!
"# !
$
!%&'
!
(
'
)
"#*+
!$
,$
!
!
!-
!
-
(
'
!,
!!
()
"#
*
#".
-
!
"#!
$
!/&'
!
(
'
#".*)'
'(
+#+01 2
!
$
,
3
!
)
!-!
$
!*
!.
!
'4-
,
.45.02
1&%62*
7!
7+89:
!:+8
8!8+8#;
#;&
#!
%<2
!#02%<5.02
=&%&>
2
-<;<%0*2
!! ,!
!,
!
? #
.
//##+@==/=%*/;#!
%<2
! #02%<*
A!!
8 A8#5.02
1/=&>
)
'A!!
8 )
'A8#5.02
1/<&#
.!-
!
>(
-!.#>5.02
1&1/
.#>B6&(('
'
)
,
#!0
)#0
*
:5.02
1/1&
>
C>
D
9
!
9
-!,
D
9
C-!
5.02
1&/%
.
E4
,
.
E4
,5.02
8
!
.
1&1%0
8 (
(
.
1%;%
.3!
5.02
F&F60G.3!
'
!
*
.
2
5
'
6&H'
*
+
$-9#$-
? ,!-+#?5.
//##+@==/=%*/%G/I4D
JKLMLNOPMQROQNRSTUVJWMMWRQXQOYZ[\]^_`\SaV\\JJbcdd\d`S\\ZefghiPOKWjklmaJ
-GF=G
3
>-5.
/=##+@==/=%*/;=
!
!
!
"#$ %&'()*+,(& -$.(*,&' /&0$+ 12&'(03 %*,0+*' 4*&+56 7&, 8($.* -$.(*, 9#$+$(,&)0$+ -$.(*,&' 4*&+5:6 )(,5; 0#&0< => ?, @2.2;0 =A6 =BBC6 0#(; -$.(*,&' 4*&+5 &5*D0$5 ?+5$+ E*> BCFGA6 HIJK LIMNHOPK KQRLOKSKTJ U
V SKTWSKTJ XO HYY YHII RTLMLZHY YLW
HIJK U
V
HTWXLYYI LT JNLI KPLT! J SZYKSKTJ JHJK
HJKO HOW KIYRJLT
[! WZJKW \RTK ]! ! HI JHJK YLM^ XO
HJKO RHYLJ^ TJOY RTWKO KMJLT _` X JNK
HJKO WK ?+5$+ E*> BCFGA $;0&a'(;#$5 b*cD'(&,b$ d(0# e$5$+&' -$.2'&0(*,; 9fg %e- D&+0; hfi j hfG6 +$)$++$5 0* &; 72a0(0'$ 8:> h> k&,5)(''; d(0# '(,$+; &,5 '$&b#&0$ b*''$b0(*, ;3;0$c; &DD+*l$5 (, &bb*+5&,b$ d(0# %&'()*+,(& %*5$ *) -$.2'&0(*,;6 "(0'$ hi6 8(l(;(*, h 9#$+$(,&)0$+ hi %%-: D+*l(5$; $,#&,b$5 d&;0$ b*,0&(,c$,0 &,5 &, &55(0(*,&' '$l$' *) D+*0$b0(*, &.&(,;0 '$&m&.$ &; b*cD&+$5 0* 2,'(,$5 '&,5)('';> C> @; &c$,5$56 ?+5$+ E*> BCFGA d*2'5 $;0&a'(;# b*,b$,0+&0(*, '(c(0; )*+ 0#$ 5(;b#&+.$ *) ;*('; b*,0&(,(,. ,*,#&n&+5*2; b*,b$,0+&0(*,; *) D$0+*'$2c #35+*b&+a*,;6 *+.&,(b &,5 (,*+.&,(b b*cD*2,5;6 c$0&'; &,5 D$;0(b(5$; 0* '(,$5 b$''; *) *D$+&0(,. '&,5)('';> f> 7$b0(*, ho=oi>G9&: *) 0#$ %&'()*+,(& p$&'0# &,5 7&)$03 %*5$ D+*#(a(0; 0#$ 5(;D*;&' *) d&;0$ b*,0&(,(,. 0*0&' '$&5 (, $qb$;; *) Cog D&+0; D$+ c(''(*, 9DDc:6 b*DD$+ (, $qb$;; *) hogg DDc6 &,5 E(bm$' (, $qb$;; *) hggg DDc 0* *0#$+ 0#&, & %'&;; r #&n&+5*2; d&;0$ ;(0$6 2,'$;; 9=: 0#$ &DD+*D+(&0$ -$.(*,&' /&0$+ 12&'(03 %*,0+*' 4*&+5 &c$,5; d&;0$ 5(;b#&+.$ +$s2(+$c$,0; 0* ;D$b()(b&''3 &''*d 0#$ 5(;D*;&' *) 0#$ d&;0$ &,5 9h: 0#$ &DD+*D+(&0$ '*b&' $,)*+b$c$,0 &.$,b3 #&; +$l(;$5 0#$ ;*'(5 d&;0$ )&b('(03 D$+c(0 *) 0#$ )&b('(03 0* ;D$b()(b&''3 &''*d 0#$ 5(;D*;&' *) 0#$ d&;0$> o> 7*('; b*,0&(,(,. ,*,F#&n&+5*2; b*,b$,0+&0(*,; *) D$0+*'$2c #35+*b&+a*,;6 *+.&,(b &,5 (,*+.&,(b b*cD*2,5;6 c$0&'; &,5 D$;0(b(5$; 5(;b#&+.$5 0* '(,$5 d&;0$ c&,&.$c$,0 2,(0; ;#&'' a$ b*,;(5$+$5 0* ,*0 D*;$ & ;(.,()(b&,0 0#+$&0 0* d&0$+ s2&'(03 () b*,b$,0+&0(*, '$l$'; &+$ a$'*d 0#$ 0#+$;#*'5 b*,b$,0+&0(*,; '(;0$5 (, 0#$ 8(;b#&+.$ 7D$b()(b&0(*,; *) 0#(; ?+5$+> A> 7*(' d&;0$; ;#&'' a$ b*,;(5$+$5 0* D*;$ & 0#+$&0 0* d&0$+ s2&'(03 () (0 #&; b*,0&c(,&0(*, '$l$'; &a*l$ 0#$ 0#+$;#*'5 b*,b$,0+&0(*,; '(;0$5 (, 0#$ ;D$b()(b&0(*,; *) 0#(; ?+5$+ &,5 c&3 ,*0 a$ 5(;b#&+.$5 &0 0#$;$ ;(0$;> i> "#$ 5(;b#&+.$ *) #&n&+5*2; d&;0$6 &; 5$)(,$5 (, %&'()*+,(& %*5$ *) -$.2'&0(*,; 9%%-: "(0'$ hh 8(l(;(*, C6 %#&D0$+ Cg6 @+0(b'$ == (; D+*#(a(0$5>
!
"
"
#
$
%#
& '
( ) *+ $
$
,!
+$ "
+
+
-.
) ,!
/
"
!
"
!
0
.) ,!
/
1
(
"
'
0
2324567689:7;676;+)
0
(<
=>>?@ABCDDCEFGHI =J;24K5=7L64M6K2N2K=32:O4
"
1
( "!!
'"
!
P)
%# !
+ Q '
R$
+*S+T%#
Q
!
' +
U
U
-..
'
+
""
..
'
(
1V
U
(-..
-...
'
+
"
1
#
'-..
'
$WWW #""
#
1"
!
"
( X$$,
.X.
!
"
'""
#
' ,!
/
( X$$,
'
Y
'
#
( ""
#
' ""
"
!
*(
#
$
Y
!
$$,
-Z$WWW ! T +!+'
"
'
( "
'
+
!
!
"
+ + "
(
(!
(
"
(
U '
!
<
!
Y
"
+
!
!
"
Y
(
! (
[%)\[,
$$,) +
*\
!
Y
+"
+
!
!
"
!)
'$
Z
!Q
[)$ZQ\'[,
< $$,) +
*\ Page 912 of 957
!
"###$% &''(
)
"
*
++,&(
-%
''
."
)
" ! *
'
/
)
")
'
/
'
'
01234516789:34;<3=4>?4>2<7@><>2 A<B@767?4>;1>23<2@4>C@7@2D E
/
& F (
G###''HI G###+G###''HI)$! J
/
KGL
GM NG & ("//
G###''HI G###+###''HI
)$! J
/
I/
G E
GO
P
GQ
& F#"//
(
###''!HI G###+###''HI
)$! J
/ HI
H
I/
!HI
!
"
H
I/
! JI
Q
! " /G
" /GJ
/
I
R
/
/ !
P
*
H
I/
S
)
'
H
I/
012345167 ;4>D2@261>2 T08 UVWXYAZ
[<D T08 UVWXY A\@1D15 U]0^ _XV`XZ aT]b UVWcWZ C1<: UT?C0Z A12<5D U?:d?3d0=d e@df>Zdgbd <>:0?aD h17@ij45<2@51 g3k<>@;D UVclW43]0^ mcYZ j45<2@51 43k<>@;D UVcmWZ A12<5D
U?^A XlZd<>:
0?aD nE
o
p L
M N KN I/
E
O
P
Q
qrstuvwxyz{|t}tsw|tu}tw|~y|~{}v{v}r}ustwsx}~~w|st{ Page 913 of 957
!
"!
!
#
$ %&
'()
*
"&+
+
) ,'
,'&-
)''&
. !/
0) ('&
1!) +!
2.
.
#
..
3 #
12.
!
"
#
!
$
!
!
"
"1
.
3
1.
1
" !
"4
.
#
!
"
#
.
5
"#
!
.
..
6
"
.
789
%+
1
8:6! 3
!
8
1"!
"
8
!
! !
."
. 1"
+
;
<
"
0
8
4
+
8
98
=>?@ABCDE= FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF GHIJIKLHMNLOPQ :6! 3 !
!
"#
$
%
&
'()$
*) ++,
+'+-
.'
