The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutC-3870 - PSA for Newport Coast Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) Monitoring3,-�1� AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE NEWPORT COAST AREAS OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE (ASBS) MONITORING THIS AMENDMENT NO. 4 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of T VM viz- 2008, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation ("City") and WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, whose local address is 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92008, ("Consultant"), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On August 8, 2006, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement, which authorized Consultant to conduct public use and biological surveys (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"). This work falls under ASBS Planning Grant awarded to the City by the State Water Resources Control Board and funding under the Proposition 50 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Program. B. Under the Agreement, Consultant was hired to conduct public use and biological surveys at ASBS areas along Newport Coast and Heisler Park (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). Under the Agreement, City agreed to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed $174,736 for the services. This Agreement was scheduled to expire on June 30, 2008. C. City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement on October 24, 2006, to conduct bio-accumulation studies at the ASBS. The total compensation payable to Consultant under Amendment No. 1 to reflect additional services not included in Agreement was $69,500. D. City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement on February 27, 2007, to install current velocity detectors and collect sediment samples to support verification of computer modeling of contaminant loads from Newport Harbor to the ASBS. The total compensation payable to Consultant under Amendment No. 2 to reflect additional services not included in Agreement or prior Amendment was $39,942. E. City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement on December 11, 2007, to perform a flood inundation modeling simulation and other tasks. The total compensation payable to Consultant under Amendment No. 3 to reflect additional services not included in Agreement or prior Amendments was $42,266. The term of the contract was extended to December 31, 2008. F. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 4 to further amend the Agreement to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement or prior Amendments. G. City desires to compensate Consultant for the additional professional services needed for Project. H. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 4", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work and Fee Schedule dated October 8, 2008, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated in full by this reference. Consultant agrees to meet the deadlines outlined in Exhibit A. 2. Total additional compensation to be paid to Consultant for all work performed in accordance with this Amendment, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Two Hundred One Thousand, Three Hundred Sixty -Nine Dollars ($201,369). 3. 7 The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2009. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 4 on the date first above written. APP OVED AS TO FORM 7 (, on", Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: C� a es , City Clerk 2 CITY 01,NEWPORTIYEACH, A MLXiipal kqMoratlqn j iviayor Iv v for the City of Newport Beach WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.: By: (Corporate Officer) Title: Ut �-� ►" f'C'.S Print Name: B y: w� (Fina al Officer) Title: �D <clrsled e,,-T;ea c t A Print Name: L',,�% "Lngren Attachment: Exhibit A — Scope of Work W) SOLUi1C8I15 Mr. Bob Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. 2433 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 (760) 795-69001 (760) 931-1580 FAX www.westonsolutions.com October 8, 2008 Subject: Scope of Work for 2008-2009 ASBS Monitoring and Related Studies Dear Mr. Stein: Weston Solutions, Inc. (Weston) is pleased to provide a Scope of Work to perform monitoring and related studies in support of the Newport Coast Area of Special Biological Significance. This Scope of Work consists of four main Tasks: Task 1. ASBS Proposition 84 Grant Support Task 2. ASBS Compliance Monitoring Task 3. High Tide Inundation Survey, and Task 4. Citizen Monitoring Program Each Task is described below. TASK 1. ASBS PROPOSITION 84 GRANT SUPPORT The Proposition 84 Grant proposal will seek to obtain $2.5 million dollars to fund projects associated with the Newport Coast ASBS. Weston worked closely with the City to develop the Proposition 84 Concept Proposal application, which was submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board for consideration in May, 2008. In July, the City was notified that the Concept Proposal was accepted and that the City was invited to submit a Full Proposal. The Concept Proposal highlighted eight projects that the City is interested in completing: 1. Runoff Reduction 2. Low Impact Development (LID) Bioswales 3. Habitat Restoration and Impact Metric Development 4. Buck Gully Erosion Control & Treatment Wetland 5. Buck Gully Restoration & Fire Control 6. Public Impact Reduction 7. Pesticide Management Program 8. Bacterial Source Identification Study and Modeling EXHIBIT A Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 2 These projects are all important for addressing issues related to ASBS regulatory requirements. Thus, securing funds through the Proposition 84 grant process is extremely important. The Scope of Work for this Task includes: 1. Preparing and submitting all required documentation to the State Board or other granting agency. 2. Soliciting and collating letters of support from interested parties. 3. Preparing accurate budgets for the proposed works 4. Communications with the granting agency, stakeholders and the City 5. Preparing engineering concept designs 6. Providing bi-weekly status updates This scope of work is scheduled to begin upon notice to proceed and will continue through final submittal of grant application materials. Sub -Task 1. Meeting Attendance & Coordination Weston's management team will perform the following tasks over the estimated time period: • Correspondence with the granting agency, City and interested Stakeholders • Coordination with project leads • Biweekly updates to the City Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at: $6,686. Sub -Task 2. Preparation of Full Proposal Weston anticipates close coordination with the City, the grant stakeholders, and the granting agency to ensure that a successful application is made. This task includes: • Preparing cost estimates for proposed works • Preparing schedule of works, including required submittals to the State Board • Initiate CEQA and related documents • Soliciting letters of support from interested parties (up to 20) • Review/Revision of Draft by City staff After review of a Draft document by the City, a final application will be submitted on behalf of the City. Weston will also provide a paper and electronic copy of the application for archival and reference purposes. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at: $20,709. Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 3 Sub -Task 3. Concept Designs • Preparing concept engineering designs for the bioswales and graphics for attachment to the application Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at: $2,605. The costs associated with Task I are summarized in Table 1. Table 1. Task 1 cost summary. Description Sub -Task 1 Meeting Attendance & Coordination $6,686 Sub -Task 2 Preparation of Full Proposal $20,709 Sub -Task 3 Concept Designs $2,605 SUB -TOTAL: $30,000 Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 4 TASK 2. ASBS COMPLIANCE MONITORING The ASBS Compliance Monitoring program is designed to be in line with regional coastal monitoring efforts (i.e., the Bight 08 program) and meet the requirements of the California Ocean Plan Storm Water Discharge Exemption Process in the Newport Coast Watershed. The primary focus of this study is to support the Bight08 study program for Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS). Since 1983, the California Ocean Plan has prohibited the discharge of waste into ASBS along the California Coast, unless the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) grants an exception to dischargers. As part of the exception process, the SWRCB has produced a guidance document for monitoring discharges to ASBS entitled Special Protections for Selected Storm Water and Nonpoint Source Discharges into Areas of Special Biological Significance (Draft - March, 2008). The Draft Special Protections document is intended to define the terms and conditions that limit storm water discharge to the 34 ASBS along the California Coast. The City of Newport Beach (City) is listed as the responsible entity for discharges into ASBS Number 32, the Robert E. Badham Marine Conservation Area, and they have applied for an exception with the SWRCB to the ASBS discharge requirements. As part of the exception process, the City has participated in the Bight '08 ASBS Planning Committee with the SWRCB, the Southern California Coastal Water Research Project (SCCWRP), and other ASBS dischargers in southern California. Together, the Committee has developed a Regional ASBS Work Plan as part of the Southern California Bight 2008 Regional Monitoring Survey. The Regional Work Plan is based on the Draft Special Protections document and is intended to provide compliance guidance for the majority of ASBS dischargers in southern California that wish to be part of a regional monitoring effort. The Scope of Work described in this document is designed to be in compliance with the Committee's Regional Work Plan with additional monitoring and assessment activities specific to the needs of the City of Newport Beach and furthering understanding of watershed influences on ASBS 32. The tasks outlined below are based on the parameters set forth in the Committee's Regional Work Plan and will be carried out during the 2008-2009 storm season. Sub -Task 1. Project Manal4ement Weston's management team will perform the following functions as part of project management: • Administration and daily management of the contract for this project • Coordination and communication with City staff • Progress reporting and project invoicing on a monthly basis • Kick-off Meeting with Weston staff • Project conclusion presentation at meeting with City staff Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 5 Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task will be $14,125. Sub -Task 2. Storm Water Monitoring The overall goal of the storm water monitoring discussed in this Scope of work is to assess how storm water discharges affect water quality in the ASBS ocean receiving waters. There are two areas in the northern extent of ASBS 32 that are of particular interest in addressing this goal: Buck Gully and Storm Drain NEW018 (defined by the SWRCB). Buck Gully represents the largest sub -drainage in the Newport Coast Watershed that discharges to ASBS 32. It discharges directly to the beach near the end of Poppy Street in Corona Del Mar. Because Buck Gully is a natural drainage, it is not required to be monitored according to the Draft Special Protections document, which targets storm drain discharges. Storm Drain NEW018 is an 18 inch culvert that discharges to the beach approximately 150 in south of the Buck Gully discharge. It has been targeted as part of the Regional ASBS Work Plan for monitoring because of its size and direct discharge to ASBS 32. Weston will monitor water quality over the course of three storms in 2008-2009 wet weather season at both Buck Gully and Storm Drain NEW018. In addition to addressing the goal of assessing how storm water discharges affect water quality in the ASBS, the project will distinguish the relative impacts on the ocean receiving waters from the two discharges. Samples will be collected over the course of three storms from two locations at each site: 1. Storm water effluent from each of the two discharges; 2. Ocean receiving water directly in front of each of the two discharges. During each storm event, grab samples will be collected four times over the course of the storm: 1. Beginning of the storm when flow is initiated; 2. Beginning of the storm prior to the peak of the hydrograph; 3. At the peak of the hydrograph; and 4. During the descending limb of the hydrograph. Each sample will be analyzed for the following constituents: • salinity, • total suspended solids (TSS), • dissolved organic carbon, • total and dissolved trace metals, • nutrients (ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus), • polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and • chlorinated and organophosphorus pesticides. Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 6 The complete analyte list and performance criteria are presented in Appendix A. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task will be $99,225. Sub -Task 3. Post Storm Toxicity Within 24 hours of the end of each of the three storms, samples will be collected from the ocean receiving waters at two locations: 1. Directly in front of Storm Drain NEW018 2. Directly in front of El Morro Creek (reference site) Each of the six samples will be delivered by courier to the Weston Bioassessment Laboratory in Carlsbad, California, following standard chain of custody procedures. Samples will be analyzed for short-term chronic toxicity using the sea urchin fertilization test. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task will be $11,850. Sub -Task 4. Data Analysis and Reporting Weston's team will review and analyze the data compiled under the tasks conducted in the Scope of Work. Weston will prepare a Draft report for review by City staff. After the draft report is accepted, a Final Report will be prepared and issued to the City. The Draft and Final Reports will include the following elements: Executive Summary, which will summarize the salient procedures and findings of each of the report sections; Introduction, which will introduce the historical background of the area, the history of regulatory issues surround the ASBS, and identify the key questions to be answered by the monitoring program; Materials and Methods, which will detail the procedures and materials used to conduct the sampling, as well as analytical and statistical approaches used in the assessment of data; Results, which will describe in detail the outcome of the monitoring program; Discussion, which will elaborate on the findings relative to local and regional ASBS monitoring, regulatory implications, and sampling concerns; Recommendations, which will use the results of the study to determine future monitoring activities, data gaps, and any concerns relative to the monitoring program. Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 7 Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at $27,313 The Tasks associated with Task 2 are summarized in Table 2 below. Table 2. Task 2 cost summary. Task Description Task 1 Project Management $12,981 Task 2 Storm Water Monitoring $99,225 Task 3 Post-Storn Toxicity $11,850 Task 4 Data Analysis and Reporting $27,313 SUB -TOTAL: $151,369 Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 8 TASK 3. HIGH TIDE INUNDATION SURVEY A high tide inundation survey is proposed for December 12, 2008, when an extreme tide estimated at 7.3 feet is predicted for the Newport Harbor area. This represents the largest astronomical tide for the next 20 years, and monitoring is proposed to record patterns of inundation for model validation purposes. The ability of the model to accurately depict the December 12 flooding will build confidence in its ability to predict flooding from even larger tides that could occur in the near future if a storm condition were to impact the coastline at the same time as a high tide. The proposed study involves the following three sub -tasks: Sub -Task 1. Tide Monitoring in Newport Harbor Monitoring the tide in Newport harbor will be conducted using an Interocean Science s4 Tide and Current meter. This will deployed for a period of at least several days around the high tide. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at $4,300. Sub -Task 2. Ground -based Observations of Flooding Ground -based observations of flooding will be conducted throughout the study period. We will mark areas of inundation that result from the high tide and seepage or over -topping of bulk heads. Markings will be made along the bay -side of the Harbor, as well as along the open coast where waves cause runup to even higher levels. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at $8,500. Sub -Task 3. Mapping A post -event survey to map the horizontal and vertical extent of flood water will be constructed from the results of the study. Weston estimates the cost to perform this sub -task at $1,200. The Tasks associated with Task 3 are summarized in Table 3 below. Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring Scope of Work Page 9 Table 3. Task 3 cost summary. TASK 4. CITIZEN MONITORING PROGRAM Research and community outreach will be conducted as part of the Citizen Monitoring Program. The results will be organized in a community monitoring plan. Total for Task 4 not to exceed estimated project cost on time and materials: $6,000. TASK SUMMARY Costs associated with the Tasks outlined in this Scope of Work are summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Scope of Work Task Summary. DescriptionTask Task I ASBS Proposition 84 Grant Support $30,000 Task 2 ASBS Compliance Monitoring $151,369 Task 3 High Tide Inundation Survey $14,000 Task 4 Citizen Monitoring Program $6,000 Total Contract Not to Exceed: $201,369 If you have any questions regarding this SOW, please feel free to contact me at (760) 795-6905. Very Truly Yours, Weston Solutions, Inc. Stephen J. Gruber Project Manager cc: project file Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 10 Appendix A. List of analytes for Newport Coast ASBS Monitoring, 2008-2009. Group Parameter Accuracy Precision Recovery Completeness Conventional Constituents in marine waters Salinity, hardness, TSS, DOC Standard Reference Materials (SRM, CRM) within 95% Cl stated by provider of material. If not available then with 80% to 120% of true value Laboratory duplicate, Blind Field duplicate, or MS/N4SD 25% RPD Laboratory duplicate minimum. Not Applicable. 90% Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons in marine waters 1-Methyl naphthalene Standard Reference Materials (SRM, CRM) within 95% Cl stated by provider of material. If not available then with 50% to 150% of true value Field replicate, laboratory duplicate or MS/MSD + 25% RPD. Field replicate minimum. Matrix spike 50%-150% or control limits at+ 3 standard deviations based on actuallab data. 90% 2,6 Dimethylnaphthalene 2,315-Trimethylnaphthalene 2-Meth 1 henanthrene Acena hthene Acenaphthylene Anthracene Benz[a]anthracene Benzo a]pyrene Benzo ,h,i e lene Benzo k fluoranthene Biphenyl Chrysene Dibenz a,h anthracene Fluoranthene Fluorene Methyl anthracene Indeno 1,2,3-c,d pyrene Naphthalene Perylene Phenanthrene P ene Trace Metals in marine waters Arsenic Standard Reference Materials (SR-M, CRM, PT) 75% to 125%. Field replicate, laboratory duplicate, or MS/MSD + 25% RPD. Laboratory duplicate minimum. Matrix spike 75% - 125%. 