wWwc)ux
recognizes the necessity (and the requirements) for water quality improvements, It has long a
a
recognized that water quality in the Florida Keys has been deteriorating, particularly as it is relate]
our canal systems.
Today most of our canals are listed as "impaired water bodies" by the EPA and are in need
restoration. In 1999 the Florida Watershed Restoration Act (Section 403.067 F.S.) was established
implement Florida's water body restoration program and thereby set forth a requirement for a Tot
Maximum Daily Loads (TDML's) to be established for all impaired water bodies.
The Village, in cooperation with local governments, state agencies, and federal agencies within the
Florida Keys, pursuant to the DEP Florida Keys Reasonable Assurance Plan (FKRAD), agreed to accelerate
and implement projects that were already planned in order to work towards a water quality standard
that will help restore water quality.
• Removal of accumulated organics from within canals;
• Weed gates, air curtains or other physical barriers to minimize additional organic accumulation
in the canals;
• Culvert connections to facilitate flushing;
• Pumping systems to facilitate flushing; and
• Backfilling to prevent occurrence of deep stagnant zones.
2 E
Canal water restoration projects will be constructed and implemented in canals within the municipality
of fslamorada,Village of Islands, (centrally located in the Florida Keys) as specified in the Monroe County
CMMP. The Village has already initiated a $100,000 demonstration program that has evaluated the
permitting issues, costs and water quality effectiveness to assist in future restorations of the top 10
"Poor Water Quality" residential canals. In addition, in 2014 the Village completed installation of the
first canal restoration project within its boundaries by installing a weed barrier system, leaving nine (9)
canals on the top priority list for restoration.
LOCATION
The location of the remaining 9 canals considered "Poor Water Quality" and ready for remediation are
outlined in the Village of Islamorada Selection of Demonstration Canals for Water Quality Improvements 1
(SDC) document. The canals are found within four islands of the Upper Keys: Plantation Key, Windley
Key, Upper Matecumbe Key & Lower Matecumbe Key.
:( 7..74 - -,o- ;.4.
% ` 2
.. f i. a KevLa-go
Islamorada , `" Y -�,t !jam Y
Canal Improvement Project ., x
_
r ,. r .
' PlantaI on Ke
illy
es 4
�p•e` `` �.
,a. "�
Matecurnbe Key `
. 7
r j• ,e
a ,4.
-
.d r
tv-
Lo•.er +o*
Matecumte Kev f,
Long Key -
,!
'K Canal Wotan-Htanarana
n R'
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
• Improve the overall canal water quality conditions in the canals.
• Eliminate the DEP-identified impairments for dissolved oxygen in the selected canals.
• Improve the benthic habitat and native flora and fauna in the canals.
• Reduce nutrient and pollutant loading to nearshore waters caused by excessive amounts of
weed wrack (floating seaweed) that enter canals, stagnant water caused by non-circulating
water,and decay of nutrient rich sediments.
27
Improve nearshore water quality to protect the habitat and marine environment of our near
shore waters.
Improve nearshore water quality to reduce threats to the quality of the waters and habitat and
marine environment of the National Marine Sanctuary,
Restore water quality and improve near shore water quality to protect our local tourism
economy that is dependent on a healthy and robust marine environment,
Support of the goals and objectives of the Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program and
comply with relevant federal and state regulatory requirements and mandates.
on
Islamorada, Village of Islands, has identified the ten worst water quality residential canals within the
municipality's boundary. The 10 canals considered "Poor Water Quality" were ranked based on criteria
outlined in the CMMIP and The Village of Islamorada Selection of Demonstration Canals for Water
Quality improvements (SDC) document. Restoring water quality is necessery to ensure the health and
welfare of our natural resources, our economy and our quality of life. Canal restoration is an important
Itpiece of the puzzle" that will require a long-term effort and commitment from many sources, not just
the Village.
IN
Canal restoration projects will improve water quality, aquatic and benthic habits within the canals and
also improve water quality in the surrounding nearshore Sanctuary waters, benefitting the fragile and
unique marine ecosystem of the Sanctuary. Water quality is also directly related to all aspects of our
local economy. Islamorada, Village of Islands is in the center of Monroe County and supports a large
tourism and charter boat fishing industry which are both dependent on the FKNMS and good water
quality. Improvements in the canal water quality will ensure continued dollars from these industries.
The restoration of our canal systems is crucial to ensuring the sustainability of both our environmental
and economic resources. Improvements in our water quality also mitigate negative impacts from storm
events as storm events can "remove" the water from within a canal system and directly deposit it into
our near shore waters.
RESTORE OBJECTIVES
RESTORE objectives addressed by this project include environmental improvements, economic
development, and community resilience.
