# DRAFT

## About the Everglades

America’s Everglades once covered almost 11,000 square miles of south Florida. Just a century ago, water flowed down the Kissimmee River into Lake Okeechobee, then south through the Everglades to the Florida Bay

— the ultimate destination of unobstructed sheetflow. Because of efforts to drain the marshland for urban development, agriculture and flood control, the Everglades today is half the size it was a century ago. Dubbed the “River of Grass” for the sawgrass that flourished throughout the marsh, the Everglades is a mosaic of freshwater ponds, prairies and forested uplands that supports a rich plant and wildlife community. Renowned for its wading birds and wildlife, the Everglades is home to dozens of federally listed threaten ed and endangered species. The mix of salt and freshwater makes it the only place on Earth where alligators and crocodiles exist side by side.

Upon implementation of the foundation and the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) projects, water f lows will more closely mirror pre

- drainage conditions to the extent possible given certain modern day constraints, and realize the goals of CERP for both the natural

and human environments.



### Water System Modifications:

Historic Flow, Current Flow , and Flow a fter CERP R e storation in South FloridaAgency Letters

CERP 2010 Report to Congress i October 2010 

### AGENCY LETTERS

Section 601 of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000 approved the Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (the Plan)

, which is the framework for modifications and operational changes to the Central and

Southern Florida (C&SF) Project needed to restore, preserve and protect the s outh Florida ecosystem while providing for other wa ter

- related needs of the region, including water supply and flood protection. This legislation i s now commonly referred to as the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP).

Section 601 (l) of WRDA 200 0 requires that the Secretaries of the Army and the Interior jointly submit a Report to Congress not less than every five years on the implementation of

the Plan. In accordance with section 601 ( l ) 1 of the Act this report includes:

“...the determination of each Secretary, and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, concerning the benefits to the natural system and the human environment achieved as of the date of the report and whether the completed projects of the Plan are being operated in a manner that is consistent with the requir ements of subsection (h)...”

Th e final report will include these detrminations and will also include a letter of support signed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD).Agency Letters

CERP 2010 Report to Congress ii October 2010 This page intentionally left blankExecutive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress iii October 2010 

### EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Restoring the South Florida Ecosystem

Recognizing that a healthy ecosystem is fundamental to a healthy economy, numerous initiatives and construction projects are now under way to revitalize and protect the expansive s outh Florida ecosystem. A major component of south Florida ecosystem
restoration is implementation of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)

. Approved by Congress in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2000, CERP is a framework for large

- scale restoration . CERP is based on ―getting the w ater right‖ by improving water quality, quantity, timing and distribution

. There are o ther important projects that pre

- date CERP for Everglades restoration that work hand

- in

- hand to realize the benefits of the CERP. These important companion F oundation P rojects restore s the Kissimmee River and improve water flows into Everglades National Park . The S tate of

Florida is also working to restore and protect the Northern Everglades by creating water quality treatment marshes for water flowing into Lake Okeech obee, coastal estuaries and the Everglades.

Working across political boundaries and in collaboration with partners and many stakeholders at the local, state and federal level, restoration of the historic Everglades ecosystem is one of the largest and mos t complex environmental restoration efforts in North America. The overarching goal is to capture the fresh water that now flows unused to the ocean and the gulf and redirect it to storage for delivery to natural areas when they need it. Returning a more historic flow of water to the River of Grass will not only revive the native

habitat for 68 federally listed threatened and endangered species, it will also naturally replenish the underground aquifers that supply drinking water to the pop ulation of south

Florida.

Major components of CERP include above ground and underground water storage

, water

preserve areas
, management of Lake Okeechobee as an ecological resource

, improved water

deliveries to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries

, treatment wetlands

, improved water deliveries to the Everglades

, removal of barriers to the natural sheetflow of water

, reuse of

wastewater

, and improved water conservation.

Sound environmental science is at the heart of this effort, much of it new an d pioneering

work. Since 2000, much has been learned through rigorous Everglades research, extensive monitoring and the development and refinement of computer models. The CERP planners recognized this natural progression in applied science and included a commitment to adaptive management as an integral part of CERP implementation to support improved decision

making and CERP performance over time

. As restoration and scientific investigations advance, so, too, do the opportunities to incorporate CERP improv ements and changes to better achieve restoration goals and objectives.

Five Years of Restoration and Implementation Progress

This second Report to Congress details the progress made over the last five

- year reporting period on implementation of the Compre hensive Everglades Restoration Plan

. ContinuousExecutive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress iv October 2010 project and program level achievements for both CERP and foundation project s have produced not only much needed momentum, but also greater confidence in restoration

efforts. During this period, a number of earlier initiatives and construction projects continued to move forward, and significant progress has been made in many areas, including additional scientific knowledge and understanding of the natural, pre

- drainage system and how water flow, depth and tim ing influences Everglades ecology.

Highlights for this period include:

 Passage of WRDA 2007, authorizing construction of three major projects: Site 1 Impoundment, Indian River Lagoon

- South (IRL

- S) and Picayune Strand Restoration.

 Construction and job creation provided by the passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) for both CERP and other restoration projects.

CERP Authorized Projects

 Initiated construction for the Merritt Pump Station feature of Picayune Strand Restoration, buildi ng on the state’s work of fill ing and plugg ing seven miles of the Prairie Canal; remov al of 65 miles of roadways and install ation of seventeen culverts. Wading birds, black bears and the endangered Florida panther have already been observed within the 13, 000 acres of restored habitat.

 Installed pilot projects for aquifer storage and recovery and ongoing cycle testing and monitoring at two sites:

Kissimmee River and Hillsboro Canal.

 Completed designs to prepare Indian River Lagoon

- South (IRL

- S) for

construction

.  Awarded the first construction contract for the Site 1 Impoundment, adjacent to

the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge.

 Project Implementation Reports complete d or nearly completed for: Caloosahatchee (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir, C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western Project, Broward County Water Preserve Areas and Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase I).

Foundation Projects

 Kissimmee River Restoration: More natural flow was reestablished for four miles in 2007

and four more miles in 2009 for a total of 22 miles of the meandering Kissimmee River

now restored. Seasonal rains and flows now inundate 15,000 acres of restored floodplain

habitat with a decade of comprehensive monitoring documenting that the river and its floodplain have surpassed the anticipated environmental response.

 Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park (ENP) : Initiated construction of the Tamiami Trail Bridge portion of the project to directly benefit water flows to Everglades National Park

, completed initial necessary flood mitigation improvements in

the 8.5 S quare M ile A rea and continuing closeout of punch list items

. Kissimmee Aquifer Storage and Recovery InstallationExecutive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress v October 2010  C

- 111 ( South Dade ) : Completed construction of a series o f shallow impoundments to reduce seepage from Everglades National Park.

 Completed construction of two Critical Projects and three more are in construction.

State Expedited Projects

 Completed an additional 6,000 acres of Stormwater Treatment Area with anot her 12,000 acres currently under construction. To date, more than 45,000 acres of effective treatment marsh are in operation and using plants to naturally remove phosphorus from water flowing into the Everglades.

 Initiated construction of the Deering Esta te s Flow

- way, part of Phase 1 of the proposed

CERP Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project to restore natural water flows to the Bay

and Biscayne National Park.

 Completed construction of L

- 31E Culvert s
, part of Phase 1 of the proposed CERP Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project

.  Initiated construction of the proposed CERP C

- 111 Spreader Canal

- Western Project to benefit Florida Bay by restoring freshwater wetlands, tidal wetlands and near

- shore

habitat.

 Test cells constructed for the CERP Caloosahatchee River ( C

- 43 ) West Basin Storage

Reservoir and the IRL

- S C

- 44 Reservoir/Stormwater Treatment Area projects . Design s complete d on both features.

 Completed Acme Basin B Discharge Phase I (C

- 51 pump and C

- 1 canal improvements) and Phase II (Section 24 Impou ndment) components.

 Initiated design work on all proposed CERP Broward County Water Preserve Area components (C

- 9 Impoundment; C

- 11 Impoundment; Water Conservation Area

- 3A/3B Seepage Management). Remaining design and construction will be undertaken by th e U.S. Army Corps of Engineers following project authorization

.  Initiated construction on Lakeside Ranch Phase 1 (S tormwater T reatment A rea [ STA ]

North and S

- 650 Pump Station). Phase II design (STA South and S

- 191A Pump Station)

is under way.

 Completed L

- 8 Reservoir components of the proposed North Palm Beach County

- Part 1 CERP project, including installation of the G

- 160 and G

- 161 structures. Design and construction plan for L

- 8 additional storage capacity is complete.

 Approved the acquisition of an ini tial 26,800 acres of strategically located land south of Lake Okeechobee from the U.S. Sugar Corporation to provide construction opportunities for treatment and storage configurations never before contemplated.

Protecting Water for the Environment

 Fulfilling its commitment to meet the requirements of WRDA 2000 to set aside water generated through project construction first for the protection of fish and wildlife ahead of consumptive uses, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) as

CERP’s local sponsor undertook rulemaking to reserve the water identified for the natural system in three Project Implementation Reports authorized by the Congress. The rulemaking also created a restricted allocation rule for the Everglades Protection Area.