90% Cadmium Chromium Copper Iron Lead Nickel Silver Zinc Chlorinated Chlordane (alpha, gamma) Standard Field replicate, Matrix spike 90% hydrocarbons in marine waters reference laboratory 50%-150% materials (srm, duplicate or or control crm) within 95% MS/MSD + 25% limits at + 3 Cl stated by RPD. Field standard provider of replicate deviations material. If not minimum. based on available then actual lab with 50% to data. 150% of true value Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Newport Coast Regional ASBS n Monitoring — Scope of Work Page 11 Group Parameter Accuracy Precision Recovery Completeness Total PCB (PCB 18,28,37,44,49,52,66,70 ,74,77,81,87,99,101,105,110, 114,118,119,123,126,128,138 ,149,151,153,156,157,158,16 7,168,169,170,177„180,183,1 87,189,194,201,206) Lindane DDTs (o,p- and p,p'-DDT, DDE, DDD Oragnophosphor Diazinon, chlorpyrifos 70-130% Field replicate, Matrix spike 90% us Pesticides in laboratory 50% - l50% Marine Waters duplicate or or control MS/MSD + 25% limits at + 3 RPD. Field standard replicate deviations minimum. based on actual lab data. Nutrients Nitrate, nitrite, ammonia, TP, TN Toxicity Sea Urchin Fertilization Test + 2 SDI + 2 SD 30%z 90% FEE SCHEDULE Weston Solutions, Inc. 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92010 Labor Category Rate Sr. Project Engineer 160.79 Project Manager 153.48 Sr. Project Engineer 160.79 Assistant Project Manager 135.21 Senior Scientist 116.94 Scientist II/Civil Engineer 1 80.40 Scientist 1 62.12 GIS Specialist/Modeling 93.19 Enviromnental Analyst 54.82 Senior Teclnician 47.51 Bioassay Technician 40.20 Contract Administrator 89.53 Word Process ing/Graphies 51.16 G&A on ODC and Subs 10.0% Fee on ODC and Subs 10.0% C-3eg-�O AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTON SOLUTIONS FOR AREA OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT THIS AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of J)Lcv'► bp/ , OW '7 , by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation, (hereinafter referred to as "City") and Weston Solutions, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation whose address is 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92010 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On August 8, 2006, CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a Professional Services Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Agreement", to investigate the reasons for the decline of the sensitive marine areas, the so-called Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) along Newport Coast, hereinafter referred to as "Project". This Agreement is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2008. B. City and Consultant have entered into two separate Amendments of the Agreement dated October 24, 2006 and February 27, 2007. C. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 3 to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement or prior Amendments and to extend the term of the Agreement to December 31, 2008. D. City desires to compensate Consultant for additional professional services needed for Project. E. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 3", as provided here below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall be compensated for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 3 according to "Exhibit A" dated November 29, 2007 attached hereto. 2. Total additional compensation to Consultant for services performed pursuant to this Amendment No. 3 for all work performed in accordance with this Amendment, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant 2 fees, shall not exceed Four -two Thousand Two Hundred Sixty-six Dollars ($42,266). 3. The term of the Agreement shall be extended to December 31, 2008. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 3 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: C ff F-a City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By' dm ' �r� LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk v - a Al CITY O "I EWPORT BEACH, A Munic pal Qae oration B mayor v for the City of Newport Beach CONSULTANT: Weston Solutions, Inc. )i YL (Corporate Officer) Title: ! I,',(.�,p�0 Print Name: By: / d ( inancialOfficer) Title: 1.647 OA - Print Name: /q,jf'41 S4 Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates f:\users\pbw\shared\agreements\fy 07-08\weston-asbs-amend-ldoc 3 Exhibit A WESTSOLUTIONS, INC. 2433 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 (760) 795-6900 / (760) 931-1580 FAX www.westonsolutions.com November 29, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd Newport Beach, California 92663 Subject: Scope of Work for ASBS Contract Amendment. Dear Bob: Weston Solutions, Inc. (Weston) is pleased to provide this Scope of Work to complete additional works under the City of Newport contract: These works include: Additional deployment of mussels in ASBS Please refer to the attached scope of works. Total: $9,700 Preparation of Round 2 of Proposition 50 funding applications Tasks to be completed under this project are: Project Management Preparing and submitting all required documentation for eight project proposals for compilation of IRWMP and submittal to the State Board. Preparing accurate budgets for the proposed works Preparation of quarterly reports for Prop 13 fund Please refer to the attached scope of works for further details. Total: $20,566 Finalization of the Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan The Integrated Coastal Watershed Management plan is a comprehensive planning document comprising project development for the enhancement of the City of Newport Beach watershed and surrounding marine environment. This task portion comprises the final stage of the ICWMP development with the completion of an illustrated executive summary of the ICWMP highlights. The final executive summary will provide a definitive summary of the City of Newport's plans for the watershed And its innovative approach to understanding the Areas of Biological Significance (ASBS). This stand-alone summary document is intended for distribution to the public, stakeholders and Council. The final ICWMP together with the illustrated summary has been completed and distributed to stakeholders. Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach 11/29/2007 Scope of Work Page 2 Total: $12,000 The total cost for this proposed amendment is: $42,266 Please contact me at (760) 931-8081 if you have any questions or comments on this Scope of Work. Regards, David H. Pohl, Ph.D., P.E. Program Manager Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Protection Program: Change of Scope for Mussel Bioaccumulation Study August 2007 A component of the City of Newport Beach's Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) monitoring program mussel bioaccumulation, toxicity and growth studies are being conducted to evaluate contaminant related impacts to the ASBS. Additional funds are requested to complete the program due to additional costs related to growth evaluation and the loss of test organisms from greater than expected wave action. The addition of the growth endpoint was incorporated to align study design with efforts being conducted at the La Jolla ASBS. The labor and material required to individually label and measure 100 test organisms per deployment was not included in original cost estimate. During last weeks intertidal monitoring event, all on -shore test mussels, 6 bags, were missing. The bolt anchoring system was still intact. In late April, a large wave event occurred due to a tropical storm. Waves were in excess of 10 feet. From our monitoring data, mussel beds in Little Corona were reduced in size by more than 30 percent, large patches of mussels ripped out. We believe it was this event that ripped apart the Vexar bags that held the test mussels. As CRM completed their public use survey work, they would report that the bags were present, however, starting late April through late September the low -low tides occur only at night, therefore, the mussel bags are not easily observed by the crew. The buoy that held the offshore mussels used to evaluate the contribution of contaminants from Upper Newport was in place after the wave event and last observed in late May. We believe it may have been run over by a vessel. We will be diving in the area next week to see if the anchor and perhaps the test organisms are still in place. We have designed a program that will allow for inclusion of the bioaccumulation in the monitoring report in spring of 2008. We recommend doubling the number of organisms placed in the field immediately. Half of the organisms will be retrieved after 3 months exposure and the rest will be retrieved after 6 months of exposure. In order to ensure the bags can withstand future large wave events, we have redesigned the enclosures and increased the number of bolts from 2 to 4. When the 3 month mussels are collected, the remaining mussel bags will be serviced. All the Vexar will be replaced to ensure the bags integrity. Growth study equipment and labels: $100 ■ Labor to measure and tag individuals (100) for deployment and retrieval: $1000 Mussel bag equipment: Vexar, bolts, PVC, additional mussels - $800 ■ Labor: 2 nights to deploy new cages, 2 Senior Scientists and mileage: $1600 ■ 1 Boat day to replace offshore buoy, 1 Senior Scientist and 1 Environmental Analyst: $1400 ■ 1 tide series to retrieve 3 month cohort and service 6 month cohort, 1 Senior Scientist and 1 Environmental Analyst: $1200 ■ 1 Boat day to retrieve 3 month cohort from offshore buoy, 1 Senior Scientist and 1 Environmental Analyst: $1400 ■ 1 day to retrieve 6 month cohort and service 6 month cohort, 1 Senior Scientist and I Environmental Analyst: $1000 ■ 1 boat day to retrieve 6 month cohort from offshore buoy, 1 Senior Scientist and 1 Environmental Analyst: $1200 Total estimated cost: $9700 WSOLUTIONS, INC. 243333 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 Tom m (760) 796-6900 1 (760) 931.1580 FAX www.westonsolutions.com November 14"' 2007 Mr Robert Stein City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd Newport Beach CA 92663 Subject: Scope of Work for IRWM Round 2 Application. Dear Bob: Weston Solutions, Inc. (Weston) is pleased to provide this Scope of Work to complete Round 2 applications for Newport Coast proposed works: I. Project Management 2. Preparing and submitting all required documentation for compilation of IRWMP and submiftal to the State Board. 3. Preparing accurate budgets for the proposed works 4. Preparation of quarterly reports for Prop 13 fund This scope of work is scheduled to begin in December 2007 and proceed through to January 2008. The Weston Solutions team that will accomplish this scope of work is as follows: Management Team Project Director — David Pohl Project Manager - Gretel Roberts Assistant Project Manager — Garret Williams Task 1: Project Management Weston's management team will perform the following tasks over the estimated four month project period: • Administration of the contract- for this project • Day-to-day management of the contract • Coordination with City of Newport Beach • Correspondence with the State Board, City and interested Stakeholders • Meetings with the .State Board and the City • Biweekly updates to the City "l; Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Scope of Work Weston estimates the cost to perform this task at: $1,905 Hours to complete this task are estimated as follows: Project Director - 2 Project Manager — 8 1 u 15/2007 Page 2 Task 2: Preparation of draft documentation Weston anticipates close coordination with Dudek and the State Board to ensure that a successful compilation of documents is submitted. This task includes detailed development of the following projects: • A03: Restoration of the ASBS • A04: Integrated bundle of Low Impact Developments • A05: Copper Elimination Program • A06: Buck Gully Erosion Control Project • A08: Pelican Ave diversion • A09: County -wide "Drugs Down Drains" program • A 1 I : Public Use • A 13: Habitat Restoration kind Fire Prevention Each project must be completed with the following detailed information: • Work plan with details of approach • Deliverables from project • Budget — line item details • Schedule of proposed works • Proposed effectiveness monitoring • Technical aspects and any available concept designs • Letters of support from stakeholders specific to the project Weston estimates the cost to perform this task at: $13,775 Hours to complete this task are estimated as follows: Project Manager — 40 Senior Scientist — 30 GIS Specialist - 20 Task 3: Preparation of accttrate cost estimates Each individual project will require cost analysis to ensure that an accurate value is attributed to each component of the work. This process is vital to ensure the successful completion of the project as well as ensuring that the City of Newport is aware of all possible funding match commitments. Weston estimates the cost to perform this task at:$4,124 Bob Stein, City of Newport Beach Scope of Work Hours to complete this task are estimated as follows: Project Manager — 10 Engineer - 20 11/ 15/2007 Page 3 Task 4: Development of draft quarterly reports Weston will prepare draft revisions to the 2007 quarterly reports due to the State Water Quality Control Board for ASBS and HAMP projects. Weston estimates the cost to perform this task at: $762 Hours to complete this task are estimated as follows: Project Manager — 4 Total cost Task Description Cost not to exceed Task I Project Management $1,905 Task 2 Draft documentation $13,775 Task 3 Cost Estimates $4,124 Task 4 Draft Quail rly report $762 Total $20,566 Schedule to be followed Upon approval, Weston will begin this Scope of Work and adhere to the following tentative deadlines: Tahle 2 5cherinle Task Description Schedule Task I Project Management On -going throughout the entire project Task 2 Draft documentation December 15, 2007 Task 3 Cost Estimates December 15, 2007 Task 4 Draft Quarterly report November 2007 Please contact me at (760) 931-8081 if you have any questions or comments on this Scope of Work. Regards, David H. Pohl, Ph.D., P.E. Program Manager WESTSOLUTIONS, INC. Exhibit B M12433 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 M- (760) 795-6900 / (760) 931-1580 FAX www.westonsolutions.com The information below provides a preliminary estimate of otal direct and indirect costs to complete the Scope of Work including staff hours and hour rates (with benefit and overhead costs). WESTON's current fee schedule for each ioh classification Category Senior Project Manager David Pohl $185 Project Manager/Task Manager Gretel Roberts $139 Senior Scientist Bryn Evans $121 Engineer I Suraj Shankar $108 Scientist III Brent Mardian $101 GIS Special ist/Modelin Bruce Ferguson $116 Word Processing / Graphics Michelle Patzius $60 Contracts Administration Amee Ventures $55 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE NEWPORT COAST AREAS OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE (ASBS) MONITORING THIS AMEN NO. 2 O PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of V u 4r 2007, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal cor oration ("City") and WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, whose local address is 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92008, ("Consultant"), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On August 8, 2006, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement, which authorized Consultant to conduct public use and biological surveys (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"). This work falls under ASBS Planning Grant awarded to the City by the State Water Rerources Control Board and funding under the Proposition 50 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Program. B. Under the Agreement, Consultant was hired to conduct public use and biological surveys at ASBS areas along Newport Coast and Heisler Park (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). Under the Agreement, City agreed to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed One Hundred Seventy -Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty -Six Dollars ($174,736) for the services. This Agreement is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2008. C. City and Consultant entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement on October 24, 2006. The total compensation payable to Consultant under Amendment No. 1 to reflect additional services not included in Agreement was not to exceed Sixty Nine Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars ($69,500). D. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 2 to further amend the Agreement to reflect additional services not included in the Agreement or Amendment 1. E. City desires to compensate Consultant for the additional professional services needed for Project. F. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 2", as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work dated February 14, 2007, attached hereto as' Exhibit A, and incorporated in full by this reference. Consultant agrees to meet the deadlines outlined in Exhibit A. 2. Total additional compensation to be paid to Consultant for all work performed in accordance with this Amendment, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Thirty -Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred Forty -Two Dollars ($39,942). 3. The term of the Agreement shall not change. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 2 on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: o',— aron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A — Scope of Work CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, AM al orpo ation y: Steven Rosansky, May r for the City of Newport ch WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.: By:_ Title: (Corporate Officer) Print Name: By: (Financial Officer) Title: Print Name: f:\users\pbw\shared\agreements\fy 06-07\weston - asbs monitoring amend 1.doc 2 NOW, THEREFORE, the partk,,- v-, �,, o,,-,e asfollows: Collst,11tant shall perl'k'Drn-i Ill in the S,-.--ope of Work dated Fe6ruary 14, 2007, attached h ' Lxhibit A, and incorporated in full by this reference. Con.c�,Mltant agr�e J 1�, -ies outlinek.) -In Exhibit & co�, �eadlii 2, Tottal Consuftant Ifor zfll w,,)I,k A- -is and accordance with this Am, 3 ,, �, ,, - ' ]ill(] all subconsultant fees, shall riot E,,, Forty -Two Dollars ($39,942). 1 1 Thirty-Ni . ne Thousand, Nine Hundred 3, The t(,�rrrn of the Aggeement sriall not change. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terf-ris, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I'll e parties hereto have UE-.Dated this Amendmemt No. 2 on the date first above written, APPROVED AS TO FORM, P<aron f Harp, Assistant City Attorney ,,or the City of Newport B(,,Wl-� I aVonne I Ci'tky' Clerk Atta,nhnnent: Exhibit A - Scope of Work CITY OF NEWPO� ',,BEA(-'H, A a "t Mr uL�Zoa By: for the City of Newport Bea WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC, - (G*orporate Officer) President & CEO P Print Naar,: Patrick McCa_rui---- By:, 'n(Jal TiIH Senior Vice President & CFO Vincent A. Laino, Jr. 2 WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. 