/01234513126/789:;<
=>?/;; 4@AB CDEFGHDI JK CLMNDFO KPQ RSLFTG JQQ RNLIUUFTG QPVK WSXGFTG JPQ WYLHGFTG K WHZSUE [Q WH\\NL ]K ^NSX KPQ _NLOTLI QP] _HUIZXNDTG `KQ aFObNU ]Q cNUNDFTG JPQ cFUdNL K eYSUUFTG VPQ fSDSXFTG ]g hFDO ]KQ /0123451312 =>?/64@AB< CUXLFD QPJg WYUHLXSDN QP]K iiejiikjiiiQPJ ]jgliFOYUHLH\YNDHmISONEFOSOFXJQ iFNUXLFD QP[ iFHmFDn]j`jVj[leWiioQPQQJ kDXLFD QPQ] pN\ESOYUHL QPgV qN\HDN ]PJ ^NSXOHG\HTDXMjHLrSDFOl ^FDXSDN QPg _NEYHmIOYUHLJQ _FLNm ]PJ sNDESOYUHLH\YNDHUJPV sHUIOYUHLFDSENXZF\YNDIUMnsWRMoKPQ eHmS\YNDN QPK eLFOYUHLHNEYIUNDN]Qg ]jgjKleLFOYUHLH\YNDHmI\LH\FHDFOSOFXJPQ tuvwxyz{|xv}~vwuu
ttuzww~{~zwxxuz|~|{vxz|
!
"#
$
%&
'
(
)"
" &
*
&+ )
,*-$
.- %
,/
+,
01234562423 7486595012:;23<43612=6563> ?@ABCDEFGHI@J@CKLAMCN OPQRSTU VWX YZPT[\ ]XXWX YRS^RSR XWV _Z`\T[\ ]WX _ZPabScRcPZUdebPT`RXWV _debP`ZSR XWXf ebPbaRS^RSR]XXWX ebPbgbP\ hWX Pb\T[\ VWX Xi_PRQbe jXXWX \i_PRQbe ki_PRQbe _PRQbelcbcZe jlmin ]XWX ]lminTUdebPbaRS^RSRoWV ]ljinTUdebPbRcdZSRX ]l]inTUdebPbRcdpeRSRXWo jlminTSTcPbcbe[RSRXW]f qS`PTS XWXj rRkcZUdebPsZS`TcQRkbtT`RuXWXXv tZUdebPbaRS^RSRXW]f tZUdebPba[cZ`TRSRXWV tZUdebPbRcdZSRfWX wRZ` VWX wTS`ZSR XWm xRPU[Pp XWj cdbtpUdebP ]XWX cdpeRcdpeyRcbSRjXXWX zTcPbaRS^RSR jWX {RScZUdebPbkdRSbe]XXWX {pPT`TSR VWX |ReRST[\ ]WX |Te}RP VWX ~RcPZUdebPbRcdpeRSRXWo ~btZkdRSR XWV ~PTUdebPbRcdpeRSRXWV jlmlVi~PTUdebPbkdRSbemXXWX lhi~PTUdebPbkdRSbejWX lVi~{s|Te}Rtu] TSpe_debPT`R XWj
TIJUANA RIVER SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT WORK PLAN
Funding provided by State Coastal Conservancy through Proposition 68 California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018 resources Appendix D
Glossary of Regulatory Terms, Pertinent Agencies, and
Applicable Legislation Regulatory Guidelines
General
Upland is defined as any area out of the water (above the higher high tide line or approximately +7 feet relative to the North American Vertical Datum in tidal locations and above the ordinary high water mark and outside of special aquatic sites in riverine systems) and not on the beach. Inland and fresh/brackish waters include rivers, lakes, non-tidal wetlands, and connecting waters. Coastal and estuarine waters include tidal waters, waters extending from the baseline (as defined by the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, Clean Water Act Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations 230.3) to 3 nautical miles offshore, also called the territorial sea.
Open ocean is defined as commencing 3 nautical miles offshore to 12 nautical miles offshore and beyond, also called the contiguous zone (USACE and EPA 2004).
Federal
Federal legislation that may apply to sediment management activities in the Valley is presented below.
Legislation
Rivers and Harbors Act (Section 10) - Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 established the regulatory structure for dredging and related construction. USACE was designated as the lead agency to review and approve construction permits “for any work or structure, including fill material discharges, in navigable waters of the United States” (USACE and EPA 2004). The goal of the permitting system is to safeguard federal navigation from unfavorable effects of private in-water construction (USACE and EPA 2004).
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 - NEPA pertains to federal projects that may cause considerable environmental impact and is applicable to all types of beneficial use and disposal regardless of their locations. It requires federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision-making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed plans and/or actions and their reasonable alternatives. Permits authorized by USACE fall under this regulation. Therefore, dredging, beneficial use, and disposal of dredged and fill material must comply with NEPA. Alternatives for a new project must be developed and evaluated in either an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. An environmental assessment is a concise document that either results in a Finding of No Significance or, if environmental impacts are apparent, an environmental impact statement.
An environmental impact statement is similar to an environmental assessment but requires a more in-depth review of cumulative impacts and reasonable alternatives. As part of the NEPA process, the document will go out for public comment (USACE and EPA 2004).
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) - The MPRSA, also known as the Ocean Dumping Act, governs disposal into the open ocean or territorial sea. It is “the primary Federal environmental statue governing transportation of dredged material to the ocean for the purpose of disposal” (USACE and EPA 2004).
The MPRSA overlaps with the Clean Water Act (CWA); formerly the federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, jurisdiction and precedence is defined by the function of disposal. Material dredged, transported, and placed within the territorial sea for purposes of disposal is regulated under MPRSA. If the material is placed within the territorial sea for purposes other than disposal such as beach nourishment, island creation, underwater berms, and aquatic habitat enhancement, the activity is regulated as fill placement under the CWA (USACE and EPA 2004). EPA has primary responsibility under Section 102 of MPRSA to authorize ocean dumping for all substances except dredged material. In the case of dredged material, EPA establishes D-1
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
MARCH 2023
environmental criteria and selects disposal site locations in consultation with USACE. Section 103 tasks USACE with the authority to authorize disposal of dredged material and any related excavated sediment in the open ocean. Permit applications are evaluated against EPA criteria, economic and industrial development considerations, navigation impacts, available beneficial use alternatives, and foreign and domestic commerce effects. EPA reviews permit determinations, especially focusing on environmental impacts, and has veto authority (USACE and EPA 2004). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) advises USACE regarding habitat/biological resources protected under the MPRSA such as fisheries.
Clean Water Act (CWA) of 1977 – The CWA is the chief statute that governs beneficial use and disposal in the inland and estuarian waters of the United States and fill (not disposal) in the territorial sea. Section 404 of the CWA organizes the regulatory structure similarly to MPRSA. EPA has the primary responsibility to develop environmental guidelines that protect the waters of the United States from negative outcomes. USACE is tasked with evaluating and permitting beneficial use projects in the inland and estuarian waters and the territorial sea, in addition to disposal of material in the inland and estuarian waters. USACE assesses permit applications using EPA guidelines. EPA reviews permit determinations as part of their environmental oversight authority and retains veto power (USACE and EPA 2004). Enforcement of permit stipulations is the joint responsibility of EPA and USACE (USACE and EPA 1998).
Section 401 of the CWA declares that any projects permitted by USACE and discharging material into the waters of the United States also require state water quality certifications to ensure that those projects are meeting water quality standards of the state (Table 6-1) where the construction is occurring (USACE and EPA 2004).
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that a discharge of any pollutant or combination of pollutants to surface waters that are deemed waters of the United States be regulated by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permitting requirements cover runoff discharged from point (e.g., industrial outfall discharges) and non-point (e.g., stormwater runoff) sources. In California, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit regulations are encompassed into the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR), which are written and enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board and RWQCBs as part of their Basin Plans (see Porter Cologne Act).
Coastal Zone Management Act - Directs states with a coast to create a coastal management program that will coordinate with USACE through the permitting process.
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act of 1958 – Establishes the policy that wildlife conservation is to be given equal consideration with other water resources development. The act requires any federal agency or permittee proposing to modify a water body to consult with USFWS and other appropriate state agencies.
Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) of 1973 – The FESA protects threatened and endangered species and their habitats. Section 7(c) of FESA requires that any federal agency authorizing, funding, or carrying out an action that “may negatively affect” (referred to as “take” within the FESA) a federally listed threatened or endangered species or its critical habitat consult with the USFWS and NMFS prior to commencing with the action. In the event a threatened or endangered species is present, an Incidental Take Statement will be required from USFWS and or NMFS, which includes the extent to which a proposed action will result in harm to a threatened or endangered species and recommended mitigation measures.
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
MARCH 2023 D-2
Section 10 of FESA allows an individual or private citizen to “take” a listed species by acquiring an Incidental Take Permit, administered by USFWS/NMFS.
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) – The MBTA is a federal statute enforced by USFWS that implements treaties with several countries on the conservation and protection of migratory birds. MBTA prohibits the take of migratory birds except under a valid permit. “Take” as defined in MBTA is less general than that in FESA and as a result MBTA authority does not extend to activities beyond the nests, eggs, feathers, or specific bird parts. Migratory birds are not necessarily federally listed endangered or threatened birds under FESA. The list of bird species covered by the MBTA is extensive and is detailed in Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 10.13.
The regulatory definition of “migratory bird” is broad and includes any mutation or hybrid of a listed species, including any part, egg, or nest of such a bird (Title 50 Code of Federal Regulations Section 10.12).
National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 – Requires identification of all National Register of Historic Places or eligible properties in a project area and development of mitigation measures for those adversely affected. The act mandates USACE to solicit comments from the Federal and State Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (also referred to Section 106 consultation) and evaluate any historic object in the environmental impact report/ environmental impact statement prior to approval of a permit.
Federal Water Project Recreation Act – Requires consideration of opportunities for outdoor recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement in planning water resource projects.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) - Governs upland disposal in an existing landfill. RCRA is a conglomerate of federal laws and regulations governing the generation, storage, treatment, and disposal of nonhazardous and hazardous solid waste. EPA is authorized as the lead agency to produce policy and regulations that the states then implement. RCRA bans the unrestricted disposal of waste; therefore, dredged or excavated material would need to be placed in an existing landfill, or a new landfill would need to go through NEPA and RCRA permitting. This report assumes that projects will use an existing landfill. Therefore, a permitted landfill that accepts the material may be used (EPA 2022).
Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act – The Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, commonly referred to as the Magnuson–Stevens Act (MSA), is the legislation providing for the management of marine fisheries in U.S. waters. Originally enacted in 1976 to assert control of foreign fisheries that were operating as close as 12 nautical miles off the U.S. coast, the legislation has since been amended, in 1996 and 2007, to better address the twin problems of overfishing and overcapacity (i.e., too much fishing power). These ecological and economic problems arose in the domestic fishing industry as it grew to fill the vacuum left by departing foreign fishing fleets.
Eight regional fishery management councils, composed of representatives of the fishing industry and state fishery officials, prepare fishery management plans for approval and implementation by the NMFS, which is an agency within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, a part of the Department of Commerce. The plans are amended frequently to adjust management policies and measures to changes in fish stock abundance and to meet the goals of the MSA as they are revised by Congress. Acting on behalf of the secretary of commerce, who is responsible for implementing the MSA's mandates, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration administrator must determine whether a council's proposed plan amendment or adjustment meets the MSA's national standards. These standards require that management measures actually prevent overfishing, are based on the best scientific information available, and are fair and equitable. If allocations of allowable catches are
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
MARCH 2023 D-3
necessary to prevent overfishing or rebuild overfished stocks, such allocation schemes do not allow sectors of the industry to obtain an excessive share.
Federal Antidegradation Policy – The Federal Antidegradation Policy (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 131.12) requires states to develop and implement statewide antidegradation policies. State antidegradation policies and implementation methods must, at a minimum, protect and maintain (1) existing instream water uses; (2) water quality, where the quality of the waters exceeds levels necessary to support existing beneficial uses (unless the state finds that allowing lower water quality is necessary to accommodate economic and social development in the area); and (3) water quality in waters considered an outstanding national resource. No water quality degradation is permitted in waters classified as an outstanding national resource (CDPR 2021).
Regulatory Agencies and Permits
Regulatory agencies and their relative individual permits are addressed in this section. For any of the sediment pathways described in Section 5, an assortment of permits will be required prior to commencing any work. Some permits such as a Section 404/10 permit from USACE are widely applicable as they pertain to actions such as dredging or excavation that are required regardless of the sediment pathway. Other permits are project specific, and applicability may vary depending on the chosen sediment pathway and other specific aspects such as location.
USACE
USACE will be the primary federal permitting agency for sediment management projects. They are primarily responsible for navigation and protection of aquatic resources under Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the CWA, and thus issue Sections 10 and 404 permits.
Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit and Rivers and Harbors Act Section 10 Permit The following section only describes the Sections 10 and 404 Permits as typically only a single permit decision, pursuant to both authorities, is required.
Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act regulates the discharge of fill material within waters of the United States. Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act similarly regulates obstruction or alteration of navigable waters of the United States. For beach nourishment projects, compliance involves demonstration that the sediment proposed for placement will not degrade water quality, closely matches the sediment grain size of the receiver beach sediment, contains a minimum quantity of silt and clay, and is free of contaminants. Sediment sampling and testing of the proposed source sediment and the beach receiver site must be performed to demonstrate compatibility; review and approval of the sediment testing program and results is the responsibility of the EPA.
Additional requirements include the submittal and implementation of a detailed pre- and post-monitoring report.
EPA
EPA advises USACE on compliance with 404(b)(1) guidelines and on sediment/water quality and impacts to habitat/biological resources, concurs on MPRSA issues, and has joint enforcement authority for the CWA. They are also the lead agency responsible for regulating upland disposal of non-hazardous and hazardous waste under RCRA.
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
MARCH 2023 D-4
USFWS
USFWS advises USACE regarding habitat/biological resources, specifically wildlife and fisheries protected by the FESA and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. They conduct a Section 7 Consultation for USACE and issue a biological opinion that USACE can use to quantify impacts and any mitigation measures. In the event a threatened or endangered species is present, an Incidental Take Statement will be required for inclusion in the biological opinion. Additionally, USFWS is responsible for issuing ESA Section 10 Permits also known as Incidental Take Permits.
Federal Endangered Species Act Section 10 Permit
In the event a proposed project may result in take of a threatened or endangered species not associated with another federal action (i.e., USACE 404/10 Permit), an ESA Section 10 permit, also known as Incidental Take Permit, is required. Note that most sediment management activities will require a USACE permit, in which case a Section 10 permit would not apply. In the case that a Section 10 permit is required, an applicant must develop a habitat conservation plan. At a minimum, the habitat conservation plan must include an assessment of the likely impacts on protected species, measures that will be taken to mitigate potential impacts, an analysis of alternative mitigation efforts, potential funding sources, and a plan to monitor and manage species and their habitats.
Typically, the NEPA/California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process will identify the potential need for a habitat conservation plan in California (USFWS 2016).
National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service NMFS advises USACE regarding habitat/biological resources, specifically fisheries protected under the MPRSA and MSA, and some endangered species protected under the FESA. Specifically, NMFS is responsible for all marine species listed under the FESA (all other species are the responsibility of USFWS). Similar to USFWS, NMFS conducts Section 7 consultations and administers ESA Section 10 permits (see above) for relevant species.
State
State legislation that may apply to sediment management activities in the Valley is presented below.
Legislation
California Coastal Act of 1976 – The California Coastal Act requires the state to consider actions within the Coastal Zone (roughly one mile inland and along the perimeters of wetlands and embayments). The act served to form the California Coastal Commission (CCC) to assess and enforce provisions of the act. The act also includes provisions for local agencies (cities) to prepare their own local coastal programs (LCPs) to cover actions anticipated within the boundaries of their coastal zone and make local determinations. The state can consider certain local decisions if they address actions within certain “appealable areas.” The CCC is a state agency within the California Natural Resources Agency with quasi-judicial control of land and public access along the state's 1,100 miles (1,800 kilometers) of coastline. The CCC's mission is defined in the California Coastal Act, including to "protect" and "enhance" California's coast. Protection of coastal resources includes shoreline public access and recreation, lower cost visitor accommodations, terrestrial and marine habitat
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
MARCH 2023 D-5
protection, visual resources, and regulation of agricultural lands, commercial fisheries, and industrial infrastructure. By regulating land use within a defined "coastal zone" extending inland from 3,000 feet (910 meters) up to 5 miles (8.0 kilometers), it has the authority to control construction of any type, including buildings, housing, roads, and fire and erosion abatement structures, and can issue fines for unapproved construction. It has been called the single most powerful land-use authority in the United States due to its purview over vast environmental assets and extremely valuable real estate.
The California Coastal Act has particularly stringent regulations pertaining to coastal wetlands, requiring most projects to instill buffers or avoid them entirely. Specifically, the act limits the diking, dredging, or filling of wetlands to certain allowable uses, and these are only permitted “where there is no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative and where feasible mitigation measures have been provided to minimize adverse environmental effects” (California Coastal Act Section 30233, as referenced in CDPR 2021).
Porter Cologne Water Quality Act – The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act is the pioneering clean water act of California that expanded the enforcement authority of the State Water Resources Control Board and the nine RWQCB. The act provided for the California Environmental Protection Agency to create the local boards and better protect water rights and water quality. The act requires the RWQCBs to create Basin Plans, which identify beneficial uses (recreation, drinking water, agriculture, etc.), establish goals to protect beneficial uses, and create a program to achieve those goals for each water body in their jurisdiction. The plans must be reviewed and updated every 3 years. Within the Basin Plans the RWQCBs create WDR, which encompass all discharges that “could affect the quality of the state.” A permit is required from the RWQCBs to ensure compliance with the most up to date WDR.
California Ocean Protection Act – The California Ocean Protection Act was signed into law in 2004, establishing the California Ocean Protection Trust Fund and the Ocean Protection Council. As amended in 2011, the act is also a tool in assisting city governments to plan for climate change adaptation and SLR.
The Ocean Protection Council seeks to improve management, conservation, and protection of coastal waters and ocean ecosystems by:
Coordinating activities of state agencies that are related to the ocean and coasts to improve the effectiveness of state efforts to protect ocean resources Establishing policies to coordinate the collection and sharing of scientific data related to ocean and coastal resources between agencies
Identifying and recommending to the changes in law and related actions to the governor and legislature The California Ocean Protection Act implements policies specifically related to climate change adaptation. The act mandates the provision of funding for adaptive management, planning, coordination, monitoring, research, and other necessary activities to minimize the adverse impacts of climate change on California's ocean ecosystem, including, but not limited to, the effects of SLR, changes in ocean productivity, and ocean acidification on coastal and ocean habitat, wildlife, fisheries, chemistry, and other key attributes of ocean ecosystems, and to increase the state's understanding of the ocean's role in carbon sequestration.
Specifically, it mandates that adaptive management strategies, planning, research, monitoring, or other activities shall be designed to improve the management of coastal and ocean resources or aid the state to adapt to climate change impacts. Further, the act calls for increasing the amount of baseline scientific and geospatial information MARCH 2023 D-6
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
that is available to public agencies in a publicly accessible, electronic, and geospatial format—specifically with respect to the effects of climate change on coastal and ocean ecosystems.
The California Ocean Protection Act also created the institutional and financial structures needed for older, unimplemented policies to be enacted, such as the Marine Life Protection Act (1999) and the Marine Life Management Act (1999). The Marine Life Protection Act mandated the creation of 124 interconnected marine protected areas based on comprehensive mapping and ecosystem-based marine spatial planning.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) – CEQA is a California statute passed in 1970 and signed in to law by Governor Ronald Reagan, shortly after the United States federal government passed NEPA, to institute a statewide policy of environmental protection. CEQA makes environmental protection a mandatory part of every California state and local (public) agency's decision-making process, and as a result all state and local level permits mentioned in this document must be CEQA compliant. It has also become the basis for numerous lawsuits concerning public and private projects.
