# Site

- Specific Information in Support of Establishing Numeric Nutrient Criteria for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Division of Environmental Assessment and Restoration Standards and Assessment Section Florida Department of Environmental Protection Tallahassee, FL 32399

August 24

, 2010Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft ii August 2010 

### Table of Contents

Executive Summary

............................................................................................................... 1 Geographic and Physical Description

..................................................................................... 4 Extent and Overview of Area

......................................................................................................... 4 Designated Uses

............................................................................................................................ 5

Climate and Weather Patterns

....................................................................................................... 5

Wate rshed, Land Use, and the Coast

.............................................................................................. 6 

### Biological Summary

............................................................................................................... 9 General Characteristics of Reef and Hardbottom Communities

....................................................... 9 Southeast Florida Coral Reef Tract Monitoring

............................................................................. 12 

### Water Quality Studies

......................................................................................................... 17 Ground Water and Upwelling

...................................................................................................... 18 Coastal Water Quality Monitoring

............................................................................................... 19 

### Water Quality Summary

...................................................................................................... 29 Nutrient Enrichment and Adverse Biological Effects

..................................................................... 31 

### Waters on the 1998 303(d) List

............................................................................................ 33

Numeric Nutrient Criteria for the Protection of Coral Communities

...................................... 35

Hawaii and Australia’s Criteria To Protect Corals

.......................................................................... 35 Criteria Based on Nutrient Dosing Experiments

............................................................................ 36 Development of Criteria To Maintain Healthy Conditions of the Southeast Coral Community

........ 36 

### Background on the Components of Water Quality Criteria

................................................... 37 Methodology

.............................................................................................................................. 37 Duration and Frequency

.............................................................................................................. 38 

### Summary of the Proposed Criteria

....................................................................................... 39
Proposed Criteria

........................................................................................................................ 39


### References

.......................................................................................................................... 41 Appendix A. Coral Reef Data

- Gathering Activities Summary and Acronyms from Collier et al. 2008.

.................................................................................................. 44Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft iii August 2010 

### List of Tables

Table 1. Checklist of nutrient enrichment symptoms in the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract.

............ 2 Table 2. Stony coral species presence/absence for the 12 standard SECREMP sites in Broward,
Miami

- Dade, Palm Beach, and Martin Counties for 2008 (Gilliam 2009)

. ............................... 15 Table 3. Treated wastewater outfall data (Carsey et al. 2010b).

.............................................................. 17 Table 4. Calculated nutrient fluxes from the wastewater treatment plant outfalls (Carsey et al. 2010b).

................................................................................................ ...................................... 18 Table 5. Summary of FACE field studies (Carsey et al. 2008).

.................................................................... 22 Table 6. Net mass (kg] of nutrients into the coastal ocean for eight ebb tide (outflowing) pulses (from Carsey et al. 2007).

......................................................................................................... 24 Table 7. Nutrient concentrations at Broward County sampling stations (Nancy Craig – Broward County).

................................................................................................ ..................................... 29 Table 8. Background values for nutrients (ug/L) on the southeast coast (μg l -1 ) (Carsey et al. 2010; Broward County unpublished data).

............................................................................... 30 Table 9. Effluent bloom threshold concentrations (Tichenor 2004b).

........................................................ 32 Table 10. Impaired waters for nutrients, DO, and/or chlorophyll a.

.......................................................... 34 Table 11. Comparison of Hawaiian (HI) and Great Barrier Reef (GBR) nutrient criteria (in μg l -1 ) with sample values from a Broward County station in southeast Florida (Station OS

- 3; see Figure 18 for exact location) (HA R 11

- 54, Moss et al. 2005).

............................................. 36 Table 12a. Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for TP (ug/L) for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract.

................................................................................................ ................................ . 39 Table 12b. Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for TN (ug/L) for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract.

................................................................................................ ................................ . 39 Table 12c. Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for chlorophyll a (ug/L) for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract.

.................................................................................................................... 40 Table 12b. Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for DIN (ug/L) for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract.

................................................................................................ ................................ . 40



### List of Figures

Figure 1. Southeast Coastal Basin Groups and Coastal Basins Planning Units. The black lines indicate the extent of are a under consideration.

....................................................................... 5 Figure 2. South Florida drainage (after Kelble et al. 2010).

......................................................................... 6 Figure 3. Ocean currents of continental southeast Florida (courtesy of K. Banks, Broward County).

................................................................................................ ....................................... 8 Figure 4. General coastal ocean circulation sample retention times (Courtesy of R. Smith, NOAA AOML).

................................................................................................ ........................................ 9 Figure 5. The reefs of the continental shelf of southeastern Florida (Banks 2010).

................................... 11
Figure 6. SECREMP sites in relation to southeast Florida counties (SECREMP 2007).

............................... 14 Figure 7. Proportion of different biological communities on the southeast Florida reef tract (Gilliam 2007).

.......................................................................................................................... 16Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft iv August 2010 Figure 8. Stony coral species richness for Broward County (BC), Miami

- Dade County (DC), Palm Beach County (PB), and Martin County (MC) sites, 2003

– 08 (Gilliam 2009).

........................... 16 Figure 9. Map of inlet and outfall locations in southeast Florida (FACE 2010).

......................................... 17 Figure 10. Map of cruise sampling locations and coast locations (Proni et al. 2009).

............................... 21 Figure 11. Boynton Inlet nutrient concentrations over two complete tidal cycles for September 2007 (Carsey et al. 2 007).

......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 12. Location of sampling stations during the FACE SC monitoring cruises in 2007 and 2008 (Carsey et al. 2010a). The red star indicates the location of the South Central (SC) ocean outfall.

............................................................................................................................ 25 Figure 13. Mean station concentration of N+N with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).

.................................................................... 26 Figure 14. Mean station concentration of NH 4 with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).

.................................................................... 26 Figure 15. Mean station concentration of P with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).

.................................................................... 27
Figure 16. TP at the Hillsboro Inlet site, 1981

– 97 (BCDPEP 2001). The dashed line shows the Broward County estuarine TP standard of 0.05 mg L - 1 (BCDPEP 2001).

................................... 28 Figure 17. TN at the Hillsboro Inlet site, 1981

– 97 (BCDPEP 2001). The dashed line shows the Broward County estuarine TN standard of 1.5 mg L -1 (BCDPEP 2001).

..................................... 28 Figure 18. Location of stations sampled by Broward County (courtesy of Nancy Craig – Broward County).

................................................................................................ ..................................... 29 Figure 20. Map of stations and corresponding NH 4 concentrations at sites sampled during the Boynton

- Delray cruises (Carsey et al. 2010).

............................................................................ 30 Figure 19. Map of stations and corresponding NH 4 concentrations at sites sampled during the Boynton

- Delray cruises (Carsey et al. 2010).

............................................................................ 30 Figure 20. Location of the South Central (Delray) outfall and the Gulf Stream Reef (Tichenor 2006).

................................................................................................ ........................................ 33Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 1 August 2010 

### Executive Summary

This report was prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), in cooperation with local scientists, to support the development of numeric nutrient criteria for the Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

. The primary purpose of the p roposed numeric nutrient criteria is to protect healthy

, well

- balanced natural populations of flora and fauna from the effects of excess nutrient enrichment.

The southeast Florida coast , as defined here for numeric nutrient criteria development, includes the Atlantic coastal waters from the northern border of Biscayne National Park (BNP) in Miami

- Dade County to the St. Lucie Inlet in southern Martin County, extending approximately three miles (4.83 km) offshore (Figure 1). The entire area is Class III, w ith a designated beneficial use of “Recreation, Propagation, and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well

- Balanced Population of Fish and Wildlife ”.

The hard bottom and c oral reef system that occurs i n the southeast coast al waters is the most prominent and diverse marine community in the area , and is considered to be the northern end of the Florida Reef Tract

. The ecosystems that flourish on and around reefs are some of the most productive in the ocean, supporting extensive benthic and pelagic communities. More t han 3

, 000 animal species can coexist on a large reef tract. Because of the potential for nutrient inputs to stimulate macroalgal growth, which could subsequently physically damage this community, the hard bottom and coral reef community is considered to be the most sensitive indicator of nutrient enrichment. Additionally, experimental evidence suggests that moderate additions of inorganic nitrogen may be associated with chronic effects on corals (reductions in calcification and healing rates).

While bent hic macroalgal growth has occurred in the offshore waters of the reef tract, t he Southeast Florida Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project determined that the community composition and coral cover within the project’s thirteen monitoring sites was sta ble, and that diseases did not appear to be a maj or factor affecting stony corals at t hese sites. This information supports the position that the condition of the coral reef and hard bottom communities at these sites is generally healthy

.

As part of a multiple lines of evidence approach, FDEP examined nutrient criteria for corals developed by Hawaii and Australia and results from experiments involving nutrients and coral, and then compared these values with the nutrient concentrations that occur in po rtions of the S outheast Coastal Reef Tract beyond human influences. The existing southeast coast nitrogen concentrations were similar to the established Australian and Hawaii protective criteria, while the existing southeast coast phosphorus values were lower than Australian and Hawaii criteria. Experimental evidence suggests that Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen levels of 14 μ g/L would be protective of coral health (Renegar et al. 2008)

, while ambient data from the southeast coa st indicates surface and bottom Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen ( DIN ) values are near this protective level. These observations, in conjunction with the overall health of the reef, indicate that existing nutrient and chlorophyll a levels are protective of th e designated use.

Table 1 provides a checklist of nutrient enrichment symptoms and describes whether each symptom has been historically or is curren tly observed in the S outheast Coastal Reef Tract

. The proposed recommendation for the protection of a healthy, well

- balanced aquatic community in the Southeast Coastal Reef Tract , as well the annual limits for the area , are provided at the end of this report (in Table s 12 a through 12 d ).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 2 August 2010 Table 1. Checklist of nutrient enrichment symptoms in the S outheast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

.

- = Empty cell/no data Response variable Observed historically

or currently? Explanation Source

Low dissolved oxygen (DO) (hypoxia/anoxia) No Low DO not observed. Carsey et al. (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010a)

Reduced clarity No While nearshore turbidity has been associated with beach renourishment, and inlets are a potential source of color and turbidity, no turbidity increases at the reef have been quantitatively linked to human discharges. Proni et al. (2009)

Increased chlorophyll

a concentrations No No trends in chlorophyll a have been observed, including

down

- gradient of potential nutrient sources. Carsey et al. (2010b)

Phytoplankton blooms (nuisance or toxic) No Phytoplankton is not an issue (consistently very low chlorophyll a ). BCDPEP (2001), Carsey et al. (2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010a)
Problematic epiphyte growth No See SAV. SAV are naturally sparse in the area and local
scientists did not consider SAV to be suitable for criteria development. Collier et al. (2008)

Problematic macroalgal growth Yes Lyngbya and Codium growths have periodically affected portions of the reef, however, no relationship between these growths and human nutrient inputs has been definitively established. LaPointe et al . (2005a, 2005b), Tichenor (2003, 2004a, 2004b, 2006)

Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) community changes or

loss No SAV is naturally sparse in this area and not considered, by local experts, to be a suitable endpoint for nutrient criteria development. Collier et al. (2008)

Emergent or shoreline vegetation community changes or loss No While mangroves have been adversely affected in lagoons (covered by other reports), the southeast coast shoreline consists of sandy beach. Banks et al. (2005)

Coral/hard bottom community changes or

loss Yes Lyngbya and Codium growths have periodically affected portions of the reef, however , no relationship between these growths and human nutrient inputs has been definitively established. Collier et al. (2008).