2433 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 (760) 931-8081 / (760) 931-1580 FAX www.westonsolutions.com February 14, 2007 Mr. Robert Stein, P.E. Principal Civil Engineer Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Subject: Exhibit A - Scope of Work for Current Study Dear Mr. Stein: Weston Solutions, Inc. (Weston) is pleased to provide this Scope of Work to conduct the current study of the Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) at Little Corona for the purpose of defining the constituent flows from and to the ASBS. These data will be used to further refine the current and pollutant transport model being developed. The overall objective of this study is to further define potential impacts to the ASBS that will assist in the City developing management actions to preserve the ASBS and cost effectively meet the anticipated requirements of the Ocean Plan Permit Exception Process. The scope of the current study includes the deployment of an array of three RDI Workhorse Acoustic Doppler Current Profilers (ADCP). The first will be placed in 6 m depth just offshore of where Buck Gully meets the intertidal zone. The second will be deployed along the 12 in isobath 1 km downcoast of Buck Gully, and the third will be deployed along the 10 in isobath offshore of the south jetty of the Newport Harbor entrance. All units will be anchored into position (either rocky or sandy substrate) by scientist divers, and left in place for one month (30 days). Data logging will be set to record at intervals of approximately 15-min during the duration of deployment. At the end of the sampling duration, the units will be retrieved and the data will be downloaded in the laboratory. Vector flow fields will be generated to reflect prevailing current directions over multiple time periods to enhance the predictability of water mass fates on scales of tidal periodicity and lunar cycling. A technical memorandum summarizing these data will be generated and submitted within 60 days after. This scope also includes effort by Everest International, who is completing the current and tidal model for the Lower Newport Bay and Little Corona, to meet and provide input on the current study. The data generated by this field effort will also for calibration of the model being developed by Everest International. The scope also includes sediment sampling and analysis to further support these efforts. Robert Stein, City of Newport Beach February 14, 2007 Exhibit A - Scope of Work Page 2 Cost Proposal The cost for the current study is $32,422. The cost for the sediment analysis is $6,500. TOTAL: $39,942. This cost estimate assumes that a boat will be provided by the City of Newport Beach for the deployment and recovery of the ADCPs. This work will be completed on a time and materials not to exceed basis. Schedule Work will begin within a week of authorization of notice to proceed. All work will be completed by May 1, 2007. Please contact or David Pohl at (760) 931-8081 or Lisa Kay if you have any questions or comments on this revised Scope of Work. Very truly yours, Weston Solutions, Inc. David H. Pohl, Ph.D., P.E. Sr. Project Manager cc: K. Morris AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC. FOR THE NEWPORT COAST AREAS OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE (ASBS) MONITORING THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1O PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT, entered into this day of 61 06P✓ 2006, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a municipal corporation ("City") and WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation, whose local address is 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92008, ("Consultant"), is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. On August 8, 2006, City and Consultant entered into a Professional Services Agreement which authorized Consultant to conduct public use and biological surveys (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"). This work falls under ASBS Planning Grant awarded to the City by the State Water Rerources Control Board and funding under the Proposition 50 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Program. B. Under the Agreement, Consultant was hired to conduct public use and biological surveys at ASBS areas along Newport Coast and Heisler Park (hereinafter referred to as the "Project"). Under the Agreement, City agreed to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed one hundred seventy-four thousand seven hundred thirty-six dollars and no/100 ($174,736) for the services. This Agreement is scheduled to expire on June 30, 2008. E. City desires to enter into this Amendment No. 1 to reflect the additional services to be performed by Consultant, which were not included in the original Agreement. F. City desires to compensate Consultant for the additional professional services needed for Project. G. City and Consultant mutually desire to amend Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Amendment No. 1," as provided herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Consultant shall perform the services outlined in the Scope of Work dated October 1, 2006, attached hereto as Exhibit A, and incorporated in full by this reference. Consultant agrees to meet the deadlines outlined in Exhibit A. 2. Total additional compensation to be paid to Consultant for all work performed in accordance with this Amendment, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed Sixty Nine Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars ($69,500). 3. The term of the Agreement shall not change. 4. Except as expressly modified herein, all other provisions, terms, and covenants set forth in Agreement shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment No. 1 on the date first above written. APPR VED AS TO FORM: Aaron C. Harp, Assistant City Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk Attachment: Exhibit A — Scope of Work CITY OFN.E PORT BEACH AIc ial pC rpora ' B Mayor " " for the City of Newport Beach WESTON SOLUTIONS, INC.: (Corporate Officer) Title: 5 t . Print Name:--JbC[V1d Y (Fin ncialOfficer) Title: Cp�k'ller /D PqV-`-' Print Name: /_ Y�UG M f:\users\pbw\shared\agreements\fy 06-07\weston - asbs monitoring amend 1.doc 2 Exhibit A Weston Solutions Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Protection and Restoration Program: Bioassay Testing October 6, 2006 The Cities of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach have initiated a program to protect and renovate sensitive marine life areas, Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS), adjacent to the Cities' jurisdictions. The objective of this program is to identify and quantify those environmental impacts having the most deleterious effects on the water quality and habitat of the ASBSs and to prepare an Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan for these areas. These potential impacts may include constituent loading from dry and wet weather flows to the ASBSs, constituent loading from storm water, public trampling and scavenging activities, fishing activities, cross contamination from tidal flows from Newport Bay and other environmental stressors. Goal Bioassay studies will be used to examine creek (Buck Gully) water quality and potential impacts on rocky intertidal marine flora and fauna at Little Corona del Mar. Background Buck Gully is a steep, open canyon extending 2.5 miles from Little Corona Beach to Newport Coast Drive in the San Joaquin Hills. The lower section extends from Little Corona Beach to the Coast Highway and the larger, upper section stretches from the Coast Highway to Newport Coast Drive. A small freshwater marsh comprised almost exclusively of cattail is situated at the mouth of the gully (Newport Beach Creek) adjoining Little Corona Beach. The principal issues associated with Buck Gully include the indicator bacteria exceedance rates, approaching 100% of the time and erosion associated with the continuous flow of water through the gully. This creek is 303 d listed for indicator bacteria exceedances. Little Corona is also a very popular ocean beach receiving many visitors throughout the year. Because there are a wide range of activities that can create adverse effects on this beach the Cities of Newport Beach and Laguna Beach are exploring potential causes of these different effects. The objectives of these programs are to prioritize potential solutions to these different sources of adverse effects. One of these potential causes of adverse effects to the intertidal environment at Little Corona are the contaminants contained in the runoff associated with Buck Gully. The cities have decided that a bioassay approach is the best method to evaluate this source of potential adverse effects. The bioassay approach to be developed will be designed to permit quantifying and priortitizing the types of adverse impacts associated with the discharge of these waters from Buck Gully. Introduction Toxicity and bioaccumulation studies are the most definitive methods in which to assess contaminant related impacts in the environment. Weston recommends the inclusion of toxicity and bioaccumulation testing on indigenous organisms to demonstrate the exposure of contaminants of concern and adverse effects associated with that exposure on to specific intertidal species known to be sensitive to multiple contaminants. Task 1. Update sampling Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) Weston will use the existing QAPP from the Water Quality and Flow Assessment as base document and develop an addendum to this QAPP that includes the methods for deploying and retrieval of mussels for bioaccumulation and toxicity studies. The Weston Team has available these methods from other projects and will streamline the preparation of this QAPP addendum by using these methods with modifications as appropriate. Weston has a strong working relationship with the Santa Ana RWQCB on the development of the current QAPP and will continue working successfully with the Regional Board for the approval of this addendum. Task 2. Mussel Bioaccumulation Study Bioaccumulation of contaminants of concern in California Mussels will serve as a method to determine the integrated accumulation of bioavailable contaminants from various sources. Transplanted adult mussel tissues will be analyzed for a wide -range of chemical contaminants. These tissue concentrations will be compared to pre -exposure concentrations for the transplanted individuals to examine site -specific uptake rates. These tissues will be compared to two large databases that contain numerous studies on impacts related to tissue concentrations for Californian mussels, Mussel Watch and ERED. The Mussel Watch program has been in existence for 20 years and will allow comparisons of tissue concentrations to more than 280 locations along the California coast, including previous data collected in Newport Beach. The ERED database, developed by ERDC and personnel now at Weston (Drs. David Moore and Jack Word), is a direct assessment of the effects of elevated body burdens from chemicals of potential ecological concern. This data base has over 12,000 pairs of body burden and biological effects data and allows researchers to make comparisons of the effects of various chemicals to other species and effects ranging from physiological impacts to mortality associated with various tissue concentrations. Mussels are filter feeders that relay on collecting organic particles from large volume of water as food. Large number of bacteria and viruses has been found to accumulate in mussel tissue that harvested from contaminated water body. Mussels are also known to bioaccumulate domoic acid, a neurotoxin produced by a diatom species in the ocean water. This biotoxin can be transported to seals and sealions who use mussels as food source and cause morbidity and mortality in marine mammal population. In addition to the chemical contaminants that will be analyzed by Weston, a subcontract with University of California Irvine will be made to test the concentration of bacteria (i.e., Vibrio spp.), viruses (i.e., coliphage and human viruses) and domoic acid in the mussels. These data will be compared with mussels collected from uncontaminated area. Task 3. Mussel Reproduction and Development Bioassays In addition to bioaccumulation, a subsample of the transplanted mussels will be tested using standardized toxicity tests to evaluate the success of reproduction and larval development. Larvae of mussels are highly sensitive to contaminants, the successful reproduction by and subsequent development of zygotes to first feeding larval stages would serve as sensitive surrogates for the other broadcast spawning species along the coast. Examination of larval development can indicate whether exposure to contaminants of concern (bioaccumable or not) or bacterial exposure have influenced the adults to an extent where viable reproduction is impaired. Prior to deployment, a subset of the mussels will be tested to determine their sensitivity to reference toxicants in the laboratory by establishing an LC50 for each cohort. These data will be compared to responses of a subset of mussels when they are sampled to determine if `fitness' has changed as a result of the exposure of mussels to contaminants in the intertidal adjacent to Buck Gully. Reference toxicant exposures using ammonia and Cu will be made on the developing larvae to ascertain similar sensitivity of test populations and to develop a dose response measure for one of the potential contaminants from Buck Gully (ammonia). Task 2 and 3 Methods Four locations for mussel deployments are recommended. A site will be located at the mid intertidal zone where water from Buck Gully first mixes with the intertidal zone. A subtidal site will be set below the mid intertidal site, within the mixing zone. To evaluate exposure of contaminants within Newport Bay from those specific to Buck Gully a Newport Bay control will be located north of the mixing zone within the channel. Weston will work with Everest and Rick Ware to determine the best location to deploy mussels for evaluating Upper Newport Bay effects from Buck Gully effects. To evaluate physical impacts due to tide height from freshwater flow from Buck Gully, a mid intertidal control site will be located just north of Little Corona. Bioaccumulation and toxicity testing will be conducted twice a year in order to determine if these organisms exhibit seasonal patterns in uptake and health within Newport Harbor that may be related to wet and dry weather patterns. The seasonal difference in contaminant concentrations will be compared at each site. If the seasonal differences are greater at the site adjacent to Buck Gully, this may be evidence of the degree of Buck Gully influence on those tissues. If the seasonal differences are similar across all sites, this may be evidence that Buck Gully does not have a greater influence than Newport Bay as a whole. The effects of contaminants associated with Upper Newport Bay may be so great that they mask any effects associated with proximity to Buck Gully. Mussels secured in bags attached to the intertidal and subtidal zones will be collected in April and October in order to evaluate large scale differences between wet weather and dry weather exposures. These dates may change to reflect adequate spawning condition of the test organisms in areas adjacent to the study site. New mussels will also be deployed at the same time that exposed mussels are retrieved. If the mussels located within the intertidal zones are vandalized, stations will be moved to deeper-subtidal areas. Weston will work with Rick Ware and his team for all field components of this proposal. This is more cost effective due to his labor pool and proximity to Little Corona. All tissues will be analyzed for a full suite of environmental contaminants currently measured in the Mussel Watch program. These include PCB, PAHs, chlorinated and OP pesticides and trace metals (As, Cd, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Se, Zn). Pyrethroids, an emerging pollutant, have been identified as potential contaminants of concern in Buck Gully and therefore will also be analyzed in the mussel tissue. Fecal and total coliform bacteria will also be measured in these test organisms. UC Irvine will use the same tissue collection for analysis of Vibrio bacteria, an opportunistic human pathogen; coliphage, an indicator of fecal contamination in the water; and human adenovirus, an indicator of human waste pollution. Mussel tissues will also be extracted and analyzed for the concentration of domoic acid. The same suite of assays will be performed using samples collected in the Mussel Watch program. The data from these two sources will be compared. Depending on this studies findings, toxicity and bioaccumulation evaluations may be recommended in the monitoring plan, however, the level of effort collecting base -line information may be greater than what is necessary for long-term monitoring. The analyte list may be scaled back during the monitoring program to target specific analytes that have been found to be the contaminants of concern within the ASBS. Task 4. Storm Effluent toxicily testing on Kelp Germination In February of 2006, effluent from Buck Gully was evaluated for acute and chronic toxicity using three standardized marine toxicity tests with Macrocystis pyrifera (giant kelp), Mysidopsis hahia (mysid shrimp), and Strongylocentrotus purpuratus (purple urchin). Testing found significant reduction in kelp spore germination within the Buck Gully mixing zone, no toxicity was observed using the shrimp or urchin. While cadmium in the mixing zone sample was found at concentrations in exceedance of the water quality objectives, it is uncertain whether this analyte contributed to the observed toxicity. It was suggested that kelp spore germination may have been effected by increased suspended solids (from stormwater runoff and physical processes that cause flocculation during the brining of the sample prior to testing). To determine if the observed toxicity is due to dissolved contaminates of concern or the presence of particulates in the water samples, kelp will be tested in unaltered effluent and effluent that has had the opportunity to settle prior to testing. To examine the presence of dose -response relationships between effluent and kelp germination success, kelp will be tested in effluent collected at the discharge point, in the mixing zone and at the edge of the mixing zone. Again, Weston will work with Rick Ware and his team for stormwater sample collection. Kelp toxicity is proposed as a one-time experiment to determine if the physical presence of particulates may have confounded the interpretation of toxicity test data or if the dissolved components of the effluent were the true cause of toxicity. Task 5. Report Deliverables: ■ Bioassay laboratory reports: Bioassay reports will be provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of sample date. ■ Bioaccumulation chemistry summary report: Raw chemistry results and summary tables will be provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of sample date. ■ Bioaccumulation microbiology summary report: Raw microbiological measurements