I n February 2009 the SFWMD adopted a water reservation for the Picayune Strand and Fakahatchee Estuary, the first

- ever water reservation for America’s Everglades.Executive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress vi October 2010

The SFWMD also adopted a second reservation for the St. Lucie River and Estuary as part of th e Indian River Lagoon

- South p roject. The SFWMD also initiated rulemaking to reserve water for the Caloosahatchee River and Estuary on Florida’s west coast as part of the upcoming C

- 43 West Basin Storage Reservoir project.

Program Coordination

 Execution of the Master Agreement between the SFWMD and the Department of the Army, which serves as the umbrella

accord between the State and federal partners to govern all CERP projects.

 Execution of Project Partnership Agreements for five projects : Picayune Strand Restoration, Site 1 Impoundment, L

- 31 N (L

- 30) Seepage Management P ilot

, Melaleuca Eradication and Other

Exotic Plants

– I mplement Biological Controls and I ndian River Lagoon

- South.

 Incorp oration of the CERP Master Implementation Sequencing Plan into the Integrated Delivery Schedule

, which not only includes CERP projects, but also includes other major ongoing restoration efforts and that recognizes project interdependencies and interagency prioritization and budgeting.

New Science and Adaptive Management

An invaluable feature of Everglades restoration is the continuous expansion of scientific knowledge on the s outh Florida ecosystem. During the past decade, applied research, field monitoring and computer analysis have delivered extensive new data that inform the understanding of the complex Everglades environment. This information has emerged not only from CERP

- related activities but from studies taking place in academic, government al

and research institutions.

Examples include a more detailed knowledge of how water depths, velocities and flooding cycles change Everglades topography and impact the plants and animals that thrive there.

More extensive data has been collected on invasi ve exotics and today there is a better understanding of the impact of salinity imbalances on the health of s outh Florida’s estuaries.

Emerging information about climate change is also transforming the approach to Everglades

restoration. New information o n rainfall and temperature patterns, ocean acidification and sea level rise has shown that assumptions made a decade ago are no longer fully accurate. Restoration plans must now address a variety of expected impacts, such as changing salinity zones, spread of invasive species and altered drought/flood cycles.

The value of new scientific information is its ability to improve decision making within

CERP , thereby improving restoration success. This is being achieved through a structured August 13, 2009 signing of the Master AgreementExecutive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress vii October 2010 approach known as adap tive management, which provides a process to address the uncertainties and risks inherent in ecosystem restoration. Going beyond solely addressing new scientific information, adaptive management encourages flexibility. It encourages project designs that p erform well or can be adapted given uncertain or changing future conditions; it encourages stakeholder engagement, interagency collaboration to build shared understanding and support for restoration, and problem resolution; and it helps reconcile competing objectives to benefit both nature and society.

During the past five years, an adaptive management framework has been developed for

CERP , integrating relevant principles and activities at both the program and project levels. Scientific studies now indicate that greater flow through the Everglades is essential to restore the ridge and slough system that continues to disappear. This same in creased flow is needed to restore the health of Florida Bay.

Financial Status

The c urrent cost estimate for the CERP is $13.5 billion at October 2009 price levels. O ver two billion dollars in funding in combined contributions from the federal and state p artners has been provided in support of CERP and prospective CERP projects over the past five fiscal years (2005

- 2009). During this time, the federal government expended almost $259 million, while it is estimated that local sponsors spent approximately $2 70 million on activities not related to land acquisition. Land acquisition is a major expense. As of December 31, 2009, the State of Florida has spent $1.26 billion to purchase more than
230,000 acres which could be made available for CERP project featur es . Some of this land was acquired by the state using federal grant funds amounting to over $327 million.

Funding over the past five years included resources made available under ARRA which are outside the general fiscal year 2009/fiscal year 2010 budget process. ARRA funds combined with the President’s Fiscal Year 2009 and 2010 budgets infused the largest amount of Federal funding received since Congress authorized CERP in 2000. Th is resul t ed i n a ― jump

- start ‖

of important restoration projects, speeding the recovery of the natural system, and providing jobs and contracts during difficult economic times.

The Road Ahead

CERP must balance a long

- term vision with judicious planning. The first order of business is to complete f oundation and CERP projects tha t are under construction or being

readied for construction. During the next five

years important projects being constructed include the Kissimmee River Restoration,

C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western Project

, Modified Water Deliveries to ENP , Site 1 Impoundment, Picayune Strand Restoration

, IRL

- S C

- 44 Reservoir/ Stormwater Treatment

Area , t he Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir

, and Biscayne Bay Endangered Florida panther with two kittens at Picayune Strand (after road removal, 2010) Photo courtesy of Darrell Land at the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Comm issionExecutive Summary

CERP 2010 Report to Congress viii October 2010 Coastal Wetlands (Phase I) , among others. These crucial efforts will begin to transfo rm the management of water throughout the system, providing much needed water storage, water treatment and rehydration to large areas of the ecosystem.

Restoration success can be achieved only if projects and programs are designed to embrace

new informati on and can be flexible and adjust to improve their implementation. Adaptive

assessment and management will become a more significant factor as CERP projects are completed and more is learned about the system and its operation al need s. Ultimately, this

will mean evolution of CERP itself

— consistent with CERP restoration and other water resource related goals and objectives.

Public engagement has been and will continue to be a key part of the CERP project development process. In addition to public engage ment through the normal project development process, the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force and the SFWMD’s Water Resources Advisory Committee have reached out to all agencies, stakeholders, and special interests groups as well as the general p ublic to provide a more open and inclusive process in the overall restoration program development.

Finally, a look forward does not present a clear or accurate view if it does not recognize

economic realities. The economic downturn has had a substantial impact on the State of Florida’s funding capabilities. Advanced construction initiatives by the state plus its bold vision for land acquisition have been hampered by significant revenue declines since 2008.

At the same time, recent federal funding has been invaluable. ARRA and Fiscal Year 2010 appropriations together enabled a meaningful step forward for CERP

. Partner agencies are busy at work planning, designing and building CERP projects, which is bringing multi

faceted returns. Implementing Evergla des construction projects not only provides immeasurable environmental benefits, it also injects funds into local communities, provides higher

- wage jobs for Americans and ensures continued momentum for ―green‖ initiatives that will offer safeguards for Flo rida’s economic well

- being for decades to come.

S ustained funding at both the state and federal level along with timely and continuing authorizations of CERP projects in upcoming Water Resources Development Acts are essential to maintaining the benefits and progress documented here. Together, pioneering

science

, engineering, and funding serve as the true foundation for America’s willingness and vision to restore her Everglades.

Modified Water Deliveries to ENP, a Foundation Project, strives to return Shark River Slough to a natural flow pattern (from the right) across Tamiami Trail, which serves as the northern boundary of Everglades

National Park (to the left).Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress ix October 2010 

### TABLE OF CONTENTS

AGENCY LETTERS

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................ ................................ ................................ .. III

TABLE OF CONTENTS

................................ ................................ ................................ ..... IX

LIST OF TABLES

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ XI

LIST OF FIGURES

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. XI

1 INTRODUCTION

................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 1

2 ACCOMPLISHMENTS DURI NG THE PAST FIVE YEA RS

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

2.1 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATI ON

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

2.1.1 CERP Projects Under Construction

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

2.1.2 State Expedited Efforts

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

2.1. 3 CERP Pilot Project Installation and Testing

................................ ............................. 8

2.1.4 Other Federal and State South Florida Restoration Projects

................................ .... 9

2.1.5 Construction Ready

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

2.1.6 Project Authorizations

................................ ................................ ............................ 13

2.1.7 Project Partnership Agreement Execution

................................ ............................. 13

2.1.8 Protecting Water for the Environment

................................ ................................ ... 14

2.1.9 Project Implementation Reports and Studies

................................ ......................... 15

2.1.10 Integrated Delivery Schedule

................................ ................................ ................. 15

2.2 LAND ACQUISITION

................................ ................................ ............................ 18

2.3 SCIENTIF IC INVESTIGATIONS

................................ ................................ .......... 18

2.3.1 Overview of South Florida Ecosystem New Science

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

2.3.2 Independent Scientific Review

................................ ................................ ............... 21

2.3.3 Restoration Coordination and Verification (RECOVER)

................................ ...... 22

2.3.4 Adaptive Management

................................ ................................ ........................... 22

2.3.5 Non

- Indigenous (Invasive/Exotic) Species

................................ ............................ 23

2.3.6 Climate Change

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 23

2.4 FINANCIAL STATUS AND ECONOMIC/SOCIAL DEVE LOPMENT

.............. 24

2.4.1 Project/Program Funding

................................ ................................ ....................... 24

2.4.2 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Passage

................................ .............. 25

2.4.3 Expenditures Through Fiscal Year 2009

................................ ................................ 26

2.4.4 Cost Estimate Update

................................ ................................ ............................. 28

2.4.5 Cost Share Crediting for Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Projects

.. 29

2.4.6 Outreach and Assistance Activities

................................ ................................ ........ 29

2.4.7 Recreation and Tourism

................................ ................................ ......................... 29

2.4.8 Economic Benefits Achieved

................................ ................................ ................. 30

3 THE NEXT FIVE YEARS

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

3.1 PROGRAM EXPECTATIONS

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

3.1.1 Construction

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

3.1.2 Authorizations Expected

................................ ................................ ........................ 32