Impacts to benthic community N/A Benthic communities consist of the coral reef, covered

above. -

Fish kills No None reported. -Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 3 August 2010Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 4 August 2010 

### Geographic and Physical Description

Extent and O verview of Area

The southeast Florida coast , as defined here for numeric nutrient criteria development , i ncludes the Atlantic coastal waters from the northern border of Biscayne National Park (BNP) in Miami

- Dade County

to the St. Lucie Inlet at the southern end of the Indian River in Martin County

, and extends approximately three miles (4.83 km) offshore (Figure 1)

. Coastal waters are defined as those occurring between mean high water and the shelf break. The total aerial extent is approximately 627 km 2

.

Often c alled the “gold coast” because of the color of the beach sand ( consisting largely of crushed shell), the area includes appr oximately 130 km of sandy beaches and occasional rock outcrops on the coast in four counties (Martin, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami

- Dade). The southeast coast is a high energy coast, exposed to greater wave action and vertical mixing than in the Keys (Wagener et al. 2008 ; Collier et al. 2008 ).

The continental shelf here is fairly narrow (3

- 4 km ) and generally bounded on the east by a branch of the Gulf Stream called the Florida Current . The current travels very close to the shore

, and t he area is subject to a f airly constant movement of oceanic water . As a result, w ater quality in this ar ea is highly
i nfluenced by open ocean conditions with naturally low nutrient levels

. A prominent habitat feature is a series of coral reefs and hard bottom communities roughly parallel to the shoreline.

Note that this report concerns the coastal waters, and that the main natural estuaries in the area (Biscayne Bay on the southern end, Lake Worth Lagoon, Loxahatchee River, and St. Lucie River on the northern end) are covered in other individual reports.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 5 August 2010 Figure 1. Southeast C oastal Basin Groups and Coastal Basins Planning Units. The black lines i ndicate the extent of area under consideration.

Designated Uses

The entire area is Class III, with a designated beneficial use of “Recreation, Propagation, and Maintenance of a Healthy, Well

- Balanced Population of Fis h and Wildlife”. The area is well known for the high quality of r ecreational use in and on the water (which occurs year

- round )

, which is generally associated with biological resources of the estuaries or reefs.

Climate and Weather Patterns

T he climate of the southeast coast is defined as Tropical Savanna (using the Köppen Climate Classification System). The area is subject to a pronounced dry season (from November to March), during which precipitation is usually less than 4 0 cm

. During the wet season ( f rom June to September)

, the area receives 70% of its annual rainfall, resulting in a total annual precipitation of 15 2 cm (Banks etNutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 6 August 2010 al. 2008). Hurricane s, which generally occur from June to November, can significantly influence biological communities (including the coral reefs). Hurricanes can physically damage coral reefs, but can also benefit coral communities by facilitat ing asexual recruitment of s ome coral species and remov ing macroalgal and bacterial overgrowth from corals (Banks et al. 2008).

T his part of the coast is somewhat protected from strong easterly winds of t he Atlantic by the Bahama Bank, a factor which may have contributed to formation of the reefs that form the hard bottom community and may also influence current coral recruitment a nd reef formation along the coast (Banks
et al. 2007).

Oceanographic texts describe this area as the “ Caribbean coastal oceanic region ” in the southern three counties, shifting to the “South Atlantic ocean ic region ” in northern Palm Beach County (Gross e t al. 1982). This shift can be seen in the near shore biota

, as the continental shelf widens in the vicinity of northern Palm Beach and Martin Counties

, where a slightly broader range of oceanic and land temperatures occur . The “frost line”, below which winter freezing temperatures are uncommon, is around Palm Beach. Overall, ocean temperatures range between 18 .3

- 30.5 ° C on the reefs (Banks et al. 2007), which includes the cooler temperature range of most tropical reef coral s

.

Watershed, Land Use
, an d the Coast

The hydrology of south Florida has been h ighly altered by man’s efforts to manage water for water supply and flood control (Figure 2). The southeast coast lies within three major coastal basin groups : the northern half of the Southeast Coast

- Biscayne Bay, the Lake Worth Lagoon

- Palm beach Coast, and the southern quarter of the St. Lucie

- Loxahatchee watersheds.

Figure 2. South Florida d rainage ( after Kelble et al. 2010).

Much information has been compiled on the history of the hydrological changes in south Florida, and these are briefly described here to frame the discussion of coastal characteristics. Beginning in the late 1800’s, two major hydrologic changes occurred in southeast Florida, signif icantly changing the historic al hydrodynamics and the timing and quantity of water that is delivered to the coast :Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 7 August 2010 1. S everal large canals and levees were created to assist in draining and directing the water from areas around Lake Okeechobee and the Everglad es. The water is

now sent to the coast during wet times (or in anticipation of wet weather), an d retained during drier times

, for flood protection and irrigation , respectively ;

2. T he coastal lakes, lagoons, and estuaries were connected to each other by the creation of the Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW) that runs the length of the east coast from the Georgia line through Biscayne Bay. It also crosses the state through Lake Okeechobee. The ICWW is generally maintained at a depth of 12 feet of seawater ( fsw ) fo r purposes of navigation, commerce, and safe
recreation. Associated with the ICWW is the creation and maintenance of permanent inlets that allowed the runoff from land to go more directly to the

sea.

The land between the ocean and the historic al Evergla des is highly urbanized

. Martin, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami

- Dade Counties combined contain over thirty percent of Florida’s estimated 18.5 million people (U.S. Census, 2009).

Hundreds of miles of canals have been built to allow more and more immediate water access for the population. The ICWW connects the remaining natural estuaries , and while the ICWW includ es habitats such as salt marsh and mangroves, they occur in limited amounts compared to the linear miles of bulkheaded seawalls. Mangrove forests are common in t wo contiguous State parks in the southeast part of Broward C ounty (John U. Lloyd, and West Lake). In the four county coastal area, water from t he canals, estuaries, remnant ( including some formerly freshwater) coastal lakes

, and the ICWW

, eventually discharge to the Atlantic Ocean by way of stabilized inlets.

There are t hree major ports in the coastal watershed, located at Palm Beach

, Port Everglades, and
Miami. Cruise ships

, commerce vessels and recreational boats frequent these ports and use the coastal waters for transportation and /or recreation

. T he near shore hard bottom and reefs systems close to the ports have been physically modified over time to accommodate the vessels and to minimize safety hazards associated with navig ating through narrow passes or over shallow reefs.

Nine inlets are maintained in the area covered in this summary. From south to north, Government Cut and Baker’s Haulover Inlets allow exchange of water from Biscayne Bay onto the coastal shelf . Port
Ever glades, Hillsboro, Boca Raton, South Lake Worth (Boynton), and Lake Worth exit to the narro west portions of the shelf. At the north end, Jupiter and St. Lucie Inlets allow exchange of water from the Loxahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries to the coast.

The inlets are armored to secure their position from natural meandering that would otherwise occur, and are periodically dredged to prevent sand deposition

. Most of these inlets require regular maintenance dredging to transfer sand from the north side of the inlet to the south side, and occasionally to maintain depth.

Between the inlets, there are numerous public beaches that ar e a hi ghly used recreational resource

. Several of the beaches are “renourished” over time by the addition of sand either from inlets or from offshore. The renourishment is generally on a 10

- 15 year cycle (Banks et al. 2008)

. Inlet maintenance and beach renourishment creates relatively short

- lived turbidity events that can affect the near shoreNutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 8 August 2010 resources by re

- suspending finer p articles and potentially exposing reefs to turbidity and sediment deposition (Banks et al. 2008).

Hydrodynamics

— Currents and Circulation P atterns

Figure 3 shows the generalized currents affecting the southern part of the state. As the Gulf Stream

moves we st across the Atlantic and Caribbean

, and turns northward across the Bahamas, a branch called the Florida Current continues westward toward Florida and then northward along the southeast coast ).

The Florida Area Coastal Environment ( FACE ) program has documented that there is a northward current along the coast approximately 85% of the time . The Florida Current is the primary driver of currents along the southeastern part of the coast. The lowest monthly averag e velocity is 1.0 m /sec in November

, and the highest monthly average is 2.3 m /sec in July (Banks et al. 2008).

Figure 3. Ocean currents of continental southeast Florida (courtesy of K. Banks, Broward County).

On the western side of the Florida peninsula in the Gulf of Mexico , there is a clockwise flowing portion of the Gulf Stream called the Loop Current. The Loop Current extends its range northward in the Gulf during the summer and can entrain waters from the Mississippi drainage before flowing across the SW shelf of Florida, east through the Florida Straits, and in to the Florida Current (Wagener et al. 2008 ). Lee
et al. (1994) and Wagener et al. (2008) describe the Florida Current as connecting the Loop Current with the Gulf Stream.

Figure 4 shows the main gyres in the Keys

, their approximate residence times, and their movement in relation to the Loop and Florida Currents. The gyres are important because they are part of a complex current interaction with the continental shelf and appear to bring cooler, naturally nutrient

- ri ch waters from depth onto the continental shelf in the central and northern Keys ( FACE 2009 ). These Keys coastal

gyres may drift northward, potentially affecting the nutrient balance of the waters farther north along the southeast coast. The gyres are much shorter

- lived as the southeast shelf narrows and the waters

are more quick ly mixed.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 9 August 2010 Figure 4. General coastal ocean circulation sample retention times (Courtesy of R. Smith, NOAA AOML).

Tides in the region are semi

- diurnal with amplitudes of appr oximately 0.8 m

, and tidal plumes influence

water circu lation near navigation inlets. Factors affecting coastal circulation include inlet dimensions, shelf width at the inlets, offshore distance of the Florida Current, tidal plume constituents

, and salini ty

. The salinity of the plumes from the inlets is significantly different in the wet season (June

– September) than the dry season (October

– May )

. S alinity stratification in the plumes may influence local circulation patterns (Banks et al. 2008)

.

H igh w ave action , especially when combined with spring tides, can result in greater ebb flows from the inlets , potentially causing more sediment suspension and turbidity than an average hurricane because of the relatively short time duration of hurricanes (USACE 19 96 in Banks et al. 2008).