and results and summary tables will be provided to the City of Newport within 90 days of sample date. ■ A draft Buck Gully Water Flow Bioassay Impact Report will be written and submit to the City of Newport and the Technical Advisory Committee for comment and review. ■ A final Buck Gully Water Flow Bioassay Impact Report will be written and submit to the City of Newport. Task 6. Coordination with CalState Fullerton's Renovation Plan. Experiments on the optimal methods for rock weed reintroduction into Little Corona will be conducgted by CalState Fullerton. Weston will coordinate with CalState Fullerton to update the Sampling QAPP and Monitoring Plans when the exact methodology has been determined. Schedule by Task Task 1. Update of QAPP to include mussel deployment and collection methods. ■ Updated QAPP will be completed by November 1, 2006, prior to deployment of mussel bags. Task 2. Mussel Bioaccumulation Study ■ Mussels deployed in November 2006 at 4 stations (Winter Exposure Test 2006, WET 2006). ■ WET 2006 mussels retrieved and deployment of Summer Exposure Test 2007 (SET 2007) in April 2007. Bioaccumulation tissue analysis to be initiated within 7 days of retrieval. ■ Summary chemistry report provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of mussel retrieval events. ■ Summary microbiological report provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of mussel retrieval events. Task 3. Mussel Toxicity Testing WET 2006 mussels retrieved in April 2007. Mussel toxicity testing to be initiated within 7 days of retrieval. Summary toxicity report provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of collection. Task 4. Storm Effluent toxicity testing on Kelp Germination ■ Prior to March 2007 effluent from a storm event collected during peak flow will be collected. Kelp bioassays will be initiated within 36 hours of collection. ■ Summary toxicity report provided to the City of Newport within 60 days of collection. Task 5. Project Management and Report Deliverables: ■ Interim chemistry and toxicity test results provided within 60 days of data collection. ■ Draft Buck Gully Water Flow Bioassay Impact Report will be presenented and a hard copy submitted to the City of Newport and the Technical Advisory Committee for comment and review in January 2008. ■ A final Buck Gully Water Flow Bioassay Impact Report will be written and submit to the City of Newport within 15 days of receipt of comments. Task 6._Rock weed Renovation: Coordination with CalState Fullerton, QAPP update, inclusion of methods in Monitoring Plan ■ QAPP update and inclusion of renovation methods in Monitoring Plan to be completed prior to restoration work, which is scheduled for January 2007. Costs by Task Task Activity Cost Task Cost Task 1 Update of QAPP to include mussel deployment and $1,500 $1,500 collection. Mussel bag set-up, deployment and retrieval (3 $4,000 events) Tissue chemistry: (4 locations + tissue control) x 2 $15,000 events = 10 samples Tissue bacteriology (4 locations + tissue control) x 2 Task 2 events = 10 Samples (testing at Weston $2,000 $32,000 Microbiological Certified Laboratory) UCI subcontract for bacteria (i.e., Vibrio spp.), viruses (i.e., coliphage and human viruse) and domoic acid in $10,000 the mussels Coordination with UCI and data review $1,000 Mussel bioassays: 10 fertilization and reference $5000 toxicant tests (copper and ammonia) Task 3 $11,000, Mussel bioassays: 10 development and reference $6,000 toxicant tests (copper and ammonia) Buck Gully discharge sampling (one event) $1,500 Task 4 Kelp bioassays: 2 treatments x 3 locations = 6 $4,500 $6,000 germination tests and reference toxicant tests Analysis, Reporting and QA/QC $10,000 Task 5 Meetings and Coordination based on two people $2,500 $14,500 attending 2 meetings Project Management $2,000 Rock weed Renovation: Coordination with CalState Task 6 Fullerton, QAPP update, inclusion of methods in $4,500 $4,500 Monitoring Plan Total $69,500 Costs by Task Task Activity Cost Task Cost Task 1 Update of QAPP to include mussel deployment and $1,500 $1,500 collection. Mussel bag set-up, deployment and retrieval (3 $4,000 events) Tissue chemistry: (4 locations + tissue control) x 2 $15,000 events = 10 samples Tissue bacteriology (4 locations + tissue control) x 2 Task 2 events = 10 Samples (testing at Weston $2,000 $32,000 Microbiological Certified Laboratory) UCI subcontract for bacteria (i.e., Vibrio spp.), viruses (i.e., coliphage and human viruse) and domoic acid in $10,000 the mussels Coordination with UCI and data review $1,000 Mussel bioassays: 10 fertilization and reference $5000 toxicant tests (copper and ammonia) Task 3 $11,000, Mussel bioassays: 10 development and reference $6,000 toxicant tests (copper and ammonia) Buck Gully discharge sampling (one event) $1,500 Task 4 Kelp bioassays: 2 treatments x 3 locations = 6 $4,500 $6,000 germination tests and reference toxicant tests Analysis, Reporting and QA/QC $10,000 Task 5 Meetings and Coordination based on two people $2,500 $14,500 attending 2 meetings Project Management $2,000 Rock weed Renovation: Coordination with CalState Task 6 Fullerton, QAPP update, inclusion of methods in $4,500 $4,500 Monitoring Plan Total $69,500 Newport 1 Beach ASBS Protection and Restoration ScheduleTask Task 1- Update QAPP Program Start Date- Notice to Proceed October 2006 Draft Submitted to RWQCB October 30, 2006 Review by RWQCB November 14, 2006 Finalized QAPP monitoring plan review to Newport November 16, 2006 Task 2- Mussel Bioaccumulation Study Wet Weather Program Preparation and Installation of Mussel Plantings December 2006 Mussel Field Program - Bioaccumulation by December 18, 2006 Mussel Collection and Tissue Analytical Analysis April 2007 Dry Weather Program Preparation and Installation of Mussel Plantings April 2007 Mussel Field Program - Bioaccumulation by April 30, 2007 Mussel Collection and Tissue Analytical Analysis October 2007 Task 3- Mussel Reproduction and Development Mussel Field Program December 2006/April 2007 Toxicity Testing of Mussels December 2006/April 2007 Testing to start within 3 days of delivery from supplier or retrieval from field Task 4- Storm Water Toxicity Testing on Kelp Germination Stormwater Sample Collection January 2007+ Target the first large (>0.5" rainfall) storm event beginning in January Bioassay Toxicity Testing of Kelp January 2007+ Within 36 hours of stormwater sample collection Task 5- Report Deliverables Bioaccumulation Reports June 2007/December 2007 Chemistry lab reports to be delivered within 60 days of testing Bioassay Laboratory Reports June 2007/December 2007 Bioassay lab reports to be deliveredwithin 60 days of testing Draft Bioassay Impact Report January 31, 2008. Draft Review by the City and Agencies February 2008 Final Bioassay Impact Report March 2008 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH WESTON SOLUTIONS FOR NEWPORT COAST AREA OF SPECIAL BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE MONITORING THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this day of Atc?`tS t , 2006, by and between the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, a Municipal torporation ("City"), and WESTON SOLUTIONS a California Corporation, whose address is 2433 Impala Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92010 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following: RECITALS A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. City is investigating the reasons for the decline of the sensitive marine areas, the so -call Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS's) along Newport Coast. C. City desires to engage Consultant to perform surveys of public use, biological surveys and the pilot renovation project ("Project"). D. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and knowledge to provide the services described in this Agreement. E. The principal member of Consultant for purposes of Project, shall be Dr. David Pohl. F. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: 1. TERM The term of this Agreement shall commence on the above written date, and shall terminate on the 30 day of June, 2008, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein. 2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The City may elect to delete certain tasks of the Scope of Services at its sole discretion. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time is of the essence in the performance of services under this Agreement and Consultant shall perform the services in accordance with the schedule included in Exhibit A. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to the schedule may result in termination of this Agreement by City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of any such delay in the services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees to provide notice to the other party so that all delays can be addressed. 3.1 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance in writing to the Project Administrator not later than ten (10) calendar days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control. 3.2 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by either telephone, fax, hand -delivery or mail. 4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT City shall pay Consultant for the services on a time and expense not -to -exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant's compensation for all work performed in accordance with this Agreement, including all reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed One Hundred Seventy -Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty -Six Dollars and no/100 ($174,736) without prior written authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City. 4.1 The City shall make progress payments monthly as the Project work proceeds based on the percentage of Project work completed. The Consultant shall furnish a summary breakdown of the Scope of Services and budget for the Project in a format acceptable to the City, showing the amount included therein for each principal category or task of the Project work, in such detail as reasonably requested, to provide a basis for determining progress payments. All requests for payment shall show the I percentage of work completed for each task of the Scope of Services, the position and hours of each person who performed work under that task, a brief description of the services performed under each task, and a description of any reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) days after approval by City staff of a request for payment. 4.2 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically approved in this Agreement, or specifically approved in writing in advance by City. Unless otherwise approved, such costs shall be limited and include nothing more than the following costs incurred by Consultant: A. The actual costs of subconsultants for performance of any of the services that Consultant agrees to render pursuant to this Agreement, which have been approved in advance by City and awarded in accordance with this Agreement. B. Approved reproduction charges. C. Actual costs and/or other costs and/or payments specifically authorized in advance in writing and incurred by Consultant in the performance of this Agreement. 4.3 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this, Agreement. Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B. 5. PROJECT MANAGER Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated Dr. David Pohl to be its Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel. Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from .the Project any of its personnel assigned to the performance of services upon written request of City. Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement. 3 6. ADMINISTRATION This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works Department. Robert Stein, P.E. shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator or his/her authorized representative shall represent City in all matters pertaining to the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement. 7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES In order to assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement, City agrees to, where applicable: A. Provide access to, and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner so as not to cause delays in Consultant's work schedule. B. Provide blueprinting and other services through City's reproduction company for bid documents. Consultant will be required to coordinate the required bid documents with City's reproduction company. All other reproduction will be the responsibility of Consultant and as defined above. C. Provide usable life of facilities criteria and information with regards to new facilities or facilities to be rehabilitated. 8. STANDARD OF CARE 8.1 All of the services shall be performed by Consultant or under Consultant's supervision. Consultant represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel required to perform the services required by this Agreement, and that it will perform all services in a manner commensurate with community professional standards. All services shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City, nor have any contractual relationship with City. 8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has or shall obtain all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant further represents and warrants to City that Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, keep in effect or obtain at all times during the term of this Agreement, any and all licenses, permits, insurance and other approvals that are legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement. 8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes, lockouts, accidents, or acts of God, or the failure of City 51 to furnish timely information or to approve or disapprove Consultant's work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by City, contractors, or governmental agencies. 9. HOLD HARMLESS To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties) from and against any and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses, judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation, attorney's fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever (individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims"), which may arise from or in any manner relate (directly or indirectly) to any work negligently performed or services provided under this Agreement (including, without limitation, defects in workmanship or materials and/or design defects [if the design originated with Consultant]) or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on the Project (including the negligent and/or willful acts, errors and/or omissions of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants, subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts they may be liable or any or all of them). Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall be construed as authorizing any award of attorney's fees in any action on or to enforce the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by the Consultant. 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis and Consultant is not an agent or employee of City. The manner and means of conducting the work are under the control of Consultant, except to the extent they are limited by statute, rule or regulation and the expressed terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the work, provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details of the performance or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the services. 0 11. COOPERATION Consultant agrees to work Project Administrator and interest in the work to b 12. CITY POLICY e Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies. 13. PROGRESS Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator and/or his/her duly authorized designee informed on a regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired. 14. INSURANCE Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement of work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this Agreement, a policy or policies of liability insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to City. A. Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance with original endorsements to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein. Insurance certificates must be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance or issuance of any permit. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with City's at all times during the term of this Agreement. B. Signature. A person authorized by the insurer to bind coverage on its behalf shall sign certification of all required policies. C. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders' Rating of A (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City's Risk Manager. C D. Coverage Requirements. i. Workers' Compensation Coverage. Consultant shall maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance for his or her employees in accordance with the laws of the State of California. In addition, Consultant shall require each subcontractor to similarly maintain Workers' Compensation Insurance and Employer's Liability Insurance in accordance with the laws of the State of California for all of the subcontractor's employees. Any notice of cancellation or non -renewal of all Workers' Compensation policies must be received by City at least thirty (30) calendar days (10 calendar days written notice of non- payment of premium) prior to such change. The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against City, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by Consultant for City. ii. General Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain commercial general liability insurance in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, including without limitation, contractual liability. If commercial general liability insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to the work to be performed under this Agreement, or the general aggregate limit shall be at least twice the required occurrence limit. iii. Automobile Liability Coverage. Consultant shall maintain automobile insurance covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with work to be performed under this Agreement, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) combined single limit for each occurrence. iv. Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance. Consultant shall maintain professional errors and omissions insurance, which covers the services to be performed in connection with this Agreement in the minimum amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000). E. Endorsements. Each general liability and automobile liability insurance policy shall be endorsed with the following specific language: The City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds with respect to liability arising out of work performed by or on behalf of the Consultant. 