Resolution 135-1991
'v
RESOLUTION NO. 135-1991
A RESOLUTION OF THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE
BOARD TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AND MONROE COUNTY FOR A STUDY OF EUTROPHICATION
IN THE WATERS SURROUNDING THE FLORIDA KEYS
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Coastal Management Act of
1972, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
has federal funds available for state and local coastal
managment projects; and
WHEREAS, the Department of Environmental Regulation has
the responsibility for the disbursement of these funds; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has been awarded $48,000.00 in
funding to investigate the impact of nutrient enrichment on
the county's extensive nearshore seagrass/macro meadows; and
WHEREAS, this information is vital to implement the
goals and objectives of improving water quality mandated by
Chapter 380 Florida Statutes; now therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, that the Mayor of the Board is
hereby authorized to execute the Department of Environmental
Contract Agreement No. CM300 and the County Administrator
has authorization to sign the agreement's fiscal
reimbursement reports.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners
of Monroe County, Florida, at a regular meeting of said
Board held on the 23rd day of April, A.D. 1991.
c. 00 <i
0: r;) ....J
c> LL
c; - :~r:
L"" Et: r--
Cr ,-;z
- :::::.: =:J
" '~'O
...L I
C U
l--. ~ ~w
::e::: r'.~O
0 Z ,..) ex:
u..; ~.- :z:
~ - , 0
- P' -, L
lJ-
Mayor Harvey Yes
Mayor Pro Tern London Yes
Commissioner Cheal Yes
Commissioner Jones Yes
Commissioner Stormont Yes
(Seal)
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY
~. A ~
BY:~' ~
L. X:OLHAGE, Clerk
~~/
Attest:
APPFf(JVEDAS 70 FOAM ~
NlD~.~Y.
By ~~o_
Date Lj -'& -ct\
,.; --<-</
~..
/,1 /1
, ,/
-( /
/,
-'
DER contract No. CM - 300
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
AGREEMENT FOR A STUDY OF EUTROPHICATION
This contract is made and entered into between the State
of Florida, Department of Environmental Regulation, and
Monroe County, (hereinafter called DER and CONTRACTOR
respectively).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the DER has responsibility for disbursement of
federal funds appropriated under the Coastal Zone Management
Act of 1972, as amended, and
WHEREAS, the Coastal Zone Management Improvement Act of
1980 requires state coastal management efforts to provide
for the management of coastal resources.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of
covenants, promises and representations
CONTRACTOR and DER hereby agree as follows:
the mutual
herein, the
SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES.
The CONTRACTOR shall perform the services and specific
responsibilities as set forth in Attachment A, attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
SECTION 2. COMPENSATION.
For satisfactory performance, the DER agrees
compensate the CONTRACTOR on a fixed price basis in
amount of $48,000.
to
the
y
The State of Florida's performance and obligation to pay
under this contract is contingent upon an annual
appropriation by the Legislature or continuation of other
funding presently anticipated, without liability for
anticipated profits for unfinished work.
SECTION 3. PAYMENTS.
The DER shall pay all satisfactory invoices in
accordance with Section 215.422, Florida Statutes (F.S.).
The CONTRACTOR shall submit invoices to the DER project
manager in four copies, on a convenient basis but not more
frequently than monthly, based on a percentage of
completion. The invoices shall be submitted in conjunction
wi th the progress reports requi red hereunder or with
supplemental progress reports meeting the contract
requirements if payment is desired more frequently than
quarterly. Travel expenses incurred are included in the
amount of this contract, no additional travel expenses will
be authorized. Invoices shall be in sufficient detail for a
preaudit and postaudit review thereof. A final invoice
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 2
shall be submitted to the DER within 30 days of contract
completion and must be identified as a final invoice which
satisfies all claims the CONTRACTOR has against DER under
the terms of this contract. The DER reserves the right to
wi thhold payment of up to lO\ of the total proj ect budget
pending receipt and acceptance of the final product.
SECTION 4. TIME OF PERFORMANCE.
This contract shall cover the period from the date of
execution through March 31, 1992. However, no funds may be
expended or work conducted after December 3l, 1991 unless
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(hereinafter called NOAA) approves the availability of funds
after December 31, 1991.
SECTION 5. APPROVALS AND NOTICES.
A. The CONTRACTOR' s project manager is George Garrett,
telephone (305) 294-464l. The DER project manager is James
w. Stoutamire, Coastal Management Section, telephone (904)
488-6221 or (Suncom) 278-6221. DER reserves the right to
approve changes in project managers upon receipt of a
wri tten request; however, this approval will not require a
contract amendment or a change order. All matters shall be
coordinated with or directed to the proj ect managers for
proper disposition.
B. Any notice or other written communications between
the CONTRACTOR and the DER shall be considered delivered
when posted by certified mail or delivered in person to the
respe~tive project manager.
C. Either party may request changes in the scope of the
services to be performed hereunder. Those changes which are
mutually agreed upon shall be made by a written order
designated to be a Change order. Any change order which
causes a change in the cost or time of performance shall be
incorporated in written amendments to the contract.
D. The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide the DER with
reports or other appropriate documentation of findings prior
to making or allowing any agent of the CONTRACTOR to make a
press release or other public announcement of project
findings. In the event the CONTRACTOR is contacted by any
media regarding the project, the CONTRACTOR agrees to
immediately provide DER with a summary of the contact and a
copy of any documents released to the media.
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 3
SECTION 6. WORK/REPORTS REOUIRED.
In an effort to conserve and recycle natural resources,
the CONTRACTOR shall submit all reports generated under this
contract on recycled paper.
A. proiect Initiation Report
This report shall be submitted within two weeks of the
contract beginning date and shall include, for approval by
DER, names and brief credentials of staff persons assigned
to the proj ect, a proj ect schedule based on the tasks in
Attachment A and a total estimated cost for each major task
heading contained in Attachment A.
B. Quality Assurance Plan
upon contract execution the CONTRACTOR shall submit a
Research Quality Assurance Plan (RQAP) for the purpose of
approval by the DER' s Quality Assurance Section. The RQAP
shall be prepared in accordance with Section 6 of the
document entitled 'DER Manual for Preparing Quality
Assurance Plans, DER-QA-00l/90".
The RQAP shall be submitted through the DER Project
Manager to the QA Section. Failure to submit the Quality
Assurance Plan within one month of contract execution shall
result in suspension of the contract until the document has
been submitted to the DER Quality Assurance Section.
The CONTRACTOR shall have three (3) opportunities to
submi t the RQAP to the DER Quality Assurance Section for
approva-l. If the Plan fails the approval process three (3)
times.c. the DER may terminate the contract in its enti rety.
The CONTRACTOR shall adhere to the data validation
requirements for laboratory analysis contained in Attachment
B, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Failure to
provide an acceptable Quality Assurance Plan will result in
suspension or termination of this contract.
The DER contract number shall appear on the title page
of the submitted RQAP. Within thirty (30) days of receipt
of properly identified QA Planes) by the DER Quality
Assurance (QA) Section, the QA Section shall review and
either approve the QA Plan, or Provide comments to the
CONTRACTOR as to why the Plan is not approved. If further
revisions are needed, the CONTRACTOR shall have fifteen (15)
days from the receipt of such comments to respond. The QA
Section shall respond to all revisions within 30 days of
receipt in the QA Section.