### Biological Summary

Based on information from local scientists, coral/hard bottom is the most nutrient

- sensitive community, and therefore, should be the focus for numeric nutrient criteria development

. Although SAV may be sporadi cally found, SAV coverage is generally sparse because of the significant currents and wave action associated with this area.

General Characteristics of Reef and Hard b ottom Communities
Most of the US Atlantic and Gulf Coast continental shelf is flat and sandy, with little rock or natural reef on which communities can build or pelagic populations can find shelter ( Cole et al. 1982 ). Where there are firm substrates, benthic organisms, such as hard and soft corals, can colonize and form reefs . A reef develops when benthic organisms build a rigid, wave

- resistant structure on the bottom. The reef provides a shallow water environment that is favorable to many organisms, where nutrients are readily recycled. As sessile organisms colonize, ecological succession occurs and a reef grows until it reaches a balanced state ( Cole et al. 1982 ).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 10 August 2010 Coral reefs occur mainly in tropical and subtropical oceans warmer than 18 °C, where carbonates precipitate readily. Reef building coral builds calcareous skeleto n, which multiple subsequent generations colonize (Cole et al. 1982).

Unicellular symbiotic algae

, zooxanthellae, provide photosynthetic products directly to the coral in

return for nutrients and CO 2 . Zooxanthellae photosynthesis , which requires signifi cant sunlight, greatly
increases the coral’s ability to extract CaCO 3 from seawater to produce the carbonate skeleton (Cole et al. 1982).

While c orals are the most conspicuous contribut ors to the framework of a reef, encrusting algae (crustose red algae) a re also important cement depositors at shallow depths. In addition, beneficial red and green calcareous algae produce much of the loose carbonate sediment incorporated in the crevices in the reef mass

, which is a complex, shallow water benthic environment . The ecosystems that flourish on and around reefs are some of the most productive in the ocean, supporting extensive benthic and pelagic communities. More than 3

, 000 animal species can coexist on a large reef tract. Competition for firm surface space, rather than lack of food, probably limits the population of filter

- feeding benthos, at least above 200 meters depth (Cole et al. 1982)

.
Characteristics of the Southeast Florida Reef Tract

The reef tract adjacent to the southeast Florida coast is generally regarded as the northern end of the Florida Reef Tract . Recent research suggests that the reef tract system from Biscayne Bay north may have a slightly different origin and underpinning than the reef system from Biscayne Bay southward, but th e relationship is unclear ( Banks et al. 2007 ). Regardless, the coral reef system in southeastern Florida
is a high

- latitude system near the environmental threshold for significant reef growth (Banks et al.
2008 ). These reefs represent the most northward extension of tropical reefs on the east coast of the United States, and transition into worm reef/limestone habitat near the Jupiter Inlet (Jaap and Hallock 1990). Reefs on the southeast coast lie at the northernmost thermal boundary for reef development i n the Caribbean, exposing the reef system to greater temperature fluctuations than other Caribbean reefs (Chiappone and Sullivan 1994

, Wagner et al

. 2008).

F rom south to north, the southeast Florida reef system tracks the relatively narrow continental sh elf

. This narrow shelf affects the hydrodynamics of oceanic waters, and t he Florida Current and deeper waters found along this coast provide a relatively narrow range of salinity change and moderate the temperature year

- round, which provides stability to the reef /hard bottom community.

Comparatively, southeast Florida reefs generally have similar stony coral species richness but reduced stony coral cover compared to the Dry Tortugas or Florida Keys coral reefs. Benthic cover by octocorals is similar throughout the Florida reef system

, while macroalgae appears to contribute less cover and sponges appear to contribute more cover off southeast Florida (Callahan et al. 2007).

The reefs and ridges comprising the current coral/hard bottom community in this area are roughly parallel to the existing shoreline, and based on underlying geology ( Banks et al. 2007)

. From shore to
30

- 40 m in water depth, the region s’ coral/hard bottom habitat appears to have 5 different ar eas based on reef and coastal mo rphology. The reef system consists of relict Holocene reefs and lithified sand ridges that formed in response to sea

- level changes. The current reef system consists of a series of three main linear reefs paralleling the shore in an almost due north

- south orientation (Figure 5 ). From
the shore seaward, the inner reef crests in 3

- 4 m of water, the middle reef in 6

- 8 m, and the outer reef, which is a relic acroporid

- framework reef, crests in 15

- 21 m of water (Ban ks et al. 2008). A series ofNutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 11 August 2010 ridges occur on the shoreward side of the inner reef areas (Collier et al. 2008 ). Banks et al. (2007) describe the underlying geomorphology of this reef system in detail, and also describe the deeper, outer reef as one of the longest continuous reef structures in the western Atlantic.

Figure 5

. The reefs of the continental shelf of southeastern F lorida (Banks 2010).

Different reef organisms characterize the type of habitats found along southeast Florida reefs, typically transitioning from a cover of algae and small octocorals near shore to numerous octocorals and varied hard coral populations at the outer reefs ( http://www.dep.state.fl.us /coastal/programs/coral/sefcri.htm ).

Inner reefs are characterized by macroalgae and numerous small octocorals living on a substrate of relict reef of Anastasia Formation limestone and worm reef ( Phragmatopoma spp.), with breaks and sediment pockets within the reef (Collier et al. 2009) . Typical sessile organisms are lesser starlet coral ( Siderastrea radians ) and colonial zoanthids ( Palythoa mammilosa and P. caribaeorum ). In the past few years, vigorous recruitment of staghorn coral ( Acopora cervicornis ) has occurred, and some extensive aggregations are now present generally inshore of inner reefs in Broward County (Collier et al. 2008 ). Here, monospecific stands of coral form significant habitats (Vargas

- Angel et al

., in prep.).

Octocorals are most consp icuous on the m iddle reef, which is characterized by more relief, dissecting channels, and octocoral densities of up to 30 colonies per m 2 . Abundant stony corals include great star coral ( Montastraea cavernosa ), massive starlet coral ( Siderastrea siderea ), and mustard hill coral ( Porites astreoides ) (Gilliam et al. 2003)

.
The outer reef system often has stronger vertical relief and exhibits the highest diversity and abundance of sessile reef organisms. Octocorals and large barrel sponges ( Xestospongia mu la ) are most conspicuous , and s tony corals are somewhat larger than th ose located on the middle reef (Collier et al.
2008 ).

The reef system at St. Lucie Inlet Preserve State Park ( 0 5’ to 27 09’N) is the northern limit for subtropical coral reefs on the east coast of Florida. The topography is composed of Anastasia Formation limestone that is covered with reef biota. Diploria clivosa forms very large pancake

- like colonies and provides the majority of the cover. Montrastraea cavernosa also attains large siz es. The other species present, including Siderastrea radians, Isophyllia sinuosa

, Solenastrea bournoni , and Oculina diffusa

, are not large. Stony corals account for 3

- 5% of benthic cover at two 100m transects (Herren 2004).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 12 August 2010 Southeast Florida Coral R eef Tract Monitoring

Prior to 2004, southeast Florida coral reef monitoring and management activities were limited and led primarily by local county agencies (Collier et al. 2008). In 2004, t he Southeast Florida Coral Reef
Initiative (SEFCRI) was develope d with guidance from the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force to assist in coordinating federal, state, local and non

- governmental r eef

- related efforts. The FDEP Coral Reef Conservation Program, which manages the implementation of SEFCRI, coordinated a “State of the Coral Reef Ecosystems of Southeast Florida” report in 2008 that summarized various management and monitoring efforts ( Appendix A ).

The Southeast Florida Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project (SECREMP), a SEFCRI local act ion strategy project, is an expansion of offshore monitoring by the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project (CREMP) intended to document changes in reef resources throughout the Florida reef tract from the Dry Tortugas northward. In 2003 , t en sites i n Miami

- Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties were added to the original CREMP

, which was initiated in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary in 1996

. Three additional sites were added in Martin County in 2006 (Collier et al. 2008) . The SECREMP is d esigned to assess coral coverage, monitor stony coral condition, and archive biotic attributes of coral reef ecosystems nationwide (Gilliam 2009). To a large extent, coral cover throughout the southeast Florida reefs has been poorly defined and there are few long

- term data sets on abundance and/or cover for benthic components. This has made it difficult to scientifically determine status and trends for the system (Gilliam 2009).

Figure 6 shows the SECREMP sites in relation to the reefs , and Table 2 list s the coral species identified at each of the twelve standard SECREMP sites. The mean number of species identified per site was twelve. Figure 7 shows the stony coral species richness by year for the different stations. Over the period of monitoring, 20 03

- 2008, there was little change on the reef system (Gilliam 2009). Stony coral richness and cover were similar between years. The incidence of disease in 2008 was less than that in 2007

, and disease did not appear to be a major factor affecting stony co ral condition or cover (Gilliam 2009).

Figure 8 shows the relative percent of bottom cover for the different benthic biological communities (Gilliam 2007). In general

, the status of the southeast reef system has changed little from 2003 to 2008, but the re were a few site specific changes. For instance, coral cover was reduced at site PB1 following burial by sand between 2004 and 2005. In addition, there was an increase in coverage by the cyanobacteria Lyngbya spp. at site DC3 in Miami

- Dade County, which may have contributed to a slight decline in octocorals and sponges at this particular site (Gilliam 2009). In Broward County however, a n area of Lyngbya growth seen in previous years (2004) appeared to be in decline from 2005

- 2008. Octocorals and macroalgae remained the two benthic functional habitats with the highest cover for the region (Gilliam 2009).

In 2009, SECREMP assessed the condition of stony corals at their sampling sites. With six years of data (2003

- 2008), the community composition and coral cover was stable, and diseases did not appear to be a major factor affecting stony corals at the sites. The SECREMP report states that “Other than the reduced cover for the site PB1 following burial between the 2 004 and 2005 sample events, there do not appear to be any consistent regional trends in temporal changes in functional group cover between 2003 and 2008. Macroalgae and octocorals remain the two (non

- substrate) benthic functional groups with the highest c over for the region.” This information supports the position that the overall existing condition of the coral reef and hard bottom communities is healthy , although the potential for localized
stress remains

.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 13 August 2010 Although the limited available monitoring data to date shows little change in the southeast coast coral community

, there is concern that intermittent benthic algal growth (e.g., Lyngbya ) , which may be related to nutrients associated with natural upwelling, NPDES outfalls, and /or freshwater inputs discharged through the inlets, may impact the reef system

. In fact, partly as a response to concern about potential adverse near

- field effects on Gulf Stream Reef , the Delray Beach NPDES outfall has ceased open ocean wastewater discharges

, except during e mergencies , prior to a Legislatively

mandated 2025 deadline . By 2025, all domestic wastewater facilities discharging to the southeast coastal area via ocean outfalls are to be eliminate d as primary disposal method s. Also i n response to these general conc erns, t he SEFCRI developed a Land

- based Sources of Pollution Technical Advisory Committee to focus attention on potential anthropogenic nutrient effects

.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 14 August 2010 Figure 6

. SECREMP sites in relation to southeast Florida counties (SECREMP 2007).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 15 August 2010 Table 2

. Stony coral species presence/absence for the 12 standard SECREMP sites in Broward, Miami

Dade, Palm Beach, and Martin Counties for 2008 (Gilliam 2009).