Environmental: The project area is located in the only state in the continental United States to
have extensive shallow coral reef formations near its coasts. Coral reef, as well as seagrass bed
health, is directly linked to near shore marine water quality. Both corals and seagrasses thrive in
areas where water is clear (low turbidity), low in nutrients, and high in dissolved oxygen (DO).
High levels of nutrients and low DO have been directly linked to extensive die -off in coral reefs
in the coastal waters.
Economic Development: The socioeconomic importance of the reef to Monroe County was
documented in a 2007-2008 socioeconomic study performed by the FKNMS which concluded
that more than 33,000 jobs and $2.3 billion dollars in annual added revenue are directly
attributed to Florida Reef Tract (Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuaries, 2013). Islamorada is
geographically centered in Monroe County and supports a large tourism and charter boat fishing
industry which are dependent on the FKNMS and good water quality. Tourism relies on clean
beaches, thriving fisheries and healthy natural resources. The need to restore and sustain our
marine environment is critical in maintaining our livelihood.
Community Resilience: Restoration of canal water will lead to a healthier reef system, greater
protection of natural resources, and a stronger economy all of which contribute to the
community resilience of the all of the communities of the Florida Keys. The reef contributes to
resilience by serving as natural first line of defense for the shoreline by breaking waves offshore,
which is particularly important during storms. Improved water quality also ensures a healthy
natural environment, which in turn, ensures a healthy economy. Economic vibrancy is integral to
community resilience. Water quality is directly related to all aspects of our local economy.
PLAN OF ACTION AND MILESTONES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT
Task
Proposed Date
Consultant Notice to Proceed
1/11/16
Final Design
3/11/16
Permitting
6/10/16
Proposal Advertisement and Award
10/10/16
Contractor Notice to Proceed
10/17/16
Start Construction
11/7/16
Complete Construction
12/16/16
29
As -Built Survey 12/20/16
Final Report 1/20/17
Project Close Out and Contract Termination 2/17/17
PROJECT SUCCESS CRITERIA
The primary goal of this restoration project is water quality improvement of the selected canals and the
adjacent near shore waters. Project success will be measured over time by scientific analysis of water
quality samples primarily of dissolved oxygen and turbidity, but may also include salinity, pH, nutrients
and other factors.
Funding from this project will be provided as follows:
RESTORE Funding
$ 100,000
Islamorada, Village of Islands has committed $100,000 in its FY 2013-2014 General Fund Budget for a
canal restoration project located within the boundaries of the Village.
W
Appendix B: MAP OF PROJECT LOCATIONS(Where All Work Will Be Performed)
•;‘,
V . 0
3 --- ....tt
al)I .1. ',1'.. '. ! - j•—%
."..; =
--s
%Astir 0 CD --,
0
CD
B -, 0
a> 11) o
.-...= 5. S
1 *A;Aeo
t•
• i 4.--c." 'a 'N.' 0 =
cri irp_
0
al, xi eIP•
I (A
- C
1 1
s .
er ,
.,•s,'
,1-
...;• 1.‘ r.' 1
, 'i •t g ,
Ir ,
,
1.!. .
,...3
ii
, r4 r— •
' • t
'a E 1 g ,
1 ...
.,_.
if
il Ac tit.
W 11
Ii
is 1- h
1 a
,
31
1
VM,
(Formal letter or resolution from the Board of County Commissioners approving the Final MYIP will be
included here as part of the Final MYIP submitted to the US Department of Treasury.)
32
AM EC Environment IS Infrastructure, 2013. Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan Summary
Report.
Department of Environmental Protection, 2011. Florida Keys Reasonable Assurance Plan
Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 2013. Background Information & History of TMDL
Program. September 2013,
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Water Quality Protection Program,
t1jailflo ring keys. noa a.Aov w welcoe.htmi and hnm n-ILocean.floridaarine.orgLFKNMS WOPPZ
L_gA2Lm_
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, 2007. Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Revised
Management Plan. FKNMS. Marathon, FL.
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary; National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, 2013. Florida
Keys National Marine Sanctuary Socioeconomic Factsheet, bsite Accessed September 2013
htt;Jsar�ctuaris.r�oaa,;oaxscinclsocioctnrnicldfslfk final f.
. i
Florida Keys, Estuaries Volume 15, No. 4.
Lapointe, B., Tomasko, D., and Alatzie, W., 1994. Eutrophication and trophic State Classification of
Seagrass.
Monroe County RESTORE Act Web page: hUa:Lw�ww.nIggount -R.ov de .ash
Monroe County Canal Restoration Webpage: haE.Lwww-monroecounty411A.Lov ndex.aspx?NID=598
_ _
Ruzicka R. at al., (2010) CREMP 2009 Final Report. Fish IS Wildlife Research Institute, Florida, Fish &
Wildlife Conservation Commission, Saint Petersburg, FL,
33
ENDNOTES
I KR< 4348, Public Law 112-141, Subtitle F, Section 311(t) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
2 Department of Treasury Regulations for the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund, 31 C.F.R. Part 34, AM 1505-AC44, 79 FR 48039
(August 15, 2014).