3. 1.3 Decision Documents

................................ ................................ ............................... 32Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress x October 2010 3.1.4 Project Partnership Agreements Anticipated

................................ ......................... 32

3.1.5 Protecting Water for the Natural System

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

3.1.6 Expectations for Other South Florida Restoration Efforts

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

3.2 LAND NEEDS

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 34

3.3 EXPECTATIONS IN SCIE NTIFIC INVESTIGATION S

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

3.4 FUNDING NEEDS

................................ ................................ ................................ .. 36

4 LOOKING FORWARD

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

TAB A

- REFERENCES

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 41

TAB B

- ABBR EVIATIONS AND ACRONY MS

................................ ............................. 45

TAB C

- LAND ACQUISITION UPD ATE MAP

................................ .............................. 47

APPENDICES

APPENDICIES

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ I

APPENDICIES

- TABLE OF CONTENTS

................................ ................................ ....... III

APPENDIX A

- CERP PROJECT INFORMA TION

................................ ..................... A

- 1

APPENDIX B

- CERP PROGRAM COORDIN ATION

................................ ................ B

- 1

APPENDIX C

- SCIENTIFIC INITIATIV ES

................................ ................................ . C

- 1

APPENDIX D

- STATUS OF OTHER SOUT H FLORIDA EVERGLADES

ECOSYSTEM RESTORATIO N PROJECTS

................................ ................................ . D

- 1

APPENDIX E

- UPDATED COST ESTIMAT ES BY CERP PROJECT

..................... E

- 1Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress xi October 2010 

### LIST OF TABLES

Table 2

- 1: Integrated Delivery Schedule Through 2020 as of June 2010

.............................. 16

Table 2

- 2: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Funding Fiscal Years 2005 through

2009

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 25

Table 2

- 3: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Expenditures through Fiscal Year

2009*

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 27

Table 2

- 4: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Cost Estimate Update Summary

.. 28

Table 3

- 1: Estimated Land Crediting for Authorized Projects Expected within the Next Five

Years

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

Table 3

- 2: RECOVER’s Anticipated Efforts

................................ ................................ ......... 36

Table 3

- 3: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Funding Required to S upport the

Integrated Delivery Schedule from Fiscal Year 2010 through Fiscal Year 2014

...

................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 37



### LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1

- 1: Pre and Post

- Alterations to South Florida Natural System

................................ ... 2 Figure 2

- 1: Map of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Projects

..................... 17 Figure Tab

- C

- 1: South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Land Acquisition Strategy

............ .. 47Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress xii October 2010 This page intentionally left blankSection 1 Introduction

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 1 October 2010



### 2010 REPORT TO CONGR ESS

1 INTRODUCTION

This 2010 Report to Congress on the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) is the second in a series of periodic reports to fulfill the requirements of the Water Resources Development Act of 2000 (WRDA 2000) and the CERP Programmatic Regulations. This Report provides members of Congress and other interested parties with an update on the progress of CERP over the past five

- year period ( mid 200 5

- mid 2010) and the accomplishments expected over the next five years. It is submitted join tly by the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of the Interior after consultation with the State of Florida, the Secretary of Commerce, other federal and state agencies, the Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Seminole Tribe of Florida, and the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task

Force (SFERTF) . Cumulative expenditures, including the past five years, for this joint cost share program, are included, along with forecasts for funding requirements for the next five

years.

The initial 2005 Report to Congress was submitted to Congress on September 22, 2006. The

full text of which , as well as the Programmatic Regulations and other pertinent Water Resources Development Act ( WRDA ) legislation, is located on the official CERP W eb site www.evergladesplan.org

.

The Central and South ern Florida ( C&SF ) Project was authorized by Congress in 1948, in response to the deadly flooding in south Florida to address issues related to flood and water level control, w ater conservation, prevention of salt water intrusion and preservation of fish

and wildlife. E arlier drainage projects were expanded by the federal government, through the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

, in partnership with the State of

Flo rida. Together, they construct ed and manage d an elaborate water management system consisting of 1,000 miles of canals, 720 miles of levees and more than 150 water control

structures

-- the largest civil works project of its time

.

The C&SF Project altered significant portions of the natural system as shown in Figure 1

- 1

. The Kissimmee River was channelized and Lake Okeechobee was diked to preve nt uncontrolled overflows from the lake. The region of the Everglades immediately south of Lake Okeechobee, now called the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA), was drained to accommodate agricultural production. A drainage system was constructed in the lo wer east coast to support and enhance urban, suburban, and agricultural development. An elaborate dike system was constructed in the central portions of the Everglades to create the Water Conservation Areas (WCAs), which serve the dual purposes of storing water for human needs in the lower east coast and for deliveries of water to the Everglades National Park (ENP).

Unfortunately, these alterations has had unintended adverse consequences for much of the south Florida ecosystem. The significant reductio n of natural water storage capacity in the regional system led to substantial ecological damage to natural habitats

.Section 1 Introduction

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 2 October 2010 FIGURE 1

- 1 : PRE AND POST

- ALTERATIONS TO SOUTH FLORIDA NATURAL

SYSTEM

The south Florida human environment benefits from ecosystem services, too. Water quality impacts public health, flood protection contributes to safety, agricultural/aquaculture and tourism affect economic health and recreational opportunities enhance the quality of life

.Section 1 Introduction

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 3 October 2010 T he ability to restore the health of the remaining Everglades ecosystem and achieve sustainability in water resources for all needs depends on the successful implementation of restoration projects. As a result, the C&SF Project Comprehe nsive Review Study was

directed under the WRDAs 1992 and 1996 to determine how to restore the south Florida ecosystem, enhance water supplies and maintain flood control.

The WRDA 2000 approved the Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Revie w Study Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, dated April 1, 1999 (the Plan), as ―a framework for modifications and operational changes to the Central and Southern Florida Project‖...―needed to restore, preserve and protect the south Florida ecosystem while providing for other water

- related needs of the region, including water supply and flood protection.‖

The Plan includes a holistic implementation plan focused on ―getting the water right‖ in the

south Florida ecosystem as related to quantity, quality, distribution and timing

— getting the right amount of water of the right type to the right places at the right time. Success for the natural system of south Florida will be achieved by restoring and sustaining tho se hydrological and biological characteristics that both defined the original pre

- drainage greater Everglades; and made it unique among the world’s wetlands.

These defining characteristics of the original Everglades include: sheetflow; low levels of

nut rients in fr eshwater wetlands, healthy productive estuaries, resilient plant communities, and an abundance of native wetland animals. Although the future Everglades ecosystem will be smaller than the

pre

- drainage system, restoration will be

successful if the activities that recover these characteristics allow the Everglades to function as one cohesive ecosystem, rather than as a set of managed and separated wetlands.

The USACE and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) are the lead federal agencies

res ponsible for undertaking implementation of the Plan in partnership with the South Florida Water Management District (lead non

- federal sponsor) and the State of Florida along with other local sponsors. In addition, SFERTF is charged with coordinating the d evelopment of consistent policies, strategies, plans, programs, project activities and priorities for addressing restoration, preservation and protection of the south Florida ecosystem.Section 1 Introduction

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 4 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 5 October 2010 2 ACCOMPLISHMENTS DURI NG THE PAST FIVE YEA RS

2.1 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATI ON

The USACE, the DOI and their partners are proceeding with the detailed design and implementation of multiple restoration projects as ide ntified in the Integrated Delivery Schedule (IDS), see Table 2

- 1

. These restoration projects include CERP proje c t s w hich are being implemented through a partnership bewteen the USACE and local sponsors. The primary local sponsor for CERP is the South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD )

. The restoration projects al s o include project s the State of Florida , through the SFWMD, is designing and constructing under their Expedited projects initiative.

. Although some of the

State’s expedited projects may become portions of CERP projects, other expedited projects

are not expected to do so

. O ther projects, such as Foundation Projects (see section 2.1.4.1 ) and Critical Projects (see section 2.1.4.2 ) that pre

- date CERP

, are also included in the IDS

. A lthough not all of the projects in the IDS are a part of the P lan, they are fundamental to achieving restoration of the south Florida ecosystem and realizing the benefits of the Plan.

The status of the construction and design of restoration projects in south Florida is presented

below. The status of the CERP project s currently being planned can be found in Appendix A

with the status of the Project Implementation Reports ( PIRs ) in Table A

- 1 of Appendix A

.

2.1.1 CERP Projects Under Construction

Picayune Strand Restoration Project The State of Florida initiated an early start on the proposed Picayune Strand R estoration project in 2003 as a state expedited project. Subsequently, Congress authorized construction

of this as a CERP project in WRDA 2007 for $ 375.3 million.

Picayune Strand Restoration g roundbreaking c eremony, January 7, 2010

The balance of construction, along with the remaining road removal efforts, is being implemented by the USACE . Construction was initiated with the October 30, 2009 award of the contract for the Merritt Pump Station and road removal. A groundbreaking ceremonySection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 6 October 2010 took place on January 7, 2010. A ward of a second contract for the Faka

- Union Pump Station

and road removal features is scheduled for late 2010.

