Home Archived October 29, 2018

South Florida Information Access (SOFIA)

projects > coastal gradients of flow, salinity and nutrients > scope of work

Project Scope of Work

Project Scope of Work 2003

Coastal Gradients of Flow, Salinity and Nutrients

1. Introduction/Background. The Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 authorized the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) as a framework for modifications and operational changes to the Central and Southern Florida Project needed to restore the south Florida ecosystem. Provisions within WRDA 2000 provide for specific authorization for an adaptive assessment and monitoring program. A Monitoring and Assessment Plan (MAP) has been developed as the primary tool to assess the system-wide performance of the CERP by the REstoration, COordination and VERification (RECOVER) program. The MAP presents the monitoring and supporting enhancement of scientific information and technology needed to measure the responses of the South Florida ecosystem.

The MAP also presents the system-wide performance measures representative of the natural and human systems found in South Florida that will be evaluated to help determine the success of CERP. These system-wide performance measures address the responses of the South Florida ecosystem that the CERP is explicitly designed to improve, correct, or otherwise directly affect. A separate Performance Measure Documentation Report being prepared by RECOVER provides the scientific, technical, and legal basis for the performance measures.

Generally, the scope of work (SOW) described below is intended to support four broad objectives of the MAP:

a. Establish pre-CERP reference state including variability for each of the performance measures

b. Determine the status and trends in the performance measures

c. Detect unexpected responses of the ecosystem to changes in stressors resulting from CERP activities

d. Support scientific investigations designed to increase ecosystem understanding, cause-and-effect, and interpret unanticipated results

The SOW is intended to support the Greater Everglades (GE) Wetlands module of the MAP and is directly linked to the monitoring or supporting enhancement component identified inthat module as number This SOW includes: objectives of the work order effort, a general description of the scope citing the methodologies to be used by USGS to perform the data collection, a detailed breakdown of tasks to be performed and associated deliverables and timeframes, planning, coordination, data review, report preparation and submittal, equipment purchases, rental and ownership and project management.

In 1995, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) began a series of studies to monitor several major creeks and rivers that discharge freshwater into northeastern Florida Bay and the southwest coast of Everglades National Park (ENP). These studies provide flow, salinity, and water-level data for model development and calibration and also serve as baseline information for other physical, biological and chemical studies being conducted in these areas. These studies are being done as part of the USGS Greater Everglades Priority Ecosystems Science program (PES), which is an effort by the USGS to provide earth science information needed to resolve land-use and water issues. Additional support is provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Everglades National Park (ENP) for PES. As part of these studies, a network of 20 hydrologic monitoring stations is already in place and historical data is currently available through the USGS South Florida Information Access (SOFIA) web page at URL: http://sofia.er.usgs.gov/. Real time information is available at the USGS national water information systems URL: http://waterdata.usgs.gov/fl/nwis/rt.

In 2003, CERP MAP funding through the South Florida Water Management District established 10 monitoring stations as part of the Coastal Gradients Network, Map Activity The purpose of this MAP project with the USACE is to continue operation of these 10 stations for those MAP activities.

Future funding for the northeastern Florida Bay and southwest coast estuarine studies is expected to continue from the USGS PES program in order support the proposed integrated monitoring network. The MAP funding of monitoring stations within the Coastal Gradients network is a direct benefit to the overall integrated network and supplies critical hydrologic information where none previously existed.

2. Objectives

The objective of this project is to operate and maintain ten (10) recently established hydrologic and water quality data collection platforms (DCP's) in the coastal and fresh water marsh environments of the Everglades in order to support a larger integrated monitoring network (Figure 1). The hydrologic and water quality information from this network will be made available for the development and calibration of hydrodynamic and water quality models of the Everglades, Florida Bay, and adjacent marine systems, and will supply physical data to help evaluate impacts from CERP.

map showing location of Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Monitoring and Assessment Plan and Priority Ecosystems Science funded United States Geological Survey monitoring stations along the southern estuaries of South Florida
Figure 1. Location of CERP MAP and PES funded USGS monitoring stations along the southern estuaries of South Florida. [larger image]

The network of DCP's collect information at points of interest along transects that represent major flow paths from the Everglades wetlands to the southern estuaries. The information collected on flow, salinity, temperature, ground water - surface water interactions, and nutrient flux will be provided annually within a USGS data report. The data collected from this effort will contribute to the success of CERP by:

a. Having pre-CERP (baseline) and concurrent data on hydrologic and water quality parameters available for comparison during and after CERP modifications.

b. The ability to perform scientific investigations with physical data in order to increase ecosystem understanding.

c. Having real-time and historic data available to detect unexpected responses within the ecosystem due to CERP activities.