7 ii. This policy shall be considered primary insurance as respects to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers as respects to all claims, losses, or liability arising directly or indirectly from the Consultant's operations or services provided to City. Any insurance maintained by City, including any self -insured retention City may have, shall be considered excess insurance only and not contributory with the insurance provided hereunder. iii. This insurance shall act for each insured and additional insured as though a separate policy had been written for each, except with respect to the limits of liability of the insuring company. iv. The insurer waives all rights of subrogation against City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers. V. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its elected or appointed officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers. vi. The insurance provided by this policy shall not be suspended, voided, canceled, or reduced in coverage or in limits, by either party except after thirty (30) calendar days (10 calendar days written notice of non-payment of premium) written notice has been received by City. F. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely notice of claim made or suit instituted arising out of or resulting from Consultant's performance under this Agreement. G. Additional Insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work. 15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be construed as an assignment: The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Consultant, or of the interest of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member or cotenant if Consultant is a partnership or joint -venture or syndicate or cotenancy, which shall result in changing the control of Consultant. Control means fifty percent (50%) or more of the voting power, or twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint -venture. 16. SUBCONTRACTING City and Consultant agree that subconsultants may be used to complete the work outlined in the Scope of Services. The subconsultants authorized by City to perform work on this Project are identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and omissions of the subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual relationship between City and subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor other than as otherwise required by law. Except as specifically authorized herein, the services to be provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. 17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing produced (hereinafter "Documents"), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant, its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and City shall have the sole right to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party. Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents to City upon prior written request. Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant and City assumes full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has received from Consultant written consent for such changes. 18. COMPUTER DELIVERABLES CADD data delivered to City shall include the professional stamp of the engineer or architect in charge of or responsible for the work. City agrees that Consultant shall not be liable for claims, liabilities or losses arising out of, or connected with (a) the modification or misuse by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data; (b) the decline of accuracy or readability of CADD data due to inappropriate storage conditions or duration; or (c) any use by City, or anyone authorized by City, of CADD data for additions to this Project, for the completion of this Project by others, or for any other Project, excepting only such use as is authorized, in writing, by Consultant. By acceptance of CADD data, City agrees to indemnify Consultant for damages and liability resulting from the modification or misuse of such CADD data. All original drawings shall be submitted to City in the version of AutoCAD used by CITY in ".dwg" file format on a CD, and should comply with the City's digital submission requirements for Improvement Plans. The City will 0 provide AutoCAD file of City Title Sheets. All written documents shall be transmitted to City in the City's latest adopted version of Microsoft Word and Excel. 19. CONFIDENTIALITY All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and communications that result from the services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential unless City authorizes in writing the release of information. 20. OPINION OF COST Any opinion of the construction cost prepared by Consultant represents his/her judgment as a design professional and is supplied for the general guidance of City. Since Consultant has no control over the cost of labor and material, or over competitive bidding or market conditions, Consultant does not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids or actual cost to City. 21. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY The Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright infringement, including costs, contained in Consultant's drawings and specifications provided under this Agreement. 22. RECORDS Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with. the work to be performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any services, expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable. Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow inspection of all work, data, Documents, proceedings and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant under this Agreement. 23. WITHHOLDINGS City may withhold payment to Consultant of any disputed sums until satisfaction of the dispute with respect to such payment. Such withholding shall not be deemed to constitute a failure to pay according to the terms of this Agreement. Consultant shall not discontinue work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate right to appeal to the City Manager or his/her designee with respect to such disputed sums. Consultant shall be entitled to receive 10 interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of any amounts found to have been improperly withheld. 24. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the work accomplished by Consultant, the additional design, construction and/or restoration expense shall be borne by Consultant. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit City's rights under any other sections of this Agreement. 25. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project. 26. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The Consultant or its employees may be subject to the provisions of the California Political Reform Act of 1974 (the "Act"), which (1) requires such persons to disclose any financial interest that may foreseeably be materially affected by the work performed under this Agreement, and (2) prohibits such persons from making, or participating in making, decisions that will foreseeably financially affect such interest. If subject to the Act, Consultant shall conform to all requirements of the Act. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach and is grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from Consultant's violation of this Section. 27. NOTICES All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing, to City by Consultant and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first-class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall be addressed to City at: Robert Stein Public Works Department City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Boulevard Newport Beach, CA 92663 Phone: 949-644-3322 Fax: 949-644-3308 11 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from CITY to Consultant shall be addressed to Consultant at: Attention: Dr. David Pohl Weston Solutions 2433 Impala Drive Carlsbad, CA 92010 Phone: 760-931-8081 Fax: 760-931-1580 28. TERMINATION In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default, specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, the non -defaulting party may terminate the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof. Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by giving seven (7) calendar days prior written notice to Consultant. In the event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for services satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form. 29. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS Consultant shall at its own cost and expense comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter enacted. In addition, all work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City, county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject to approval of the Project Administrator and City. 30. WAIVER A waiver by either party of any breach, of any term, covenant or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. 12 31. INTEGRATED CONTRACT This Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein. No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions herein. 32. CONFLICTS OR INCONSISTENCIES In the event there are any conflicts or inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern. 33. INTERPRETATION The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of construction which might otherwise apply. 34. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the City Attorney. 35. SEVERABILITY If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. 36. CONTROLLING LAW AND VENUE The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Orange. 37. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYMENT Consultant represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. is] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM: ) 4r� C'� Assistant tity Attorney for the City of Newport Beach ATTEST: By 6V6111t M LaVonne Harkless, City Clerk CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, A Municipal C oration &/ 9 By: rl?42 Mayor for the City of Newport Beach CONSULTANT: (Corporate Officer) Title: Print Name:-ja,,,,& 14 .—?oh 11 A -1 NJ, �- Title: Wa}>vY 1d�aLhLz L.Ujer Print Name: %si& NAcy'k c 0, , Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates F:\Users\PBw\Shared\Agreements\FY 06-07\Weston-ASBS Monitoring.doc 14 EXHIBIT A wr ; � S(�uLU71pN5 B. Scope of Services The following technical scope of services discussion presents the Weston Team's approach to each of the tasks. Included in this discussion is first a summary of the activities and deliverables that will be completed under the task, followed by the team's approach to completing the task. For Tasks 1 and 3, which include the completion of the Public Use Survey and the Baseline Biological and Pilot Renovation Surveys, a summary of the following will be provided: key questions to be answered; target outcomes; integration with other ICWMP tasks; and linkage to other program elements. A part of the target outcomes for these tasks is the refinement of the Impact Metric that will provide for a measure of relative impact to prioritize the source impacts and subsequent management action defined in the ICWMP. A discussion of potential enhancement to the proposed Impact Metric is provided under Tasks 1 and 3. Task 1 - Public Use Impact Study at each ASBS Public use impacts on the marine resources from activities such as trampling, harvesting, and scavenging is a critical factor in the protection of State of California Areas of Special Biological Significance. The Weston/CRM Team will utilize findings from recent local public use monitoring studies at Treasure Island (Montage Resort Project) conducted for the City of Laguna Beach by Coastal Resources Management (2003, 2005) and other relevant studies in the development and completion of the Public Use Impact Study for the Newport Beach Marine Life Refuge ASBS No. 32 and the Heisler Park Ecological Reserve ASBS No. 30. The study will consist of compiling information on the spatial and temporal impact by public use on the sensitive marine life areas. As part of the holistic ASBS watershed approach, we will be conducting these studies to quantify public use impacts for comparison with constituent loading from municipal storm drains as well as contributions from migration of constituents from adjacent watersheds. A methodology for comparing these impacts (Impact Metric) quantitatively will be developed as part of this Planning Project. The results of these studies and quantitative comparisons will be presented in the Public Use Impact Report and the ASBS Impact Metric. The schedule for these deliverables are presented on the attached project scheduled. Locally, the team brings nearly 40 years of experience to the project, conducting and evaluating the effects of coastal development and public use on shoreline and nearshore biological resources throughout southern California. Within Orange County, this includes working extensively with City of Laguna Beach and City of Newport Beach stakeholders. We have conducted long-term intertidal and subtidal studies in Laguna Beach (1996-2006)_, including 155, year-round, eight -hour public use surveys, quarterly rocky intertidal monitoring surveys since November 2001 (19 surveys at five locations), and winter/summer subtidal reef monitoring surveys since May 2000 (12 surveys at seven stations). The public use study at the Montage Resort documented substantial increases in public use after the opening of the resort, and quantified such activities such as tide pooling, trampling, collecting, handling/returning organisms to the tide pools, spear fishing, shore fishing, commercial lobstering, and party boat activity in the nearshore waters. With this background in public use studies, the Team is well versed with field methods, techniques, and problems that can arise by conducting such studies, working with both city and other stakeholder groups in managing and protecting local marine resources, and assessing public use impacts. Along with the public use studies at Treasure Island, CRM is mapping the intertidal habitats, including rockweed resources and surfgrass resources using GPS and GIS methodologies to document habitat conditions and provide a spatial baseline for future public use impact analysis. CRM was the prime contractor and Mr. Ware was the principal investigator for preparing biological appendices for the City of Newport Beach LCP update, assisting the City in updating LCP policies and identifying potential impacts and mitigation measures within the City of Newport Beach's Environment Study Areas including ASBS 7 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys 31/32 (2002-2003). The Team has also conducted intertidal field studies and identified impacts and mitigation measures for improvements to the Salt Creek drainage systems, and conducted intertidal and subtidal field studies and evaluating the effects of beach sand nourishment on that City's marine resources. Based upon the extensive experience that the team brings to this project and the long-term associations with the project stakeholders, we believe the team is well qualified and has scientific background to conduct the public use impact analysis for this project. Study Needs Public use of the shoreline and nearshore waters of California's Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) has a potential to exert environmental pressures on rocky intertidal plants and invertebrates, and nearshore fishery resources. Recent studies along the Orange County shoreline, including within MMAs, have established that these areas are subjected to intense public pressure (Murray et al. 1999; Coastal Resources Management (2003, 2005). These pressures include such activities as the collection of tide pool plants and animals, picking up and handling tide pool organisms, trampling vegetation and soft -bodied tide pool organisms, legal and illegal sport fishing from the shoreline, spear fishing while SCUBA or skin diving, and commercial fishing and sports fishing party boat fisheries. Historically, Addessi (1994) documented reduced density of macro invertebrate species (i.e., snails, crabs, anemones) in heavily visited intertidal areas along the San Diego coastline comparing data collected in 1971 and 1991. Public use pressure reduced the density of macro invertebrate species (i.e., snails, crabs, anemones). Collecting will also alter age sizes within a population, and produce changes in intertidal community structure (Murray et al. 1999; Kido and Murray 2003). Trampling is a significant concern because it will reduce the viability of seaweeds and soft - bodied animals (i.e., anemones), and crack mussel shells. Trampling can result in changes in the community composition of the plants and animals living under the canopy provided by seaweeds (Zedler 1978, Murray et al. 1999, Kido and Murray 2003). In order to identify the degree to which public use affects marine resources within ASBS areas and to identify the relative importance of public use -related impacts with constituent loading from municipal storm drains as well as contributions from migration of constituents from adjacent watersheds (i.e., constituent loading from dry and wet weather flow and cross contamination from tidal flows from Newport Bay and coastal watershed inputs) the Weston/CRM project team will conduct a comprehensive public use study of selected ASBS rocky intertidal areas. The results of these studies will establish public use intensity quotients [PUIQ] (i.e., numbers of people per area and time) for each ASBS, quantity the types and abundances of public use activities within the study sites, and prepare a semi -quantitative Public Use Impact Metric (PUIM of the various types of activities that result in damage to intertidal habitats and selected target species. The focus of the Impact Metric is to provide a relative importance ranking of public use impacts with watershed - based impacts so that the long-term management plan of ASBS is quantitative rather than subjective. Task Identification Task la-lg. A primary task to be accomplished is the collection of both qualitative and quantitative data on how the public has used Orange County shoreline and nearshore waters. Based on the results of the recent Montage Resort Study completed by Coastal Resource Management in 2005, on public use activities in the rocky intertidal areas, the impacts from public use on the marine resources from trampling and scavenging is a critical factor in the protection of the ASBS. The Weston Team will utilize our findings from this study in the development and completion of the Public Use Impact Study for the Newport Beach Marine Life Refuge ASBS No. 32 and the Heisler Park Ecological Reserve ASBS No. 30. This historical information will be collected and used to: • identify appropriate public use field data collection methodologies; and, 0 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys SOLUTIONS • provide comparative spatial and temporal databases of publics use impacts on other California rocky intertidal and nearshore marine habitats. The team will collect, review, and analyze at a minimum, previous studies conducted at Half Moon Bay's Fitzgerald State Park (Task la), review and summarize reports prepared by the County of Orange, The City of Laguna Beach (i.e., Lifeguards (prior to 2005), and the Tidepool Enforcement Officer (2005-2006), and the City of Newport Beach Harbor Resources Division Tide Pool Ranger Coordinator (Task lb), the Coastal Resources Management Marine Resources Public Use and Rocky Intertidal Monitoring Program Reports for the period 2001-2006 (Task lc), public education and community outreach programs of the cities of Laguna Beach and Newport Beach, California State Parks, and where