Work completed by the SFWMD as a state expedited project included the p lugging of seven

miles of the Prairie Canal , removal of 65 miles of roadways, and the construction of 17

culverts. Over

- drainage of the adjacent Fakahatche e Strand Preserve State Park was successfully reduced

. Native vegetation is quickly covering the plugged areas and very few nuisance or exotic plant species have been observed. An increased number of ospreys and wading birds have been observed foraging i n the area and beneficial surface water flows have also been observed during the wet seasons. The Florida panther is also beginning to use the area again, with the first recorded dens in the area.

Construction of the full authorized plan will restore a nd enhance more than 55,000 acres of wetlands in the former Southern Golden Gate Estates and in adjacent natural areas and public lands by reducing over

- drainage and restoring more natural water flow through the area. Implementation of the restoration pla n will also improve the water quality of coastal estuaries by moderating the large salinity fluctuations caused by the freshwater point discharge from

the Faka

- Union Canal.

Site 1 Impoundment Project The SFWMD completed a siginificant portion of the desi gn of this project before turning the designs over to the USACE for completion and award. The USA CE's first construction

con tract for this project was awarded on August 24, 2010. This project will reduce the amount of seepage loss from the adjacent Arthu r R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, help ing to maintain water levels in this area, reduce water supply withdrawals from the Refuge, increase the amount of water remaining in the natural system (especially during the dry periods); and in tur n allow for ecological habitat improvements

.

The full Site 1 Impoundment authorized plan includes an 1,660

- acre above

- ground impoundment (13,280 acre

- feet capacity) with associated structures. When completed, t his project will also supplement water deliveries to the Hillsboro Canal by capturing and storing excess water currently discharged to the Intracoastal Waterway, reducing demands on Lake Okeechobee and the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge. It will provide groundwater

recha rge, further reduce seepage losses from adjacent natural areas, and prevent saltwater

intrusion

. Existing levels of flood protection will be maintained and may also be enhanced along with improvement in the overall water quality.

2.1.2 State Expedited Effort s

Certain projects are being implemented by the State of Florida through their own resources. These projects or portions of projects, some of which are identified in CERP , are expected to advance the delivery of benefits to the natural and human environm ents in and around the Everglades ecosystem. The USACE has worked closely with the State of Florida to assist them in their efforts to expedite these projects with regard to the required federal permitting

under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act

. The USA CE works closely with SFMWD to

coordinat e during the Project Implementation Report (PIR) process. This coordinationSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 7 October 2010 maximize s the probability that state initiatives prior to authorization will be consistent with the recommended plan identified in the ap propriate PIR and proposed for congressional

authorization. Whe n the state’s initiative is consistent with the recommended plan authorized by Congress , credit may be afforded (e.g. Picayune Strand).

Lakeside Ranch Stormwater Treatment Area, a Potential Component of Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough Storage and Treatment Area

This Lakeside Ranch Stormwater Treatment Area ( STA ) is being constructed by the State of Florida and involves construction of a 2,700

- acre STA, adjacent to Lake Okeechobee in the Taylor Cre ek/Nubbin Slough basin , which will provide up to 19 metric tons of phosphorus reduction annually. Removing this phosphorus will help improve Lake Okeechobee’s water quality. An STA feature in t he Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough basin was included in the Plan and the Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough project was conditionally authorized in WRDA 2000

, however

, due in part to incl usion in the large r Lake Okeecho bee Watershed Project, additional authorization will be sought

. More information on the status of the Lake

Ok eechobee Watershed Project can be found in Appendix A . Per the Pre

- Partnership Credit Agreement (PPCA), work performed by the sponsor on the Lakeside Ranch STA may be eligible for credit in the future pending the conditions not ed in the PPCA. Construction for

the STA North and the S

- 650 Pump Station (Phase 1) has begun. Design for Phase II (STA

South and S

- 191A Pump Station) is currently underway.

C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western Project

– State Expedited Efforts

The final PIR for the western features is under review prior to submittal to Congress for

authorization

. Construction for t his component, which includes two pump stations, culverts and water control

structure s in south Miami

- Dade County, was initiated by the SFWMD in January

2010. It will provide increased

sheet flow to Florida Bay via Taylor Slough and ecosystem restoration of freshwater wetlands, tidal wetlands and

near

- shore habitat as well as flood

mainten ance and recreation opportunities.

C

- 44 Reservoir and Stormwater Treatment Area

– State Expedited Efforts This component is a part of the CERP Indian River Lagoon

– South ( IRL

- S ) project that was

authorized for construction in WRDA 2007. The C

- 44 Reservoir and STA will reduce harmful freshwater inflows and generate habitat and water quality improvements in the St. Lucie Estuary and the IRL. State expedited work included the comp letion of two test
reservoirs and two test STA cells used to reduce construction and design uncertainties

. Significant progress was also made on the design of the relocation work, including the C132/133 canals; the Troup Indiantown Water Control District Reconfiguration; and the

Communications Tower. C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western Project constructionSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 8 October 2010 Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir

- State Expedited Efforts

E xpedited design and planned land clearing activities are expected to support the planned CERP project of the same name and is a part of the final PIR under review by the Administration prior to submittal to Congress for authorization . The project is designed to capture and store stormwater runoff from the C

- 43 Basin and reduce excess freshwater flow

to the Caloosahatchee Est uary. It will also capture and store water releases from Lake Okeechobee, reducing discharges to coastal estuaries. Test cells

, and their associated analysis used to reduce construction and design uncertainties, were completed in 2007. The final design of the reservoir (in Hendry County on approximately 10,500 acres) was completed by SFWMD in January 2008 and tree clearing to remove approximately 6,000

acres of citrus is scheduled for 2010.

Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands ( Phase 1 )

- State Expedited Effor ts The SFWMD completed designs for L

- 31 Culverts, Deering Estates and Cutler Wetlands in

2009 . Construction on L

- 31 was completed in 2010 and construction on Deering Estates is underway. This phase will restore more natural water flows to Biscayne Bay an d Biscayne National Park, improving salinity distribution near the shoreline. This will re

- establish productive nursery habitats for shrimp, shellfish and near

- shore habitat.

North Palm Beach County L

- 8 Reservoir

– State Expedited Efforts

The L

- 8 Reservo ir will provide 47,000 acre

- feet of water storage. Th is will improve water levels in the Loxahatchee Slough and increase freshwater deliveries to the Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee River during dry periods. Components that are complete include

installation of the G

- 160 and G

- 161 structures.

Information ab out other restoration efforts outside of the CERP can be found in Appendix D

.

2.1.3 CERP Pilot Project Installation and Testing

The A quifer S torage and R ecovery (ASR) Pilot projects have been designed to address local scale technical uncertainties relative to ASR design and operation. This includes investigating options for surface water withdrawal, injection, and pumping cycles; water treatment technology; and effect s of these pumping cycles on the groundwater and ecosystem in the test region. Operating these pilot projects also provides insight into likely operational costs for the larger system, which will aid in a comparison of ASR technology with conventional (e. g., surface water reservoirs) and alternative (e.g., desalination) technologies to meet the water supply needs for the natural and human environments.

Installation of the Kissimmee River ASR system was completed in December 2008. Operational cycle testi ng began on January 12, 2009. Two cycle tests were completed by December 2009, and a third is ongoing. Preliminary analyses of the engineering and scientific information collected during cycle testing at the pilot facilities is currently being accomplish ed. Construction of the Hillsboro Canal ASR system was completed by

SFWMD in autumn 2008 and operational cycle testing began in January 2010. Adaptive Management measures will be conducted at both facilities during Fiscal Year ( FY ) 2010 and FY 2011 to op timize operational performance.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 9 October 2010 The purpose of the L

- 31N (L

- 30) Seepage Management Pilot is to resolve critical uncertainties associated with seepage management technologies and cost and time requirements for implementation. The recommended plan will t est two structural seepage reduction technologies (steel sheet pile and slurry wall), and test the ability to seasonally manage seepage flows through pumping operations with extraction and injection wells. This pilot was identified for funding under the A merican Recovery and Reinvestment Act ( ARRA ) in May 2009, however it was determined that a post authorizaton change report will be necessary before construction can proceed.

In addition, the USACE is moving forward with a design test project for the proposed CERP

C

- 111 Spreader Canal to resolve a specific design issue related to the eastern spreader canal. A contract for the design test was awarded and operation began in February 2010 with testing to continue for two years.

2.1.4 Other Federal and State S outh Florida Restoration Projects

The full suite of benefits from the implementation of all of the CERP projects has some dependency on the successful completion of other s outh Florida r estorati o n p rojects. T he Foundation Projects were authorized, or mod ified from the Flood Control Act of 1948 and other directives with the goal of correcting prior environmental damage while also enhancing water supply and flood mitigation. T he Everglades and South Florida (E&SF) projects

, more commonly known as Critical Projects, were authorized in WRDA 1996 and are smaller restoration projects that could produce ―independent, immediate, and substantial restoration, preservation, and protection benefits.‖ Lastly, some projects originally identified in CERP

have been con structed by local and state agencies outside of CERP

.