3. Scope of Work

Ten monitoring stations will be operated and maintained along the southwest coast of ENP, the Everglades wetlands, and along the coastlines of northeastern Florida Bay and northwest Barnes Sound (Figure 1). Data collected at these 10 stations will include water level, velocity, salinity, and temperature. Three stations (Upstream North River, North River, and West Highway Creek) will also include automatic samplers for the collection of water samples and determination of Total Nutrients (TN and TP). These 10 stations will complement information currently being generated through an existing network of 20 hydrologic monitoring stations of on-going USGS projects. By combining data collected from the ten monitoring stations and the existing monitoring network, information will be available across 9 generalized coastal gradients or transects (Figure 2). Data collected at all flow sites will be transmitted in near real time (every 1 or 4 hours) by way of satellite telemetry to the automated data processing system (ADAPS) database in the USGS Center for Water and Restoration Studies (CWRS) in Miami and available for CERP purposes. In addition to data from monitoring stations described above, salinity surveys will be performed along these 9 generalized transects, and these will include salinity, temperature, and GPS data from boat-mounted systems. Surveys will be performed regularly on a quarterly basis and twice following hydrologic events, totaling a maximum of 6 surveys per year.

map showing location of the nine generalized coastal transects involved in the study
Figure 2. Location of the nine generalized coastal transects involved in the study. [larger image]

4. Work Breakdown Structure

a. Introduction. The results of the work performed under this scope of work will be used to develop the cumulative finds of the AAT System Status Annual Reports. These annual reports will be used by the AAT to develop a RECOVER Technical Report at five-year intervals, as pursuant to the regulations [Section 385.31 (b)(4)]. This Technical Report presents an assessment of whether the goals and purposes of the CERP are being achieved. The Report will also include an assessment of whether the Interim Goals and Interim Targets are being achieved or likely to be achieved and evaluating whether corrective actions should be considered based on scientific findings of system-wide or regional ecological needs. The Principal Investigator(s) (PI) will be required to work with the AAT Modules Chair to assist in the development of the AAT System Status Annual Report and asked to include their participation as a task in this work breakdown structure. Additionally, the following reporting guidance is offered by AAT to the principal investigator(s):

1) Evaluate Ability to Detect Change - PI Level
a) Describe the results of the power analysis for the sampling design.
b) Determine the minimum detectable difference of the power analysis, and its associated confidence and uncertainty.
c) Describe changes in the MAP sampling design and its implications for the power analysis and the minimum detectable difference.

2) Establish Reference Condition - PI Level
a) Describe the non-MAP data sources, if any, used in the assessment. If non-MAP data were used, did the data meet the guidance criteria? If the non-MAP data were used and did not meet the guidance criteria, provide a rationale to justify the inclusion of the data.
b) Describe how representative the data are in space and time.
c) Describe the approaches used to address measuring variability.
d) Enter the data into the CERPP-Zone and update Module Group

3) Measure Change from Reference Condition - PI Level
a) Describe the methods used to estimate the direction and magnitude of change in performance measures from the reference state both annually and back-cast for multiple years.
b) Compare current status of the PM with its desired trend or target.
c) Evaluate consistency of monitoring results with MAP hypotheses.
d) Determine if there are indications of unanticipated events and describe how they are affecting the desired outcome.

4) Annual Integration of Performance Measures (PM) To Evaluate Module Hypotheses -Module Group Level
a) Annually integrate multiple PMs to provide an assessment of module level hypotheses.
b) Describe the direction and magnitude of change in the integrated performance measures and determine if the changes are consistent with expected responses described in the CERP hypotheses.
c) If the trends do not correspond to expected responses provide scientific explanation.
d) Evaluate progress toward achieving module-level Interim Goals and Interim Targets.

5) System-Wide Performance Evaluation - AAT Level
a) Synthesize findings across-modules and across years to provide a holistic description of the status of the system.
b) Evaluate the results in relationship to; supporting system level hypotheses and achieving system-wide Interim Goals and Interim Targets.
c) Summarize those system-wide changes that are consistent with goals and hypotheses and those that are not.
d) Provide a scientific discussion of why the goals and hypotheses are not being achieved.

b. Task Description.