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 4
Sampling and analysis may not begin until the RQAP has
been given approval or "approval pending" status.
C. Progress Reports
Progress reports shall be submitted on January l, April
1, July 1, and October 1 beginning with contract execution.
These reports shall consist of a summary of the work
completed on the project to date and shall be based on
project tasks listed in Attachment A. Progress reports
shall also include any press clippings or press notices
related to this project.
D. Final Report
A final report, in eight copies, shall be prepared and
submitted detailing the work conducted under all tasks
contained in Attachment A and any conclusions and/or coastal
management recommendations based on that work. The report
shall include' a separate executive summary section briefly
outlining the work conducted and its results; a completed
National Technical Information Service Form 272, Attachment
C attached hereto and made a part hereof; and shall be
provided two-sided, single spaced on 8.5 by 11 inch paper.
The report shall be submitted no later than the completion
date of the contract.
E. Ownership of Documents
All reports produced and other data gathered by the
CONTRACTOR for the purpose of this contract shall become the
mutual property of the NOAA, the DER, and the CONTRACTOR
wi thout restriction or limitation upon thei r use and shall
be mad~ available by the CONTRACTOR at any time upon request
of th~ DER.
F. Copyrights
Books, publications, or other copyrightable materials
developed under this contract may be copyrighted provided
that the DER and the NOAA reserve a royalty-free,
nonexclusive and irrevocable right to reproduce, publish, or
otherwise use, and to authorize others to use the materials
for government purposes.
G. Documentation
The cover or title page of all reports, studies, maps or
other documents resulting from contracts supported in whole
or in part by this contract shall contain the following
statement: Funds for this project were provided by the
Department of Environmental Regulation, Office of Coastal
Management using funds made avai lable through the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended.
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 5
SECTION 7. UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT.
A. This contract is funded in part by a grant from the
NOAA. In exchange for Coastal Zone Management funding, the
CONTRACTOR agrees to abide by and comply with OMB Circulars
A-l02 and A-87.
B. The CONTRACTOR agrees that the DER, the State, and
the Comptroller General of the United States or any of their
duly authorized representatives and the United States
Secretary of Commerce or any of his duly authorized
representatives shall, until the expiration of three years
after expenditure of funds under this contract, have access
to and the right to examine any directly pertinent books,
documents, papers, and records of the CONTRACTOR involving
transactions related to this contract. The CONTRACTOR
agrees that payment(s) made under this contract shall be
subj ect to reduction for amounts charged thereto which are
found en the basis of audit examination not to constitute
allowable costs under this contract. The CONTRACTOR shall
refund by check payable to the DER the amount of such
reduction of payments within 30 days of receipt of request
of DER. All required records shall be maintained until an
audi t is completed and all questions arising therefrom are
resolved, or three years after completion of the project and
submission of a final invoice, whichever is later.
C. The CONTRACTOR certifies, to the best of its
knowledge and belief, that it and its subcontractors are not
currenr-iy ineligible from transactions by any Federal
depar1;.ment or agency i have not wi thin the past three years
been convicted of or had a civil judgement rendered against
them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense inVOlving
any Federal, State, or local transaction or contract; are
not presently indicted or otherwise criminally or civilly
charged by any Federal, State, or local entity; and have not
within the past three years had any Federal, State, or local
transaction terminated for cause or default.
SECTION 8. NON-SUPPLANTING.
Federal funds made available for state or local projects
under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended,
may not be so used as to supplant state or other funds that
would be available in the absence of such federal funds for
coastal zone management program activities, but rather will
be so used as to increase such state or other funds
available for coastal zone management.
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 6
SECTION 9. RESPONSIBILITIES OF DER.
The DER shall:
A. Provide guidance, assistance and coordination to the
extent necessary and feasible;
B. Provide reference documents as required;
C. Provide for
reports and furnish
appropriate; and
timely review of drafts
comments, suggestions or
and interim
approva Is as
D. Provide for review of the final report draft and
furnish comments within twenty working days.
SECTION 10. DECISIONS BY THE DER.
All services shall be performed by the CONTRACTOR to the
satisfaction of the Secretary of DER or her designated
representative, who shall decide all questions and disputes
of whatever nature whiCh may arise under or by reason of the
contract, the prosecution and fulfillment of the services
hereunder and the character, quality, amount and value
thereof. The Secretary's decision upon all claims,
questions and disputes shall be final, conclusive and
binding upon the parties hereto.
SECTION lI. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT.
A. ,... Termination for Convenienc~
Tllis contract may be terminated by either party at any
time prior to fulfillment upon thirty calendar days written
notice, delivered by certified mail return receipt
requested, to the other party. The CONTRACTOR shall be paid
for services satisfactorily performed and/or costs incurred
based on an estimate of that portion of the work that has
been completed, as determined by the DER.
B. Termination for Cause
If the CONTRACTOR fails to fulfill, in a timely and
proper manner, its obligations under this contract, or if
the CONTRACTOR violates any of the covenants, agreements, or
stipulations of this contract, the DER shall thereupon have
the right to terminate this contract by giving written
notice to the CONTRACTOR of such termination and specifying
the effective time/date thereof. All items or materials
furnished by the DER and any finished or unfinished reports,
notes, or field data prepared by the CONTRACTOR shall
immediately be delivered to a place designated by DER, and
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 7
the CONTRACTOR shall be entitled to receive just and
equitable compensation for any satisfactory work or services
completed.
Notwithstanding the above, the CONTRACTOR shall not be
relieved of liabi Ii ty to the DER for damages sustained by
the DER by virtue of any breach of the contract by the
CONTRACTOR, and the DER may withhold any payments to the
CONTRACTOR for the purpose of setoff until such time as the
exact amount of damage due the DER is determined.
C. Termination Based Upon Withdrawal of Federal Funds
This contract is subject to the availability and
continuation of federal funding anticipated at the time of
execution. Should funding be discontinued or reduced, the
contract will be terminated or amended, as appropriate, and
the CONTRACTOR shall be compensated for work or services
satisfactorily completed.
D. - Termination for Refusal to Allow Public Access to
Records
The DER reserves the right to unilaterally cancel this
contract for refusal by the CONTRACTOR to allow public
access to all documents, papers, letters, or other material
subj ect to the provisions of Chapter 119, Florida Statutes,
and made or received by the CONTRACTOR in conjunction with
the contract.
SECTION 12. INTEREST OF THE CONTRACTOR.
Th~ CONTRACTOR covenants that it presently has no
inter~st and shall not acquire any interest, direct or
indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with
the performance of services required to be performed under
this contract. The CONTRACTOR further covenants that in the
performance of this contract no person having any such
interest shall be employed.
SECTION 13. PERSONNEL.
A. To the extent required by law, the CONTRACTOR will
secure and maintain such insurance as will protect it from
claims by employees under the Workers' Compensation Act and
from claims by employees for bodi ly inj ury or death which
may arise from the performance of its services under this
contract.
B. The CONTRACTOR assures that the program supported by
this contract will be conducted in compliance with Title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L.88-352), as amended (42
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 8
USC 2000d), and the requirements imposed by the regulations
of the Department of Commerce (15 CFR Part 8) issued
pursuant to that Title. In accordance therewith, no person
in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color,
or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to
discrimination under any program or activity for which the
CONTRACTOR receives federal financial assistance.