2.1.4.1 Foundation Project s

Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park The Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park project (ModWaters) is a key

cornerstone to the foundation of CERP . Many CERP projects that will deliver water to this area are dependent upon this project to complete the goals of restoration. I n the 8.5

- square

mile area, lands were acquired and construction was completed in 2008. Operational t esting is ongoing and project features (perimeter levee, flowway, detention cell and seepage collector canal) will be transferred to the SFWMD for operati ons when testing is complete. Groundbreaking

for construction of a one

- mile eastern bridge with reinforcement of the road (Tamiami Trail Modifications) took place in December 2009 with construction beginning in March 2010.

Tamiami Trail along L

- 29Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 10 October 2010 Construction on water control structures S

- 331 modifications were completed in 2009 and

modifications on S

- 333 were completed in 2007. In addition, the installation of a pilot project consisting of two speader swales is expected to be complet e d by the end of February 2011 through a mo dification to the Tamiami Trail contract.

Kissimmee River Restoration As the headwaters of the Everglades system, the health of the 3,000

- square

- mile Kissimmee River basin is crucial to the health of the south Florida ecosystem. More natural flow was re

established for an additional four miles in 2007 and four more miles in 2009 for a total of 22

miles now restored. This has also restored the natural function of over 1 5 ,000 acres of floodplain. As a result, s everal species of birds have returned to t he Kissimme e after an absence of 40 years. T he following features were completed between 2006 and 2010: S

84/84 spillway addition, radio tower relocation, S

- 65DX2 grade control structure, and S

- 68 spillway addition. Currently under construction are the Istokpoga Canal improvements, the

S

- 65DX1 retrofit , the C

- 37 Widening and the River Acres flood reduction features.

Central and Southern Florida: C

- 111 Project (South Dade)

The modifications to the C

- 111 project will improve hydrologic con di tions in Taylor Slough and maintain flood protection for development and agricultural interest in south Miami

- Dade County. Between 2006 and 2010, construction of the S

- 331 Command and Control Center

and construction of the first retention/detention zone f eatures, which help to reduce seepage losses from Everglades National Park were completed. Both have been transferred for operations to the sponsor, the S FWMD

.

Central and Southern Florida: West Palm Beach Canal Stormwater Treatment

Area 1E/C

- 51 West

T he construction of STA

- 1E / C

- 51 W was substantially completed by the USACE in June 2004 and transferred to the SFWMD for operations in 2005. Maintenance issues and minor repairs have been addressed that required de

- watering access and a mechanical change on another structure to finalize inspections. A field test for treatment with periphyton has also been underway

. Preliminary small scale studies indicated a p eriphyton

- based stormwater

t reatment a rea may be a cost effective way to greatly reduce phosphorus levels.

2.1.4.2 Everglades and South Florida: Critical Restoration Projects Program

Prior to 2006 , the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study , the East Coast Canal Structures Project , and the Western C

- 11 Water Quality Improvement project were completed

. During this reporting period, the SFWMD completed construction of the western portion of the Tamiami Trail Culverts (Phase 1) with assistance from Florida Department of Transportation funds. This work was incorporated into the Picayune Strand Restoration

PIR and as such was cost shared under that authorization. Construction for the Lake Okeechobee Water Retention and Phosphorus Removal

- Nubbin Slough and Taylor Creek portion was physically complete in 2006. Testing, which was initiated in 2007

, identif ied additional construction needs and will resume once modifications are complete and

water levels in the area are sufficient. Construction was initially completed on the Ten Mile

Creek Water Preserve Area project by June 2006 . H owever additional project needs haveSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 11 October 2010 been identified, which will require modifications to the project authorization . The USACE has place d the facility in a passive operating state while a post authorization change report is completed.

The second muck

- removal effort for Lake Traf ford Restoration began in November 2006

and is continuing following drought related delays. T o date SFWMD has removed 3.15 million cubic yards of muck. Southern Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) will restore historical sheetflow in the projec t area and reduce excessive freshwater discharges (which include nutrients and pollutants) to Estero Bay during the rainy season. Ninety

- three percent of land has been acquired and construction is twenty

- five percent complete. Construction of Basin 1 fea tures of the Seminole Tribe Big Cypress Reservation

Water Conservation Plan was completed in June 2008 with transfer to the sponsor exec u ted

in February 2010. Construction of the Basin 4 features is scheduled to begin in 201 1

.

2.1.4.3 Everglades Ecosystem Water Quality

In the last decade the State of Florida has made significant progress in improving the quality

of the water entering the Everglades (SFWMD 2010, South Florida Environmental Report).

Water quality improvements are central to hydrologic restoration . The primary focus of the State effort is in reducing phosphorus levels in discharges to the Everglades Protection Area, including the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge, the W ater
C onservation A rea s, and ENP. The State’s investment in this effort is now over a billion

dollars.

The State’s Everglades Agricultural Area Stormwater Treatment Area Expansion will expand the size and enhance the performance of existing STAs in reducing stormwater phosphorus

levels and hel p ing achieve sta te water quality standards for the Everglades. Of the total 18,000 acres of treatment wetlands planned, 6,000 acres have been completed within the

initial ex pansion of STA

- 2, STA

- 5, and STA

- 6 in 2007. C onstruction of pump stations beg a n in September 2009

. Design and permitting is completed and construction is underway

for the rest of the STA expansion

.

2.1.4.4 Project Construction by N on

- Federal Parties

Projects described below were identified as Other Project Elements (OPE) within the Plan

. All are currently being implemented outside of the CERP program by local entities.

Acme Basin B Discharge This project is located in western Palm Beach County. The SFWMD has partnered with local interests to design and construct the Acme Basin B Discharge project. The project will improve Everglades water quality by diverting urban stormwater runoff from the Acme Basin

B into the C

- 51 Canal and then on to STA

- 1E for treatment. Phase 1 construction completed

included Pump Station #7 and C

- 1 Canal conveyance improvements

. Phase 2, which includes Pump Station #9, was completed in 2010.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 12 October 2010 Winsberg Farm Restoration Palm Beach County's Water Utilities District (PBCWUD) completed constructio n of Phase 1, or the western half, of the restoration project in 2004. Phase 1 included 72 acres of wetlands, plus a parking lot, visitor center, and recreational access features and was completed without federal funds. PBCWUD refers to this portion of t he project as "Green Cay Wetlands." In

the summer of 2008, PBCWUD made a decision to discontinue development of the remainder of the project identified in the Plan

.

Lakes Park Restoration The South Florida Water Management District advised that they would work with the non

federal sponsor (Lee County) to accomplish Lakes Park with non

- federal resources to design

and construct outside of the CERP . Federal efforts on this project are discontinued. Lee County, working with SFWMD, has retrofitted two co ntrol structures to stop salt water intrusion and constructed detention areas to improve water quality along the eastern edge of the park, upstream of the control structures (Phase I and Phase II) . The county has also moved forward with design and permitt ing for an additional treatment area consisting of a

40

- acre filter marsh and flowway (Phase III) to address offsite stormwater issues. Construction of the filter marsh and the flowway is anticipated to begin in FY 2011. The

restoration effort s will prov ide immediate habitat and water quality benefits at Lakes Park and improve downstream conditions in Hendry County and the Estero Bay Aquatic Preserve.

2.1.5 Construction Ready

The Indian River Lagoon

– South (IRL

- S) Project

, which includes the C

- 44 Reservoir an d STA elements, will improve the overall environmental health and sustainability of the St. Lucie Estuary and IRL. Half of the land acquired for this project was for the Allapattah

"natural‖ area and SFWMD, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agric ulture ( USDA ) Natural Resource Conservation Service, has begun work to return it to a natural condition. This property has been opened to the public for passive recreational usage (e.g., bird watching, hiking). Plans and specifications for the C

- 44 Reser voir (50,600 acre

- feet of storage) and its STA components (6,300 acres) were part of the SFWMD state expedited work. The USACE is currently re

- packaging those plans into separate contracts in order for

the USACE to be able to advertis e and award the first contract for construction in late 2010 or early 2011.

The primary benefits of the Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics project include preventing the expansion of invasive exotic plant species into natural areas, and reducing coverage and density of invasive exotic species. Secondary benefits include promoting the

re

- establishment of native plants, restoring native habitat for native bird and wildlife species, and reducing stressors on rare, threatened and endangered species. This project builds upon work already underway (see Appendix C

– Non

- Indigenous Species)

.

As an OPE in the CERP , this project was authorized by the Secretary of the Army under the Programmatic Authority in WRDA 2000 . The approved plan fo r the control of melaleuca and Australian pine, as well as Brazilian pepper and Old World climbing fern, is to treat all test areas with approved biocontrol agents (such as specialized insects) and to construct aSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 13 October 2010 mass rearing annex for housing and testing the agents. The USACE is working to award a

contract with 2010 ARRA funding for the annex facility located in Davie, Florida.

2.1.6 Project Authorizations

There are several full

- scale and pilot projects, as well as an Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring ( AA&M ) program, included in the Plan, which have already received some form of congressional authorization. WRDA 1999 authorized for construction the Hillsboro and Lake Okeechobee Aquifer pilot project, in B roward, Highlands, Martin, Palm Beach, St.

Lucie and O keechobee counties (Referred to separately in CERP as the Hillsboro Aquifer Storage and Recovery [ASR] Pilot and the Lake Okeechobee ASR Pilot).