Key: A, 1, 2 3 = sites with species present; 0=species absent.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 16 August 2010 Figure 7

. Proportion of different biological communities on the southeast Florida reef tract (Gilliam 2007).

Figure 8

. Stony coral species richness for Broward County (BC), Miami

- Dade County (DC), Palm Beach County (PB), and Martin County (MC) sites
, 2003

– 08 (Gilliam 2009).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 17 August 2010 

### Water Q uality Studies

Sources of both natural and anthropogenic nutrients to the Southeast Coastal Reef Tract include stormwater runoff discharged at inlets, outfalls from wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), upwelling, groundwater seepage, and atmospheric deposit ion. Runoff from land and discharge of treated wastewater are the most direct fresh water influences to this system. Figure 9 shows a map with the location of inlets and outfalls in the Southeast Coastal Reef Tract area.

There are six domestic wastewater treatment facilities that are permitted to discharge to the study area via ocean outfalls, with a combined permitted capacity of over 280 mgd. The facilities provide secondary treatment and basic disinfection ( FACE 2008). The outfall depth and locations were sited so that the discharges would be to the outside edge of the outer reef system and directly influenced by the Florida Current to minimize possible effects on the recreational beaches. Table 3 shows the general characteristics of the outfalls including permitted flow, depth, length, and diameter, and Table 4 shows the calculated nutrient loads from each of the wastewater treatment plant outflows.

Figure 9 . Map of i nlet and outfall locations i n southeast Florida (FACE 2010).

Table 3 . Treated wastewater outfall data (Carsey et al. 2010b).

Name Outflow ( MGD ) Depth (m) Length (km) Diameter (m) Ports

South Central 12.3 27.4 1.6 0.8 1

Boca Raton 10.7 27.4 1.6 0.9 1

Broward – N 36.5 32.6 2.2 1.4 1 Hollywood 39.5 28.3 3.1 1.5 1

Miami Dade – N 80.6 32.9 3.6 2.3 12

Miami Dade – C 104.6 30.5 5.7 2.3 5Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 18 August 2010 Table 4. Calculated nutrient fluxes from the wastewater treatment plant outfalls (Carsey et al. 2010b).

1 Mass output computed from concentrations and averaged monthly flows from Koopman et al. (2006).
Name TN (kg day - 1 N) NH 4 (kg day - 1 N) N+N (kg day - 1 N) TP (kg day - 1 P)

South Central 871 545 191 79

Boca Raton 685 425 134 28

Broward – N 2, 045 Nr Nr 180 Hollywood 2, 482 1779 179 164

Miami Dade – N 5, 339 Nr Nr 634

Miami Dade - C 6, 652 Nr Nr 634

Legislation passed in 2008 (SB 1302) will decrease significantly the discharge from ocean outfalls. The legislation requires that:

**•** New construction or expansion of wastewater ocean outfalls is prohibited, and facilities are limited to the permitted capacity in effect on July 1, 2008.

**•** Discharge of domestic wastewater through ocean outfalls must meet advanced wastewater treatment and management requirements by December 31, 2018, unless the facility reduces its baseline loadings of total nitrogen and total phosphorus by an amount equivalent to advanced wastewater treatment requirements or the facility meets 100 % reuse for domestic wastew ater discharge by the same date.

**•** All facilities are required to achieve, at a minimum, 60 % reuse of the facilities actual annual flow by December 31, 2025.

**•** Discharge through ocean outfalls beyond December 31, 2025

, are prohibited, unless as a backup to the functioning reuse system.

In addition to outfalls, inlets may contribute significant amounts of nutrients to the southeast coastal area. Estimates of fluxes or concentration from the Boynton, Hillsboro, and Port Everglades I nlets have been quantified, and are discussed in the coastal water quality monitoring section, but estimates of
nutrients from the other inlets are unknown.

Ground W ater and Upwelling
Groundwater seepage is known to be an important contributor of nutrients (especially nitrate) in s ome regions of Florida (Carsey and Stamates 2009). Seepage may transport these materials to the coastal ocean, but the contribution to the southeast coastal region has not been adequately evaluated (Carsey and Stamates 2009).

Another contributor of nutrients to the coastal ocean is oceanic upwelling of deep

, cooler water that is enriched in nutrients. Upwelling has been observed off the coast of southeast Florida (e.g.

, Smith 1983), however, the quantity, duration, and seasonality of the upwelled nutrient contribution has not been determined (Carsey and Stamates 2009).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 19 August 2010 Coastal Water Quality Monitoring
Florida Area Coastal Environment ( FACE ) Program
The FACE program was established in 2004 to gather a broad range of data needed for understanding Florida’ s coastal environment. Data are used for evaluating potential anthropogenic impacts, for guidance in the operation and development of water and sewer infrastructure

, and for the formulation of science

- based regulation. The FACE program includes nutrient, stable isotope, sediment, algal, coral, physical oceanographic, chemical, meteorological, genetic and microbiological measurements. The primary area sampled includes the coastal ocean off southeast Florida and adjacent waters and groundwater. In the southeast coastal area

, the FACE program has sampling sites at the Boca Raton outfall and inlet, the Broward, Hollywood, north and central Miami outfalls

, and the Hillsboro, Port Everglades and Haulover inlets. Table 5 shows a summary of field studie s performed along the coast that included sampling in inlets and outfalls.

Brief Summaries of Several FACE Studies

Hollywood Tracer: A tracer study was conducted on the Hollywood outfall in June 2004 by injecting sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ) gas into the d ischarging outfall pipe over the course of six days (Wanninkhof et al. 2005). Transportation and dispersion of the plume depend s on the physical oceanographic conditions during the discharge

. Sampling was performed continuously by towing a “fish” contain ing sampling equipment from the side of the vessel at a 2

- m depth with periodic sampling at deeper depths to aid in defining the plume. The sampling track was irregular within 17 km of the outfall terminus and proceeded in a systematic zigzag pattern northward crossing the tracer path. The surface SF 6 concentrations indicated the discharged water flowed northward parallel to the coast in a broadening plume, reaching about 3 km width at the farthest point sampled, 66 km from the outfall (Wanninkhof et al. 2005)

. In the experiment, the outfall discharge , which was positively buoyant

, generally rose to form

a seawater

- effluent surface layer at about one third of the water depth (Wanninkhof et al. 2005). The effluent was transported as a near surface plume u ntil the density contrast was eroded by dilution with surrounding water. Depth profiles of SF 6 indicated that vertical mixing of the discharged waters occurred within 13 km of the outfall. The dilution of the treated wastewater (Dilution = 212 times distance (km) from outfall) (Wanninkhof et al. 2005) was consistent with earlier outfall studies in the

area.

Outfall Surveys: From October 6

- 19, 2006 the treated wastewater plumes in the southeast coastal area were surveyed as part of the FACE outfalls survey cruise (Carsey et al. 2010b). Figure 10 shows the locations of the outfalls and cruise sampling locations. Samples collected during the cruise were analyzed for N+N, NO 2 , NH 4 , ortho

- P, and Si. Samples were collected near surface, mid

- depth, and n ear bottom. Samples were also collected on east

- west transects at locations inshore of the boil, near the boil, and offshore from the boil. The ephemeral nature of the rising plume and boil was the predominant feature observed , with the downcurrent plume irregular and variable in shape (Carsey et al. 2010b).

In general, the surface samples had the highest nutrient concentrations compared to those collected at depth

, and surface samples near the boil had hig her nutrient concentrations than samples fa rther away. Water was rapidly diluted by a factor of 10 within 300 m of the boil (Carsey et al. 2010b). There was no obvious relationship with the nutrient patterns and chlorophyll a concentrations. Nutrient concentrations agreed with reported outfall fluxes from discharge reports (T able 4 ). The treatment plant outfalls differed considerably in their flow and nutrient output and this was also reflected in the receiving water concentrations.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 20 August 2010 Seagrass samples and organic sediments were also collected from various locations near the six outfalls. The samples were analyzed for stable N and C isotopes to detect signals of anthropogenic N enrichment. There were no differences among sites in the isotopic signatures of either algae or sediment and thus no
indication of anthropogenic enrichment (Carsey et al . 2010b).

Boynton Intensive: The Boynton Inlet was created in 1917 to improve tidal circulation and provide flushing to the south end of the Lake Worth Lagoon, which itself receives input from three canals (C

- 16,
C- 17, and C

- 51), several cities, and other nonpoint sources (Carsey et al. 2007). The inlet is approximately 200 ft wide and 12 ft deep

, with a mean tidal range of 2.5 ft. It is estimated that it takes a single day to replace 50% of water in this area of the Lagoon . At the Boynton Inlet

, nutrient and flow measurements were taken during two 48

- hour studies in June and September

, 2007 (Carsey et al. 2007). The studies were designed to collect water samples over two complete tidal cycles and quantify the f lux of nearshore source entities into coastal waters. Samples were analyzed for Si, PO 4 , NH 4 , NO 3 +NO 2 , N isotopes, biological indicators, and other physical parameters.

Nutrient concentrations in incoming tides were nearly zero, while concentrations in outgoing tides were much higher (Figure 1 1 ). The large volume of water in the outgoing flow from the Boynton Inlet means that there are large quantities of nutrients transported out into the coastal ocean. Table 6 provides the

net mass ( in kg ) of nutrien ts discharged during ebb tide pulses.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 21 August 2010 Figure 1 0

. Map of cruise sampling locations and coast locations (Proni et al. 2009).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 22 August 2010 Table 5

. Summary of FACE field studies (Carsey et al. 2008)

.

- = Empty cell/no data Study Name Goals Study

Area Platforms Notes Dates Source

Hollywood

Tracer Define HW outfall plume 10

- 66 km HW outfall R/V Coral

Reef II Rhodamine dye SF6 June 7

- 9 2004 Wanninkhof et
al. 2005

Outfalls
Survey 1 Survey of all six

TWWP outfall plumes All outfalls R/V N.

Foster Nutrients, multibeam,

microbio October 6

- 19

2006 Carsey et al.

2010b

Outfalls
Survey 2 Survey of all six
TWWP outfall plumes All outfalls R/V N.