3 Department of the Treasury, RESTORE Act Direct Component Guidance and Application to Receive Federal Financial
Assistance (August 2014), available at: h!W1Lwww.treasurUov �servjces �restor�e-
'As a condition of receiving amounts from the Trust Fund, a Gulf Coast State ...shall ... (iv) develop and submit a multiyear
implementation plan for the use of such amounts, which may include milestones, projected completion of each activity, and
a mechanism to evaluate the success of each activity in helping to restore and protect the Gulf Coast region impacted by the
Deepwater Horizon oil spill," 33 US.C, § 1321(t)(1)(E)(iv) (2012).
Eligible activities in the gulf coast region:
(1) Restoration and protection of the natural resources, ecosystems, fisheries, marine and wildlife habitats, beaches,
and coastal wetlands of the Gulf Coast region.
(ll) Mitigation of damage to fish, wildlife, and natural resources.
(111) implementation of a federally approved marine, coastal, or comprehensive conservation management plan,
Including fisheries monitoring,
(IV) Workforce development and job creation.
W) Improvements to or on State parks located In coastal areas affected by the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
(VI) Infrastructure projects benefitting the economy or ecological resources, including port infrastructure.
(Vil) Coastal flood protection and related infrastructure.
(Dill) Planning assistance,
(IV) Administrative costs of complying with this subsection,
(X) Promotion of tourism in the Gulf Coast Region, including recreational fishing.
(XI) Promotion of the consumption of seafood harvested from the Gulf Coast Region.' 33 U.S.C. §1321(t)(1)(B) (2012)
Resolution 094-2013 Creating Local RESTORE Act Advisory Committee: h11pJLfl-
7 Resolution 129-2013 Addressing Voting Conflicts for Local RESTORE Act Advisory Committee hfiG-Ufl-
Official Monroe County Website Main Page Link: h1LQJLwwwrnonroecounty-fL ovLindex.aspx
RESTORE Act Page Link: ht[Q-YLwww-_monroecounty-fI.gov inc1ex.asDx?NiD=432
I ..... _
With regard to the project entitled "Canal Water Quality Restoration In Monroe County for Canals Across All Entities in
Monroe County," the term "all entities" refers to the five municipalities within Monroe County (differentiated from those
portions of the County that are unincorporated, le, not part of one of these municipalities), as all are part of the County -
Wide Canal Management Master Plan. The individual entities are at various stages In their respective canal project planning.
The Board of County Commissioners approved funding for one entity, Islamorada, because Islamorada Is furthest along in its
project planning, and had canal restoration projects most ready to proceed. Readiness to proceed he, the ability to utilize
the funding and implement the project timely) was one of the evaluation criteria,
M.C.C. Sec. 1-2. - Rules of construction and definitions. Computation of time. In computing any period of time, the day of the
act, event or default from which the designated period of time begins to run shall not be included. The last day of the period
so computed shall be included unless it Is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, In which event the period shall run until the
end of the next day that is neither a Saturday, Sunday nor legal holiday. When the period of time prescribed or allowed is less
than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays shall be excluded in the computation.
zr !11111:Lloccan floridamarineorgLFKNMSW( JIN P 1Lw IlEpg&s c htmi
IP- _-.
!Itti2iljoceanfl-oridamarineore FKNMS WC P a i;QGEn him[ es/wetrn
.__ .. p
ILlIpjjoceanfloridamarine.orKMS WPP a as html
gLFNCs creme - - - - - - - - - -------------------------- .. ............ JpS...... p
h!! �.www�.monroe�count -ft. �ov Do�cumenr�Center �iewQl&
15 lit!.n:Llwww
dery stag flusLwater wgss ofwfshtm
16
17 http-f/ocean.floridarn;grinD.tiriz/FKNMS
VVCLP P/prod u cts/wq I)p/FK N M S%2013ien nial%20 Repo rt5QQ201309.Pd
Is httpljocean.f
Ig rid arna ri ne-a rj-JFKNMS WQPP/prclducts/wrjpl)IFKN"57;208iennlal%2DRel)ort%20201309,pdf
19
ance.html
20
21 !� �.fwr�idake
s,�noaa. ov �scisum�marles w �monitvrin. uff.