Besides authorizing the AA&M program,th e following pilot projects were authorized for implementation by WRDA 2000 (upon review and approval by the Secretary of the Army):

 Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) Basin ASR Pilot

- Hendry and Lee counties

 Lake Belt In

- Ground Reservoir Technology Pilot

- Broward County

 L

- 31N Seepage Management Pilot

- Miami

- Dade County

 Wastewater Reuse Technology Pilot

- Miami

- Dade County

On November 8, 2007, WRDA 2007 (P.L. 110

- 114) authorized three major CERP projects

for construction:

 Site 1 Impoundment Project, Palm Beach County, Florida

 Picayune Strand Restoration Project, Colli er County, Florida

 Indian River Lagoon, Indian River, St. Lucie and Martin counties, Florida [a/k/a Indian River Lagoon

- South (IRL

- S )]

2.1.7 Project Partnership Agreement Execution

Prior to the USACE initiating construction on a CERP project, they must first enter into a Project Partnership Agreement ( PPA ) with a non

- federal sponsor describing each party’s responsibilities, including cost

- share obligations for construction, operation and maintenance of a project. The signing of PPAs was dependent upon the USAC E and the SFWMD executing a Master Agreement between the Department of the Army and the SFWMD (CERP Master Agreement). Some authorities , such as the process for sharing costs on projects and balancing the 50

- 50 cost

- share on a program

- wide basis , are unique to CERP

. The CERP Master Agreement contains important provisions and establishes a framework of uniform terms and conditions that will be incorporated by reference into future PPAs, serving as a template; related to construction, operation, mainten ance, repair, replacement and rehabilitation of projects in CERP. The CERP Master Agreement was executed on August

1 3 , 2009.

Also, p rior to entering into the PPA, Congress must authorize the project and appropriate construction funding for the project. Execution of a PPA is a major milestone in project implementation because it establishes the legal partnership for construction of the project.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 14 October 2010 To date, PPAs have been executed for the following CERP projects:

 Picayune Strand Restoration [August 2009]

 L

- 31N (L

- 30) Seepage Management Pilot [July 2010]

 Site 1 Impoundment Phase 1 [June 2010]

 Indian River Lagoon

– South Phase 1 [September 2010]

 Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics [July 2010]

2.1.8 Protecting Water for the Environment

Completed projects in CERP are required to be operated in a manner consistent with the overall goals of the restoration effort as envisioned in WRDA 2000. Although there are no projects that are fully completed to date, efforts have been underway to ensure that completed proje cts will be operated in a manner that will benefit the natural system and protect water supply users.

The SFWMD is required to use its reservation or allocation authority to protect water for the natural system identified by CERP projects prior to executi ng an agreement to construct these projects with the USACE. In addition to state statutory requirements, WRDA 2000 mandates that the USACE cannot enter into a PPA to cost share CERP projects until the

SFWMD executes under state law the reservation or allo cation of water for that project. The SFWMD adopted its first reservation of water rule for the Picayune Strand and Fakahatchee Estuary in 2009 in support of the CERP Picayune Strand Restoration project and a second was adopted in March 2010 for the North Fork of the St. Lucie River in support of the CERP

IRL

- S project.

The SFWMD also applies a second type of regulatory mechanism, known as Restricted Allocation Area rules, for protecting natural systems from consumptive uses. The first

Restricted Allocat ion Area rule to protect water for CERP projects was adopted on February 15, 2007. This rule limits the allocation of water from the Everglades and the Loxahatchee

River Watershed for other purposes and was utilized to protect the water for the Site 1 Imp oundment project. A second Restricted Allocation Area rule for the Lake Okeechobee Service Area was adopted in 2008. This limits consumptive use withdrawals from Lake

Okeechobee and the Caloosahatchee and the St. Lucie canals in association with the IRL

- S project.

In addition, work has been initiated to compile the collection of existing water control plans and operational guidance into a single manual, the Initial System Operating Manual . The manual will be comprised of a set of volumes organized by s pecific geographic regions. Each volume will provide information regarding authorization, operational intent, regional history, basin descriptions, watershed characteristics, descriptions of data collection and communication networks, and a regional opera ting manual

. It will also include an explanation of the effects of regional operations on flood control, recreation, water quality, water supply and navigation.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Yea rs

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 15 October 2010 2.1.9 Project Implementation Reports and Studies

Progress has been made on completion of several Project Implementaion Reports (PIRs) as

well as other s tudies.

 The A quifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) Regional Study team released an interim report in June 2008 summarizing efforts from 2003

- 2007 concerning ASR.

 A Final PIR for Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir was completed and the Chief of Engineer’s Report was signed in March 2010.

 The PIR for the C

- 111 Spreader Canal

- Western P roject was completed in 2009 and

the signed Chief of Engineer’s Report is expected in fi scal year 2011

.

 The project team completed a draft PIR for Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase 1) and published it in the Federal Register in February 2010.

PIRs under development include:

 Broward County Water Preserve Areas

 North Palm Beach County

– Part 1

 Water Conservation Area 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement (DECOMP)

 Lake Okeechobee Watershed

More informatio n on the project planning effor t s underway is provided in Appendix A

.

2.1.10 Integrated Delivery Sc hedule

In 2005, the Master Implementation Sequencing Plan (MISP) was completed in accordance with South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Programmatic Regulations. The MISP defined the order in which CERP projects would be planned, designed, and constructed. It was based on the banding or grouping of projects within five

- year time periods. In 2006 and 2007 two independent entities, the Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress and the General Accountability Office recomme nded the development of an integrated schedule to guide the overall south Florida ecosystem restoration effort (CERP and non

- CERP initiatives). Thus, while the MISP was being updated, it was incorporated into an overall schedule for restoration known as t he Integrated Delivery Schedule (IDS).

The IDS includes the various components of CERP , the earlier Foundation projects and critical projects, as well as other efforts by the SFWMD and State of Florida towards restoration that are projected to be under construction by the year 2020. It also provides guidance to implementing agencies for decision

- making, scheduling, staffing and budgeting south Florida ecosystem restoration programs as coordinated efforts. The IDS was developed by an interagency team an d was presented to the SFERTF. The most recent version of the IDS is depicted in Table 2

- 1

.

Figure 2

- 1 shows the approximate location and current official names of each of the projects, pilots and feasibility studies that are part of CERP

.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 16 October 2010

TABLE 2

- 1 : INTEGRATED DELIVER Y SCHEDULE THROUGH 2 020 AS OF JUNE 2010Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

C ERP 2010 Report to Congress 17 October 2010 FIGURE 2

- 1 : MAP OF THE COMPRE HENSIVE EVERGLADES R ESTORATION

PLAN PROJECTSSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 18 October 2010 2.2 LAND ACQUISITION

Each year the SFERTF publishes the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Land Acquisition Strategy which describes the land acquisition needed for proposed ecosystem restoration projects that would be either federally funded or jointly funded by federal and non

- federal agencies. The 2009 strategy measures and reports the acquisition of identified land s. The full report can be found at www.sfrestore.org

.

The State of Florida, with financial assistance from the DOI, USDA and the local governments of St. Lucie, Martin, Palm Beach, Broward, Miami

- Dade and Lee count ies, is acquiring lands that may be needed by CERP . Final footprints needed for each ―selected plan‖ on every project have not yet been determined. To ensure the availability of lands needed for potential CERP project implementation, the state has moved forward aggressively in acquiring lands well in advance of project need. Acquiring this land now, rather than waiting, preserves land that may otherwise be developed or become unavailable. The actual lands needed for a project are determined through fina liz ation of the PIR and associated plans and specifications

.

As of December 31, 2009, the State of Florida has spent $1.26 billion to purchase more than 230,000 acres which could be used for CERP project footprints. Some of this land was acquired by the state using federal funds that total over $327 million of which $247 million was for land acquisition only. Local government contributions of more than $116 million have been made along with Tribal contributions of $8 million. Funds spent on land acquisi tion are not included in the total expenditures information in s ection 2.4

.

The map on Tab C illustrates current federal lands, joint projects, State of Florida holdings and the land acquisition strategy for the overall South Florida Ecosystem Restoration effort as well as the CERP conceptual footprint (dependent on final PIRs).

2.3 SCIENTIFIC INVE STIGATIONS

During the past five years, CERP scientists have obtained new knowledge focused on addressing many of the uncertainties that existed at the time of CERP authorization. Important new knowledge has improved our understanding of water flows throu gh the system, particularly how depths and durations of flooding influence Everglades ecology. The strong efforts to resolve uncertainties have increased scientific understanding of the driving forces of the system, thereby improving our awareness of the restoration needs of different parts of the landscape. New knowledge gained from RECOVER’s system

- wide monitoring program helps to create better predictive tools, improve ecological models, and improve restoration implementation. REstoration COordination and VERification ( RECOVER ) provides scientific input to CERP projects during the selection of project alternatives, with the goal of achieving the greatest environmental benefits.

Adaptive management principles have been advanced over the past five years and have

resulted in incorporat ion of numerous adaptive assessment proposals into project plans, including the Decomp artmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement (DECOMP) , C

- 111Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 19 October 2010 Spreader Canal, Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands, and Mela leuca Eradication and Other

Exotics projects . The DECOMP Physical Model is a prime example of an active AM application, where new information from the field test will be used to inform future phases of

the DECOMP projects

.