pertinent, Surfrider Foundation, Coastkeepers and other community volunteer programs (Task ld), sport fishermen, sport divers, commercial fisherman, and commercial divers near each ASBS (Task le) and review local and state enforcement activities and practices at each ASBS (Task lf). These tasks will be summarized and compiled into a Technical Memorandum that will present findings and conclusions of Tasks 1 a -If, and provide scientific guidance for the preparation of a detailed Public Use Monitoring Plan and the conduct of Public Use Monitoring (Task lh-11). Tasks lb-lk. The Public Use Impact Study Monitoring Plan (Task lh) at a minimum will describe the rationale for ASBS sites to be monitored, the frequency and duration of monitoring, target species to be included in field observations, observer survey methodology, the types of public behaviors and activities to be monitored (i.e., trampling, handling and returning specimens, collecting and removing specimens, tide pool intrusion, fishing), quality control/assurance, data reduction and analysis, statistical methods to be employed to analyze and compare data, and the methods to develop a semi -quantitative Public Use Impact Metric (PUIM) that will rank the degree of impact of public uses with watershed -born associated impacts. The monitoring activities and site selection will be directly tied in with Task 3 biological survey tasks (Task li). The draft plan will be submitted to the City of Newport Beach for review and comment (Task lj) upon which, a final plan will be developed and submitted for approval (Task lk) The Weston/CRM team tentatively proposes to conduct public use monitoring at three locations where Task 3 intertidal monitoring studies will occur: • Little Corona Tide Pool ASBS #32 (Newport Beach Marine Life Refuge) at the base of Poppy Avenue in Corona del Mar. This area is subject to watershed runoff from Buck Gully, elevated number of tide pool visitors, accessibility for public use, shore fishing, spear fishing, SCUBA, and consistent use of the waters within the ASBS for commercial and sports fishing purposes; • ASBS #32 downcoast of Little Corona tide pools near Arch Rock or Morning Canyon (Cameo Shores) or the northwest corner of the Irvine Coast Marine Life Refuge/ASBS (01). These areas are less accessible to the public, but similar to the Little Corona Tide Pool monitoring site in all other aspects and; • Heisler Park ASBS #30. This area is comparable in public use and watershed runoff yet, and is typically a greater destination for skin and scuba divers than the Little Corona Tide Pools or the Morning Canyon monitoring site. In addition to these sites, the Team believes that it could be extremely valuable to cross- link the public use survey with Cal State Fullerton pilot intertidal restoration efforts at one or more sites selected by Cal State Fullerton to assess (1) how public use in areas selected for restoration affect the success of these restoration 0 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys efforts, (2) if long-term restoration efforts could be successful with constant public use, and (3) what measures could be implemented to enhance the potential for restoration success. Each of the three ASBS areas included in the study likely displays distinctive physical attributes that will ultimately bias the public's usage within each area, i.e., the ability of individuals to access the shoreline, fish from outcrops, collect bait, and to access tide pools) as well as influence the types and distributions of intertidal organisms. Given the differences in physical attributes among the site, the Team believes that there are no valid reference areas that would be applicable for a BACI statistical analysis of public use data. In the absence of a "reference site", concurrent public use monitoring studies being conducted at Treasure Island for the Montage Resort Project provides comparative data for analysis. In addition, the CRM Treasure Island public use studies will be implementing an Impact Metric that can be directly compared to the ASBS studies. Each site will be compared against itself through time, and then compared spatially and temporally with the other ASBS monitoring sites using a modified BACI analysis. BACI analysis, however, may be directly applicable to public use impact monitoring of CSUF intertidal restoration studies if the restoration sites can employ side -by -side comparisons where the public can access portions of the restoration areas but not others. The study will consist of compiling information on the spatial and temporal impact by public use on the sensitive marine life areas. Public use can lead to impacts on the ASBS by trampling and scavenging activities. As part of the holistic ASBS watershed approach, we will be conducting these studies to quantify public use impacts for comparison with constituent loading from municipal storm drains as well as contributions from migration of constituents from adjacent watersheds. A methodology for comparing these impacts quantitatively will be developed as part of this Planning Project. The results of these studies and quantitative comparisons will be presented in the Public Use Impact Report and the ASBS Impact Metric. These deliverables are scheduled for submittal to the Grant Manager as shown on the attached project schedule. Using our expertise and knowledge of the public use issues and the rocky intertidal habitats along the Newport and Laguna Beach coasts, the Weston Team has developed a preliminary list of the key questions, target outcomes and integration with other tasks and program elements for Task 1: Key Questions, Target Outcomes and Integration Planning Grant Study Key Study Questions Targeted Outcomes Integration with other ICWMP Tasks Linkage to Other Program Elements Public 1. What are the 1. Identify the Identify key Identify High Impact public use primary public species that are Impact Public Study activities that use activities that most affected Use Activities impact the most impact the by public use for Highlighted in preservation ASBS. baseline survey Proposed of the ASBS? 2. Provide input on and subsequent Marine 2. What are the the list of species effectiveness Resource Video species that for the Baseline monitoring — 2005/2006 are most survey that can following Consolidated impacted by be an indicator of management Grant public use changes in public action Application activities, and use activities. implementation. how does this 3. Refine methods Identified High High Impact list compare to measure and Impact Public Activities to the quantify impacts. Activities that Prioritized by baseline 4. Develop are to be Cities in ICWMP 10 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys survey? comparative level prioritized for and Focus of 3. Do the of impact to other management 2007Integrated differences in potential sources actions in the Watershed habitat of impact to ICWMP to Implementation between ASBS. reduce impacts. Grant ASBSs effect 5. Identify the . Provide level of factors that are recommend - impact? key in ations on 4. Can the level understanding possible of impact be how the public management quantified uses each ASBS, actions to and including cultural, address public compared to economic, and use impacts for other aesthetic factors ICWMPP. impacts? . Coordinate with the Pilot Renovation project on identifying possible measures to better protect the re- introduced species Task 11. Conduct the Public Use Monitoring Program. Based upon the acceptance of the Public Use Monitoring Plan, the Team will conduct the Public Use Impact Survey. Where possible, we will utilize the resources of the Newport Beach Tide Pool Refuge Manager, and the City of Laguna Beach Tide Pool Enforcement Officer, and available interns to collect and compile data, and assist in the conduct of the field surveys to control project costs. The task deliverables include: • Submit a Technical Memorandum on Research Results • Submit a Monitoring Plan for the Public Use Survey • Submit a Public Use Survey Report with Results and Recommendations In order to identify the degree to which public affect marine resources within ASBS areas and to compare the relative importance of public use -related impacts with other types of effects on ASBS resources (i.e., constituent loading from dry and wet weather flow and cross contamination from tidal flows from Newport Bay and coastal watershed inputs) the Weston and CRM project team will conduct a comprehensive and focused public use study that will provide a (1) public use intensity quotient PUIQ (i.e., numbers of people for each ASBS and (2) a quantitative assessment, ranking, and metric analysis of the relative importance of each identified activity. Comparisons over time within each ASBS and between each ASBS using BACI will identify and semi -quantitatively rank the significance of the various types of activities that occur in ASBS rocky intertidal and near -shore waters. The data collected will then be compared to determine those types of activities that need to be controlled and the likely mechanisms of effective control. Between 2001 and 2005, Coastal Resources Management conducted 189, 8-hour public use surveys on the shoreline at Treasure Island, Laguna Beach California to document the types and frequency of public use activities on the shoreline and the near -shore waters. This information will be used with the data collected 11 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys MI U SOLUTIONS during the Newport Beach ASBS surveys proposed for this program to make comparisons of the relative importance of alternative human uses of rocky intertidal southern California beaches. The public use monitoring effort will be non -intrusive, and monitors will avoid contact with the public if at all possible to avoid biasing the data. Contact will be made with the public only after their exit from the area during which the monitors will count the types and abundance of plants and/or animals collected. Data will be collected in two-hour blocks over an eight -hour period. Factors to be monitored will include, but not limited to: • numbers of groups visiting the rocky intertidal and the number of individuals within a group; • habitat where people are observed collecting or disrupting habitat; • the frequency of tide pooling (general), trampling activities, collecting (food, bait collecting, or general), handling/retuming organisms to rocks, rock overturning, SCUBA diving, snorkeling, spear fishing, shore fishing, party boat fishing, commercial fishing, and enforcement activities per period of time during the survey; and • weather and sea state (Beaufort Scale), tide condition (hourly), and swell/wave height (hourly). The data will be analyzed by time period, by day, by survey, and by season, with respective to weather, sea state, tide levels, and habitat type. Information on the types of species collected and fished for will be important in determining the fate of key target species, providing an estimate of resource losses that may occur due to public use, and effects on intertidal and shallow subtidal community function and structure as a result of continued public use. 12 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys MMA SOLUTIONS Task 2 — ASBS Research Task 2a. Obtain Data on Marine Resources — The Minerals Management Service (MMS) has conducted core studies at Crystal Cove, Shaws Cove, Treasure Island and Dana Point and biodiversity surveys since 1995 at Crystal Cove. Core surveys are conducted twice per year and help to determine base -line population characteristics of key species (rockweed, turfweed, surf grass, acorn barnacles, owl limpet, California mussel and ocher star) should an oil spill take place in the area. Biodiversity surveys have recently been incorporated into the monitoring program to increase scope of data collected. Each of these rocky intertidal areas contain habitat that is subject to discharges of storm water and dry weather flows from municipal storm drains or non -point source discharges as well as public use. Based on the proximity of these sites to the Newport and Irvine ASBS and the similarity in adjacent upland land use, the MMS survey data provides an important data set in which to examine the relative abundance patterns of specific widely -monitored species. An assessment of the MMS survey data, with regard to the current health of the Newport Beach ASBS, will be conducted as part of the ASBS Research and Data Collection task (Task 2). Weston has already been in contact with MMS to provide a compilation of the biological data that was requested for the ASBS Exception letter response for the Cities of Laguna Beach and Newport Beach. We were directed by both Cities to wait to complete this data compilation under this scope. The Weston team can compile this data from the electronic files that MMS has for the Orange County sites, but based on discussions with MMS, we determined that it would be more cost effective to have MMS compile their data, and then we will use the compiled data to assess and develop project survey lists, etc. Weston is currently working for the City of San Diego on the Proposition 50 grant project for the La Jolla ASBS in partnership with Scripps Institute of Oceanography and San Diego Coastkeeper. Data from this project that is available for distribution will be compiled to compare with water quality, toxicity and biological data available for the ASBSs and coastal canyon creeks in Newport Beach and Laguna Beach. Weston also prepared the water quality and watershed characteristics summary for the ASBS Exception letter response for the City of San Diego. Therefore, our team already has this data compiled and available for use on this project. The Weston Team will also research other sources of data from other ASBSs in Los Angeles, Ventura, Monterey and San Mateo Counties. Task 2b. Review Newport Coast Watershed Flow and Water Quality Assessment — Weston has prepared this report and is intimately familiar with the findings and conclusions of this assessment. We are awaiting final comments on the Executive Summary and will be finalizing this report this month. No effort is needed under this task. Task 2c. Coordination with Cal State Fullerton on Renovation Project and Bioassay Testing — The Weston Team will coordinate with Steve Murray from Cal State Fullerton on the pilot renovation project to assure that the Pilot Renovation Project Monitoring Plan contains the methods and species surveys in order assess the effectiveness of the project. We will also coordinate with Cal State on providing them with the baseline biological survey and public use survey data in order to assure the pilot renovation is located and established in areas that would provide the most success of the renovation project. The Team will also provide Cal State with data from bioassays that Weston conducted at Little Corona and at La Jolla ASBS, as well as other available toxicity data from other ASBSs. The Weston Team includes biologist and a bioassay laboratory that routinely conducts toxicity testing of storm water, ocean waters and sediment. Shelly Anghera and Jack Word have considerable experience in the development, conducting and assessment of bioassay testing and 13 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys provide the high level of expertise that will be fundamental in the development of this program. Task 2d. Review Data from Public Impact and Cross Contamination Study — The Weston Team will use the results of the Public Use Impact study conducted under Task 1 and review of the Cross Contamination Study conducted by others to provide input on the development of the Impact Metric and the Long -Term Effectiveness Assessment/Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Task 3 - Monitoring Plan, QAPP and Field Surveys a. Baseline Monitoring Plan The Weston Team has conducted a preliminary review of the available marine resource data and we are already familiar with the local water quality and public use activity issues having completed recent investigations and studies for Newport Beach and Laguna Beach. An important component of the Baseline Monitoring Plan is the identification of the indicator species that will be used as a basis to compare existing impacts and effectiveness of management measures to reduce these impacts from dry weather flows, storm water, public use and cross contamination from tidal flow from Newport Bay. Areas of Special Biological Significance (ASBS) have been identified throughout California shorelines to increase the level of scrutiny and to provide protection of valuable biological resources. The intertidal habitats have similar as well as different types and degrees of pressure than subtidal environments. The impact types that can occur in both intertidal and subtidal environments include the types and quantities of sediment, contaminants of potential ecological or human health concerns, and less saline waters that are transported during dry and storm water flows or discharge of treated effluents. The additional types of impacts that occur in intertidal environments include more direct human impacts of harvesting, scavenging, trampling, and direct collecting of organisms during tidal cycles. The objectives of this monitoring program for the listed ASBS are to distinguish the potential causes of impacts that can be characterized by examining the distribution, abundance and contamination levels in species located within the ASBS. This monitoring plan is also planned to aid in the determination of magnitude and extent of multiple types of anthropogenic impacts, and to create a base -line in which to monitor change due to further impacts or effectiveness of recovery actions. Monitoring programs by definition involve the repeated sampling of measured parameters over time and space. The fundamental approach to biological monitoring includes the following key elements (Murray et al. (2002)): 1) the biological monitoring program must be carried out over long periods and designed so as to account for natural variability in the biological system; 2) the program must be designed using the best available ecological concepts, study designs, and principles; 3) the data must be collected in a consistent and well documented manner to achieve required continuity and reliability; and, 4) the program should be designed so that the detection of change and impacts can be statistically based. The proposed monitoring plan combines the species and methods of study performed by MMS in the intertidal MARINe program with additional species that were selected to help delineate potential causes of changes in the abundance of intertidal species. The plan is also expandable to incorporate addressing uptake 14 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys of contaminants into the tissues and direct assessment of the effects of those contaminants on survival and successful growth and reproduction of these sentinel species. Additional monitoring efforts may also include assessment of key species settlement and/or successful germination of local kelps. This data will not only serve to accommodate the monitoring interest of the program but help develop a prediction on the success of restoration activities in a selected ASBS region. The monitoring program will be designed at Little Corona, Morning