22
Plan,PDF
23
MS`%20BIennIals,.)nRPvnrtO --------- ---
24 Link to the Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan., htta:L/�www_mvnroecount-fl, �vvDocu�mentCen�terVww �5301
25 More detailed descriptions of each technology.
• Swinging Weed Gates: Swinging weed gates are mechanical devices that physically block seaweed from passing
through the device. The weed gates are designed to prevent floating, wind -driven flotsam from entering and
accumulating in man-made canals where it typically sinks and fouls with water. Weed gates consist of a floating arm
that contains hanging flaps often made of rubber. The gates are placed at a canal mouth to prevent floating seaweed
from entering the canal. The gate swings open when applied with slight pressure to allow access for boat traffic.
• Air Curtains: These are aeration devices that consist of perforated piping connected to a blower. They are typically
Installed at the mouth of a canal. The curtains consist of perforated PVC pipe, a blower, control panel, electric, and
protective pump housing, The PVC pipe is installed an the canal bottom across the entire canal mouth and anchored
in place. The pipe is connected to a blower located on the adjacent shore, Blower selection strongly Influences the
capital and operation and maintenance costs of the system.
• Pumping: Pumps can be installed to promote water circulation within a canal. Water can be pumped from a 'dead
end' canal to another adjacent canal or mangrove creek to increase turnover of water at the end of a canal system.
Pump installation must be designed to prevent adverse secondary effects such as bottom scouring or Impact to
adjacent waters. Circulation studies by a qualified coastal engineer would be needed to provide an effective design.
Culvert Installation: Culverts could be installed between canals or between canals and thin land strips to improve
flushing within them in a similar fashion to flushing channels. Based on canal -specific hydrology, larger or smaller
diameter culverts may be more applicable. Culverts would still need an energy source to induce flushing such as a
channel at the outfall mouth. Like channels, culverts are even more prone to clogging, and require maintenance. And
residents In Key Largo have complained that culverts serve as ideal habitats for the American crocodile so this
technology may have some wildlife management issues. Circulation studies by a qualified coastal engineer would be
needed here as well.
Canal Backfilling,, Canal backfilling could be performed in order to decrease the depth of a canal to promote flushing
and reduce/eliminate stratification. Filling in of abrupt changes in depth or sink areas would assist in Increasing
circulation, Backfilling attempts to mimic the hydrology of a mangrove creek, with the shallowest depth at the
landward end of the canal, and greatest depth at the mouth of the canal. Flushing Is typically hindered by the fact
that both the canal sill and the waters surrounding the Keys are typically shallower than the canal bottom. This
difference in depth hinders mixing in the lower depths of the canals. This option would work best in canals where
there was sufficient energy, either from tidal fluctuations or wind force, to promote flushing. Naturally there may be
some restrictions to the size of boats that can utilize filled canals. Canal backfilling can be performed in order to
decrease the depth of a canal to promote flushing and reduce/eliminate stratification. This option works best in
canals where there is sufficient energy, either from tidal fluctuations or wind force, to promote flushing.
0 Circulation Devices: Aeration can be used In smaller canals to facilitate circulation. The design of aeration systems
must be aimed at moving water out of the canal, not merely vertical mixing of the water column. Circulation
improvement needs to be coupled with reducing the pollution loading within the canal. Circulation devices are
specialized aeration devices that could be Installed to increase both the transfer of oxygen to the water as well as the
horizontal movement of water out of the canal. Circulation devices can help prevent hypoxic/anoxic conditions to a
limited extent and promote aerobic processing of nutrients.
M
Nutrient Removal: Nutrient removal from canal waters is a developing technology. In brief, It consists of pumping the
water to a structure that supports the growth of algae that utilize nutrients from the water, Special macroalgae
species have been used effectively In small-scale nutrient stripping experiments in the Keys. Water is circulated
through shallow troughs exposed to sunlight with small starter colonies of algae, Often airstones are used to
vigorously circulate the water and stimulate nutrient uptake by the algae. The algae must be periodically harvested
(and possibly sold). The water is recycled back to the canal after treatment with lowered nutrient content. In situ
systems such as Aquamats are also being employed. This technology would likely work best on small canals with high
inorganic nutrient loading.
26 Hart, Ron, and John H, Kiefer, 2006, Lake Griffin Canal Dredging, A Project Designed to Mitigate the Navigational Impacts
Resulting from Enhanced Water Level Fluctuations. Proceedings of the Florida Lake Management Society 2006 Annual
Symposium.
27 111jazLiLflor-Idas-wateEcorn EGRET
Z9
30 As per Section of the RESTORE Act, Public Law 112-141, Subtitle F.
31 Link to the Monroe County Canal Management Master Plan: hqpJLwwwmonrovcounty-
Eggy DocurnentCenterLViewLS301
32 Towards Sustainable Multispecies Fisheries in the Florida, USA, Coral Reef Ecosystem, Bulletin of Marine Science, 2005; Ault,
Jerald, at al.
36