The following are brief summaries of the work elements (tasks).

Task 1 - Elevation Control GPS and Local Surveys
GPS static surveys will be performed and processed to determine the elevation (NAVD'88) of reference marks at: Upstream Lostman's River, Upstream Broad River, Bottle Creek at Rookery Branch, Taylor Slough Wetland at E-146, C-111 Wetland, Unnamed Creek near Manatee Bay, and Card Sound Canal monitoring stations. In addition to GPS static surveys, optical surveys will be performed to transfer NAVD-88 datum from the GPS reference mark, to a set of three independent Reference Marks (RMs) at each station.

(1) Deliverable - Water level elevation referenced to the North American Datum of 1988 (NAVD'88) for all stations listed above.

(2) Timeframe - Surveys to be completed by September 30, 2004; elevation transfer to all reference marks to continue into FY-05 and completed in FY05.

Task 2 - Monitoring Station Operation and Maintenance
This task includes: a) Operation and maintenance of field instrumentation, for the collection of water level, water velocity, salinity, and temperature data; b) Computation of discharge records (not at wetland sites); c) Quality assurance and quality control of all field and computed data; d) Data release and publication. USGS will service and maintain 10 monitoring stations in good working order and in a manner conducive to producing the data and deliverables identified in this SOW for the duration of the work order. The ten monitoring stations are as follows:

2a. Upstream Lostman's River- estuarine stream
2b. Upstream Broad River - estuarine stream
2c. Bottle Creek at Rookery Branch- estuarine stream
2d. Harney River- estuarine stream
2e. Upstream North River - estuarine stream
2f. Unnamed Creek near Manatee Bay- estuarine stream
2g. Unnamed Creek in Barnes Sound land - estuarine stream
2h. Southwest Taylor Slough northeast of Seven Palm Lake - upstream wetland
2i. Upstream eastern Joe Bay in the C-111 basin- upstream wetland
2j. Seven Palm Lake-lake

(1) Deliverable - A summary report on the status of all stations and data will be provided.

(2) Timeframe - The annual status summary report will be provided each September for fiscal years 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Task 3 - Salinity Surveys
Salinity surveys will be performed using boat-mounted "flow-through" systems along the southwest coast of ENP, northeast coast of Florida Bay, and Manatee Bay/Barnes Sound areas. Data collected will include salinity, temperature, and GPS location for every data point. Four quarterly and two event-driven surveys will be completed on a yearly basis, totaling a maximum of six per year. These surveys will include the following river/creek systems:

3a. Lostman's river
3b. Broad River
3c. Shark/Harney River system
3d. North River/Whitewater Bay
3e. McCormick Creek/Seven Palm Lake
3f. Taylor River
3g. Trout Creek/Joe Bay
3h. Manatee Creek/Manatee Bay
3i. Barnes Sound Canal

(1) Deliverable - A summary report on salinity surveys will be provided.

(2) Timeframe - The annual summary report will be provided each September for fiscal years 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Task 4 - Water Quality Samples
Water quality samples will be collected at three monitoring stations for determining the Total Nutrient concentrations (TN and TP). ISCO automatic samplers will be used for the collection of water quality samples at selected intervals. Point and cross-sectional samples will also be collected to determine "point-to-mean" relations and to quality assure ISCO samples. Locations for nutrient data collection are as follows:

4a. Upstream North River
4b. North River below Cutoff
4c.West Highway Creek

(1) Deliverable - A summary report of water quality information will be provided.

(2) Timeframe - The annual summary report will be provided each September for fiscal years 2005, 2006 and 2007.

Task Five - Reports
Annual reports are due at the end of each year and a final report is due approximately after the completion of the work order associated with this SOW. Annually, data for each year (ending September) will be processed, quality assured, and made publicly available by April of the following year.

c. Approach and Methodology in relation to Tasks 1 thru 4.

1. All water level information is referenced to local datum until NAVD-88 datum is established. NAVD-88 datum will be established using GPS static surveys at monitoring platforms.

2. All flow stations are instrumented with water level, salinity, temperature and velocity sensors. Velocity data will be collected with acoustic Doppler instruments, calibrated with the use of an Acoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP), and used in the computation of discharge. Monthly ADCP discharge measurements will be done at all new sites during the first year and bi-monthly thereafter for rating verification purposes. Salinity and temperature data will be collected at one or two depths in the water column.