2.3.1 Overview of South Florida Ecosys tem New Science

Many of the ecological components of the s outh Florida ecosystem identified indicators of ecosystem health in the Interim Goals developed for the CERP continue to reflect stress being experienced by the ecosystem. H owever, new scien tific information gained within the past five years indicate s that these components still have the capacity to recover and provides insights into actions necessary. Presented below is a summary of findings by CERP scientists for each of the geographic regions a s well as the ecosystem as a whole. T he 2009 System Status Report (SSR) provides a more in

- depth assessment of the monitoring data provided by the RECOVER Monitoring and Assessment Plan (MAP) in conjunction with

historical data and data from non

- MAP sources.

Besides this information above, a dditional new science compiled over the last seve ral years is

available at http://www.sfrestore.org/new_science.html and further described in Appendix C

- New Science

.

System

- wide



###  Continuing studies of th e historical water movement patterns and geomorphology of the Everglades indicate that many areas in the Everglades were wetter than originally thought, that is more water flowed south over more extended periods of time. Consequently, additional flows to the Everglades and southern estuarine systems would be needed to achieve desired ecologic benefits.

 Researchers have identified a contiguous swath of marsh running through WCA 3A, WCA 3B, eastern Big Cypress National Preserve, and Everglades National Park that has potential for full restoration of sheetflow. This conclusion bolsters the outlook for Everglades restoration and shows a relevance of scientific monitoring to ecosystem restoration efforts (SSR, 2009).



###  Many ecological indicators of the south Florida ecosystem continue to be stressed, but data suggests that these indicators can be restored as evidenced by the recovery of juvenile oysters in the Northern Estuaries upon re

- establishment of a favorable salinity regime.



###  The south Flori da ecosystem is dynamic and continues to respond to hydrologic and water quality drivers, such as salinity in the Southern Coastal Systems and phosphorous in Lake Okeechobee, while restoration progresses.

Lake Okeechobee The goal of restoration for Lake Okeechobee is to reduce total phosphorus concentrations and to maintain submerged aquatic vegetation to provide suitable fish habitat. Over the past decade, total phosphorus concentrations have increased due to continued s ediment and

fertilizer runoff from the watershed and re

- suspension of bottom sediments by the 2004

- 2005 hurricanes. Submerged aquatic vegetation cover was extremely variable between 2000 andSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 20 October 2010 2009, reflecting both hurricane activity and the 2001 and 2007

- 2 008 droughts. The continued high total phosphorus concentrations indicate that additional watershed and in

- lake phosphorus control projects will be necessary to reduce the frequency of large

- scale algal blooms. Maintaining the lake stage between 12.5 and 15.5 feet above Na tional Geodetic

Vertical Datum is essential in maximizing the amount of nutrients that submerged aquatic vegetation and attached periphyton (algae growing on surfaces) can store, which will help reduce total phosphorus concentrations in the Lake.

Northern Estuaries

Freshwater flows to the Northern Estuaries are typically too high and vary with rainfall during the wet season, and too low or infrequent in the dry season to maintain optimal

salinities and sustain well

- structured estuarine communities. Wet season freshwater releases, from canals and watershed runoff after a storm; overlap the time of year that oysters produce their offspring. This increased water flow can flush oyster larvae downstream where salinity

and other conditions are not as favorable for growth or survival. L arge releases of stormwater due to hurricanes in 2004 and 2005 caused significant declines in salinities and stirred up sediments, damaging submerged aquatic vegetation coverage and density, and altering the h abitat of several species. Better management of the water coming from Lake Okeechobee, including construction of reservoirs to hold stormwater, is needed to minimize damaging releases in the wet season and increase dry season flows. Adding freshwater to the estuaries during the dry season is necessary to help reduce oyster disease and predation, as well as increase reproduction and survival of the submerged aquatic vegetation tape grass in the Caloosahatchee Estuary. Reestablishment of favorable saliniti es in the St. Lucie Estuary revealed that submerged aquatic vegetation and oyster populations can increase in areas currently occupied, as well as spread to areas left bare by hurricane activity.

Greater Everglades The status of the greater Everglades eco system over the last few years (2005

- 2009) reflects how existing infrastructure prevents natural processes from allowing the ecosystem to fully

recover. The combination of inherently variable climate conditions and existing infrastructure resulted in very low numbers of prey base fish and crayfish in Everglades

National Park in three of the last four years. As a result, wading birds in this region continue

to be less than 70% of their pre

- drainage population size. Alligators and crocodiles continue

to ex hibit low population numbers in marshes and coastal wetlands relative to their historical numbers. Cattail expansion in Upper Taylor Slough highlights the challenges of providing water with higher nutrient concentrations than historical levels. The ridge , slough, and tree island habitats that covered over a thousand square miles of the historical ecosystem continue to degr ade due to prolonged periods of inundation of sawgrass ridges and tree islands upstream of levees and resultant overly dry conditions d ownstream of levees

. However,

w ithin the impounded WCAs, upstream marshes tend to be over

- drained, while downstream marshes experience prolonged flooding. Studies have documented a multi

- decadal decline in the number (54% decrease) and areal extent (67% decrease) of tree island habitat, due to the influence of both high and low water levels, and to increased fire frequency (Sklar 2007). If

restoration is fu rther delayed and altered water management regimes continue, tree islands will remain more vulnerable to fires in drier areas and flooding in downstream areas, andSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 21 October 2010 their resilience to natural hydrologic variability will decline, potentially leading to floo ding stress when historic water depths are ultimately restored (NRC 2008).

Two positive indications that the Greater Everglades can be restored are found in Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and successful ecological response to alterations of

C

- 111 ca nal operations. Water management within the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge led to a consistently higher population of prey fish, successful wading bird nesting, and healthy alligators during this period. Roseate spoonbills in Florida Bay responded

p ositively to recent alterations in of C

- 111 canal operations. In addition, c rocodile populations found near the outlet of Shark Slough are increasing following the repair of plugs

that block salt

- water intrusion into canals.

In Everglades marshes, flow ing water is required to transport fine sediment and organic matter and thereby shape the land into the linear ridge

- and

- slough systems and flow

- sculpted tree islands that defined the pre

- drainage system. Flow velocities in impounded areas of today’s syst em are not sufficient to support these physical and biological processes and maintain the characteristic landforms of the historic Everglades (Larsen et al. In review ). A group of interagency scientists estimated the need for approximately 1.9 million acr e

- feet of average annual flows entering the Everglades Protection Area from the north. Based on this current scientific information, the DOI supports the need for approximately 1.9 million acre

feet of average annual flows as well as the need for addition al storage. This water flow is viewed as the key to re

- establishing the enormous feeding grounds and rookeries that were legendary for that area as well as providing the additional influx of fresh water deemed vital for the survival of Florida Bay.

Sou thern Coastal Systems Salinity was found to be the most important physical parameter driving the ecological health and suitability as nursery, refuge and food web habitat for aquatic and aquatic

- dependent

fauna in s outh Florida’s coastal waters. The large reduction in fresh water flows into the

southern estuaries

, due to diversions in the northern part of the system, have resulted in hyper

- saline conditions in the coastal estuaries which ha ve negatively impacted the region’s

estuarine communities. In the absence of increased freshwater flows, the existing salinity regime does not support the desired estuarine communities expected under restored conditions. Salinity targets were met less frequently during the dry season than during the wet, indicating that there is little ability to store water within the current system. Salinity modeling results for estimated restoration conditions in Florida Bay predict that suitable habitat could increase from 25,000 to 44,000 acres once favorable salinities are reestab lished. Small increases of nutrients in the water caused large algal blooms which lasted several years. These blooms underscore the highly sensitive and nutrient

- poor nature of the se systems , revealing their vulnerability to nutrient loading and random c limatic events.

2.3.2 Independent Scientific Review

During the reporting period the Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration Progress (CISRERP) of the National Academies produced two reports (NRC 2006 and NRC 2008) . In the first report, the CISRERP concluded the scientific programSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 22 October 2010 accompanying the restoration efforts was of high quality and comprehensive. Important issues concerning scientific understanding, scientific coordination, and the incorporation of

science into program planning and management remained, but the Committee asserted that no significant scientific uncertainty should stand in the way of restoration progress.

In the second report, the CISRERP highlighted the major accomplishments of CERP

, inclu ding the development of guidance documents, a monitoring and assessment plan and the foundation for adaptive management (AM). The overarching conclusion of the second report, however, was that progress was not being made quickly enough and that the Evergl ades ecosystem continued to decline even as work began on the first CERP projects. The CISRERP concluded that lack of timely restoration progress by CERP , to date, has been largely due to the complex federal planning process and the need to resolve confli cts among agencies and stakeholders. To avert further declines, the CISRERP stated that CERP planners should address major project planning and authorization hurdles and move forward expeditiously with projects having the most potential for contributing t o restoration in the

s outh Florida ecosystem.