Foster Nutrients, biology, isotopes February 8

- 16

2008 -

FOCITE -1 SC plume, Boynton Inlet
tracer exp. SC plume
Boynton
Inlet R/V Coral

Reef II Winter February 19

- 22 2007 -

FOCITE -2 SC plume, Boynton Inlet
tracer exp. SC plume R/V Walton

Smith Summer June 10

- 13

2008 -

Boynton

Intensive 1 Water, chemistry, and biology flux through Boynton

Inlet Boynton
Inlet ADCP 4 ebb tides
and 4 flood

tides June 3

- 4 2007 Carsey et al.

2007

Boynton

Intensive 2 Water, chemistry, and biology flux through Boynton

Inlet Boynton
Inlet ADCP 4 ebb tides
and 4 flood

tides September

26

- 28 2007 Carsey et al.

2007

Boynton Inlet

flows 1- year measurement of Boynton Inlet

flows Boynton
Inlet ADCP Horizontal

ADCP February 2007

to October

2008 -

GSR

- ADCP 1- year measurement of

ocean current at

GSR GSR reef ADCP Vertical

ADCP April 2007 to July 2008 -

SC Monitoring

Cruises WQ sampling program around

SC outfall SC outfall R/V Cable Six bimonthly

cruises June, August,
& October
2007; February, Carsey et al.

2010Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 23 August 2010 May, & July

2008Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 24 August 2010 Figure 1 1 . Boynton I nlet nutrient concentrations over two complete tidal cycles for September 2007 ( Carsey et al. 2007).

Tabl e 6. Net mass (kg] of nutrients into the coastal ocean for eight ebb tide (outflowing) pulses ( from Carsey et al. 2007).

South Central Monitoring Cruises: The South Central (SC) monitoring cruises collected samples from the surface, middle and near bottom of the water column at 18 locations during June, August, and October 2007 and February, May, and July 2008 (Figure 12 ; Carsey et al. 2010a). The cruise went from approximately 5 km south of the SC outfall to just north of the Boynton Inlet. Samples were analyzed for various parameters

, including NH 4 , N+N, orthophosphate, Si, DOC and chlorophyll a.

Nutrient concentrations around the outfall site showed s ignificantly elevated concentrations in surface samples, but were much less elevated in the middle or bottom samples. For N+N, NH 4 , and P there was a rapid decrease in surface concentration, and little to no increase in middle or bottom sample
concentrati ons, with no discernable effect from the outfall at > 3 km from the outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a). Figures 13 through 15 show the decrease in nutrient concentration with distance north (positive) and south (negative) from the SC outfall. Concentrations i n the figures are means for each sampling station over the 6 cruises.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 25 August 2010 Figure 12

. Location of sampling stations during the FACE SC monitoring cruises in 2007 and 2008 (Carsey et al. 2010a). The red star indicates the location of the South Central (SC ) ocean outfall.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 26 August 2010 Figure 13

. Mean station concentration of N+N with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).

Figure 14 . Mean station concentration of NH 4 with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 27 August 2010 Figure 15

. Mean station concentration of P with distance (km) north (positive) and south (negative) of the SC outfall (Carsey et al. 2010a).

Samples collected from stat ions within Lake Worth Lagoon (S tation #s 16

- 18 ; see Figure 12 ) had higher nutrient, chlorophyll a , and TSS concentrations and lower pH and salinity than the coastal stations (Carsey et al. 2010a). Inlet concentrations tended to fall in termediate between the lagoon and coastal
stations.

Broward County Environmental Monitoring

The Broward County Department of Planning and Environmental Protection has conducted water quality monitoring at estuarine sampling stations in the Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW), Hillsboro and Port Everglades Inlets, beginning at a subset of stations in 1973 (BCDPEP 2001) . The county water quality monitoring study was conducted to determine water quality conditions, both long

- term and current at each sampling site. Nitrogen values at the Hillsboro Inlet were generally within compliance with Broward County standards, 1.5 mg L 1

, but phosphorus values were frequently above the TP standard of 0.05 mg / L. The source of TP is likely land use and secondary canal dischar ges upstream. The water quality near the Hillsboro Inlet was better than the canals due to the influence of the Atlantic Ocean. Figures 16 and 17 show the annual mean TN and TP for the Hillsboro Inlet site. The influence of the estuarine water from the Hillsboro Inlet to the offshore reef system is unknown.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 28 August 2010 Figure 1 6

. TP at the Hillsboro Inlet site
, 1981

– 97 (BCDPEP 2001). The dashed line shows the Broward County estuarine TP standard of 0.05 mg L - 1 (BCDPEP 2001).

Figure 1 7

. TN at the Hillsboro Inlet site
, 1981

– 97 (BCDPEP 2001). The dashed line shows the Broward County estuarine TN standard of 1.5 mg L -1 (BCDPEP 2001).

The Port Everglades Inlet is loc ated at the boundary of the Central ICWW, which receives freshwater inputs from the C

- 13, Middle River, North New River Canal and New River Canal systems, and the southern ICW, which receives freshwater inputs from the Dania Cutoff. Land use in the central ICWW area is highly developed, but there are also some undeveloped mangrove forests in the southern ICWW of Broward County (BCDPEP 2001).

Bro ward County EPGMD implemented a targeted w ater quality monitoring program in the spring of 2006 to determine ambi ent water quality over the reefs and in t he water exiting through the Port Everglades Inlet

. Four stations were sampled on a monthly basis (Figure 1 8). Sa mples were collected at the surface and near bottom on an outgoing tide

. Water column parameters me asured included TN, TP, TDN, TDP, NO 3 , NH 4 , SRP, TOC, DOC, Si, chlorophyll a , and turbidity.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 29 August 2010 Figure 1 8 . Location of stations sampled by Broward County (courtesy of Nancy Craig – Broward County).

Data indicate that water exiting through the Port Everglades Inlet has higher nutrient, chlorophyll a and turbidity concentrations compared to offshore stations (Table 7)

. However, t he extent to which this less saline, higher nutrient surface water mixes down to the r eef community is unclear.

Table 7. Nutrient concentrations at Broward County sampling stations ( Nancy Craig – Broward
C

ounty).

Parameter OS1 PE1 PE1 (surface) PE1 (bottom) OS2 OS3 TN (μg N L - 1 ) 118.5 120.89 138.41 105.28 116.4 108.00 DIN (μg N L - 1 ) 9.35 17.09 24.64 11.77 9.24 9.76 NH4(μg N L - 1 ) 3.65 5.25 6.08 4.52 3.3 3.33 NOx (μg N L - 1 ) 5.30 9.55 14.86 6.09 5.34 5.58 TP (μg P L - 1 ) 7.04 8.43 9.84 7.17 6.94 6.75 Chl a (μg L - 1 ) 0.71 1.21 1.84 0.80 0.81 0.64 Turbidity (NTU) 0.24 0.49 0.72 0.33 0.25 0.22



### Water Quality Summary

Water quality is generally affected by nutrient inputs from both outfalls and inlets only in the immediate vicinity of the nutrient source. At a short distance from both inlets and outfalls, the nutrient concentrations drop b ack to lower “background” levels. For instance, nutrient concentrations fell to background at the surface within 3 km of the SC outfall (Carsey et al

. 2010a).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 30 August 2010 Figure 19 shows a map of the Boynton Delray sampling stations on the left and the corresponding average station NH 4 concentrations on the right by depth (surface, middle, and bottom). There are
elevated NH 4 concentrations near the outfall at the surface ( Stations 3 through 5) and near the inlet and in Lake Worth Lagoon (Stations 13 and 16 through 1 8), but values are near background between the outfall and inlet (map and data for figure from Carsey et al

. 2010a). Table 8 shows nutrient concentrations for several parameters at stations outside of the direct influence of either inlets or outfalls from the recent FACE and Broward County sampling efforts.

Figure 20. Map of stations and corresponding NH 4 concentrations at sites sampled during the Boynton

- Delray cruises (Carsey et al . 2010).

Figure 19. Map of stations and corresponding NH 4 concentrations at sites sampled during the Boynton

- Delray cruises (Carsey et al . 2010).

Table 8. Background values for nutrients (ug/L) on the s outheast c oast ( μg l -1 ) (Carsey et al. 2010; Broward County unpublished data).

Program Station N+N NH 4 Ortho -P TN TP CHLA

FACE BD -7 3.22 7.66 0.001 - - 0.497

FACE BD -8 1.43 8.71 0.001 - - 0.275

FACE BD -9 1.59 5.61 0.002 - - 0.317

FACE BD

- 10 1.25 6.77 0.002 - - 0.387 Broward County OS -3 - 3.33 - 108.00 6.75 0.64 0 10 20 30 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

NH4 ug/lStation Surface

Middle

BottomNutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 31 August 2010 Nutrient Enrichment and Adverse Biological Effects

Many s tressors associated with human activity could potentially a ffect the southeast Florida reef tract, including inlet dredging and port channel deepening, boating and fishing activities, grounding or anchoring of ships on reefs, and/or installation of fiber optic cables across reefs (Gilliam 2009; Collier et al. 2008). In addition, temperature can play a role. Extreme o r sudden c old temperatures (e.g., climate or unusual upwelling events) can result in expulsion of zooxanthellae, and possible coral bleaching.
W arming temperatures associated with climate change may lead to coral bleaching, although mass bleaching events similar to those reported in the Caribbean have not been reported off southeast Florida (Collier et al. 2008).

Establishing a relationship between anthropogenic nutrient inputs and coral health has proven to be difficult. During the past decade i n south east Florida, benthic macroalgal growth has occurred in the offshore waters of Palm Beach County

, and benthic cyanobacterial mats ( Lyngbya confervoides ) have

o ccurred on por tion s of the middle reef tract offshore of Broward County ( Banks et al

. 2005). Excess growth of Codium and Caulerpa has been associated with physical smothering and mortality of some reef biota (Lapointe 1997; Lapointe et al . 2005b). Growth of Codium isthmocladum was first observed in 1989 on deep (27

- 45 m) reefs off northern Broward and Palm Beach Counties (Collier et al. 2008). The
Codium was adapted to low light levels and developed seasonally in the late spring and summer (Lapointe 1997). Tichenor (2004) also reported the occurrence of Codium on the Gulf Stream Reef (GSR)
in 20 03 at 75

- 90 f ee t below the surface.