CEQA does not directly regulate land uses, but instead requires state and local agencies within California to follow a tiered protocol of analysis and public disclosure of environmental impacts of proposed projects and, in a departure from NEPA, adopt all feasible measures to mitigate those impacts. From the analysis protocol, an appropriate level of environmental impact assessment review is performed that is commensurate with the project’s scope of work, prior background record, perceived impact potential, and stakeholder interest. The project may undergo one of four levels of review with increasingly stringent mitigation requirements for each level.
A project falls under the first level and is considered “Exempt” if the proposal can be viewed with certainty that it will have no significant adverse impact on the environment. If there is a perception that some impacts may occur, an initial study is performed to make a preliminary assessment of significance based upon a checklist of prescribed environmental review categories. From this analysis, the initial study may then conclude one of the following:
Negative Declaration – There are no significant impacts or impacts are all considered less than significant. No mitigation measures are necessary.
Mitigated Negative Declaration – Potentially significant impacts may be identified, but these impacts could be mitigated to less than significant through adoption and implementation of specific mitigation measures. As a result, project related impacts would be considered less than significant with mitigation implementation.
Environmental Impact Report – Any impacts identified that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level trigger preparation of a detailed environmental impact report that considers impacts, mitigations, and alternatives to the proposed project.
When a project is subject to federal and state/local jurisdiction typically a joint document can be written to satisfy both NEPA and CEQA requirements. However, agency coordination is advised as NEPA and CEQA requirements are slightly different.
Opportunistic beach nourishment projects may generally be considered as requiring CEQA review under a mitigated negative declaration. Mitigation measures are proposed for implementation before, during, and/or after the nourishment activity with the intent of reducing anticipated environmental impacts. Specific mitigation measures that may be proposed include best management practices that specify construction procedures to be followed and equipment operation and maintenance practices to be employed. Generally, this type of mitigation MARCH 2023 D-7
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
action is intended to address potential air quality and noise impacts. Significantly more expensive monitoring programs have been invoked on many past opportunistic beach nourishment projects to verify that the construction operations and the resultant nourishment volume that is placed does not adversely impact adjacent beaches, recreational surfing, biological resources, or water quality. The longer-term monitoring and reporting requirements can result in higher project cost.
California Endangered Species Act (CESA) – The CESA protects state designated threatened and endangered species. CESA is enforced by CDFW.
California Toxics Rule – The California Toxics Rule was promulgated by EPA to create numeric water quality criteria for priority toxic pollutants within the State of California, as required in the CWA. Specifically, the legislation established acute (i.e., short-term) and chronic (i.e., long-term) standards for pollutants in bodies of water, such as inland surface waters and enclosed bays and estuaries, that are designated by each RWQCB as having beneficial uses protective of aquatic life or human health (CDPR 2021).
California Antidegradation Policy – The California Antidegradation Policy, otherwise known as the Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High-Quality Water in California, was adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board Resolution No. 68-16) in 1968. The policy incorporates and expands upon the minimum water quality requirements established by the federal Antidegradation Policy. Unlike the federal Antidegradation Policy, the California Antidegradation Policy applies to all waters of the state (e.g., includes isolated wetlands and groundwater), not just surface waters. The policy states that whenever the existing quality of a water body is better than the quality established in individual Basin Plans, such high-quality waters must be maintained, and discharges to that water body must not unreasonably affect present or anticipated beneficial uses of such water resources. The policy also states any discharge of waste to high quality waters are subject to compliance with WDR (CDPR 2021).
Regulatory Agencies and Permits
California Coastal Commission
The CCC enforces consistency with the California Coastal Act, specifically public access and recreation, habitat/biological resources, sediment transport, impacts to water quality, traffic, air quality, and noise. They are responsible for issuing a Coastal Development Permit for projects within state jurisdiction including cities that do not have an approved LCP (see California Coastal Act).
Coastal Development Permit
The California Coastal Act of 1976 established the statewide program requirement to obtain a state permit for any development or work within the coastal zone so that existing resources and public uses are protected.
Applications must demonstrate that the excavation, conveyance, and placement of source sediment at a receiver site complies with a broad spectrum of policies and guidelines that are outlined in the act. Protection of biological resources, preservation of public access, public acceptance of the project proposal, and minimization of temporary or permanent environmental impacts associated with sand placement are the key assessment criteria commonly involved when reviewing beach nourishment projects.
MARCH 2023 D-8
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CDFW protects and manages the public's fish and wildlife resources of the state. Advises state agencies regarding habitat/biological resources, specifically wildlife and fisheries, and issues 1600-1601 Streambed Alteration Agreements and CESA incidental take permits for state listed species. 1600-1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement
A Streambed Alteration Agreement may be required if the receiver site is at or adjacent to an existing river mouth or streambed and may affect that stream.
California Endangered Species Act Incidental Take Permit 2081(b) A CESA Incidental Take Permit 2081(b) is required if there is a likelihood of taking a state listed species.
If a species is listed by both the FESA and the CESA, California Fish and Game Code Section 2080.1 allows an applicant who has obtained federal Section 7 consultation or a federal Incidental Take Permit to request that the director of CDFW find the federal documents consistent with CESA. If the federal documents are found to be consistent with CESA, a consistency determination is issued, and no further authorization or approval is necessary under CESA.
California State Lands Commission
The California State Lands Commission maintains jurisdiction of lands waterward of the mean high tide line including habitat/biological resources, public access and recreation, sediment transport, water quality, and related issues with traffic, air quality, and noise. They are responsible for issuing a Lease of State Lands for projects within state jurisdiction not already possessing a lease. However, if a public benefit will result from the project proposal, rental fees are usually waived. For beach nourishment projects, the procedure can be nominal and consist of a relatively simple determination from the commission to verify the beneficial nature of the renourishment thereby exempting it from any further action.
Lease of State Lands
A Lease of State Lands is necessary for any work occurring below the mean high tide line. Prior to placement of sand below the mean high tide line a mean high tide line survey is required. Additional surveys may be required every few years for long-term programs. Supplemental maps and CAD drawing files of the survey may also be required.
California State Department of Parks and Recreation
State Parks manages state beach parks including habitat/biological resources, access and recreation, sediment transport, and water quality. The department also issues Encroachment Permits for projects within park jurisdiction.
MARCH 2023 D-9
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
Encroachment Permit
An Encroachment Permit will be required if the receiver site is located within a State Park or State Beach, or if access across state property is necessary for project implementation. This program could also require a special use permit or right of entry permit.
State Water Resources Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board is the water pollution control agency of California. It establishes state policy on water quality control and enforces protection of water and sediment quality, and habitat/biological resources within waters of the state. Additional responsibilities include overseeing the legal and financial aspects of the RWQCBs.
Construction General Permit
Projects that disturb 1 or more acres of soil or disturb less than 1 acre are required to obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit. Construction activity subject to this permit includes clearing, grading, and disturbances to the ground such as stockpiling or excavation.
A stormwater pollution prevention plan containing site maps, best management practices, and visual and chemical monitoring programs is required.
Regional/Local
This section includes regional and local legislation that may apply sediment management activities in the Valley.
Regional Water Quality Control Board
Within California there are nine RWQCBs whose jurisdictions are based upon watershed limits. Projects within the Valley fall under the jurisdiction of the San Diego RWQCB. The RWQCB enforces protection of water and sediment quality and habitat/biological resources, and evaluates beneficial reuses of sediment within the regional jurisdiction. It is responsible for implementing the Porter-Cologne Act and CWA within California and issues WDR enrollment and CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certifications.
Section 401 Certification and WDR Enrollment
Section 401 of the federal CWA requires that a state water quality certification be obtained for any project that discharges material into United States waters. The project must be reviewed to ensure that water quality will not be degraded, or sensitive biological resources affected. Limitations on turbidity and sediment toxicity are the primary criteria for assessment.
WDR encompass all discharges that “could affect the quality of the state’s waters.” Requirements are created by considering beneficial uses to be protected, water quality objectives, other waste discharges in the water body, the need to prevent nuisance, and economic considerations.
MARCH 2023 D-10
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
WDR can be written for a specific discharger (individual WDR) or to regulate a similar group of dischargers (general WDR). An individual WDR is written to address the specific discharges of an individual facility and must be renewed over time. A general WDR addresses a common source of discharge and has discharge specific requirements that permitees must meet to be granted coverage under the permit. Typically, if a general WDR is applicable to a project, it is preferred over an individual WDR. In previous projects the RWQCB has combined 401 certification and general WDR enrollment into one document.
Previous projects, such as the Tijuana River Valley Fate and Transport Study utilized the general WDR for dredged or fill discharges to use sediment from the Valley as beach nourishment. However, various sediment pathways may require coverage under additional WDR at their end destination. For example, upland disposal methods including mine reclamation and construction material may require enrollment under a General Permit that regulates stormwater runoff discharges and as a result requires the development of a stormwater pollution prevention plan. The Nelson Sloan Quarry Restoration and Beneficial Re-use of Sediment Project Environmental Impact Report concluded this permit would be necessary for the beneficial reuse of excess sediment excavated from managed sources within the Valley to be used as fill to facilitate the closure of the mine.
San Diego Regional Board Conditional Waivers for Upland Disposal In 2019 the RWQCB established Conditional Waivers of Waste Discharge Requirements for low threat discharges, which may allow for a more streamlined process that eliminates extra requirements from the previously mentioned WDR. Conditional Waivers relevant to the scope of the sediment management plan are applicable to upland disposal options and include Waiver No 8: Discharges of Slurries to land and No 9: Discharges/Disposal of Solid Wastes to Land.
Local Agencies
City Of San Diego
City of San Diego General Plan
Comprised of 10 elements that provide a comprehensive slate of citywide policies, the City of San Diego General Plan (General Plan) is the City’s constitution for development (City of San Diego 2008). The General Plan has a strong sustainability focus and provides local policies to address global climate change. Also, the General Plan furthers the city of villages smart growth strategy for growth and development in San Diego. The plan includes many policies relevant to the scope of the Sediment Management Plan. Sections of relevance include the Land Use & Community Planning Element, Conservation Element, and Historic Preservation Element. Relevant policies and information from these elements are provided below.