SECTION 14. OFFICIALS NOT TO BENEFIT.
No member of or delegate to Congress or resident
Commissioner shall be admitted to any share or part of this
contract or to any benefit that may arise therefrom.
SECTION l5. COVENANT AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES.
The CONTRACTOR warrants that it has not employed or
retained any company or person, other than a bona fide
employe-e working solely for the CONTRACTOR, to solici t or
secure this contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to
pay any person, company, corporation, individual, or firm,
other than a bona fide employee working solely for the
CONTRACTOR, any fee, commission, percentage, gift or other
consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or
making of this contract. For breach or violation of this
provision, the DER shall have the right to terminate the
contract without liability and, at its discretion, to deduct
from the contract price, or otherwise recover, the full
amount of such fee, commission, percentage, gift, or
consideTation. The DER shall further be responsible for
reporUng the details of such breach or violation to the
proper legal authorities, when and where appropriate.
SECTION 16. ANTI-LOBBYING
The CONTRACTOR certifies that it has neither used nor
will use any funds derived from this contract for payments
to lobbyists; will disclose the name, address, payment
details and purpose of any agreement with lobbyists whom the
CONTRACTOR or its subcontractor(s) will pay with profits or
nonappropriated funds on or after December 22, 1989; and
wi 11 fi Ie quarterly up-dates about the use of lobbyists if
material changes occur in their use.
SECTION 17. SEVERABILITY.
In the event one or more provisions of this contract are
declared invalid, the balance of this contract shall remain
in full force and effect.
DER Contract
No. CM300
Page 9
SECTION l8. CONTRACT AS INCLUDING ENTIRE AGREEMENT.
This instrument embodies the entire agreement of the
parties. There are no provisions, terms, conditions or
obligations other than those contained herein; and this
contract shall supersede all previous communications,
representations or agreements, either verbal or written,
between the parties hereto.
MONROE COUNTY
Mayor/Chairman
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION
~
Secretary
Date: 0/02o/}Y'
Date:
(SE AL )
ATTEST: DANNY L. KOLHAGE, CLERK
By:
Deputy Clerk
-
APPROVED AS TO FORM
! AND t.EGAt. ~_IC ICIENCIENCY.
~,o-.S"J.,..; ,~~)
By 0IIice
l.J- .. r..:{ _ 0 \
Date -\ '-" \.\
MONROE COUNTY
W~TER QUALITY RESE~RCH PROPOSAL
"Eutrophicetionend 1roph1c Structuring 1n Marln~
Plant Co~munities In the Florida Keys"
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Background
1. Physiography:
The Florida Keys are a 225 mile long archuate archipelago which
extends from Soldier Key in Biscayne Bay to the Dry Tortugas and Fort
Jefferson National Monument. The emergent islands are comprised of two
distinct carbonate geologies. From Soldier Key to the southern "tail" of
Big Pine Key, a dista~ce of approximately 120 miles, the keys are an
expression of an ancient bank and patch reef formation known as the Key
Largo Limestone. From the remainder of Big Pine to the Tortugas, a
distance of approximately 105 miles, the Key Largo Limestone formation is
overlain by an oolitic formation known as the Miami Oolite. Though the
characteristics of these formations are somewhat different, both have
relatively high permeability and porosity (see Hoffmeister, 1974; and
Multer, 1977, chapters 10 & 11). Tidal and ground waters flow rather
rapidly through them (Lapointe and O'Connell, 1988), though core areas
of the lower or southwesterly Keys are known to hold ~ well developed
freshwater lens (Hanson, 1980)
The Keys separate' the marine environments of the Gulf of Mexico and
Florida Bay from Hawks Channel, the Straits of Florida; and the Atlantic
Ocean. There are numerous tidal passes between the islands, particularly in
the lower Keys, which provide for water exchange between these
waterbodies. Typically the net flow of water is from Bay to Ocean in a
southwesterly direction (Lapointe and Smith, in preparation). Thus, water
from the Bay moves through the tidal channels between islands to Hawks
Cpannel and the bank reef formations which lie parallel to the Keys and
adjacent to the Straights of FLorida.
The oligotrophic or low nutrient status of the nearshore waters of
the Keys directly supports Unique marine habitats and a diverse variety of
flora and fauna. These"ecosystems depend on very specific conditions
found in highly differentiated habitats such the Keys' coral-dominated patch
and ban~ reefs, seagrass beds and hardbottom communities. There are also
extensive fringing mangrove habitats. Mangrove habitats protect shorelines
from erosion, particularly during storm events, provide habitat for
invertebrate, juvenile and adult fish species, and a large variety of
wading birds, and act as a biological filter for stormwater runnoff and
terrigenous and aquatic pollutants. While all of these habitats are
uniquely coupled to fisheries production, because of their oligotrophic
character they are also very sensitive +0 nearshore water quality
degradation.
1 C i
~owever, th~ ~ost dlstingU1Shln~ feature of th~ ~eys is th. llving
coral reef tract and associ.ted patch reef .55e~blages. Coral for~tions
vary in character, based primarily on light and nutrient availability,
depth, turbidity, and location between Florida Bay and the Straights of
Florida. The coral assemblages and the hundreds of other invertebrates and
fish that comprise this'co~~unity are found in no other part of the
continental United Stetes. As such, these areas are noted es "issues of
special focus," in section II of the FloridA COAstal Manege~ent Program.
Associated with the reef areas and throughout Hawks Channel, the island
passes, and Florida bay are expansive seagrass meadows. Thes~ are of
potentially greater ecological significance than the reef system. Comprised
principally of three species of flowering plant. Halodule wrightii,
Syringodium filiforme, and Thalassia testudinum, this habitat serves
to stabilize sediments, entrap silt. store And recycle nutrients, provide
shelter and substrate, and as a vital nursery ground for fish and
invertebrates important to associated biological communities and to
Florida marine fisheries. These areas can hp loosely defined as "issues of
special focus" as well.
The tropical ecosystems of the Keys are naturally subjected to the
stresses of wind and water damage from tropical storms and hurricanes. This
is an especially strong consideration in 8 region at the northern limits of
tropical climates. Damage to the natural communities from these forces can
be quite severe. It is the additional manmade encroachments, however,
that may contribute to future ecological imbalances in the form of water
quality degradation.
z. legislative Mandate:
Under Chapter 380 Flori~a Statutes, Monroe County was designated an
Area of Critical State Concern. Secti6n 380.0552, The Principles for
Guiding Development in the Florida Keys Area of Critical State Concern were
adopted by the Administrative Commission in July of 1984. The purpose of
the Act is to "insure a water management system that will reverse the
deterioration of water quality and provide optimum utilization of our
limited~water resources, facilitate orderly and well planned development and
proteLt the health, welfare, safety and quality of the life of the residents
of this state."
Under Chapter 403 Florida Statutes, the waters of the Florida Keys,
Monroe County were designated as Outstanding Florida Waters in 1985.
Simultaneously these same waters were proposed as an Aquatic Preserve under
the guidelines of Chapter 258 F.S. The draft aquatic preserve management
plan had the preliminary approval of the Governor and Cabinet but did not
receive final approval and funding.