While some researchers have hypothesized that land based sources of nutrients are associated with these macroalgal and cyanobacterial growths ( e.g. , Lapointe et al . 2005a and Tichenor 2004), the algal growths generally appear first in deeper offshore waters where upwelling may be a significant nutrient

source

. Other investigators have noted that the effects of land

- based nutrient enrichment on reef

associated communities are not entirely understood (Banks et a l . 2005). C omparisons of tissue nutrient content of C. isthmocladum and water column concentrations between southeast Florida and the Caribbean indicate higher P availability in southeast Florida relative to the Caribbean , potentially due to natural sourc es, such as upwelling and sediment, or anthropogenic land based sources (Lapointe et al. 2005a). Analysis of δ 15 N values of C. isthmocladum and Caulerpa species collected from shallow, mid

depth, and deep reefs off the southeast Florida coast found that t he δ 15 N levels were highest near shore and decreased with increasing depth

. This observation, coupled with higher δ 15 N values in the southern part of the study area ( near Boca Raton )

, prompted Lapointe et al. (2005b) to conclude that land based
nutrient sources were more influential than nat ural upwelling for these algae

.
Based on a projection of plume dynamics and predicted water column nitrogen concentrations, Tichenor (2004b) concluded that the South Central NPDES outfall contribut ed to Lyngbya growth on a reef approximately 5- 7 km down

- gradient of the outfall , however, no actual water column nutrients on the reef were available to substantiate the model predictions . Tichenor (2004a and 2004b) plotted the facility’s effluent n utrien t concentration s (based on monthly discharge monitoring report data) over time, and suggested that an increase in the nutrient effluent concentration was coincident with the emergence and spread of the down

- gradient Lyngbya growth on Gulf Stream Reef

. Bas ed on observations in March 2002, Tichenor (2004b) developed a series of maximum effluent nutrient
concentrations that may be associated with the potential onset of cyanobacteria proliferation (Table 9)

. It is important to note that the effluent nutrient concentrations are not the same as concentrations found on the reef

, and the actual nutrient levels responsible for the Lyngbya proliferation are not known.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 32 August 2010 Table 9 . Effluent bloom threshold concentrations (Tichenor 2004b).

- = Empty cell/no data

- TKN NH 4 N+N TP Threshold concentration (mg l - 1 ) 15.99 10.18 1.07 1.16

In 2005, Palm Beach County Reef Rescue ( PBCRR ) performed nutrient analyses to establish background
concentrations and determine the potential for elevated concentrations down current of the South Central outfall (Tichenor 2006). The PBCRR noted that down current DIN values were relatively similar

to DIN values predicted by the outfall plume model developed at the Hollywood outfall (Wanninkhof et al. 2005). Tichenor (2006) con cluded that the location where the Lyngbya proliferation begins, approximately 5

- 7 km down current of the South Central outfall, is likely where downward vertical mixing of effluent begins to occur (Figure 20 ). In contrast, o ther investigators have found there were no differences in the isotopic signatures of either algae or sediment associated with sites up and down

gradient of outfalls, and concluded there was no indication of anthropogenic enrichment (Carsey et al. 2010b).

W hile a relationship between anthropogenic nutrient inputs from ocean outfalls and coral health has not been clearly established

, the six domestic wastewater treatment facilities that discharge to the
S outheast Florida Coastal R eef T ract area via ocean outfalls are legislatively requ ired to eliminate their outfalls as the primary disposal method by 2025, in part due to concerns that nutrients in these outfalls could exacerbate algal growth on the reef

.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 33 August 2010 Figure 20 . Location of the South Central (Delray) outfall and the Gulf Stream Reef (Tichenor 2006).



### Waters on the 1998 303(d) List

Although there are no listings for the coastal waters in this area, there are nutrient

- listed waters in the estuaries and canals in the coastal basins that ultimately drain to the coas t by way of the inlets (Table
10 ).Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 34 August 2010 Table 10

. Impaired waters for nutrients, DO, and/or chlorophyll a.

- = Empty cell/no data Planning Unit Waterbody Name WBID Impairment(s)

St. Lucie – Loxahatchee (Group 2 Basin) - - -

North St. Lucie North St. Lucie - DO, nutrients (historical chla)

North St. Lucie Tenmile Creek - DO

North St. Lucie St. Lucie - DO, nutrients (chla)

North St. Lucie Fivemile Creek - DO

C- 24 C- 24 Canal - DO, nutrients (chla)

C- 23 C- 23 Canal - DO, nutrients (chla)

South St. Lucie Tidal St. Lucie - Nutrients (chla)

South St. Lucie St. Lucie Canal - DO, nutrients (chla)

South St. Lucie South Fork St. Lucie - DO

South St. Lucie Bessey Creek - DO, nutrients (chla)

Loxahatchee North Fork Loxahatchee - DO, nutrients (chla)

Coastal North Coastal - Nutrients (chla)

Coastal St. Lucie River - Nutrients (chla)

Coastal Manatee Pocket - Nutrients (chla)

C- 44 C- 44 Canal - DO Lake Worth Lagoon – Palm Beach Coast (Group 3 Basin) - - -

L-8 L- 8 Canal 3233 DO

C- 51 C- 51 3245 DO, nutrients ( chla)

C- 51 Lake Clarke 3245B DO, nutrients (TSI)

C- 17 PB Stations/D Canals 3242A DO, nutrients (chla)

C- 15 Lake Ida 3262A Nutrients (TSI)

Hillsboro Canal E- 4 Canal 3264D Nutrients (chla)

Intracoastal Hillsboro Inlet Park 8096B Historical chla
Biscayne Bay – Southeast Coast (Group 4 Basin) - - -

Broward Pompano Canal 3271 DO, nutrients (chla)

Broward C- 13E/Middle River 3274 Nutrients (chla)

Broward North Fork New River 3276A DO, nutrients (chla)

Broward South New River Canal 3277A Nutrients (historical chla)

North Dade Snake Creek Canal E 3283 Nutrients (historical chla)

South Dade C- 111 Canal 3303 Nutrients (historical chla)Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 35 August 2010 

### Numeric Nutrient Criteria for the Protection of Coral Communities

After determining that t he southeast Florida coastal reef tract coral and hard bottom community is the most sensitive biological resource in this region , the FDEP evaluated three different lines of evidence to develop numeric nutrient criteria that would be protective of coral commu nities. The three approaches

were ( 1) an evaluation of nutrient criteria developed by Hawaii and Australia to protect their coral reef communities, ( 2) an evaluation of available nutrient dosing experiment studies on corals, and ( 3) development of criteri a calculated using available water quality data for the area that would maintain the currently healthy conditions of the southeast coral community.

Hawaii and Australia’s Criteria t o Protect Corals

Hawaii and Australia

, two areas with coral reef systems

, have developed nutrient guidelines to protect their coral reefs , with combined wet season/dry season values rang es from 110 -1 60 μg/L for TN and 16

- 30 μg/ L for TP, in open coastal waters (see Table 1 1)

. In Australia, guidelines for the Great Barrier Re ef (GBR) were developed by Moss et al. ( 2005 ) , using GBR water quality data and consulting the values

recom mended by Hawker and Connell ( 1989 ) which was drawn from worldwide literature. While the
Moss et al

. (2005) stated their dissolved inorganic nitrogen v alues (DIN, ranging from 1

- 5 μg/L ) were similar to those of Hawker and Connell (2 μg/L ) , the y also noted that the ortho

- ph osphate values derived (3

- 8 μg/L ) were an order of magnitude higher than the Hawker and Connell guidelines ( 0 .25 μg/ L, and that this was most likely due to Caribbean data used in the earlier research. Caribbean waters generally have lower concentrations of phosphate than waters adjacent to reefs in t he Indo

- Pacific ( Moss et al. 2005 ).

The Hawaiian criteria were also dev eloped to protect the coral reefs from upland sources of nutrients

, and included criteria for TN, TP and chlorophyll a , expressed as geometric means for wet and dry

season s, and criteria not to be exceeded more than 10% and 2% of the time

. Chlorophyll a l evels in Hawaii for both seasons (0.30 μg/ L wet season and 0.15 μg/L dr y season ) were similar to both the GBR guidelines (0.5 μg/L wet season and 0.6 μg/ L dry season ) and those of Hawker and Connell (1989) (0.59 μg/ L, no seasons)

. Total P criteria in Hawaii ( 20 μg/L wet season and 16 μg/L dry season ) were higher than the levels observed in the southeast Florida coastal waters (6.75 μg/L ) because the Hawaiian TP background levels are naturally higher due to the underlying basalt.

Both Hawaii an d Australia divide their coastal waters similarly (i.e. estuary, embayment

, etc.) for the purposes of nutrient criteria . Waters on the southeast Florida coast are most similar to the “open coastal” or “Inshore” categories of Hawaii or Australia respect ively. Additionally, both Hawaii and Australia established “ wet and dry ” criteria based on either freshwater input or regional climate. V alues from Broward County OS

- 3 station are included in Table 1 1 for comparison to the criteria for Hawaii and Australia

. In general, the existing southeast coast nitrogen concentrations were similar to the established Australian and Hawaii protective criteria, while the existing southeast coast phosphorus values were lower than Australian and Hawaii criteria.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 36 August 2010 Table 11. Comparison of Hawaiian (HI) and Great Barrier Reef (GBR) nutrient criteria (in μg l -1 ) with sample values from a Broward County station in s outheast Florida ( Station OS -3; see F igure 18 for exact location) (HAR 11

- 54, Moss et al . 2005).

- = Empty cell /no data

- Estuary Embayment (HI)
or Enclosed Coastal (GBR) Open Coastal (HI) or Inshore (GBR) Ocean (HI) or Offshore (GBR)

TN HI criteria wet (dry) 200 200 (150) 150 (110) 50

TN GBR criteria 250

- 300 160

- 200 145

- 160 120

- 135

TN SE FL - - 108 -
NH 4 HI criteria wet (dry) 6 6 (3.5) 3.5 (2) 1

NH 4 GBR criteria - - - -
NH 4 SE FL - - 3.33 - TP HI criteria wet (dry) 25 25 (20) 20 (16) 10

TP GBR criteria 20

- 25 20 20

- 30 10

- 30

TP SE FL - - 6.75 - Chlorophyll a HI criteria wet (dry) 2 1.5 (0.5) 0.30 (0.15) 0.06

Chlorophyll a GBR criteria 3-4 2 0.5

- 0.6 0.3

- 0.5 Chlorophyll a SE FL - - 0.64 -

Criteria Based on Nutrient Dosing Experiments

As the second line of evidence, FDEP reviewed the available literature on nutrient dosing experiments on corals. While the literature was limited, experimental evidence suggests that Dissolved Inorganic Nitrogen levels of 14 μ g/L would be protective of coral health (Renegar et al. 2008)

. Ambient data from the southeast coast indicates surface and bottom DIN values are near this protective level, and these observations, in conjunction with the overall health of the reef, indicate that existing nutrient and chlorophyll a levels are protective of the designated use.