3. Discharge data is computed using established area and velocity ratings. Area ratings are developed using depth soundings from available ADCP measurements at each site and OSW supported software programs. Index-velocity ratings will be developed through regression analyses, determining relations between instrument velocity (Index velocity) and mean cross-sectional velocity from ADCP measurements.

4. Marsh sites are instrumented with water level, salinity, temperature, and velocity sensors. Velocity data will be recorded with acoustic Doppler instruments. Salinity and temperature will be recorded at one or two depths in the water column. No discharge will be computed for these sites.

5. Water velocity in the marshes is quality-assured and will be made available. No discharge will be computed at these locations.

6. Groundwater wells are instrumented with water level, salinity, and temperature sensors. Pressure transducers are used to measure water level at ground water wells.

7. Salinity and temperature probes are cleaned and calibrated on a monthly basis to assure the quality of record.

8. Salinity surveys are performed using boat-mounted flow-through systems equipped with a salinity/temperature sensor and a Global Positioning System (GPS).

9. ISCO automatic samplers are used at three locations to collect water samples for Nutrient analysis. Every 18 hours water is pumped and a composite bottle is made up of 3 pumping sessions.

10. Field visits to collect sample bottles are made on a 3-week schedule.

11. During site visits, grab samples are taken and analyzed for total and dissolved nutrients.

12. Water samples collected with auto-samplers are analyzed for total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) concentrations.

13. Grab samples are analyzed for total and dissolved nutrients, and used to compliment and quality assured auto-sampler data.

d. Approach to Task 5.

The USGS will make available all data developed under this SOW to CERP, produce an annual summary report by September 2005/06/07, and give verbal briefings of progress and results to CERP AAT members in March and September of each year.

5. Project Management

a. SOW Change Control: Changes in the statement of work must be requested of the project manager in writing, with supporting justification. Any requested changes in the statement of work will require, on part of the contracting entity, submission of an updated project workplan with supporting detail, updated scheduling and budget information. No changes in the statement of work will occur without permission from the project manager. Any delays or changes in the scheduling and budget of the project will require the approval of the Adaptive Assessment Team (AAT). After any approved changes have occurred, the contractor will include documentation of these scope changes in the A Lessons Learned section of the final project report.

In addition, in multi-year projects, where the results of each years work can or will modify what happens in the subsequent years of the contract/project, the annual report can or will provide the results of the work gathered and proposed revisions to the future schedule of tasks/deliverables.

b. Data Management: Submission of all data is required for contract closeout. Data formatting, analysis, and delivery is to meet all CERP data management standards. Any data derived from the project will be provided to the AAT at predetermined intervals. All data and results derived from this project must be made publicly available or available to the AAT at the end of the project.

c. Quality Control and Assurance: The study work plan will include a quality assurance plan. This planning process determines which quality control and quality assurance procedures are appropriate for each project (e.g., QASR, FDEP standards). Methods used for each project should be selected based upon the following criteria: cost-benefit analysis, flowchart diagram of the system process, and determination of the best statistical experimental design (if appropriate). The burden of proof of compliance with standardized quality control and assurance procedures is the responsibility of the contractor. In the case where there are not standardized methods for quality control and assurance (e.g., many ecological sampling methods), the contractor must prove that the suggested methodologies are rigorous. Examples may be citing peer-reviewed literature of a method.

d. Status Reporting: Regular progress reports will be made to the project manager as deemed by the task list. Reports will be written, and verbal reports are not acceptable. Informal reports regarding status of permits needed for the project or timely progress of field work, or completion of specific tasks may be transmitted via email or fax. Reports that include any type of data analysis, datasets, and formal quarterly or interim reports will also be sent via electronic mail; however, signed hard copies with data attached in appropriate format must be mailed to the project manager.

e. Lessons Learned: The causes of variances in the statement of work, project scheduling and budgeting, the reasoning behind any corrective action, as well as any other lessons learned will be documented in the final project report. These lessons learned will become part of the historical database for this project and other RECOVER project.

| Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | Accessibility |

U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
This page is: http://sofia.usgs.gov/projects/scopesofwork03/coastalgrads.html
Comments and suggestions? Contact: Heather Henkel - Webmaster
Last updated: 04 September, 2013 @ 02:08 PM(KP)