Monroe County, the Florida Keys, are a recognized area of local, state,
national, and international interest and concern. The elements that brought
about the state critical concern designation and it's characterization as
"Outstanding Florida Waters" evolved from a recognition of increasing
development pressure on the land areas of the Keys and the unique quality of
the natural resources in and surroundin~ the Keys.
2~ r 2
In recognition of the UnlQue natlve character of the rlO~lda ~.ys end
the unparalleled planning issues associated with ci.velop~ent in this island
archipelago the Monroe County board of County Co~issioners Adopted the
FloriGs Keys Co~preh.nsive Plan on February 2E, 1987 under Chapter 380.055
F.S. end, in accordance with the Local Govern~ent Co~prehensive Planning
Act, Chapter 163 F.S., is in the process of revising and updating this
plan. The purpose af Volu~e II of .the' Florida Keys Co~pr.hensive Plan is
to establish end pro~ulgate policies for guiding future land use decisions
within the County.
Many of these fall in line with thf' promulgated "issues af special
focus" nated in the Flarida Coastal Management Pragram, Sectian II. In
particular, Valume II, Sectio.n 2-104. !!~~I~har:e___!,!ater, states that:
"The Flarida Keys are dependent an nearshore water quality far
their enviranmental and ecanamic integrity. The heart af the Flarida
Keys ecanomy, the means by which Manroe County exists as a civil and
social institution, is based on its unique eceanic character. If
nearshere water quality is net maintained, then the quality ef life
and the ecenomy Qf Menrae Ceunty will OP directly and immediately
impacted."
Accardingly the objectives under this ~pctien are established:
"To. pro.tect, maintain, and where appropriate, improve the quality
af-nearshore waters in Monroe County."
Relevant palicy statements include:
"9. Within 6 manths of the effective date af this plan, implement, in
caaperation with the Department ef Envirenmental Regulatien and ather
state and federal agencies, a water quality manitaring program to'
ensure that the individual and cumulative impacts of development,
especially wastewater treatment systems, cammercial water dependent
activities, and live aboard vessels, do net degrade nearshare water
quali ty."
~4. To. study, in caeperatian with apprapriate state and federal
agencies, the effect af baating and recreatianal waste treatment
systems and ather develapment and activities an nearshare water .
quaIity and develap standards to ensure that grawth and develapment is
net degrading nearshare water quality."
and
"15. Within 6 manths af the effective date of these regulations, Manroe
Caunty, in cooperatian with the apprapriate state and federal agencies,
shall adapt and incarperate into. the Menroe Caunty land Develapment
Regulatians (LDRs), thresheld designatio.; criteria cansistent with
the requirements of 9.5-473.1, LDR, Threshold Designatians, for areas
with identified trends of water quality degradatian, which if
unaltered, wauld result in violatians of water quality standards. The
County, in caaperatian with state and federal agencies, shall develap a
strategy to carrect the incipient trend ~nd to enhance water quality."
7
.)
-; r 3
Other sectlons of the Lomprehenslve Plan share slmilar ~ndates, For
instance. in the Public Facilltles Element (Volume II, Floride Keys
Comprehensive Plan. Wastewater lreBtment) national policy is noted end the
document promulgetes responSlve goal~ and objectives:
Monroe County's wastewater planning has been developed in accordance
with water quality objectives and other water management goals
promulgated by Public Lay 92-500. the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments of 1972. The national goal of the Act is "to restore
and maintain thp physical, r.hpMic~l. ~nd hiological integrity of the
nations water."
Among the speci fi c objecti v~!" 1 II it... Comr>rptJensi VE> r Ian 1 s the
following:
"1. The principal objectivE> i5 to undertake a comprehensive water
quality monitoring program. The purpose of the program is to
document specific problem,area~ which may be in violation of
federal or state standards."
The County has begun to implement the aforementioned goal and objective
statements toward the end of improving WAter quality.
3. Current Knowledge:
Relatively few studies have been carried out in the Florida Keys to
assess the character and quality of our nearshore waters or to assess the
impact of development in the Keys. For example. a recent FDER report on
non-point source pollution assessment in Florida (FDER, 1988) indicates
that over 90~ of the waters of the Florida Keys remain unassessed for
ambient water quality. In 1984 through 1986, the Florida Department of
Environmental Regulation undertook a comprehensive study of water quality
parameters in'the Marathon area of the Keys (Heatwole, 1987)~ The DER
effort determined that contamination nearshore resources surrounding the
Marathon area was occurring and several sources were recognized, including;
on site sewage disposal systems (OSDS), marina and boating related
activities, di~charges from seafood processing companies, and stormwater
runof~ The author concluded that nmost pollution sources in the Keys are
located in dredged canals where mixing is minimal.n Until the DER study few
efforts had been made to .assess impacts from discharges to ground or surface
waters. ~Several investigators (Barada and Partington 1972; Larsen and
Michel, 1972; Florida Dept. of Pollution Control, 1973; U. S.Environmental
Protection Agency, 1975 and 1980; and Rich and Greenfield. 1979) have
assessed canal pollution and restricted circulation and flushing
characte~istics. Griffin (1972) and Maturo and Caldwell (1981) have
assessed the effects of turbidity from dredging activities, and three
studies of the Stock Island Power Plant have been completed (Chesher,
1973; Applied Biology, 197B; CH2M Hill, 1984),
Recently. Monroe County has undertaken two studies. The first,
completed in 1986 and supported byDER, OCM grant 170, concluded that
OSDS units were the source of significant ground water con~amination with
nitrogen and phosphorous species. It further concluded that these ground
waters exchange at a fairly rapid r~tes (7 1,0 m flow/day) with the
..
'! r 4
~..rshore weters (generally dredged canals)(l8POlnt~ and O'Connell,
19l>7; lapointe, O'Connell, and Garrett, in ,press). ThE' impacts of nitrogen
and phosphorous species were demonstrated,
The second study is currently under way, supported by the John D. and
Ca+'herine T. MacArthur ~oundation and Monroe County, and will provide a
comprehensive assessment of water quality parameters for 30 sites located
from Key West to Key largo. Sites were chosen from bank reef areas, coral
dominated patch reefs, seagrass/macro algae meadows, and canal systems.
Parameters being measured include; temperature, salinity, dissolved oxypen
(D.O.), turbidity, chlorophyll a, ammonium, nitrate plus nitrite, total
nitrogen, soluble reactive phosphorous, total ~hosphorous, and particulate
carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorous. Preliminary information indicates that
water quality contamination is currently becoming a problem. Dissolve
oxygen levels were shown to be consistently low in, otherwise presumed,
pristine arees (Lapointe and Clark, 1990). In many cases these levels
were below accepted state standards of 5.0 mg/l. D.O. levels generally
showed a negative correlation with levels of nitrogen and phosphorous
illustrating one of the indirect impacts of nutrient loading. We expect to
complete this work by.the end of the summer of 1990.
In order to quantitatively assess water quality related problems in the
Florida Keys at least three types of information must be available:
1. The nutrient profile of our nearshore waters, based on
comprehensive background monitoring;
2. The source and location of potential inputs, and;
3. The impact on nearshore resources resulting form any identified
pollution types and SOurces.
To this end Monroe County has "three primary goals with regard to
on-going and future water quality monitoring programs:
1.
To continue quantification of nutrient levels in canals and
nearshore waters as they may be asso.ciated with wastewater
treatment system leachate.