D evelop ment of Nutrient C riteria t o Support H ealthy C ondi tions on the Southeast Florida Coral Reef
C

ommunity
While benthic macroalgal growth and coral diseases have occurred in the offshore waters of the reef tract, the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Project determined that the community composition and coral cover within the project’s thirteen monitoring sites was stable, and that diseases did not appear to be a major factor affecting stony corals at these sites. This information, in conjunction with comparisons of nutrient data for the southeast coast to the criteria developed by Hawaii and Australia and proposed by Renegar , supports the position that maintaining current levels of water quality should maintain the existing healthy condition of the coral reef and hard bottom
communities

. The following section describes the components of water quality criteria and the statistical method used to calculate proposed nutrient criteria.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 37 August 2010 

### Background on the Components of Water Quality Crit eria

Methodology

For consistent application and for providing an appropriate level of protection, water quality criteria need to include magnitude, frequency, and duration components. The magnitude is a measure of how much of a pollutant may be present i n the water without an unacceptable adverse effect. Duration is a measure of how long the pollutant may be above the magnitude, and frequency relates to how often the magnitude may be exceeded without adverse effects. It is preferred to derive the magnit ude component of a criterion through a cause

- effect relationship (such as those measured through toxicity testing). The magnitude would then be set at a level that would protect a majority of the sensitive aquatic organisms inhabiting the system. Absent a demonstrated cause

- effect relationship, the magnitude may be set at a level designed to maintain the current data distribution, accounting for natural temporal variability, when the current conditions are protective of the designated uses of the waterbod y. Since a criterion derived based on the existing data distribution has no direct link to any observed cause and effect relationship, it is assumed that maintaining the current data distribution will preserve the uses associated with that distribution.

The frequency and duration components of the criteria are best established as additional descriptors of the reference condition data distribution. Specifically, these components should be part of a statistical test designed to determine whether the long

- term distribution of data has shifted upward (or in some cases, downward) from the reference distribution. This test would then be used to determine whether future monitoring data are consistent with the magnitude (long

- term average) defined by the refere nce dataset. It is critical to account for the natural variability surrounding the magnitude expression and to control for statistical errors.

The derivation of the magnitude, frequency and duration components of the numeric nutrient criteria for the Florida Keys is described briefly below. More details concerning the statistical approaches used can be found in the document “Overview of FDEP Approaches for Nutrient Criteria Development in Marine Waters” (FDEP 2010).

Magnitude

The magnitude compon ent can be set at a variety of values based on the frequency and duration that will be used to determine compliance. For the “healthy existing conditions” approach, FDEP established the magnitude at: a) an adjusted long

- term central tendency (geometric m ean) of the distribution, expressed as a long

- term geometric mean never to be exceeded; and b) an annual geometric mean, not to be exceeded more than two times over a five

- year period. The long

- term average condition was adjusted to a level that represent s an insignificant increase from the baseline. Allowing for an insignificant increase accounts for uncertainty in the estimate of the mean and partially addresses the fact that the reference based approach fails to identify a threshold of imbalance, and t hus is highly prone to excessive Type I error. For the purpose of antidegradation evaluations, EPA has established that a 10% change in a water quality parameter represents an insignificant departure from the historical condition, known as a de minimus ch ange (U .S. Sixth Circuit Court 2008). Therefore, the long

- term geometric mean limit was derived to allow for up to a 10% increase in the long

- term geometric mean, which was calculated as the geometric mean of the annual geometric means of the long

- term da taset for each segment of the waterbody.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 38 August 2010 Because it is not always practical to assess compliance with the criteria on the same long

- term basis, FDEP also developed criteria expressed as an annual geometric mean so that estuaries could be assessed

on an annual basis. It should be noted that the duration and frequency components of the criteria must be linked to the response timeframe of the sensitive endpoint. Short

- term averaging periods (e.g., 1 to 30 days) might be appropriate for nutrient criteria w here a sufficiently robust cause

- effect relationship has demonstrated that a eutrophic response occurs over such time frames. If however, such a short

term response cannot be demonstrated, or there is no indicati on of use impairment, longer averaging peri ods should be used.

Duration and Frequency

Since the duration and frequency components of the criteria must be consistent with the derivation of the magnitude component, the long

- term geometric mean target cannot simply be applied as an annual

mean. Doi ng so would result in an unacceptability high Type I failure rate (identifying a healthy system as being impaired) since approximately 50 % of the individual yearly means are expected to be above the long

- term mean. Therefore, the long

- term target must be adjusted to allow for the application to a shorter duration with an acceptable Type I error rate of no more than 10 %.

An annual criterion with an approximate 10 % Type I error rate for a given frequency was derived by appropriately accounting for the annual variability above the mean. This annual target concentration was derived as an upper percentile of the distribution of the annual geometric mean concentrations. Previous proposals by EPA have utilized 3- year assessment periods to express the duration nu trient criteria components. Although it is possible to construct a test that achieves the 10 % Type I error rate target over a 3

- year period, a slightly longer period (5 years) will provide better control for Type II error and will more fully capture clima tic cycles ( e.g ., el Niño, la Niñ a), which tend to be longer than 3 years in Florida (and may actually be on a multi

- decadal scale). Furthermore, a 5- year period is more consistent with both the s tate’s 5- year 303(d) assessment and NPDES permit renewal cy cles.

Given a five year a ssessment period, FDEP derived criteria expressed as an annual geometric mean by using the 75 th percentile of the annual geometric means from the long

- term dataset. FDEP demonstrated that setting the criteria at this percentile results in a magnitude that, when expressed as an annual geometric mean not to be exceeded more than twice during a 5- year period, will achieve the targeted 10 % error rate

. The magnitude component of the criteria (not to be exceeded more than twice
in a 5-y ear period) was established to allow for 2 separate assessments:

**•** As an annual geometric mean for a network of stations in a specified segment of the waterbody; and

**•** As an annual geometric mean for a single station in a given segment.

The two expressions of magnitude differ in the handling of within

- segment spatial variability. The network average magnitude was calculated based on the distribution of spatially averaged annual geometric means, while the single site magnitude was calculated using the distr ibution of station annual geometric means. Use of the network average magnitude is appropriate for assessing overall segment

status. However, a network average is only representative of overall segment status if it is relatively homogeneous. I f the segm ent is not well mixed, is very large, or contains localized nutrient sources, then there is a potential that isolated areas of enrichment may be masked in the network spatial

average. Therefore, the single station annual geometric mean has the benefit of assessing localizedNutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 39 August 2010 enrichment patterns. F DEP has not decided whether both expressions of magnitude are needed in all cases, and we are seeking additional feedback from local experts and stakeholders.



### Summary of the Proposed Criteria

FDEP proposes three sets of potential criteria: (1 ) a long

- term g eometric mean concentration; (2 ) an annual geometric mean of values from a network of stations over a given area, not to be exceeded more than twice in a five

- year period; and (3 ) a n annual geometric mean of va lues from a single location, not to be exceeded more than twice in a five

- year period.

Proposed Criteria

The proposed long

- term targets for the protection of a healthy, well

- balanced aquatic community in the southeast Florida coast are provided in Table s 12a, 12b , 12c, and 12d

. The proposed criteria are based on a data from sampling locations selected as representative of minimally affected by anthropogenic sources. The sites are OS1 and 3 in Broward County (Figure 18 ) for TP and TN, and BD 1, 2, 7

- 12, and 15 from the FACE studies (Figure 12 ) . Data from each of these sites were used to develop chlorophyll a and DIN values below

.

Table 12a . Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for TP (ug/L) for the S outheast Florida Coastal Reef
Tract

.

Note: The criteria are based on 4 years of data from 2 stations. For compliance purposes, the long

- term geometric mean shall not exceed the long

- term limit nor shall the average of all stations in a segment exceed the network average more than twice in a 5- year period. The last column shows the value that a s ingle station shall not exceed more than twice in a 5- year period. Note that F DEP is evaluating if the data are suffic ient to finalize criteria. Depth Long

- Term
Geometric
Mean Long

- Term
Limit Network
Avera ge 2 Out of 5 Year Annual
Limit Assessed as a Single Site
Geometric Mean 2 Out of 5 Year Annual Limit

Surface 7.13 7.85 9.7 9.9

Bottom 6.92 7.61 9.4 9.6

Surface to Bottom 7.04 7.74 9.6 9.7

Table 1 2b . Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for TN (ug /L) for the S outheast Florida Coastal Reef
Tract

.

Note: The criteria are based on 4 years of data from 2 stations. For compliance purposes, the long

- term geometric mean shall not exceed the long

- term limit nor shall the average of all stations in a segment exceed the network average more than twice in a 5

- year period. The last column shows the value that a single station shall not exceed more than twice in a 5

- year period. Note that F DEP is evaluating if the data are sufficient to finalize criteria.
D epth Long

- Term
Geometric
Mean Long

- Term
Limit Network Average 2 Out of 5 Year Annual
Limit Assessed as a Single Site
Geometric Mean 2 Out of 5 Year
Annual Limit
Surface 118 130 164 168

Bottom 112 124 157 161

Surface to
Bottom 116 127 161 165Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 40 August 2010 Table 1 2c . Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for chlorophyll a (ug/L) for the S outheast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

.

Note: The criteria are based on 3 years of data. For compliance purposes, the long

- term geometric mean shall not exceed the long

- term limit nor shall the average of all stations in a segment exceed the network average more than twice in a 5

- year period. The last column shows the
value that a single station shall not exceed more than twice in a 5

- year period. Note that F DEP is evaluating if t he data are sufficient to finalize
criteria. Depth Long

- Term Geometric
Mean Long

- Term Limit Network Average 2 Out of 5 Year Annual
Limit Assessed as a Single Site
Geometric Mean 2 Out of 5 Year
Annual Limit
Surface 0.46 0.51 0.69 0.78

Bottom 0.38 0.41 0.54 0.60

Surface to
Bottom 0.43 0.47 0.63 0.69

Table 1 2b . Proposed numeric nutrient criteria for DIN (ug/L) for the S outheast Florida Coastal Reef
Tract

.

Note: The criteria are based on 4 years of data. For compliance purposes, the long

- term geometric mean shall not exceed the long

- term limit nor shall the average of all stations in a segment exceed the network average more than twice in a 5

- year period. The last column shows the value that a single station shall not exceed more than twice in a 5

- year period. Note that F DEP is evaluating if the data are sufficient to finalize
criteria. Depth Long

- Term Geometric
Mean Long

- Term Limit Network Average 2 Out of 5 Year Annual
Limit Assessed as a Single Site
Geometric Mean 2 Out of 5 Year Annual Lim it
Surface 9.1 10.0 12.6 13.3

Bottom 10.6 11.7 14.0 14.9

Surface to
Bottom 10.1 11.1 13.5 14.2Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 41 August 2010 

### References

Wren, K., and S. Blitch. 2010. St. Joseph Bay. Apalachicola public workshop presentation on February 11, 2010, in support of FDEP numeric nutrient criteria for estuarine and coastal waters.

Banks, K., C. Beaver, J. Bohnsack, R.E. Dodge, D. Gilliam, W. Jaap, B. Keller, V.R. Leeworthy, T. Matthews,
R. Ruiz

- Carus, D. Santavy, and R. Spieler. 2005. The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of Florida. pp.
150

- 200. In: J. Waddell (ed.), The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2005. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 11. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, MD. 522 pp.