Tijuana River Valley Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan and Coastal Development Permit Community plans work together with the General Plan to provide location-based policies and recommendations in the City’s more than 50 community planning areas. Community plans are written to refine the General Plan’s citywide policies, designate land uses and housing densities, and provide additional site-specific recommendations as needed. The Tijuana River Valley Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan is the community plan for City jurisdictional lands in the Tijuana River Valley (City of San Diego 2007). The Tijuana River Valley planning area, including Border Highlands, is located within the California Coastal Zone and, as such, is subject to MARCH 2023 D-11
APPENDIX D/ GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
the regulations of the California Coastal Act of 1976. The LCP has been approved by the CCC and as a result the City of San Diego has the ability to implement Coastal Development Permits within their jurisdiction.
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program and Local Incidental Take Permits The City is one of several jurisdictions participating in the San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program, a comprehensive, regional long-term habitat conservation program. The Multiple Species Conservation Program is a cooperative federal, state, and local program for conservation of native vegetation communities to address the habitat needs of multiple species. It serves as an approved habitat conservation plan pursuant to Section 10(a)(2)(A) of the FESA and the California Natural Communities Conservation Planning Act. The Multiple Species Conservation Program provides permit issuance authority for incidental take of covered species to the local regulatory agencies.
Grading Permit
A grading permit is required for any grading, public right-of-way improvement, construction changes to an existing grading or public improvement permit, site reconnaissance and testing, and as-graded soils reports within City jurisdiction.
City of Imperial Beach
The City of Imperial Beach is significantly smaller than the City of San Diego but has similar responsibilities within their jurisdiction. Like the City of San Diego, the City of Imperial Beach issues Coastal Development Permits and grading permits (see City of San Diego). Given their smaller jurisdiction, the City of Imperial Beach’s General Plan also serves as the LCP and includes sections regarding land use, conservation, and safety, which may be relevant to sediment transport projects.
A Coastal Development Permit is required for any project involving development or repair and maintenance within the City’s coastal boundary. The permit ensures compliance with the City’s local coastal program as approved by the CCC.
County of San Diego
County of San Diego General Plan
The San Diego County General Plan applies to the unincorporated area of the County and is the County’s longterm blueprint for the vision of the future. It reflects an environmentally sustainable approach to planning that balances the need for adequate infrastructure, housing, and economic vitality while maintaining and preserving existing communities, agricultural areas, and open spaces.
Grading Permit
Similar to the Cities, the County administers grading permits within their jurisdiction (see City of San Diego).
MARCH 2023 D-12
APPENDIX D / GLOSSARY OF REGULATORY TERMS, PERTINENT AGENCIES AND APPLICABLE LEGISLATION
REGULATORY GUIDELINES
TIJUANA RIVER SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT WORK PLAN
Funding provided by State Coastal Conservancy through Proposition 68 California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018 resources Appendix E
Example Monitoring Plans
California
5550 Morehouse Drive
San Diego, CA
92121
858-587-7333
Biological Science Monitoring Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Final
August 2008
Prepared by:
Nautilus Environmental, LLC
In collaboration with:
Nordby Biological Consultants
Moffatt & Nichols
Submitted to:
Border Field State Park
Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve
California Coastal Conservancy
Tijuana River Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Biological Science Monitoring Plan
Nautilus Environmental
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. i
1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................1
2.0 Methods ...............................................................................................................................3
2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling................................................................................... 3
2.2 Sand Dollar Bed Monitoring .................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Bird Foraging Behavior Monitoring ...................................................................................... 5
2.4 Review of Nearshore Subtidal Benthic Photographic Data.............................................. 6
3.0 Data Assessment .................................................................................................................7
3.1 Comparisons within Datasets ............................................................................................... 7
3.2 Comparisons Across Data Types......................................................................................... 7
4.0 References...........................................................................................................................8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Shorebird Monitoring Conceptual Schedule ...................................................................6
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 1
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Fine-grained sediment is a natural part of the California nearshore coastal waters, and recent work suggests that approximately 34 million tonnes (Mt) – or roughly 30,000,000 cubic yards – of fine-grained sediment enters California coastal waters each year from coastal watersheds.
Fine-grained sediment may also enter California coastal waters from human activities, including opportunistic use of sediment for beach nourishment, that are subject to a precautionary rule of thumb that sediment with greater than 20% fines (silt and clay) is not appropriate for placement in the nearshore unless additional information exists to show that such placement will not result in environmental degradation. This so-called 80-20 (coarse-to-fine sediment) “rule of thumb” was originally used as a threshold because of concern that pollutants might be attached to the fines in sufficient quantity to pose environmental problems. The rule of thumb is now also applied to “clean” sediment, with extensive/long-lasting turbidity and burial of species/habitat typically cited as the reasons for concern.
Unfortunately, much of the available sediment suitable for opportunistic use does not meet the 80-20 grain-size standard and must be transported inland to landfills at high cost rather than added beneficially to nearby coastal locations to meet needs such as for beach restoration. In order to reevaluate whether this rule of thumb is appropriately protective or overly conservative, a small demonstration project is proposed to provide the physical and biological data needed to assess when sediment with greater that 20% fines is used for opportunistic reuse.
The CDPR, in partnership with the California State Coastal Conservancy (SCC), the California Coastal Sediment Management Workgroup (CSMW), the TRNERR, and the Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association are proposing to implement a Sediment Fate and Transport Study (“Science Study”) primarily within Border Field State Park (BFSP) at the TRNERR. The proposed project would utilize sorted sediment obtained from the Goat Canyon sediment basins, and include transportation and deposition of 60,000 cubic yards of this sediment to designated areas on the beach south of the Tijuana River mouth. Sediment would be sorted at an existing staging area and transported from the staging area near Goat Canyon to the beach approximately 0.5 miles south of the Tijuana River mouth. Sediment would be transported via haul truck along a dirt road that serves as a horse trail (horse trail road), to the beach. Sediment transport would commence in the fall/winter of 2008/2009 and placement of the material in the nearshore would occur during periods of fall/winter mid and low tides. Dispersion of the placed materials in the oceanic environment would then be monitored by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) according to the proposed Science Study to determine whether any adverse impacts would arise from the use of the sorted sediments. Results of the Science Study regarding the
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 2
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
transport and fate of fine grained sediments in the surf zone would be published as a USGS professional paper.
The Physical Monitoring Science Plan has been generated by USGS scientists (Warrick et al. 2008) to address the following pending questions about fine-grained sediment in California nearshore waters:
• What are the transport pathways and fate of fine-grained sediment introduced at the coastal shoreline?
• How do environmental and project variables, such as sediment placement volume, percent fines, waves, currents, and shelf setting, influence the rates and modes of transport and eventual fate?
USGS monitoring will be accomplished by systematically using seafloor mapping and turbidity plume tracking approaches. Plume tracking data will be obtained using nearshore moored instrumentation, vessel surveys, surf-zone sampling, aerial survey data, and other locally available data (including data from Southern California Coastal Ocean Observation System and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration program sources).
In addition to the physical aspects of the project, placement of fine-grained sediments on California beaches also has the potential to differentially impact the existing biota (in comparison to placement of sediments meeting the 80% criterion). The project site biota include two general habitats of interest with respect to the project: the intertidal area on which the sediments would be placed, the nearshore subtidal areas potentially impacted as sediments are transported offshore by natural processes. Placement of sediments will result in impacts at the disposal site, but the precise effects on neighboring habitat as sediments are washed alongshore and offshore are not known. In addition, impacts to these habitats also have the potential to impact the broader ecological system, in particular that of shorebirds which feed upon intertidal invertebrates. This Biological Monitoring Science Plan has been developed to assess these basic biological parameters of interest as identified by project scientists, the public (received during the Mitigated Negative Declaration public hearing process), and regulatory agency representatives. The Biological Monitoring Science Plan seeks to address the following questions:
• Is the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna of the beach impacted in the long-term by sediment placement? What are the spatial dimensions of the impact?
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 3
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
• Are offshore sand dollar beds impacted by the sediment placement, either in terms of the spatial band they inhabit or in terms of the population size-frequency distribution? • Are bird foraging patterns influenced by the project? • Can underwater photographic/video data collected as part of the physical monitoring effort be used to establish qualitative nearshore benthic invertebrate population data?
These questions will be addressed by using several types of surveying techniques, including benthic macroinvertebrate core sampling, conducting SCUBA diver transects, performing bird surveys, and reviewing other available project data (e.g. seafloor photographic data).
2.0 METHODS
Biological data collection will be conducted on a year-round basis, with particular attention focused on the late spring through fall period. This period is targeted due to timing of the threatened and endangered bird species nesting period (e.g., snowy plover and least tern), the seasonality of coastal environments (which typically climax during summer months), and health and safety concerns regarding water contact during the wet season.
2.1 Benthic Macroinvertebrate Sampling
This portion of the investigations will initially focus on two time frames: mid-summer (July) and fall (October-November). The sediment placement site is located approximately equidistant from both the U.S.-Mexico border and the Tijuana River mouth. This geographical setting lends itself to an experimental design which assesses the impact site as well as near-field control areas to the north and south. In addition, far-field control areas are available further to the north within the Silver Strand littoral cell (intervening areas consisting of either cobble back beach or rip-rap armored upper intertidal conditions which were excluded from consideration as control areas).
The sampling will therefore consist of four sampling sites: control south (500 to 1000 ft south of the southerly placement boundary (32 32'33.26" N, 117 07'29.95" W), the placement site, control north (32 32'58.08" N, 117 07'37.03 W), and a Silver Strand control location in the vicinity of the entrance gate to Silver Strand State Beach. Each of the four sites will be sampled with at least 5 replicate transects running perpendicular to the shoreline. Each transect will be designated randomly within a 100-meter length of beach, with a minimum 10-meter separation.
Three tidal zones will be established for each transect (as measured horizontally from the high tide line: upper from 10 to 30 meters, middle from 30 to 50 meters, and lower from 50 to 70 meters), and three replicate 6-inch diameter cores will be sampled from each zone. Within each
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 4
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
of these zones, a uniform area of sandy substrate will be sampled to a depth of approximately 20 centimeters and sieved through a 1-millimeter (mm) mesh following general techniques identified in Dugan et al. 2003. Each of the 9 cores collected from within individual transects will function as independent experimental units, but it is anticipated that these data will be pooled as part of the statistical analysis. The approximate area sampled per transect will be 0.16 m2.