..
-
2. To identify reasonable tolerances for the nutrients under
~ investigation. These will continue to be phosphate and nitrogen
species; as elevated levels lead most profoundly to conditions for
eutrophication.
3. To coordinate with other state agencies to investigate remedies,
to improve the ability of on-site sewage treatment systems to
contain limiting nutrients.
,To date the studies undertaken have dealt with only the first two
criteria for water quality assessment noted above. We are beginning to
acquire enough data to sufficiently define the nutrient profile and
associated parameters found in the Keys, We have a reasonable understanding
of the sources of contamination. However, we have a poor knowl~dge of the
5
...
1 0 S
lDcal iMPBcts of pollutants Dn our nearshor~ envlronments as it relates.
especially, to threshold values pertAining io the onset Df eutrophicatiDn.
TD this end we are proposing to undertAke an investipation of the impacts
of nutrient enrichment on the County's extensive nearshore seagrass/macrD
alga. Meadows.
The seagrass meadows of south florida serve critical roles as primAry
producers and sediment stabilizers (see lieman, 1982, and refs within).
They also provide substrate for attachment of filimentous and crustose
algal epiphytes which are major food iiem~ of v~luable fisheries species
(Frye, 1984; Morgan and Kitting. 19841.
Despite their importance to nearshore m~rine ecosystems, Florida
se~grasses have been vanishing at astounding rates. Tampa Bay has lost
81~ Df its original seagrass coverage (lewis pt. al., 1985), Charlotte
Harbor has lost nearly 30~ of its sea grass meadows (livingstDn, 1987),
and the Indian River has lost ne~rl y 30 :: of j t!': sea grass meadows
(livingston, 1987).
In some cases, loss Df sea grass coverage has been associated with reduced
salinities (lieman, 1982) and dredging and fiiling activities (lewis et.
al., 1985). However, the "insidious gradual change(s)" (Zieman, 1982)
in state-wide seagrass coverage are most probably due to increased land
and development and ancillary changes in water quality. Sewage effluent
and nutl"ient loading of nearshDre waters are thDught tD be resPDnsible for
seagrass decline in Tampa Bay (Taylor et. al., 1973; livingstDn,
1987), the Indian River (Jensen and Gibson, 1986), CDckburn Sound, Western
Austra1ia(Cambridge and McComb, 1984), and the French Mediterranean
(BDurcier, 1986).
In the abDve-mentiDned studies, nutrient IDading of the water column
stimulated phytDPlanktDn and algal epiphyte grDwth, with a subsequent
decline in irradiance reaching seagrass blade tissue. Algal epiphytes
Df the temperate seagrass ZDsteramarina had more efficient growth at
IDw irradiance levels than the seagrasse itself, and grew to the PDint
where they reduced blade-level irradiance by 30~ (Sand-Jensen, 1977).
-
CDmplicating the scenario, seagrass productivity may nDt always be limited
primarily by light availability (Patriquin, 1972; Short, 1987; Dawes and
TDmasko,~1988; PDwell et. al., 1989; TDmasko and Dawes, accepted).
and epiphyte standing stocks would vary between species, and also with the
severity of the overgrDwth and light reduction.
Th~Dugh MDnroe County's previous wDrk and current investigations,
there is evidence that preliminary to advanced phases of eutrDPhication
are Dccurring nearshDre waters of the Keys, including seagrass meadows.
Lapointe and Clark (1990) have provided a conceptual model fDr assessment of
~..trophic state to define potential eutrophication in the FIDrida Keys (see
eo:~~n'e'attaC'hed schematic). This model wi 11 b". ... central theme fo~ the studies
proposed within this document.
- .
(, 1 -. 6
. ,
. .
:
"e hAve identlfled several nearshore loc~tlons as suspect sites which
appear to represent a progression of impac~. Identified grass areas appear
h_vily epiphitized by _rine elpae. In more heavily impacted ereas
s..grass is sluffing or n.s disappeared entirely_ It is hypothesized
thet these impacts may be associated with the elevated nutrient levels
identified by Lapointe and O'Connell (1987) and in the current study
(Lapointe and Clark, 1990). It is critical that we begin to investigate
thase possibilities to be in line with our three goals for water Quality
monitoring and our overall goal of environmental protection and recreational
and commercial fisheries preservation. ~ea 9r~s~es are an essential
resource to the Keys in this respec1.
III. Methodology
The experimental approach will be two pronged. Controlled BQuaria
experiments will be conducted as defined below under laboratory conditions
to determine the effects of nutrient loading and low light irradience.
Qualitative and quantitative comparisons will be made between the controlled
aquaria studies and a field based transect experiment designed to assess
the trophic state of seagrass meadows under various degrees of nutrient
enrichment. The level of enrichment is being established in our current
studies of ambient water quality.
The prOposed controlled aquarium experiment has as its goal the
determination of the combined effects of nutrient loading of the water
column~nd reduced natural irradiance level~ on the growth and
productivity of the three species of seagrasses common to the Florida
Keys. The design will be utilized to test the model noted above and
proposed in Lapointe and Clark's recent work (1990) (see attached
schematic). The experiment is designed as series of three 2 X 2 factorial
experiments using the Species Halodule ~rightii, Syringodium
filiforme, and Thalassia testudinum.
For each species, replicate aquaria will be used for each of four
experimental treatments: 1) ambient light and low nutrients. 2) ambient
light end highnutr~ents. 3) low light and low nutrients. 4) low light and
high nutrients. nata will be gathered on relative growth rates, rates of .
blad~formation, above-ground productivity, area-specific epiphyte loads,
and physiological stress as measured by changes in reserve and carbohydrate
stores. nata will be analYZ#9 for effects of irradiance, nutrient
loading,-end any interactions by two-way ANOVA.
Two replicate aquaria per treatment will be set up with six replicate
rhizome sections of each species. This will result in a total of ~welve
samples per experimental cell. For low light treatments shade cloth will be
used to reduce natural irradiance by approximately 45/.. High nutrient
levels will mimic the total dissolved inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous
levels found in impacted areas of seagrass meadows in the Florida Keys.
Levels will be similar to those found 'through the County's current work and
be supplied via peristalic pumps.
.
Information from these experiments can be used to predict the expected
outcome of ~ncreased nutrient loading and subsequent increased
phytoplankton and epiphyte standing stocks on each of the three
7
~ C 7
s..gress sP@cies. Wl~h ~hlS kno~lpdg~. natural resource managers could
identify species areas where contlnupd cult~r~l eutrophication would ~v.
the most detrimental effects.
As noted cultural eutrophication is believed to ~ve resulted in loss
of saagrass habitat in many developed coastal areas worldwide and is
currently a problem in many localiz@d areas of the Florida Keys, We propose
to conduct Summer and winter studi@s (one month each) along en
onshore-offshore gradient to quantify water column and benthic marine
plant community structure and physiological state in habitats with differinp
nutrient regimes. Permanent transects ~ill bp established in
hypereutrophic, eutrophic, mesotrophic. and oligotrophic habitats
(based on current abient water quality lnformation) th~t include canal
systems, shallow open bays, as well as offshore locations in the vicinity of
Big Pine Key, Florida and looe Key National Marinp Sanctuary.