Banks, K.W., B.M. Riegl, E.A. Shinn, W.E. Piller, and R.E. Dodge. 2007. Geomorphology of the southeast Florida continental reef tract (Miami

- Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach Counties, USA). Coral Reefs 26: 617

- 633.

Banks, K.W ., B.M. Riegl, V.P. Richards, B.K. Walker, K.P Helmle, L.K.B. Jordan, J. Phipps, M.S. Shivji, R.E. Spieler, R.E. Dodge. 2008. Chapter 5. The reef tract of continental southeast Florida (Miami

Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties, USA). Ed. B.M. Riegl, R.E. Dodge, Coral Reefs of the USA, Springer Science and Business Media B.V., 2008.

Boynton

- Delray Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Plan, 2007. NOAA Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratories Ocean Chemistry Division. Miami, Florida.

Broward County Department of Planning and Environmental Protection. 2001. Florida Historical Water Quality Atlas, 1972

- 1997. Technical Report Series 01

- 03. Water Resources Division and Environmental Monitoring Division.

Carsey, T., C. Featherstone, K. Goodwin, C . Sinigalliano, J. Stamates, J

- Z. Zhang, J. Proni, J. Bishop, C. Brown, M.M. Adler, P.L. Blackwelder, and H. Alsayegh. 2010a. DRAFT Boynton

- Delray Coastal Water Quality Monitoring Program. NOAA Technical Report, OAR

- AOML

Carsey, T., H. Casanova, C. Drayer, C. Featherstone, C. Fischer, K. Goodwin, J. Proni, A. Saied, C. Sinigalliano, J. Stamates, P. Swart, and J

- Z. Zhang. 2010b. FACE Outfalls Survey Cruise – October
6- 19, 2006. NOAA Technical Report, OAR

- AOML, Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Labor atory, Miami, Florida.
Carsey, T., J. Bishop, C. Brown, S. Cummings, C. Featherstone, D. Meerhoff, C. Sinigalliano, J. Stamates, N. Amornthammarong, F. Bloetscher, J. Craynock, P. Dammann, K. Goodwin, J. Proni, P. Swart, and J

- Z. Zhang. 2007. Boynton Inlet 48

- hour Sampling Intensives, June and September 2007. NOAA Data Report AOML

- XX.
Carsey, T., K.D. Goodwin, J. Hendee, J.R. Proni, C. Sinigalliano, J. Stewart, J

- Z. Zhang, N. Amornthammarong, J. Craynock, S. Cummings, P. Dammann, C. Featherstone, J. Stamate s, K. Sullivan. 2008. A glimpse of the Florida Area Coastal Environment (FACE) program. Proceedings of the 11 th International Coral Reef Symposium, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, 7

- 11 July 2008. Session
no. 16.
Carsey, T.P. and J. Stamates. 2009. The Florida Area Coastal Environment (FACE) Program. NOAA/AOML. Miami, FL. Retrieved on July 28, 2010. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/themes/CoastalRegional/projects/FACE/ PDF/FactSheet_31mar09.p
df

Chiappone, M. , Sullivan K.M. 199 4

. Ecological Structure and Dynamics of Nearshore Hard

- Bottom
Communities in the Florida Keys

. Bulletin of Marine Science 54(3 ): 747

- 756

.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 42 August 2010 Collier, C., R. Ruzicka, K. Banks, L. Barbier , J. Beal, D. Bingham, J. Bohnsack, S. Brooke, N. Craig, R. Dodge, L. Fisher, N. Gadbois, D. Gilliam, L. Gregg, T. Kellison, V. Kosmynin, B. Lapointe, E. McDevitt, J. Phipps, N. Poulos, J. Proni, P. Quinn, B. Riegl, R. Spieler, J. Walczak, B. Walker, and D . Warrick.
2008. The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of Southeast Florida. pp. 131

- 159. In: J.E. Waddell and A.M. Clarke (eds.), The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum N OS NCCOS 73. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, MD. 569 pp.

Cook, C.B., E.M. Mueller, M.D. Ferrier, E. Annis. 2002. Chapter 28. The influence of nearshore waters on corals of the Florida reef trac t. Ed. J.W. Porter, K.G. Porter, CRC Preess, Boca Raton, Florida.

Fabricius, K.E., 2005. Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs: review and synthesis. Marine Pollution Bulleting 50: 125

- 146.

FACE. 2010. The Florida Area Coastal Environment Program: An Overview. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/themes/CoastalRegional/projects/FACE/faceweb.htm . Retrieved on July 28, 2010.

Furnas, M., A. Mitchel l, M. Skuza, J. Brodie. 2005. In the other 90%: phytoplankton responses to enhanced nutrient availability in the Great Barrier Reef Lagoon. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 51:
253

- 265.

Gilliam, D.S. 2009. Southeast Florida Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitorin g Project, 2008 Year 6 Final Report. 2007. National Coral Reef Institute, Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. FDEP contract number G0099.

Gross, M.G. ed; 1982. Oceanogrpahy.

Hawaiian Water Quality Standards. 2004. Hawaii Department of H ealth. Amendment and compilation of Chapter 11

- 54 Hawaii Administrative Rules, August 31, 2004.

Jaap, W.C. and P. Hallock. 1990. Chapter 17 Coral Reefs. In: Ecosystems of Flroida. Eds: R.L. Myers, J.J. Ewel. Univ. Central Florida Press, Orlando.

Jame son. S.C. and R.A. Kelty. 2004. A review of indicators of land

- based pollution stress on coral reefs. A background paper for the joint EPA/NOAA/USGA/DOI workshop on Assessing Pollution Stess on Coral Reefs, August 310September 2, 2004. Honolulu, HI.

Kle ypas J .A.

, R. W. Buddemeier , D. Archer

, J.P. Gattuso

, C. Langdon

, B.N. Opdyke. 1999. Geochemical consequences of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on coral reefs. Science 284:118

– 120

. Lapointe, B.E., P.J. Barile , M.M. Littler, D.S. Littler, B.J. Bedford, C. Gasque. 2005a. Macroalgal blooms on southeast Florida coral reefs I. Nutrient stoichiometry of the invasive green alga Codium isthmocladum in the wider Caribbean indicates nutrient enrichment. Harmful Algae 4: 1092

- 1105.
Lapointe, B.E., P.J. Barile, M.M. Littler, D.S. Littler. 2005b. Macroalgal blooms on southeast Florida coral reefs II. Cross

- shelf discrimination of nitrogen sources indicates widespread assimilation of sewage nitrogen. Harmful Algae 4: 1106

- 1122.
Moss, A., J. Brodie, M. Furnas. 2005. Water quality guidelines for the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area: a basis for development and preliminary values. Marine Pollution Bulletin 51: 76

- 88.
Moyer, R.P., B Riegl, K Banks, RE Dodge. 2003. Sp atial patterns and ecology of benthic communities on a high

- latitude South Florida (Broward County, USA) reef system. Coral Reefs 22: 447

- 464.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 43 August 2010 Payton, A. 2006. Submarine groundwater discharge: An important source of new inorganic nitrogen to coral reef ecosystems. Notes in Limnology and Oceanography 51(1): 343

- 348.
Proni, J., M. Adler, D. Meerhoff, N. Amornthammarong, K. Goodwin, J. Bishop, E. Peltola, F. Bloetscher, D. Pierrot, T. Carsey, C. Sinigalliano, J. Craynock, P. Swart, S. Cummings, J. Stamate s, P. Dammann, K. Sullivan, C. Drayer, R. Wanninkhof, C. Featherstone, and J

- Z. Zhang. 2009. Final Report: An Investigation of the South Central Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant Ocean Outfall and Coastal Environment. Florida Area Coastal Environment (F ACE) Project.

Proni, J.R. and R.G. Williams. 1997. Chapter 22. Acoustic measurements of currents and effluent plume dilutions in the western edge of the Florida Current. In: Acoustic Remote Sensing Applications, Ed. S.P. Singal, Narosa Publishing House, Ne w Delhi, India.

Renegar, D.A., P.L. Blackwelder, and A. L

. Moulding. 2008. Coral ultrastructural response to elevated pCO2 and nutrients during tissue repair and regeneration. Proceedings of the 11 th International Coral Reef Symposium, Ft. Lauderdate, Fl orida, Session 25, July 7

- 11.
Renegar, D.A. and B.M. Riegl. 2005. Effect of nutrient enrichment and elevated CO 2 partial pressure on growth rate of Atlantic scleractinian coral Acropora cervicornis . Marine Ecology Progress Series
293: 69

- 76.

Risk, M.J. , B.E. Lapointe, O.A. Sherwood, and B.J .Bedford. 2009. The use of δ 15 N in assessing sewage stress on coral reefs. Marine Pollution Bulletin 58: 793

- 802.
Sherwood, O.A., B.E. Lapointe, M.J. Risk, R.E. Jamieson. In press. Nitrogen Isotopic Records of Terrestrial Pollution Encoded in Floridian and Bahamian Gorgonian Corals. Environmental Science and Technology (accepted Nov 2009).

Smith, J. 1985. Temporal and special characteristics of summer upwelling along Florida’s Atlantic shelf. Journal of Physic al Oceanography 13: 1715.

Tichenor, E. 2003. The occurrence and distribution of cyanobacteria on Gulf Stream Reef, Boynton Beach, Florida. Palm Beach County Reef Rescue. http://www.reef

- rescue.org /PDFreports.shtml

Tichenor, E. 2004a. Correlation between waste water treatment plant effluent quality and cyanobacteria proliferation on Gulf Stream Reef, Boynton Beach, Florida. Palm Beach County Reef Rescue. http://www.reef

- rescue.org/PDFreports.shtml

Tichenor, E. 2004b. The occurrence and distribution of cyanobacteria on Gulf Stream Reef, Boynton Beach, Florida. Palm Beach County Reef Rescue. http://www.reef

- rescue.org/PDFreports.shtml

Tichenor, E. 2006. Examination of effluent plume behavior Delray Beach, Florida ocean outfall. Palm Beach County Reef Rescue. http://www.reef

- rescue.org/PDFreports.shtml
U.S. Census Bureau 2009. http://www.census.gov

Wagner, D.E., R Kramer, R vanWoesl k; 2010. Species composition, hab itat, and water quality influence

c oral bleaching on Southern Florida. Marine Ecology Progress Series 408: 65

- 78.
Wanninkhof, R., K. Sullivan, W.P. Dammann, J.R. Proni, F. Bloetscher, A.V. Soloviev, and T.P. Carsey. 2005. Farfield tracing of a point source discharge plume in the coastal ocean using sulfur hexafluoride. Envi ronmental Science and Technology 39: 9993

- 8890.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 44 August 2010 

### Appendix A. Coral Reef Data

- Gathering Activities Summary and Acronyms from Collier et al.
2008.Nutrient Criteria Technical Support Document Southeast Florida Coastal Reef Tract

Draft 45 August 2010