Organisms retained in the mesh will be transferred to a container containing seawater and magnesium sulfate added to prevent predation of the retained individuals. Shortly thereafter, samples will be preserved with ethanol and/or pH neutral-buffered formalin solution. Wet-weight biomass will also be determined separately for the different gross taxonomic groups (e.g., bivalves, polychaetes, etc.). Although organism abundance will be assessed for gross taxonomic groups (and for key species such as Emerita analoga), species identification is not contemplated at this time. Fixed and preserved subsamples of polychaetes, small crustaceans, and other soft-bodied organisms will be retained for a maximum of 2 years following collection.
A 10-meter offset from the most recent higher high tide line (as indicated by fresh wrack) was incorporated into the sampling design based on anticipated pattern of project-related heavy vehicle access (which will not be allowed of contractors above the most recent wrack line) and to avoid the confounding factor of beach hoppers (a proportion of which are likely to escape capture and enumeration, J. Duggan pers. comm. with J. Crooks) (and see Dugan 2003, where wrack-associated macrofauna were generally segregated). The 70-meter extent of each transect coincided with the approximate width of the beach (from wrack line to upper swash zone at low tide) at all locations except for the Silver Strand control, which exhibited a very slight slope in the very low intertidal. Calculation of abundance and biomass will therefore be calculable on a scale approximating that used in Dugan 2003; but since the upper intertidal is not ancticipated to be sampled (i.e., to the High Water Line or foot of dune vegetation), data will not be directly comparable.
2.2 Pismo Clam Monitoring
Pismo clams (Tivela stultorum) are well known to inhabit the Silver Strand littoral cell. It is expected that if Tivela is found to be a dominant species, it would be evident in the benthic macroinvertebrate sampling data. However, limited information is available on the clam’s distribution, and it is further likely that the distribution varies in space and time. In an effort to further assess potential impacts on this important fishery species, an additional qualitative visual survey of the project area will be made to estimate the prevalence of this species at the project site. The visual surveys will be undertaken during the benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring and will consist of visually assessing the low intertidal for live or freshly mortal individuals or
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 5
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
fragments thereof. 100-foot 3-meter band transects (parallel with the shoreline at the approximate mean lower low water line) will serve as the basic survey unit. At least 3 replicate areas will be qualitatively surveyed in each of the four monitoring areas.
2.3 Sand Dollar Bed Monitoring
Sand dollars (Dendraster excentricus) beds are known to occur just offshore the sediment placement site (AMEC 2007) at depths of approximately –15 to –20 ft MLLW. Due to the mobile nature of sand dollars, the highly dynamic nature of the habitat from wave action, and the seasonal deposition of fines during the wet season (from the Tijuana River discharge), the population dynamics are not expected to be impacted by project-related deposition of fine particulates. However, qualitative monitoring will be undertaken as part of this monitoring program to document any project impacts. Baseline data consisting of the spatial distribution of sand dollars collected in the summer of 2008 will be confirmed in the summer of 2009. In addition, size-frequency data will be collected.
The three areas identified above for benthic invertebrate sampling at the project site will be paired with nearshore sampling areas and diver transects used to document the distribution of Dendraster with depth. Due to the extremely poor visibility in the nearshore zone (even during calm weather), the upper and lower bathymetric contours which bound the main Dendraster population will be determined using tactile means. Size frequency data will be determined by collecting a grab sample of approximately 100 individuals from each transect and measuring the maximum diameter of each individual (to within 2 mm) (methodology similar to that in Dexter 1978).
2.4 Bird Foraging Behavior Monitoring
The beaches of southern California act as a wintering ground for several species of shorebirds, e.g., sanderlings, willets, marbled godwits, and black-bellied plovers. Shorebirds are sensitive to disturbances on the beaches and to changes in food supplies. Therefore deposition of sand on the beaches may influence their distribution, abundance and foraging activities. The purpose of this portion of the Biological Monitoring Plan is to monitor shorebird numbers in and around the sediment placement site, and to provide information on the potential impact of beach sediment deposition on the distribution, abundance and foraging of these birds.
Shorebird monitoring will be conducted along eight 0.5 mile-long beach transects. The location of these transects is similar to those being used for the intertidal invertebrate monitoring, i.e., the placement site, the near-field control areas to the north and south of the impact site, and farPage 940 of 957 Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 6
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
Table 1. Shorebird Monitoring Conceptual Schedule
Site (Distance1)
Time Period:
Month:
Monitoring Event Number:
Before
Placement
During
Placement
(3 Events)
After Placement
September
November,
December,
January
March/April
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6
Control South (0.5) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Placement (0) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control North (0.5) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control IB – 1 (1.0) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control IB – 2 (1.5) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control IB – 3 (2.0) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control IB – 4 (3.25) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Control IB – 5 (3.75) ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
1 Parenthetical value is approximate distance from placement site in miles. field control areas to the north. However the surveys will also include a few very far-field control areas, i.e., more sites that are farther away from the placement site in order to more accurately measure the extent of the impact, e.g. Silver Strand.
Each site will be monitored four times before sand deposition, three times during sand deposition (anticipated to be once per placement event), and six times after sand deposition.
Surveys will be conducted weekly and each will be at least one week apart. A proposed monitoring schedule is presented below.
2.5 Review of Nearshore Subtidal Benthic Photographic Data The Physical Monitoring Science Plan identifies collection of benthic photographic data as part of their program. The first video transect monitoring occurred in May 2008; the effort is scheduled to be repeated again in May 2009. These records may be suitably detailed to assess the presence/absence of meiofauna (large invertebrates such as sea pens, crustacean burrows, etc.). Review of these data sources will be undertaken and qualitatively described in order to document the nearshore benthic community and any apparent impacts of the project. For the purposes of this study, review of photographs or video will be focused on the nearshore portion of the project site and to areas for which multiple video transects are/will be available.
Bathymetric features of interest will also be targeted such that several habitat types are
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 7
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
assessed for potential impacts with respect to biota. It is also recognized that specific areas, particularly those in shallow depths affected by wave-generated sediment resuspension, may be unsuitable for review due to poor recovery of image data.
3.0 DATA ASSESSMENT
3.1 Comparisons within Datasets
The experimental design incorporated into the proposed monitoring scheme will allow for comparisons between impact and control areas at discrete points in time. Data will be assessed using statistics appropriate for “before, after, control, impact” (BACI) designs. In addition, by studying post-placement data through time, benthic community recovery and post-placement shorebird foraging habitat utilization will be assessed as well.
Sand dollar populations will be assessed by comparing basic population parameters in space and time, and reviewing data to available local historical information (e.g., Dexter 1978).
However, the lack of baseline information in the scientific literature at the project site, complexities of Dendraster population biology (relating primarily to the planktonic larval stage), and limited nature of the proposed surveys will limit the assessment to a level best described as qualitative.
3.2 Comparisons Across Data Types
Data, where possible, will be integrated to provide a unified assessment of the magnitude, if any, of impacts upon marine biological resources. The following assessments will be undertaken to relate the distinct monitoring efforts:
• Intertidal benthic macroinvertebrate population data will be compared to bird foraging data in order to assess whether any changes in food sources are correlated with shorebird foraging behavior.
• Sand dollar data will be compared to nearshore seafloor video/photographic data in order as an indication of the spatial extent of biological impacts upon the benthic invertebrate data, or differential effects upon different benthic communities.
Biological Monitoring Science Plan
Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Study
Nautilus Environmental 8
Biological Monitoring Plan FINAL_v2
4.0 REFERENCES
Dexter, D.M. 1978. The Infauna of a Subtidal, Sand-Bottom Community at Imperial Beach, California. California Fish and Game 64(4):268-279.
Dugan, J.E., D.M Hubbard, M.D. McCrary, and M.O. Pierson. 2003. The Response of Macrofauna Communities and Shorebirds to Macrophyte Wrack Subsidies on Exposed Sandy Beaches of Southern California. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 58:25-40 Warrick, J.A., J. Xu, and D. Rubin. 2008. Physical Monitoring Science Plan; Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Demonstration Project. Coastal and Marine Geology Program, U.S. Geological Survey. 15 April.
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
M&N 10-14-08 1
CONSTRUCTION MONITORING PLAN
TIJUANA ESTUARY SEDIMENT FATE AND TRANSPORT SCIENCE STUDY 10/14/2008
Proposed Monitoring
A primary objective of the program is to assess effects of beach nourishment on area beaches. Construction monitoring data will be one metric used to quantify the project impacts on the environment. The monitoring data will be important in assessing the success of the program in order to make future adjustments for optimization, if appropriate. The following construction monitoring program components are recommended.
1. Sandy Intertidal Monitoring
California grunion are known to spawn on nearby Imperial Beach (USACE 1995).
California grunion spawn at night as the highest tides recede and after approximately two weeks, recently hatched fish larvae are swept out to sea during high tides. California grunion use the upper intertidal habitat of beaches for spawning from late February to early September. Grunion activity is expected to be concentrated from late March to early June, which does not coincide with the proposed project’s implementation schedule.
Therefore, no grunion monitoring is proposed.
Other sandy intertidal fauna are anticipated to be present at the project placement site, including macroinvertebrates. These resources are anticipated to be monitored as part of a separate, long-term Biological Monitoring Plan effort over a period beginning prior to placement and extending post-placement. Monitoring during placement operations is not proposed.
2. Nearshore Sandy Bottom Habitat and Nearshore Reef Monitoring Pre-project biological surveys noted the presence of sand dollar (Dendraster excentricus) beds in the nearshore, in the vicinity of the outer limit of the surf zone direct. Since sand dollars have the ability to move vertically in the sediment and are subject to natural sedimentation events of a far greater magnitude from the Tijuana River, it is anticipated that the population will not be impacted by the project. It is anticipated that the population will be studied separately as part of the long-term Biological Monitoring Plan.
Monitoring during the construction phase will not be undertaken due to the likely exceedance of water quality criteria during the wet season.