At each station, ten benthic cores will be randomly taken along the
permanent transect to determine biomass (grams carbon/m2), nutritional
state (C.N,P ratios, soluble carbohydr~te), and species composition of
marine macrophytes. p,ore water samples ~ill also be sampled to 15 em
depth'from five cores per transect for nutrient determinations. Water
column samples will be taken at each transect for determination of
turbidity, nutrients, chlorophyl-a, and phytoplankton species
composition. Diurnal studies will be conducted during both winter and
summer period to determine oxygen profiles in surface and bottom waters 'at
each transect.
In addition to the onshore-offshore gradient, four other locations
through the Keys (Key Largo, Marathon, Sugarloaf, and Ke~ West) will be
sampled 'to determine the current state of seagrass habitat in these areas
as compared to the gradient. These studies will provide, for the first
time, a synoptic conceptual model of eutrophication that can be utilized
to determine the degree and extent of man-induced alterations in
nearshore marine plant communities,
1. Hork Products:
The proposed field dsts collection will occur in two phases; one
month during the winter and one month during the summer. Field work would
be subcontracted to recognized experts in water quality and nutrient
analysis in conjunction with experts in seagrass physiology and algal
taxonomy. Data would be developed by sub-contractors and interpreted
jointly with Monroe County. Aquaria experiments will be carried out during
the COUrse of the project year in accordance with the attached schedule.
Interim data and results will be made available.
An interim and a final report and synoptic conceptual model for
eutrophication will be produced by the contractor and sub-contractor. The
results and conclusions will submitted to a refereed scientific journal for
publication, Monroe County will utiliz~ resulting conclusions in further
land use planning efforts,
8
~ C 8
l:.:'~ ;'..CH~1EI\T }-
DER/QA Data Validation
Da te 1/3/89
RevisTonNO.3
Page 1. of 1.2 -
Analytical Data Validation Requirements
For Department Contracts
I. INTRODUCTION
,
,
Environmental studies or measurements are contracted out by the
Department (DER) on an as needed basis. Some contracts include the general
requirements for sampling, analytical procedure(s), and quality assurance
,protocols. Analytical parameters and methods are also commonly specified
in such contracts or in individual task assignments. Each contract/task
requires the preparation of a site- or project-specific QA plan (QAP?)
which, in general, references the contractor's and/or subcontractor's
Generic ttA plan(s) (GQA?).
-
One of the elements addressed in these QA plans is "Data Reduction,
Validation and Reporting". The present guidelines were written in order to
es:ablish uniform requirements for analytical data validation and
reporting. They must be followed by all contractors, and may be referenced
in each QAP? in the appropriate section therein. Notice, however, that
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
Revision WO. 3
Page l of l.Q. -
these guidelines do not impose any analytical QC requirement beyond those
already included in the EPA approved methods (as referenced in 40 CFR
Parts 136 and 261, and the EPA 'Contract Laboratory - CLP - protocols). The
additional requirements contained herein - denoted by the abbreviation
DER/QA in the left margin in the following sections - pertain only to
reporting and/or storage of data/records. Standard method requirements and
those which are singularly associated with the CLP protocols, are.aenoted
as STD and CLP, respectively, in likewise format.
These guidelines are meant to complement the contractors' Generic QAPs.
Their purpose is to further assure that legally defensible data will be
generated meeting U.S. Environmental Protection Agency criteria without
following the full EPA Contract Laboratory Program (CLP) protocols. Another
purpose of these guidelines is to def1ne in more precise terms requirements
for stor~ge (filing) of analytical raw data, field and custody records, and
QA/QC ~n-reportables in order to facilitate review and audit of these
documents.
II. LABORATORY REPORTING LEVEL
The analytical laboratory data required by the subject investigations
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
Revision 110. 3
Page ~ of ~ -
must meet the general QA for the EPA level III classification (qualitative,
quantitative and legally defensible). Each laboratory will perform internal
data validation according to their GQAP.
For each analytical batch per
parameter group, per matrix, the test results will be validated by
recalculating at least 5% of them, selected on a random basis, and by
the application of all other pertinent QA/QC criteria (blanks, duplicates,
~
.
spikes, etc...).
Split samples may be included in some tasks at the
discretion of the OER Project Manager in consultation with' the OER QA Officer.
Minimum of QA/QC data to be included in each laboratory analysis
report is defined below. The Laboratory QA Officer is responsible for this
data and should include in the quarterly QA report any additional remarks
concerning the validity (or quality) of the analytical data. This
is the list of reportables:
! .
,
~
STO 1. Sample data (matrix, field ID#, lab 10#, date of sampling, date of
extraction, 'date of analysis);
STO 2. Parameter, result and test method identification;
STD 3. Sample-specific detection limits for each parameter;
STO 4. Results of sampling blanks {trip, equipment, and field blanks};
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
Revision RO. 3
Page i of .!.Q. -
!
,
I
I '
I ;
I .
, I
1 ;
STD 5.' Results of field duplicates identified as such;
DER/QA 6. Resul ts of fi el d spi kes (if any) i dentifi ed as sU~.h;., and , .
CLP 7. Results of laboratory control data for replicates and spikes,
calculated SRSD of ~eplicates and SR of spikes, a~d the
control limits values utilized for each parameter/matrix.
,
.
The above 1 i st, whi ch appl i es to both Inorgani cs and Organics analyses,
will assure that the Project Managers are apprised through each laboratory
.'
report on the qual i ty 1 eve 1 of the ana lyti ca 1 data. The val i da ti on of
field data (pH, Tempe~ature, Conductivity, etc.) and the storage
requirements for these and the lab non-reportables are addressed in the
following sections. Section II below is only applicable if the contract
calls for field work to be performed.
III. FIELD DATA VALIDATION
co
All field information must be recorded in sequentially numbered bound
notebooks and be made using non-erasable waterproof ink. The notebook
pages must themselves be sequentially numbered from one through end: The
use of standardized forms (e.g. Field Trip Approval Form, Field Sampling
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
RevisTon NO. 3
Page 2 of .!.Q. -
Request Form, Field Data Sheet. Well Sampling Data Log. Equipment
Calibration Forms, etc...) is permitted but these must be assembled into
logbooks, sequentially numbered and bound prior to field use. The field
sampl,e custody records. (i .e. forms) must al so be bound and kept in the
project files along with the other notebooks and field documents. For
archival purposes. a single project file by task, containing the above
information. should be maintained by the contractor.
"
.
The field data validation process should follow each contractor1s GQAP.
Field team leaders are responsible for initial data validation including:
(a) the use of properly calibrated instruments.
(b) following appropriate SOPs, and
(c) making careful and complete records of field activities.
Final validation of field data is conducted by the project managers (or
task mal1-agers).
...
IV. LABORATORY DATA VALIDATION
The in-house data validation process begins with the analyst at the
bench level and concludes with the lab QA Officer who is responsible for
the 115~ random data verificationll (section II). The list of laboratory
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
RevisTon NO. 3
Page ~ of .lQ -
reportables is presented in that section. The list of nonreportables is
given below for Inorganics and Organics separately. Non-reportable
data/records must be kept in central files (along with reportable data)
organized by project/task/batch (in this order of filing). Active files
must be maintained for a period of at least one year from data generation,
and for a minimum total of the prescribed life of the records. Laboratory
QA Officers are to be responsible for the completeness of these fi'1es.