Canyon and Heisler Park to accomplish multiple objectives. The base -line monitoring program will identify the presence, abundance and distributions of species that have been regularly monitored at rocky intertidal sites (e.g., Shaws Cove, Crystal Cove, Treasure Island and Dana Point) as part of the MMS and CCA long-term monitoring programs. This will establish the relative abundances of specific species within Orange County. In addition, this comparable data, through the use of correlative analyses and temporal trend analyses, may help to identify species specific restoration or recovery goals for Newport and Irvine ASBS. As with the MMS and CCA monitoring programs, it is recommended that biannual surveys will be conducted, one during summer and one during winter. Along transect lines stratified by habitat type and tidal level, point contacts, quadrats, and searches will be implemented following the MMS methods for Orange County sites. The collected data will be georeferenced using digital GPS collected using a tablet based PC data collection systems that can incorporate maps, photos, standard data and notes and observations that are specific to each sampling episode. A report will be produced that summarizes the biological and physical data in a way as to make comparable to MMS and CCA databases. In addition, photos of permanent quadrats will be collected using standard photoplot methods during the winter sampling and archived for later use should they be necessary. The comparison will be focused to the characteristics previously measured during the long-term monitoring programs currently managed by MMS and CCA within Orange County. As part of the base -line monitoring program, biodiversity surveys will be conducted. Many of the long-term monitoring programs have begun to conduct annual biodiversity assessments. These standardized assessment techniques will be applied to each ASBS during the winter sampling to allow comparisons to other long-term monitoring databases. Communities of intertidal invertebrates, plants and fish have a resiliency that reflects their abilities to thrive in this harsh environment where wave actions, temperature fluctuations, and exposure are highly variable. There are natural conditions and anthropogenic impacts that can cause these populations to increase or decrease in abundance or biomass on varying scales of space and time. Distinguishing between the natural and anthropogenic causes of these changes will depend on a factorial design that compares the magnitude of change in the distribution and abundance of particular species on regional and local scales. Using a weight of evidence approach, the patterns of change in selected species can be used to support conclusions regarding the cause of the observed changes. The presence (or absence) and relative abundance of specific species known to be correlated with specific anthropogenic impacts will be monitored initially to identify specific anthropogenic impacts and later to monitor the success of remediation of these impacts. Many species included in the large-scale monitoring programs can be used to infer impact type, but often these "indicator" organisms are rare, small and more difficult to identify or sample. Therefore many are not included in large- scale, long-term monitoring events due to funding or logistically limitation. The table illustrates the types of impacts that may be identified by presence and abundance of particular groups of species. The black -font listed organisms are included as priority monitoring organisms in the MMS program (MARINe Target and Core species); the red -font listed organisms are recommended for inclusion in the Newport Coast and Heisler Park ASBS program. 15 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys Impact Assessment The table and the description of the impact types below represent the Weston/CRM's initial approach to distinguishing cause from monitoring program (non -manipulated surveys). The first two columns represent potential causes of impacts that can be related to storm water discharges or proximity to sources of contamination. The next four impact types represent other types of human impacts through consumptive, recreational or scientific use of the intertidal environment. The pattern of response by all of these species is more important to the demonstration of potential causes than simply documenting the abundance of invertebrates through time at selected locations. The initial recommendations presented in this table provide a framework to answer the key questions by identifying the potential cause/species couplet and the methods that we would use to document and extrapolate the data. A summary of the impact types are described below. The organisms included in the baseline biological survey that will be used to address key potential impacts are presented in the table that follows. Sedimentation: Using the field tablet PC/GIS photographic documentation system Weston will characterize the aerial coverage of rocks and habitat types for each of the ASBS sites. A seasonal difference in sand accumulation is expected, but permanent transects (located transverse to shoreline) and photographs from permanent site locations will be used to examine long-term changes in the loss or gain of sediment. A long- term gain in sediment will limit the distribution of sessile invertebrates, algae and plants. Organisms that are more mobile may move to avoid sedimentation and may show increased densities in the areas that have not been covered with sediment. Rock scars where organisms have died as a result of sedimentation will be seen on rocks that have recently been uncovered by wave conditions. Photographic and PC/GIS documentation of the location of increased abundance of organisms or scars on rocks will provide evidence to support increased sedimentation as an issue. Increased sediment in the water column (usually measured as total suspended solids [TSS]) can clog filter feeding organisms resulting in depressed growth rates and scour newly attached organisms resulting in depressed settlement rates. This baseline monitoring program will monitor the growth rates of transplanted mussels and the settlement rates of barnacles. Chemical contamination: Contaminant related impacts can be measured by the presence or absence of the most sensitive species during exposure to extreme contamination (i.e., oil spill, sewage discharge). However, the effects of marginal levels of contaminants that cause sublethal effects are more difficult to monitor. The results of the Newport Coast Water Quality and Flow Assessment indicate that metals (cadmium and copper), pesticides and bacteria were constituents of concern. The presence of these constituents in the canyon creeks and ocean plume samples at concentrations above the water quality objectives indicates a potential for impact. However, what concentrations are bioavailable and result in chronic toxicity and/or bioaccumulation are questions that also need to be addressed to assess long-term impacts from pollutants in the water and sediment entering and within the ASBS. Long-term impacts from chemical contamination will act to reduce diversity and remove sensitive species. Weston proposes manipulative monitoring of algal and larval recruitment. Settling plates for barnacle and algae will be monitored. In order to assess chronic toxicity and long-term exposure effects, additional toxicity tests are recommended on water or sediment collected from the ASBSs. Toxicity tests are proposed as part of the overall planning grant program, and the Weston/CRM Team will coordinate on recommendations for these tests. In addition, bioaccumulation of' contaminants of concern, especially in California Mussels is recommended to assess long-term exposure effects and to determine the integrated accumulation of bioavailable contaminants from various sources. These tests may be conducted as part of the toxicity testing program to provide the additional data needed to assess the long-term impact from the constituents of concern identified in the Water Quality and Flow Assessment. These tests are also likely to be required under the proposed ASBS Exception process, and would be cost effective to conduct these tests under the planning grant tasks to address both program key 16. Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys M - M UTAA I _'I! M_wol/ TS43LUTIONS questions and regulatory permit requirements. Toxicity tests and bioaccumulation studies are outside the scope of the baseline monitoring program, and are discussed as an option in Section H. Scavenging: Scavenging, beachcomber harvesting, is defined for the purposes of this monitoring program as being distinct from harvesting. Scavenging is the taking of organisms from the intertidal based on curiosity and a lack of knowledge what the removal or disturbance of the organisms from the intertidal means. Likely species being removed by scavenging include larger more showy organisms with little or no food or bait value (e.g., starfish, red algae, sea anemones). An additional impact of scavenging is turning over rocks while looking for tide pool animals without replacing them in their original position (orientation). This latter impact results in the loss of organisms on both the surfaces and the bottoms of the rocks that are inverted. Fresh scars or rotting organisms on rocks are signs of this type of impact. Harvesting: Harvesting is the taking of organisms for human use. The types of species collected from the intertidal for consumption are based on the size and palatability of the organisms for consumption and traditional use as bait or in medicinal preparations. Harvested organisms can be based on reductions in larger edible species relative to changes in the abundance of the larger less edible species. A sub -issue associated with harvesting is `gleaning' where all organisms of edible size and type are removed for human consumption for subsistence or based on cultural use of resources. Scientific and aquaria collection: A different form of harvesting is the collection of intertidal organisms for use in marine aquaria or for scientific purposes. The removal of turnable/transportable rocks and their associated organisms is one form of intertidal loss from aquarium use. Selective removal of individual invertebrates and fish from the intertidal does occur and these are generally the larger more showy type individuals for the aquaria trade. Census of what is being removed and for which purposes can be determined by interviewing people that are leaving with intertidal organisms. Removal for scientific purposes can be almost any type of organism and is likely to be very isolated. Records with Cal Fish and Game for collector permit use of specific areas should be available for review to determine local impacts from this specialized removal. Trampling: The influence of trampling can be observed in a variety of intertidal communities with the species that are easier to walk on. The influence of trampling on sharp cornered species (e.g., large barnacles, sea urchins, mussels) or slippery zones (e.g., sea anemone colonies) are likely to be minor, while the trampling of rock weeds, surf grasses, brown and red algal tufts and small barnacles are the most common. Open habitat is minimal in isolated intertidal zones. Documenting during monitoring program (percent cover in quadrats and transects) and photographing the unoccupied habitat will allow the documentation and help determine recovery goals. 17 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys Type of Impacts and Likely Response of Intertidal Organisms to Each Type of Impact Types of Impacts Increased Chemical Harvesting Collecting Species Sedimentation Contamination Scavenging (Food or (scientific or Trampling toxicity Bait) aquaria) Haliotis cracherodii ? No No Yes Lottia gigantea No No No Tegula gallina/aureotincta No No No Gastropoda Increased density and Tegula funebralis No No No No Norrissia nomIssii ? No decreased suitable Yes Yes Astraea undosa No No habitat of Littorina spp ? No No No mobile organisms due to Megathura crenulata No Yes No No Chitons Stenoplax conspicua No No No Mopalia spp No No Yes No emigration from zones of sedimentation Sea Stars Pisaster ochracheous No No No Stongylocentrotus Sea Urchins urnuratus Reduction in Yes No ? No Strongylocentrotus sensitive franciscanus species, settlement, bioaccumula Yes ? No Anthopleura ele antissima/solia No No Yes No Anemones tion of Anthopleura xantho rammica Decreased contaminant S. No No Yes No Pollicipes polymerus No Yes No Yes Tetraclita squamosa No No No No density and Barnacles rubescens increased Chthamalus dalli/fissus/ suitable Balanus glandula habitat of mobile organisms due to No No No Yes Bivalves Mytilus californianus No Yes No No Polychaeta Phragmatapoma No No Yes cementarium immigration Boa Kelp Egregia menziesii Yes No to new sediment free Yes Yes Rock Weed Hesperophycus californicus No No Silvetia compressa No No No zones Turf Weed Endocladia muricata No No No Surfgrass g Phyllospadix scourleri/torre i No No No No Sea Lettuce Ulva sp ? No Yes No Yes Black = Regularly monitored as part of the MMS program at most sites Red = Additional species recommended as part of the ASBS to aid in the identification of specific anthropogenic impacts ? = unknown 18 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys 5ULUTIUNS Using our expertise and knowledge of the rocky intertidal habitats and impact issues along the Newport and Laguna Beach coasts, the Weston Team has developed a preliminary list of the key questions, target outcomes and integration with other tasks and program elements for the baseline biological survey: Key Questions, Target Outcomes and Integration Planning Grant Study Key Study Questions Targeted Outcomes Integration with other ICWMP Tasks Linkage to Other Program Elements Baseline 1. What is the Reductions in Public use Impact Matrix Biological abundance of key species comparison of Development Survey species in the provides provisional cause rocky provisional with observations of Baseline Survey intertidal area indication of public use. Data to be within the cause provided to ASBS? SWRCB for 2. What is the Reduction in Comparison to ASBS Exception biodiversity of biodiversity sediment and Process — key species indicates contaminant loads, Response Letter in the ASBS? additional stress bioaccumulation for Little Corona 3. How do the or dependence data and Heisler results com on a particular Park ASBS pare to the change in Comparison to existing data resource regional on the other temperature or Orange Comparison water clarity data County MMS provides sites? assessment of more regional scale impacts (e.g. global climate b. Prepare Pilot Renovation Project Monitoring Plan One of the key results of the monitoring program and the public use assessment will be to prioritize the level of relative impact from a variety of public uses and causes of change. Appropriate renovation programs must first determine the proximate cause so that renovation plans have a chance for success. As an example, it would not be prudent to renovate an area and attempt to replace a species that is under stress from regional issues. The results of the public use and baseline biological surveys will be used to provide recommendation for the pilot renovation program. Once the cause of an adverse effect within the ASBS has been determined and mediated, plans for the renovation and restoration of species within the ASBS can be developed. After the pilot renovation plan is designed, a monitoring plan will be prepared in coordination with California State University, Fullerton to assure consensus on the monitoring and recovery goals in order to determine the level of success. Corrective and renovation activities will need to be coordinated Cal State Fullerton, the cities, resource agencies, research organizations and the public so that acceptable solutions can be developed, accepted and adopted by all of these groups. Renovation activities can then be implemented in pilot scales with adequate monitoring to ascertain success and modify the management plan based on documented success. A preliminary list of the key questions and target outcomes of the pilot renovation monitoring are presented in the following table. 19 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys SOLUTIONS Key Questions, Target Outcomes and Integration Planning Grant Study Key Study Questions Targeted Outcomes Integration with other ICWMP Tasks Linkage to Other Program Elements Pilot 1. Has the Pilot Improvement in the Public Use Adaptive Renovation Renovation been abundance of management of Monitoring successful in targeted species Comparison to restoration plan establishing re- MMS MARINe data introduced Increased from reference Provides data species? abundance of areas. for follow- 2. What other species that use the up/additional species are target species for Source evaluation renovation indicators of cover, habitat or for potential causes project under renovation food. Decreases in of impact 2005-2006 success? abundance of Consolidated 3. What factors with species that are food Grant regard to for the target Application continued impacts species. may be affecting renovation Identify success or success? lack of success 4. What species factors that can would be most influence the specific suitable for follow- species being up renovation reintroduced projects? 