Monitoring of nearshore reefs is not recommended for the Border Field State Beach site as a result of the lack of nearshore reefs in the area. The closest nearshore reefs are located to the north of the Tijuana River mouth, well outside the immediate area of impact. These reefs consist of a patchy cobble substrate and sand, an environment which is likely near equilibrium with sedimentation loads flowing into the nearshore from the
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
M&N 10-14-08 2
Tijuana River during the wet season (the average of which are several times the volume of the proposed project). Offshore kelp forest resources are located at a greater distance, and also consist of a cobble substrate. Since nearshore reefs are not present in the immediate vicinity of the project site, and construction will take place during the winter when river discharge may cause bacteriological contamination (and thereby limit water contact), no monitoring is proposed.
3. Snowy Plover Monitoring
It is well known that an over-wintering population of snowy plovers regularly inhabit the dunes south of the Tijuana River slough mouth, and monitoring provisions were included in the project as a mitigation measure for potential impacts (CDPR 2008). A minimum 400-yard buffer south of the slough mouth will be staked and delineated with signs, and all vehicle traffic and primary construction activities shall be prohibited from this area. In addition, a snowy plover biologist will be utilized to both ensure compliance with the mitigation measure and observe plover behavior.
The monitor will be present at the placement site twice weekly during all heavyequipment operations. The monitor shall have the authority to expand the buffer zone up to 600 yards, and suspend work activities if necessary, to ensure protection of snowy plovers.
4. Turbidity
Turbidity will be monitored throughout construction to qualify (as described below) and quantify (as described in the attached Construction Monitoring Plan Addendum prepared by M&N in 2008) the effect on ocean water clarity from the project. Conditions in the area are typically moderately clear in the surf zone due to resuspension. Occasional storms cause high turbidity events due to both increased wave action and discharge of suspended solids from the Tijuana River. The project is anticipated to result in increased turbidity, but the condition will be short-lived, limited to the surf zone, and should diminish shortly after construction activities are halted.
Turbidity will be monitored qualitatively by an observer from a vantage point (such as a bluff top landward of the placement site) noting the extent of turbid conditions. The observer will map the area of turbidity each day on a base map and photograph the turbidity in the ocean. A map will be created by the observer, and they will document all other pertinent environmental conditions such as waves, wind, and weather.
5. Beach Profiling
Beach profiles will be monitored to quantify sand accretion or loss at Border Field State Park beach. The survey is to provide data that enables the State Parks and the City of Imperial Beach to determine the sand gain or loss at the placement site from the project.
A licensed surveyor experienced with the survey methods and the specific project site will generate beach profiles of the site pre- and post-construction. There are two established profiles that will be used for this study (historic profile SS-0003 and SS0005), shown in the attached figure. Tasks for beach profiling include:
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
M&N 10-14-08 3
1) Utilize two existing beach profile transects to document pre- and postconstruction conditions. These transects include one that is located within the beach fill footprint that is designated as SS-0005 and one located just downcoast of the site that is designated as SS-0003. Beach profiles at these transects will be surveyed within 30 days prior to construction, and within 14 days after construction to record pre- and post construction conditions, respectively. 2) Record beach and seabed elevation along the profiles from the back of the beach out to a wading depth of -10 feet relative to mean lower low water. Survey equipment to be used includes standard survey equipment (level, Global Positioning System or GPS, and rod).
3) Reduce data and produce receiver site profiles to compare pre-project with postproject profiles for interpretation and reporting
6. Monitoring Frequency
Monitoring will occur over time from pre- to post-construction as described below. 1) Pre-Project Baseline Monitoring – Surveys of the two beach profiles will occur within one month prior to construction to observe and document the baseline condition.
2) Construction Monitoring – Turbidity will be observed during construction to document project effects on a daily basis. Plover monitoring will be undertaken at times during which heavy equipment is operated at the placement site.
Bacteriological testing, if required, would be undertaken weekly. 3) Post-Construction Monitoring – Beach profile monitoring will occur immediately after construction (within 14 days) to quantify initial project conditions. Beach profiling will occur at two locations as performed before construction. 4) Longer-Term Post-Project Monitoring – Monitoring will continue after construction to quantify project effects. Beach profiles will be recorded twice for one year after construction. They are to be recorded in fall and spring seasons after construction to determine changes and account for the natural seasonality.
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
M&N 10-14-08 4
PROPOSED BEACH PROFILE LOCATIONS (TO SOUTH END)
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
Addendum – Quantitative Turbidity Monitoring Plan Page 1 of 4 Tijuana Estuary Sediment Fate and Transport Science Study Construction Monitoring Plan Addendum - Quantitative Turbidity Monitoring Plan August 2008
Overview
As a supplement to the qualitative turbidity monitoring program detailed in the Construction Monitoring Plan (M&N 2008), additional quantitative turbidity data will be obtained and submitted to the RWQCB. The approach employed for this aspect of the monitoring is to utilize aspects of the Physical Monitoring Science Plan (Science Plan) (USGS 2008) to address turbidity concerns, but also to augment the Science Plan to collect data needed to meet regulatory requirements.
The primary goal of this supplemental effort is to assess (1) the short-term turbidity impacts in terms of compliance with the San Diego Basin Plan and (2) to ensure that beneficial uses of the Pacific Ocean are protected. The guideline for what is considered an impact will be conditions greater than 20% above ambient conditions. Furthermore, it was recognized that the goals need to be assessed on a short-term time frame (24-48 hours). The primary mechanism for meeting these goals will be accomplished by defining the sampling schedule and implementing a reporting procedure.
Methodology for Monitoring and Impact Assessment
Quantitative turbidity measurements described in the Science Plan will be collected pre-, during and post-deposition of sand on the receiving beach during each of the three project phases. This monitoring will be performed by shore and vessel monitoring teams. The vessel team will collect optical turbidity data using a CTD instrument equipped with a laser diffraction particle size analyzer (LISST). These data are one of several types of data being collected as part of the Science Plan. However, LISST data is particularly useful with regard to assessing turbidity due to the relatively quick data processing time and the ability to convert the data to total suspended solids-equivalents. LISST data will be assessed for turbidity impacts at depth of five (5) to 25 meters of the water column. A total of at least ten (10) locations will be sampled within a distance of one (1) kilometer from the source location as shown in Figure 1 below.
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
Addendum – Quantitative Turbidity Monitoring Plan Page 2 of 4 Figure 1: LISST Turbidity Sampling Locations
Data from these boat-based sampling events will be provided in a clear, descriptive manner to the RWQCB via email approximately 24-48 hours after each sampling event along with a summary statement regarding whether significant turbidity impacts have occurred. If turbidity results are discovered to exceed 20% above ambient conditions, the RWQCB would coordinate with the Construction Manager and Engineer to halt or modify placement activities.
Monitoring Plan Schedule
The number of sampling events per phase is described below (all proposed sampling is weather dependant):
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
Addendum – Quantitative Turbidity Monitoring Plan Page 3 of 4 Phase 1 – Consists of deposition of 10,000 cy of sand over a period of approximately 5 to 7 days.
- Pre-deposition sampling - One (1) sampling event 0-3 days before sand deposition (ambient condition).
- During deposition - Two (2) samplings events to take place during active sand deposition on the beach at least one hour following initiation of beach deposition activities. These events are tentatively scheduled to occur on the 2 nd and 4th day of deposition.
- Post-deposition – One sampling event to take place on the third day after sand deposition on the beach has been completed (i.e., end of Phase 1).
Phase 2 - Consists of deposition of 10,000 cy of sand over a period of approximately 5 to 7 days. Monitoring is to replicate Phase 1 monitoring outlined above.
Phase 3 – Consists of deposition of up to 40,000 cy sand over a maximum of 30 days. - Pre-deposition sampling - One (1) sampling event to take place 0-3 days before sand placement.
- During deposition – One (1) sampling event per week resulting in four (4) total sampling events over the deposition period.
- Post-deposition – One (1) sampling event to take place on the third day after sand deposition on the beach has been completed, signifying the end of Phase
3. Results from the sampling would be expedited to the RWQCB (within 24 hours) for their review. If the turbidity results signify that a turbidity plume is still present on the third day (as decided by the RWQCB), a fifth day postdeposition sampling event will be prompted.
Reporting Schedule
LISST data collected by the vessel team will be processed expeditiously following field monitoring. Results from the sampling would be expedited to the RWQCB (within 24-48 hours) for their review. Furthermore, if the turbidity results signify that a turbidity impact condition is still present at the time of the post-deposition sampling (Day 3), subsequent post-deposition sampling monitoring will be prompted on Day 5 to meet the goals of the Science Plan and demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements.
Other data collected as part of the Science Plan (e.g., shoreline monitoring data, aerial photography, long-term optical data, etc.) which quantifies turbidity conditions will be processed using standard reporting times, and will be made available following data validation and receipt of publication authorization.
1660 Hotel Circle North, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 220-6050
Fax (619) 220-6055
Addendum – Quantitative Turbidity Monitoring Plan Page 4 of 4 Reference:
M&N 2008. Proposed Construction Monitoring Plan for the Tijuana Sediment Fate and Transport Study. July 6th.
TIJUANA RIVER SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT WORK PLAN
Funding provided by State Coastal Conservancy through Proposition 68 California Drought, Water, Parks, Climate, Coastal Protection, and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2018 resources Appendix F
Typical 401 Water Quality Certification Permit
Conditions for Beach Nourishment
Projects in San Diego
APPENDIX F / TYPICAL 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PERMIT CONDITIONS FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS IN SAN DIEGO F-1
Table 1. Typical 401 Water Quality Certification Permit Conditions for Beach Nourishment Projects in San Diego, California Line
Item
Example Project Conditions
Tijuana Estuary Fate and Transport RBSP II Preliminary Guidance/Recommendation General Conditions
1 Source Sediment
▪ All sediment being used shall be screened, tested, and treated for trash, fecal coliform bacteria (through aeration and UV exposure as necessary), heavy metals, petroleum distillates and any other contaminants. If treatment does not bring sediment to acceptable usable levels, sediment shall be disposed of at an approved upland disposal site.