IV. A. General Non-Reportables
The following infonmation must be included for each task:
"
DER/QA 1. A chronological master list of laboratory tracking sample 10
numbers correlated with field sample ID numbers (per batch)
and sample analysis batch identification to correlate QA/Qe
samples to the applicable analysis batch;
'CO
'STD 2. Copy of the chain-of-custody forms signed by the laboratory
sample custodian; and
DER/QA 3. A Narrative summary identifying any QA or sample problems
encountered and the corrective actions taken (must be
prepared to be ;nel uded in quarterly and project QA
reports) .
DER/QA Data Validation
Da te 1/3/89
Revi sTon 'FJO. 3
Page!.... of ~ -
IV. B. Inorganics Non-Reportables
For analyses involving the use of atomic absorption (flame or furnace)
spectrometry (AAS), inductively coupled plasma (ICP), ion chromatography
(IC), light (visible and UV) spectrometry, other turbidimetric,
gravimetric and autoanalyzer procedures, the following data shall be on
fi 1 e:
.~
STD
1. Concentration of calibration curve standards and their
provenance or traceability;
CLP 2. Result of batch-applicaple continuing calibration verification
standards (CCVS), percent recoveries, and expected values;
STD 3. Results of batch applicable laboratory control samples (LCS)
or QC check sampl~ recoveries and expected values;
SiD 4. Results of method (lab control) blank analyses;
Results of interference check sample (ICS) analysis and
expected values (ICP only)
CLP 6. Results of dilution check sample (DCS) analysis and expected
CLP
-
5.
values (ICP only)
STD 7. Results of lab replicates (summary is reportable);
DER/QA Oata Validation
Date 1/3/89
RevisTon NO. 3
Page ~ of lQ. -
1 -
I"
sro
I i
I ;
I :
i
;
8. Results of lab matrix {digestive spikes (summary is
reportab 1 e);
9. Results of analytical (post-digested) spikes (furnace AAS
only, if necessary to check for matrix effects); and
sro 10. Sequential measurements readout records, digestion log, and
sro
raw data calculation worksheets.
.'
IV.C. Organics Non-Reportables
(a) Gas Chromatography (GC)
For analyses by GC, the following should be on file where applicabl~:
sro 1. Initial Calibration data and internal or external standard
parameter (compound) and concentration;
OER/QA 2. Chromatograms for all samples, standards and QC samples
(blanks, duplicates, spikes);
sro 3. Results of independent QC samples {EPA. NBS....l, expected
values, and percent recoveries;
-
sro 4. Results of matrix spikes (MS). calculated percent recoveries,
control limits and their source;
CLP 5. Results of matrix spike duplicates (MSD), calculated percent
recoveries and %RSD between duplicates. control limits and
their source (if analyzed);
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
RevisTon NO. 3
Page 2. of ~
STD 6. Results of laboratory duplicates, calculated %RSD and control
limits; and
STD 7. Results' of surrogate spikes, percent recoveries and control
limits (if analyzed), .'
"
(b) Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS)
For analyses by GC/MS, the following should be on file
applicable
STO 1. 'GC/MS tuning and mass calibration summary for BFB and OFTP?
where
,
.
compounds indicating compliance with acceptance criteria;
STD -2. Initial calibration data and internal standard (compound) and
concentra ti on;
DER/QA 3. Chromatograms and mass spectra for all samples, standards, and
QC samples (blanks, duplicates, spikes);
CLP 4. Results of continuing,calibration standards (system
performance check compounds, SPCC, and calibration check
compounds, CCG) and expected values;
CLP 5. Response factors (RFs) for all compounds at five standard con-
-
centrations showing linear invariance;
srD 6. Results of reagent water and extraction blanks;
STD 7. Results of matrix spikes (MS), calculated percent recoveries,
control limits and their source;
DER/QA Data Validation
Date 1/3/89
RevisTon NO. 3
Page .!Q of 10-
CLP 8. Results of matrix spike duplicates (MSD), calculated percent
recoveries, ~RSD, control limits and their source;
DER/QA 9. Results of surrogate spike recoveries, control limits and a
statement of the control limits sourc~;
STD 10. Results of independent QC samples (EPA, NBS,...) expected
I
I
1
j
t
i
val ues, and percent recoveri es; and
STD 11. Results of laboratory duplicates, calculated ~RSD and~
contro 1 1 imi ts.
V. NOTES
1. For laboratories following CLP protocol the above requirements apply
in full. All other 1 aboratori es must comply wi th requirements
listed except for those marked CLP.
I
I
!
!
i
I
1
"
2. The "5~ data recalculation", required in section II, applies to the
..
entire batch containing DER project samples. The DER samples are not
to be consi dered apart from other c1 i ent sampl es for the purposes of
this data validation.
-j
!
3. Gl os sa ry of abrevi a ti ons:
STD = Standard requirement of method(s).
CLP = EPA Contract Laboratory Program protocol requirement.
OER/QA = Requirement imposed by DER QA Section.
ATTACHMENT C
NTIS Form
~
, ~"G(
.......
'.. T-. _ ..--
.. ..
L
I"
_.'
" __ ~..u..... .._ ...., __
lc) NA9 OAA-H-CZ 809
IG)
1:' 50___'" cn.-..l2JOt.- ..- a.. ---
U.S. Dept. of Commerce/NOAA
OCRM
1825 Connecticut A., N.W.
Washington D.C. 20235
Dept. of Env.Reg.
Coastal Management
2600 Blair Stone Rd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
1'11. ,,.... - ~ -- c.-.s
Final
~4.
IL ~p__ary .......
,;.:
u. ADIn..c-l IU",1t: 2'00 _I
co
17. DocuI'ftlMlt Aftal)"SJI &. C__...,A.wn
b. IOefttlf>e"/o-...E_ecl ,......,
Coastal zone management/
~ COSATl "...ld/GrDUD
lIS. 3o.curttY C~u cn.... Il__f't)
Unclassified
I ZD. .....rtty ~ cn... ~)
"e, of ,.....
~L ."ailabl1rtY State....,,;
I %1.
j=-
~C.
(:.- "NS~i.lI)
$.-. '......-..ct_ _ "_
CW'TIOKAL 1'0_ 272 1__77)
IF_r1y HTlS-35l
INS~UCT1OHS
0CTt1on,1 FOrm ;::-:., F<egol"t C)oaIm.ntatlor ~rt II b.se<: Cl'1 CivlOtllnes for Formr. ,nd r>.O<lUC'tIO" c' Xltntlf1c ,nC: ; e<:1'In1U ~.oo'"l3,
ANSI ::39.1&-1974 ,v"lable from Al'nenean !'tUlon" SUnCltr'Ol Inltrtut.. 143C 8ro,o_)', "'- 'ro--.. "'... 'ro--. lX1e ucn wp.~te"
oound repO!1-tor Lumpte. ..ctI volum. .r, I multivOlume Mt-In.1I hIve Its uniQue Rtoon Docum~nutlon J>aie,
1. R~rt Number. uch IndIVIdually bound r.oort s1'l,II carry I uniQue alpn.numanc cesl,nrtlon USI""ad br tne partorm,nr aIV"
nlutlon or pl"DYtoad boy tn. sponaonnl ory,nlutlon ", ,ccorO' nee wltl'\ Amancan NatJon,l St.nc.n::l ANSi ::39,':3-1974, ie<:nn.cal
Regort Number (STRN). For ".,stretton at report COO.. contact NTIS Report Number CI.,nnrnouM. Spnnrfletd. VA ;::If;:. Us.
u~le lettef$. ArabiC num.rall, S11S"". .nd hypn.nl onty, II In tne fOllowln, eumptn: FASEB/N5-75/87 .nd FMI
RD-75/09.