5. How does the Based on success of abundance of the reintroduction re -introduce consider other species compare species that are to local similar likely influenced by habitats — the same cause. reference comparisons? Similar habitats but with different impacts will begin to look more similar c. Prepare Reference Location Monitoring Plan The University of California at Santa Cruz along with MMS has been conducting a multi -year research project to study the rocky intertidal habitat along the western coast which includes sites in Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon, California, and Mexico. There are 48 sites in California. Two separate methods of evaluating change can be developed using the same set of monitoring data. In the first case, a possible "natural background" site t can be used as a reference site for Newport Beach ASBS. One such site is Dana Point but we will examine all potential local sites for comparability, including Crystal Cove, Shaw Cove and Treasure Island. A data evaluation on the Dana Point reference site will be included in the MMS data assessment as part of Task 2. The monitoring studies gather information about the intertidal geologic formation and algae and invertebrate species diversity, abundance, and assemblage. The monitoring began in 2001 and is scheduled to be conducted every three to five years with the intention of utilizing the data to 20 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys detect and describe changes in intertidal biological communities at the monitoring sites and possibly ecological shifts along the western coast. However, for the effectiveness assessment monitoring planned under the implementation projects, other "reference" sites or evaluations may be needed. No two sites, even within the same cove are exactly comparable to each other. The best approach that we have used in the past is to develop time series data on specific locations and examine trends between each site relative to a baseline condition for each site. Changes that are regional in impact will show common trends (e.g., reduced abundance or percent coverage). When changes at a specific location are out of synchrony with those in the area and especially throughout the southern California region then the effects are localized and due to some site specific cause. This is a modified form of BACI (Before after control impact) where the control is the original site meristics data and the potential impact is time series data relative to that initial starting point. This method permits each location to be their own control and improves the ability to detect either common or site specific changes. The identification and selection of data from all locations will be conducted as part of the ASBS Research and Data Collection task (Task 2). Key Questions, Target Outcomes and Integration Planning Grant Study Key Study Questions Targeted Outcomes Integration with other ICWMP Tasks Linkage to Other Program Elements Reference 1. Are the Distinguish effects Public use survey Source Monitoring changes that are regional in evaluation and observed scope and outside of Impact metric identification of related to the cities power to Development high priority regional make change controls patterns? Target Research 2. Are the Identify probable activities to Implement localized direct cause of determine source of adaptive changes adverse change impact management of related.to high priority public use, Identification of the Pilot scale sources physical bioavailable types of restoration sediment the contaminants that programs Restoration supplies, increase risk monitoring chemical or biological Provide contaminants reference data ? for ASBS 3. Are the Exception Letter changes Response related to total or `bioavailable' contaminant differences? d. Prepare QAPP Addendum The Weston Team has extensive experience in the preparation of Quality Assurance Project Plans in accordance with SWAMP guidelines, and includes the preparation of the QAPP for the Newport Coast Water Quality and Flow Assessment. Weston will use the existing QAPP from the Water Quality and Flow Assessment as base document and develop an addendum to this QAPP that includes the methods and 21 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys MVT�i IF- s0LUTioNs monitoring requirements for the public use surveys, baseline biological surveys, and renovation assessment surveys. The Weston Team has available these methods from other projects and will streamline the preparation of this QAPP addendum by using these methods with modifications as appropriate. Weston has a strong working relationship with the Santa Ana RWQCB on the development of the current QAPP and will continue working successfully with the Regional Board for the approval of this addendum. e. Conduct Surveys Study Design and Sample Size. One of the most recommended sampling design methods to measure impacts in habitats with high natural variation in space and time is a design that measures biological endpoints at control and impacted sights at multiple times before and after an impact has taken place (the BACI design). However, anthropogenic impacts in Orange County to the intertidal habitat have been occurring for many decades and appropriate local control sites are difficult to find if not impossible. A successful modification of this procedure is to use a BACI approach but to compare biological parameters that are being monitored relative to each sampling location (i.e. allow each station to be its own control). This procedure can then identify change occurring over time and determine if all areas are seeing the same type of trend or if one area is showing trends in a different direction. Patterns that are common among all locations (e.g. increases or decreases in the abundance of intertidal algae) indicate long term trends that are driven by climate -related issues. Decreases in the abundance of a species when all other locations show increases or stable population leads to the conclusion that something in addition to climate -related changes are occurring. We have successfully employed this method of assessment off the Columbia River at the deep water disposal site to examine trends in benthic communities that are driven by climate as well as the impacts of dredged material placement. Weston's sampling design will incorporate a base -line monitoring program similar to the NMS and CCA long-term program using the same methods to collect information on the same organisms in order to create compatible data sets. However, this monitoring program will include monitoring of additional species whose abundance and distribution patterns are related to specific impacts. The exact number of transects, quadrats and searches will not be determined until pilot data regarding the onsite variability is analyzed. During the first sampling event the minimum number of sampling locations required for MMS monitoring surveys will be sampled. Additional transects, quadrats, and searches maybe implemented based on the need determined by power analyses. The variability of specific targeted species will be analyzed to ensure the ability to detect a predetermined level of change for specific biological endpoints with an alpha of 0.05 or 0.1. Task 4 — Data Management and Report Task 4a. Baseline Survey Report — Following the completion of the baseline biological survey under Task 3, the Weston Team will compile the data and conduct the comparison to the available data from other sites as discussed under Task 3. As demonstrated in the Newport Coast Water Quality and Flow Assessment Report, Weston has in-house statisticians and data management experts that have extensive experience in using statistical methods to obtain scientifically based and statistically sound conclusions from the data collected. We routinely evaluate data using various statistical techniques to "tease out" as much from the available data as possible to assure you are getting the full value of the field and data gathering program. The data obtain from MMS will be used to compared the results of the biological survey — (Shelly -Jack to add here) The results of the Baseline survey will also be summarized and provided to the Cities for submittal to the SWRCB as part of the ASBS Exception Process monitoring requirement. The ASBS Exception 22 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys r► 5OLUTIONS letter response submitted in May 2006 stated that this data would be provided as part of this project. Task 4b. Pilot Renovation Monitoring Report — The results of the monitoring of the Pilot Renovation project will be summarized in this report that will include an assessment of the success of the renovation and both positive and negative factors that may be affecting the success of the renovation. The Team will also use the results of the biological survey to identify species that are an indicator of renovation success that co -habitat with the renovation species. The Report will include recommendations on management measures that will allow continued success of the renovation based on the result of the public access survey and the analysis of the water quality data and impact metric. Recommendations will also be provided for the follow-up additional renovation project that is proposed under the 2004-2005 Consolidated Grant program for which Weston assisted the City of Newport Beach in the preparation of the application. Task 4c. Comparison Study Report — The base -line monitoring program will identify the presence, abundance and distributions of species that have been regularly monitored at rocky intertidal sites (e.g., Shaws Cove, Crystal Cove, Treasure Island and Dana Point) as part of the MMS and CCA long-term monitoring programs. MMS will summarize their data for the Orange County sites and Weston will compare the abundance and distribution of the MARINe species to the results of the baseline biological survey in this report. The MMS data will be used to establish the relative abundances of specific species within Orange County. In addition, this comparable data, through the use of correlative analyses and temporal trend analyses, may be used to evaluate species specific regional trends. All of the regions and each ASBS will be subject to Regional Changes. The ocean environment may increase or decease in average temperature, southern or northern waters may circulate into the southern California Bight, or extensive rains or and conditions may dominate for months years or decades. Under these circumstances all of the areas will show certain common trends in the abundance of key species. These changes will occur throughout southern California (sites near and far away from contaminating sources) will reveal if there is a common response among these areas. The data analysis to this point performed on the MARINe data collected by MMS and other organizations have demonstrated this effect very well and we will continue to compare MARINe data to that collected during our monitoring program. The results of the Comparison Study will also be summarized and provided to the Cities for submittal to the SWRCB as part of the ASBS Exception Process monitoring requirement. The ASBS Exception letter response submitted in May 2006 stated that this data would be provided as part of this project. Task 4d. Data Management and GIS Shape Files — The Weston Team will compile the data obtained from the public use, biological, renovation monitoring surveys and provide this data to the Cities as both electronic databases and geospatially referenced shapefiles. Weston is very familiar with the City of Newport's database and GIS format requirements as well as SWAMP database requirements having completed these databases for the Newport Coast Water Quality and Flow Assessment. The Weston Team also brings innovative approaches to the compilation, management and presentation of data. The data that will be generated under this project is primarily biological and public use data. The field and format of this data is very different from standard water and sediment quality data. Weston is currently working on several key projects that are developing database structures and management and presentation tools that include bioassay, bioassessment, biological survey and land use data as part of a relational database. These projects include the Common Ground project that has developed a website for the San Diego Bay watersheds that includes an interactive GIS mapping tool and comprehensive database of water and sediment quality data as well as watershed characteristics 23 Newport Coast and Laguna Beach ASBS Surveys Agreement No. 05-230-550-0 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan Newport Coast/Heisler Park ASBS's Modified for Public Use, Biological & Pilot Renovation Surveys July 12, 2006 ID 8 Task Name Duration Start Finish 2006 Dec Jan Feb Mar 44 2.4.6b Prepare Reference Location Monitoring Plan - Draft & Final (Task 3c.) - _. .. - -- - - - - - ----------- - ---- ----- -- - 2.4.7 Implement a dual study - Baseline & Reference Site (Tasks 3c. & 3e.) - -- - - . - ----- --- P... -------g -- ---- - y (Task 4d.) P.4.7a Data Com station & Mana ement Baseline &Reference Stud 2.4.7b Prepare Draft Report on Baseline & Reference Study (Task 3e & 4a.) 2.4.7c Review and Comment on Draft Report 24.are Final Baseline &Reference Stud Report (Task 3e.& 4a.) - -- - -_.. - -- - --) - ---- 2.4.6e Long -Term Effectiveness Assess./Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Task 5 40 days ', Tue 9/12/06! Mon 11 /6/06 45 ___ _ _ __ 210 days Tue 11/7/06 Mon 8/27/07 10 days - Tue 8/28/07Y- --- Mon 9/10/07 46 47 25 days Tue 9/11/07 ; Mon 1Oil 5/07 48 15 days , Tue 10/16/07Mon 11/5/07 15 days � Tue 11/60!49 T Mon 1126/077Pre 50 -- - -! ---_ 45 days! Tue 11/27/07 I Mon 1/28/O8 380 days ; Tue 9/5/06 Mon 2/18/06 51 52 2.5 Renovation Program - 53 54 ! 2.5.2 Define Planning Activities for a renovation program 22 days Tue 9/5/0�6 I Wed 10/4/06 2.5.2a Prepare Pilot Renovation Project Monitors Plan - Draft & Final p j Monitoring (Task 3b.) --- -- 40 days 9/12/06 Mon 11 /6/06 55 2.5.31nitiate habitat renovation experimental program I 2.5.3a Conduct Pilot Renovation Monitoring per Plan (Task 3e.) 180 days I Tue 4/3/07 Mon 12/16/07 180 days Tue 4/3/07 Mon 12/10/07 56 57 I 2.5.4 Monitoring and Renovation Program Report 50 days Tue 12/11/07 on 2118/08 58 2.5.4a Data Compilation and Management of Renovation Monitoring (Task 4d.) 1 15 days Tue 12111/07 1 Mon 12/31/07 59 f - 2.5.4b Renovation Monitoring & Comparison Results Report (Task 3e. & 4b.) 35 days Tue 1/1/08 1 Mon 2/18/08 60 - Task 3 Coordinate Elements of the ICWMP 61 391 days Wed 11/15/06 Wed 6/14/08 62 ME - 3.1 Prepare assessment metric 90 days Wed 11/15/06 Tue 3/20/07 63 3.2 Prepare the draft Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan 30 days Tue 3/4/08 Mon 4/14/08 64 3.3 Prepare the final Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan 22 days Tue 4/15/08 I Wed 5/14/08 65 I I 66 Task 4 CEQA Documentation and Permits 166 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 4/2107 67 68 t3 -� 4.1 Prepare list of environmental clearances and permits 15 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 9/4/06 i 4.2 Obtain environmental clearances 150 days Tue 9/5/06 Mon 4/2107 -- 69 70 Task 5 Community/Agency Outreach and Training 360 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 12/31/07 71 E3 -- _- 5.1 Website Updates 360 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 12/31/07 72 5.2 Public Forum 0 days Wed 1/17/07 Wed 1/17/07 73 IS 5.3 Training Manuals 90 days Mon 3/5/07 Fri 7/6/07 74 75 Task 6 QAPP, SAP and PAEP 180 days Tue 2126106 Mon 11/6/06 76 ® 6.1 Draft QAPP, SAP and PAEP 30 days Tue 2/28/06 Mon 4/10/06 77 6.1 Prepare Draft QAPP and PAEP Addendums (Task 3d.) 15 days Tue 9/12/06 I Mon 10/2/06 78 6.1b. Review Draft QAPP and PAEP Addendums 15 days Tue 10/3/06 Mon 10/23/06 79 6.2 Final QAPP, SAP and PAEP 15 days Tue 4/11/06 Mon 5/1/06 80 6.2 Prepare Final QAPP and PAEP Addendums (cask 3d.) 10 days Tue 10/24/06 Mon 11/6/06 81 --------- 82 Task 7 Project Reporting 514 days Tue 1/3/06 Fri 12/21/07 83 7.1 Quarterly Reports 500 days Tue 1/3/06 Mon 12/3/07 : ° c Y ^ „:: :::..^:.• ::.:.:....::_: ;;; 84 ® 7.2 Final project report___45 days Mon 10/1/07 Fri 11/30/07 85 ® 7.3 Project Summary Form 64 days Wed 2/1/06 Mon 5/1/06.................- 86 7.4 Project Survey 15 days Mon 12/3/07 Fri 12/21/07 Project: ASBS Planning Grant Schedule Date: Wed 7/12/06 Progress - Summary a ry External Tasks �Deadline Split Milestone Project Summary External Milestone Page 2 Jul Agreement No. 05-230-550-0 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan Newport CoasVHeisler Park ASBS's Modified for Public Use, Biological & Pilot Renovation Surveys July 12, 2006 ID 1 Task Name Duration Start Finish f) Task 1 Plan Preparation Activities 1 day? Tue 113/06 , Tue 1/3/06 1.1 Collect Information 1 day? Tue 1/3/06 Tue 1/3/06 1.2 Convene TAC 1 day? Tue 1/3/06: Tue 1 /3106 -- ------------ -- - 1.3 Meet wlth Resource Agencies 1 day? ----Tue 1/3/06 Tue 1/3/06 1.4 Finalize ICWMP schedule 1 day? ; Tue 1 /3/06 Tue 1.5ldentifysubcontractors 1 day?; Tue 1/3/06 Tue 1/3/06 Task 2 Development of Plan's Key Elements 524 days j Wed 3/1/06 j Mon 3/3/08 2.1 Public Use Impact Report (TASK 1) 405 days t Tue 8/15/06 Mon 3/3/08 HT —Review and compile eAsting information (Task 1a. 1f.) 20 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 9/11/06 2006 Dec Jan I Feb I Mar Apr May Jun imp Jul Aug Sep Oct 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 , . = - �: 12 2.1.1 a Technical Memo Sumadzing Research Findings (Task 11 g.) 4 days . Tue 9/12/06 2.1.1 b Prepare Draft Public Use Monitoring Plan (Task 1 h.-1j.) 15 days Tue 9/12/06 r 2.i.ic Review of Draft Public Use Monitoring Plan 15 y Tue 10/3/06 j Fri 9/15/06 Mon 10/2/06 I Mon 10/23/06 13 14 15 — 1 2.1.1d Prepare Final Public Use Monitoring Plan (Task ik.) 10 days Tue 10/24/06' Mon 11/6/06 16 17 © C3 - 2.1.2 Public Use Monitoring/Social Impact Assessment Program (Task 11.) 2.1.3 Assess Public Education and Community Outreach Programs —� -- — 2.1.4 Fisherman/Diver Impact Study (Task 11.) ---------- - — 2.1.5 Public Use Comp. Integrated ASBS Coastal Manag. Plan (Task 1 - Del. #3) 300 days 300 days 300 days 45 days Tue 1117/06 Tue 9/12/06 __ Tue 11/7/06 —Tue-1 A/_08 Mon 12/31/07 Mon 11/5/07 Mon 12/31/07 ((- Mon 3/3/08 18 19 20 I - 21 I 2.2 Urban Runoff Testing 131 days Wed 3/1/06 Wed 8/30/06 22 2.2.1 Review data (Task 2b.) 2 days Tue 8/15/06 Wed 8/16/06 23 T 2.2.2 Flow/water quality sampling at Heisler Park 30 days Wed 3/1/06 Tue 4/11/06 24 25 26 27 ® 2.2.3 Bloassay testing at Newport Coast ASBS's 2.2.4 Testing Summary Report (Task 2 - Deliverable #2 - Tech Memo) 2.3 Cross Contamination Impact ------ -- - -- ----------- -- -- - — 30 days 10 days 142 days Wed 3/1/06 Thu 8/17/06 Tue 8/15/06 Tue 4/11/06 Wed 8/30/06 Wed 2/28/07 28 M 2.3.1 Review EAsting data and reports 30 days Tue 8/15/06 Mon 9/25/66 29 2.3.1 a Review Data under Cross Comtamnation Research Task (Task 2d.) —1— 5 days Tue 9/26/06 Mon 10/2/06 30 2.3.2 Polluntant Loading Report 22 days Tue 9/26/06 Wed 10/25/06 31 2.3.3 Expand GIS databases 90 days Thu 10/26/06 Wed 2/28/07 32 2.3.4 Hydrodydamic and Water Quality Model 22 days Thu 10/26/06 Fri 11/24/06 33 2.3.5 Cross Contamination Impact Report - Draft and Final 60 days Mon 11/27/06 Fri 2116/07 34 35 2.4 ASBS Monitoring Studies 380 days Tue 8/16/06 Mon 1/28/08 _ 36 E9 2.4.1 Colllect data on other marine life areas (Task 2a.) 15 days Tue 8115/06 Mon 9/4/06 37 ® 2.4.2 Review watershed flow and water quality data (Task 2b.) 2 days Tue 8115/06 Wed 8/16/06 38 2.4.2a Prepare Technical Memo on ASBS Research (Task 2e.) 5 days Tue 9/5/06 Mon 9/11/06 39 2.4.3 Prepare recommendations for a toAcollgical study (Task 2c.) 14 days Tue 9/5/06 Fri 9/22/06 40 2.4.4 Conduct a controlled laboratory to)dcological study 180 days Mon 9/25/06 Frl 6/1/07 41 2.4.5 Define a program to track ASBS health 45 days Tue 9/5/06 Mon 11/6/06 42 2.4.6 Prepare a Mitigation Montoring Plan 40 days Tue 9/12/06 Mon 11/6/06 r .A„.`x,a..M• j.;:,:: ,.A•. ~AY TA uuti c 43 2.4.6a Prepare Baseline Monitoring Plan - Draft and Final (Task 3a.) 40 days Tue 9/12/06 Mon 11 /6/06 Pro' Project: ASBS Planning I n ng Grant Schedule Date: Wed 7/12106 Task Progress Summary l_ umm ^�<�<"�:`�"'� 9 Ede �� rY real Tasks `'' Deadline Split Milestone ♦ Project Summary External Milestone Paige 1 2007 Jan ♦ 1/17 Agreement No. 05-230-550-0 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan Newport Coast/Heisler Park ASBS's Modified for Public Use, Biological & Pilot Renovation Surveys July 12, 2006 Feb Mar Apr I May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Project: ASKS PlanningGrant Sc Task Schedule Pro gress ess Date: Wed 7/12/06 og Summary External Tasks Split Milestone Project Summary ry External Milestone Deadline Jan I Feb Jun Page 4 Agreement No. 05-230-550-0 Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan Newport Coast/Heisler Park ASBS's Modified for Public Use, Biological & Pilot Renovation Surveys July 12, 2006 2007 2006 Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Project: ASBS Planning Grant Schedule �`�P Progress Sum mary ry External Tasks Deadline Date: Wed 7/12106 Split Milestone Project Summary External Milestone Page 3 Feb Jun