▪ Borrow site sediments will meet inland Testing Manual criteria administered by the EPA and USACE and found to be suitable in accordance with the Inland Testing Manual where applicable. ▪ Borrow site sediments will consist of clean sands and silts/clays, with only background levels of metals and nondetectable levels of trace organic contaminants. Sediment used will cause negligible impact to marine organisms. The sand used for replenishment and berm material will be free of trash and anthropogenic debris.
Source Sediment
▪ Borrow site sediments will meet inland Testing Manual criteria administered by the EPA and USACE.
▪ Borrow site sediments will consist of clean sands with only background levels of metals and only trace levels of organic contaminants that EPA/waterboard determine suitable. Sediment used will cause negligible impact to marine organisms. The sand used for replenishment and berm material will be free of trash and anthropogenic debris.
▪ Screening should consider the size of the sieve that excludes large cobbles and debris, but not so small as to add significantly to project duration and costs to the State.
▪ Source sediment will not exceed regulatory limits for metals, organics, or other contaminants.
Construction Best Management Practices
2 Site Access/Traffic
▪ Wet and dry weather haul routes shall be established. ▪ Routes will be monitored and any necessary erosion control measures shall be implemented.
▪ Roads will be restored to existing conditions upon cessation of the proposed project.
▪ Public access to roads during construction will be considered and maintained if needed.
▪ Project traffic control monitors shall be posted at the beach with the authority to turn beach users away during periods of high activity. ▪ Construction activities shall not be conducted if existing conditions indicated such activity would cause a violation of water quality standards at the surf zone. Planned activities shall be postponed until the threat of causing a violation of water quality standards has been abated.
▪ Typical Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented for all projects, and site specific BMPs will be developed for each project. ▪ Equipment should be able to operate on the beach near the low tide line and within the reach of the water as needed to place the material as a low tide linear mound.
Additional Conditions
3 ▪ Work Windows: Construction activities limited to daylight hours. No work takes place on holidays. Work should be avoided on holiday weekends. ▪ Assume no compensatory mitigation will be required. ▪ Beach nourishment is considered self-mitigating as it will restore sand based marine habitat and recreational opportunities.
Monitoring Requirements
4 ▪ Monitoring Plan- Permittee must develop and implement a Monitoring Plan for the Project to evaluate potential project impacts from proposed beach replenishment activity at the designated surf zone areas. ▪ Monitoring Plan must qualitatively assess potential changes in water quality visually from a vantage point (Monument Mesa) during beach replenishment.
▪ Monitoring Plan- Permittee must develop and implement a Monitoring Plan for the Project to evaluate potential project impacts from proposed dredge and beach replenishment activity at the borrow sites and the designated surf zone areas.
▪ Monitoring Plan must measure potential changes in water quality during dredging and beach replenishment.
▪ Monitoring Plan must qualitatively assess potential changes in water quality visually from a vantage point during beach replenishment. Thresholds to shut down construction should be flexible enough to provide for exceptions considering the short-term nature of the impact and results of the TJFTS project monitoring. 14010
March 2023
APPENDIX F / TYPICAL 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PERMIT CONDITIONS FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS IN SAN DIEGO F-2
Table 1. Typical 401 Water Quality Certification Permit Conditions for Beach Nourishment Projects in San Diego, California Line
Item
Example Project Conditions
Tijuana Estuary Fate and Transport RBSP II Preliminary Guidance/Recommendation 5 Visual Monitoring
▪ Visual Observations shall be made daily, recorded, and submitted for each period of nourishment activities.
▪ Observations shall include:
i. Speed and direction of the currents;
ii. Tidal stage;
iii. Appearance of rubbish, trash, or any other solid waste; iv. Appearance of oil or other materials of petroleum origin; v. Discoloration and extent of any visible turbidity plume; and vi. odors.
Visual Monitoring
▪ Visual Observations shall be made daily, recorded, and submitted for each period of maintenance activities.
▪ Observations shall include:
i. Speed and direction of the currents;
ii. Tidal stage;
iii. Appearance of rubbish, trash, or any other solid waste; iv. Appearance of oil or other materials of petroleum origin; v. Discoloration and extent of any visible turbidity plume; and vi. odors.
6 Biological Resources
Pre-construction:
▪ Survey to identify sensitive plants and wildlife.
During-construction:
▪ Biological monitor is required on-site during all phases duringconstruction. ▪ Biological monitor is required to perform periodic inspections of the construction site.
▪ Biological monitor is required to ensure that active nesting behavior by all raptors and threatened and endangered bird species is protected.
Biological Resources
▪ California least tern- No activities will be conducted within 500 feet of terna antillarum browni, breeding colony from April 1 through September 30 (unless surveys confirm nesting ceased).
▪ Western Snowy Plover- No activities will be conducted within 500 feet of Charadrius alexandrines nivosus, breeding colony from May 1 through September 30 (unless surveys confirm nesting ceased). ▪ Grunion- If beach replenishment activities take place between March 1 and August 31, the Permittee must submit a Grunion Protection Plan to the San Diego Water Board for review and approval prior to the start of fill activities.
▪ Aquatic life- Sediment shall not be deposited in a location that may cause significant adverse effects to aquatic life, fish, shellfish, or wildlife or may harm the beneficial uses of the receiving waters. 7 Archaeological Monitoring -During-construction:
▪ Archaeologist shall conduct “spot checks” of the work to ensure the transport vehicles are remaining on the designated roadways. ▪ A qualified archaeological monitor shall be present during any necessary road work to ensure that any accidental discoveries of archaeological resources are correctly identified and evaluated for significance. Native Americans shall be advised of the road work and invited to participate in monitoring activities.
—
8 Photo DocumentationPre-, During-, and Post-Construction:
▪ Photo document the roads utilized for sediment transportation and the surrounding areas.
Photo Documentation
▪ Photo document all areas of permanent and temporary impact prior to and after project maintenance and construction.
9 — Borrow Site Monitoring
▪ Weekly sampling shall occur at designated sampling stations at each active borrow site. Sampling and analyses will, at a minimum, include temperature, salinity, pH, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen. The results of the water quality assessment must be submitted with the Final Post Construction Report.
14010
March 2023
APPENDIX F / TYPICAL 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PERMIT CONDITIONS FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS IN SAN DIEGO F-3
Table 1. Typical 401 Water Quality Certification Permit Conditions for Beach Nourishment Projects in San Diego, California Line
Item
Example Project Conditions
Tijuana Estuary Fate and Transport RBSP II Preliminary Guidance/Recommendation 10 — Surf Zone Monitoring
▪ Weekly sampling shall occur at each active beach replenishment site.
Sampling locations will be located 50 feet upcoast and downcoast from where the discharged water enters the surf zone. Sampling and analyses will, at a minimum, include: temperature, salinity, pH, total coliform, fecal coliform, enterococcus, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen.
The results of the water quality assessment must be submitted with the Final Post Construction Report.
11 — Bacteria Monitoring
▪ Weekly sampling shall occur at the active beach replenishment site for Total Coliform, Fecal Coliform, and Enterococcus. If the mean weekly water samples are found to contain bacteria in levels that exceed Ocean Plan Bacterial Water Contact Standards, the County of San Diego Department of Health Services and the San Diego Water Board shall be notified within 24 hours.
12 Turbidity
▪ Turbidity shall be monitored daily by a qualified observer from a high vantage point (e.g., a lifeguard tower) during construction. If significant water quality impacts are evident, then the discharge activities shall be modified or suspended.
Turbidity
▪ Turbidity shall be monitored daily by a qualified observer from a high vantage point (e.g., a lifeguard tower) during construction. If significant water quality impacts are evident, then the discharge activities shall be modified or suspended.
13 Trash and Anthropogenic Debris
▪ The Permittee will be responsible for the collection and disposal of trash and debris associated with the beach replenishment activities. Trash and anthropogenic debris deposited on the active beach replenishment site will be removed daily. Trash and debris will be disposed in compliance with local, State, and Federal regulations. A daily record of debris observed and removed will be included as part of the final Post Construction Report.
Trash and Anthropogenic Debris
▪ The Permittee will be responsible for the collection and disposal of trash and debris associated with the beach replenishment activities.
Trash and anthropogenic debris deposited on the active beach replenishment site will be removed daily. Trash and debris will be disposed in compliance with local, State, and Federal regulations. A daily record of debris observed and removed will be included as part of the final Post Construction Report.
Reporting Requirements
14 ▪ The Permittee must submit a Final Post Construction Report describing status of compliance with all requirements within 90 days of project completion. Report shall include the data and analysis results from the Monitoring Plan.
▪ The Permittee must submit a Final Post Construction Report describing status of compliance with all requirements within 90 days of project completion. Report shall include the data and analysis results from the Monitoring Plan.
15 Cultural Resources- (Pre-construction report)
▪ Prepare a historic study to define the precise location of the remains and foundations of historic buildings that lie beneath and around the project area.
—
16 Archaeological Monitoring- (Pre-construction report) ▪ Perform archaeological testing to identify building foundation edges, confirm mapped building locations and elevation for remains of historic structures in close proximity to or underlying the project area that have the potential to be affected by implementation of the project. —
14010
March 2023
APPENDIX F / TYPICAL 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION PERMIT CONDITIONS FOR BEACH NOURISHMENT PROJECTS IN SAN DIEGO F-4
Table 1. Typical 401 Water Quality Certification Permit Conditions for Beach Nourishment Projects in San Diego, California Line
Item
Example Project Conditions
Tijuana Estuary Fate and Transport RBSP II Preliminary Guidance/Recommendation 17 Source Sediment- (Pre-construction report)
▪ Prepare a Sampling and Analysis Plan/Results Report based requirements in Line Item 1 above. A tracking log or similar safeguard procedure shall be used to ensure all necessary soil testing has been conducted prior to the transport and deposition of sediment onto the beach.
—
18 Site Access / Traffic- (Pre-construction report)
▪ Prepare an engineering review of the structural adequacy of Routes to (1) accommodate heavy haul equipment, (2) estimate potential for such haul traffic to cause substantial damage to the road, (3) identify any possibility of subsurface compaction or compression below the road grade, (4) develop recommendations for any road improvements that would be necessary to prevent damage to the road and those resources beneath the road, and (5) determine if any road improvements needed to accommodate the project and/or return the road to its pre-project state. —
14010
March 2023