2. Le.ve blank.
3. RecIPient's Accession Number. Reserved for us, by e,ch report ntClPltnt.
4. Titl. and Subtitle. Title Ihould indiute clearly Ind bne"y tne sublect coveraie 01 tne report. subordin.t. subtItle to trIe m.'"
title. Whan a report il prePllred in more th.n one volume. r.peat the pnm.!)' tltl.. add volume numoer .no Incluee lubtltle lor
the spec:ifJc: volum..
5. Report Date. Each report sh.1l c.rry . d.te Indic:atinrlt least month .nd year. Indic.te the b.SII on which it WIS selected (a.i..
dlte of issue. d.t. of ,ppl"DY,l. d.tI of preparation. dlte publiShed).
6. Sponsorini ",ency Code. luve blink.
7. Author(s). Give name(s) in conventlon.1 order (e.... John R. Doe, or J. Robert Doe). list author's affiliation if it ditlef$ from
the pertormlnr ol'ilnlutlon.
8. Performinr Orylnlution Report Number. Insert if performing organization Wishes to aSSign thiS number.
9. Performinr Orglnlzltlon Name ,nd Mailing Address. Give name. street. city. state. and ZIP code. Ust no more th.n two l.-wls of
an organi:z:ationll hi~rarc:hy. Display the nama of the o,.,anlutlon exactly as it should appear in Govemment .ndues such as
Govemment Reports "nnouncements &. Index (GRA &. I).
10. ProJect/Task/Work Unit Number. Use the project. task Ind work unit numbers under which the report WIS prepared.
11. Contract/Grant Number. Insert contract or rrlnt number under which report WIS prepare<!.
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Mailini Address. Include ZIP code. Cite main sponsors.
13. Type of Report and Period Covered. State interim. final. etc.. and, if applicable. inclUSIve dates.
14. Performinr Orglnization Code. Leave blank.
15. Supplementary Notes. Enter intorml!tion not included elsewhere but useful. such as: Prepared in cooperation with. . . Translation
of . . . Presentlld It conterence of . . . To be published in . . . When a report is revised. include a statement whettler the n_
report supersedes or supplements the older ",port.
16. Abstract. Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summlry of the most significant intormltion contained in the report. If the
report contains a significant bibliography or literature survey. mention it here.
17. Document Analysis. (a). Descriptors. Select trom the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper luthorized terr.,.
that identity~e major concept of the researc:hand are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entnes for cataloging.
(b). Id;!ntifjG~ ::r:::! Cp:!!l.Ended Term~. Ug identifien: for pro,ect names. code names. e<lulpment deSignators. etc. Use open.
ended terms wntten in descriptor torm for those subjects for whiCh no oescrlPtor eXists. ·
(c). COSATI Field/Group. Field and Group assignments are to be taken from the 1964 CeSATI Subject Cateret)' List. Since the
maiority ot documents are multidiSCIPlinary in nature. the prImary Field/Group assign;'ent(s) will be the specific discipline.
area of humin ende.vor. or type of physic.1 object. The application(s) will be cross.referenced With secondary Fteld/Group
assignments thlt will follow the primary postlng(s).
I&. Distribution Statement. Denote P'\Jblic releasability. for exam pie '"Release unlimited'", or limitation tor reasons other th.n
security. Cite any Ivailability to the public. With address. order number and price. if known.
19. &. 20. Security Classificati.:ln. Enter U.S. Security Classification in ac::ordllnce with U.S. Security RegulatIons (i.e., UNCLA.SSIFlED),
21. Number of pages. Insert the ~otal number of pages. including introduC'tory p.ges. but excluding distribution list, if any,
22. Price. Enter once in paper copy (PC) and lor microfiche (Mr) if known.
'DIJ..l. c;......."fneft, .......,.... 0"1.... ''''7.....I&'.M'n~o.
O,""ONlAL. FOIt.. 272 BACK (4-771
.
f RtPQR'T DOCUM(NTAT-'-'
I PAGE
.
'. .["'O"'~ ...c
pt. I Ace.....*" "'C
". 't,tl" ."'C wDtl'~.
!.. Jteoo,"", CIa..
-"Tne lcenouse 60ttor:. S~te ::~J~;:::>: 1S77 ~>::c:\'ctior;s
!6.
10('>1
. -"I,
I 7 4.",tt'lo,.t, ,
I Patricia A. Cridlebaugh
,. ".rl"'''''''1 0"'"11111"" "',.... '"I: AllO'UI
It.. ".""""'''1 O..a'''%alto~ ".ot. "'e
10. p...,eetl1a.k/W"'k Unit "0.
Department of Anthropology
The University of Tennessee
Knoxville, TN 37996-0720
11. Con'..cHC) 0' (i,antlG) No,
CX500075549
leI TV56256A
1C;1
1:. Spon,or,"c O,c.ruzahon N.m. and Adore'lS
13. Type of lleDOt! .. .....oel Cove..ll
National Park Service
Southeast Regional Office
75 Spring Street
^~1 "..,+" ',.." ~n')n')
n. SUDDle...en'a';' ""t..
The Tennessee Valley Authority
Cultural Resources Program
Norris, TN 37828
Final
1(,
Report of Investioations No. 35, Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee,
Knoxvl11e and Tennessee Valley Authority Publications in Anthropology No. 34.
1'- Ab.ttac:t (Limit: 200 WO'Il.)
Between 1967-1981, The University of Tenn~see, Department of Anthropology conducted
archaeological survey and excavations in the lower Little Tennessee River valley in
mitigation of the impact of the TVA Tellico Dam. In 1977, excavations were conducted
at the Icehouse Bottom site to address certain questions left unanswered by the
previous wO'rk in 1967, 1970, and 1971.. Recovery and analysis of archaeobotanical
samples yielded remains of corn (Zea mays), other plant foods, and evidence for
reconstruction of the paleoenvironment. A suite of radiocarbon dates confirmed the
placement of the Middle Woodland component in the mid-fifth century A.D. Refined
excavation techniques reaffirmed earlier observations that the limestone tempered
Candy Creek ceramic series were coeval with the sand tempered Connestee series.
Additional Hopewellian ceramics and lithics were recovered.
i
j I
,
; ,
17. Document "'nal~.. a. DeSCtlDt"...
i I
b, Ide"tilte,,/OQ.".Enlled Terms
Tellico Archaeological PrOject/Middle Woodland period/Excavation strategies/Lithics?
Ceramics/Paleobotanical analysis/Radiocarbon chronology/Hopewell Interaction Sphere
c, COSATI Fielll/GroUD
IL Ava;labilrty Statement
19. s-..cu"ty Cia.. !Th,. ReDO'"
I :a. No. of p"...
i-ix, 1-196
. ANS1-Z39.1111
~-- In..'.."............. ...~ C"..... _..
I
.
I ;'0. SecuPlty Cia.. (ThIS Pa..,
I 22. P"ce