2.3.3 Restoration Coordination and Verification (RECOVER)

RECOVER, the scientific arm of CERP , is ensuring that science remains a fundamental and overarching element throughout the ongoing planning and implementa tion of Everglades

restorati o n . RECOVER is a partnership among federal, state and local agencies, and tribal governments and has become the model for other multiagency science teams associated with large

- scale ecosystem restoration programs. RECOVER is e stablishing a new approach to

address the uncertainties associated with Everglades restoration through one of the largest application s of adaptive management in the United States . RECOVER is also developing approaches to link new knowledge with future dec ision making in a structured manner. During the reporting period RECOVER scientists focused their attention on better

characteriz ing the functionality of a restored Everglades and m any of the ir findings are documented above. Beyond development of new sci entific findings, RECOVER has played a prominent role in enhancing CERP project planning efforts, including evaluating plan alternatives and developing tools to assess project performance

. More information about RECOVER and its accomplishments over the pa st five years can be found in Appendix C

.

2.3.4 Adaptive Management

CERP Adaptive Management (AM) is a structured management approach for addressing uncertainties by testing hypotheses, linking science to decision making, and adjusting implementation, as necessary, to improve the probability of restoration success. The Restudy recognized that the re are uncertainties regarding Everglades restoration and adaptive management is needed to address these questions and improve CERP implementation over time (USACE and SFWMD, 1999). WRDA 2000 and the 2003 Programmatic Regulations

established the need for a CERP adaptive management program that includes monitoring and assessment of ecosystem restoration performance, periodic updates to CERP, and continuous improvements to implementation. The CERP AM Program produced a strategy for integrating AM principles into CERP in 2006 (RECOVER, 2006). The National ResearchSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 23 October 2010 Council endorsed the CERP AM program and encouraged its expanded use (NRC, 2006). In 2010 the CERP AM Program produced a more detailed guidance document (CERP AM Integration Guide) to help CERP man agers, scientists, and Project Delivery Teams ( PDTs ) understand how to apply adaptive management to CERP and assist project teams in developing AM plans.

2.3.5 Non

- Indigenous (Invasive/Exotic) Species

Invasive exotic species are a serious and growing threa t to the south Florida ecosystem. More than 30 invasive exotic plant and 150 invasive exotic animal species are known to occur in the region, and the numbers are increasing (NRC 2008). Several of these pests were recognized in 2000 and remain a persistent challenge, while new species, including Burmese pythons and Old World climbing fern ( Lygodium ), have emerged as major threats to the achievement of restoration goals. The spread of many invasives, such as exotic fish, is clearly

linked to canals and other human

- altered landscape features.

Several efforts to manage and control exotics species have been done at the agency and inter

agency levels. As a result of the 2006 Invasive Species Summit, the Everglades Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area (CI SMA) partnership was formalized in 2008 with a Memorandum of Understanding among the South Florida Water Management District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission, National Park Service, and

the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Everglades CISMA has conducted region

- wide aerial mapping of invasive plants, created a web

- based invasive species reporting system (available

on www.evergladescisma.org ), drafted an Early Detection and Rapid Re sponse Implementation Plan, and conducted rapid response efforts aimed at the controlling the sacred ibis, Nile monitor; and most recently, kripa, an Asian tree. In addition, several Department of Interior projects funded through the ARRA are for the remo val and control of invasive exotics. Data on the control of invasive species has begun to be entered into a database to produce reports on acres treated and other accomplishments.

From 2005 to 2009 over 1,200 pythons were removed from Everglades National Park by authorized agents, park staff, and park partners. In December 2009, the USACE, Jacksonville District and federal and state partners unveiled a new public service campaign highlighting the statewide problem of invasive species called the ―Don’t le t it Loose‖ campaign. Developed with support from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service, this campaign features the Nile monitor, the Burmese python and the sailfin

catfish. To complement existing south Florida invasive plant c ontrol programs, the development and spread of biological control agents, usually insects, will be increased under the CERP Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics project (see s ection 2.1.5 ). More

information on non

- indigenous species can be found in Appendix C

.

2.3.6 Climate Change

Knowledge of how the Earth’s climate is changing has advanced rapidly since 2 000, and understanding the implications of climate change for south Florida is critical to restoration efforts. Changing precipitation and temperature patterns, ocean acidification, sea level rise,Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 24 October 2010 and the possibility of storms of greater frequency and int ensity will potentially have effects on all aspects of the system, including the coastal transition zone, invasive species, plant and animal physiology, and drought/flood/fire cycles. The impending natural resource alterations that will likely result from climate change should not be viewed as an excuse for delay or inaction, but rather as motivation to avoid irreversible losses and restore the health and natural resilience of the ecosystem (NRC 2008). Everglades restoration is an important adaptation resp onse to climate change.

Federal, state and local agencies are involved in a variety of activities concerning climate change

– from hosting conferences to developing models to preparing papers and making

recommendations on research and model needs. The US ACE released interim guidance in 2009 requiring that sea level change be considered in all phases of the project life

- cycle. By uncovering vulnerabilities, a better selection of alternatives produces restoration sustainable for the long term. The USACE is also working with partner agencies on a series of technical reports to facilitate collaborative information sharing, specifically regarding climate change sensitivity data and model development.

The DOI Climate Science Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives form the cornerstone of an integrated approach to climate change science and adaptation. This strategy will serve the Department’s land, fish, wildlife, water marine, tribal and cultural heritage managers, as well as for our federal, state, local, Tribal, non

- governmental organization , private landowner, and stakeholder partners. The south Florida ecosystem is part of the Southeastern Climate Change Center and also the Peninsular Florida Lan dscape Conservation Cooperative

. More information o n climate change can be found in Appendix C

.

2.4 FINANCIAL STATUS AND ECONOMIC/SOCIAL DEVE LOPMENT

2.4.1 Project/Program Funding

Over two billion dollars in funding in combined contributions from the federal and state partners has been provided in support of the CERP and prospective CERP projects over the past five fiscal years (2005

- 2009) ( Table 2

- 2 ) . As stated below in s ection 2.4.3 , the S tate has spent a considerable por tion of their funding on obtaining lands , the crediting of which is

discussed in s ection 3.1.7

.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 25 October 2010 TABLE 2

- 2 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN FUNDING

FISCAL YEARS 2005 TH ROUGH 2009

2.4.2 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Passage

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (P.L. 111

- 5), enacted on February 17, 2009, funds a total of $4.6 billion for various USACE construction and operations projects nationwide and approximately $3 billion for the DOI. Nearly $ 88 million is

p rovided through USA CE for south Florida restoration projects, while at the DOI, t he U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) received $2.2 million and the National Park Service (NPS) received $2.1 million to expend on projects in south Florida (detailed in Appendix D ).

CERP Federal and State Enacted Funding (1) Oct 1, 2004 through Sept 30, 2009 (rounded in 1,000’s)

FEDERAL FY 05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 5

- Yr Total

USACE ( 2 ) $ 64,446 $ 62,610 $64,000 $ 64,000 $ 83,640 $ 338,696

USACE

ARRA ( 3 ) - - - - $ 1,100 $ 1,100

USDOI

-
NPS ( 4 ) $ 5,213 $ 5,174 $ 5,212 $ 5,132 $ 5,108 $ 25,839

USDOI

- FWS $ 3,304 $ 3,269 $ 3,269 $3,251 $ 3,251 $ 16,344

Federal Sub

Total $ 72,963 $ 71,053 $ 72,481 $ 72,383 $ 93,099 $ 381,979

STATE FY04

- 05 FY05

- 06 FY06

- 07 FY07

- 08 FY08

- 09 5

- Yr Total

SFWMD ( 5 ) $ 101,120 $ 253,716 $ 507,980 $ 411,691 $ 114,260 $ 1,388,767

FL Department

of

Environmental

Protection $ 128,972 $ 128,638 $ 136,616 $ 102,094 $ 57,206 $ 424,888

FL Fish and

Wildlife

Conservation

Commission $ 336 $ 336

- - $ 4,465 $ 5,137

State Sub

Total $ 230,428 $ 254,052 $ 644,596 $ 513,785 $ 175,932 $ 1,818,792

TOTAL

FUNDING $ 303,391 $ 325,105 $ 717,077 $ 586,168 $ 269,030 $ 2,200,771

Notes : (1) Actual funds allocated to date, but not necessarily expended. ( 2 ) USACE CERP activities are funded under the overall Central and Southern Florida Project

. ( 3 ) USACE Everglades projects funded through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. ( 4 ) N ational P ark S ervice (NPS) CERP funding includes G eneral S ervices A dministration space rental costs in the following amounts: FY07

- $554K; FY08

- $475K; FY09

- $409K ( 5 ) Reflects SFWMD adopted budget appropriations less any state and federal funds.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 26 October 2010 Several Florida ecosystem restoration project efforts, or features (including funds for non

CERP or pre

- existing authorized Foundation Projects) were identified as water

- related

environmental infrastructure candidate s for ARRA funding in April, 2009. C andidate projects had to be ―shovel

- ready‖ with little schedule risk; result in immediate employment; be executed by contract or direct hire of temporary labor; and complete a project or project phase, or provide a usef

ul service, without requiring additional funding.

Funds made available under ARRA are outside the general fiscal year 2009/fiscal year 2010 budget process. ARRA funds combined with the President’s Fiscal Year 2009 and 2010 budget s infused the largest am ount of Federal funding since Congress authorized CERP in

2000. The result was to jump

- start important restoration projects, speeding the recovery of the natural system, and providing jobs and contracts during difficult economic times.

Among those feat ures benefiting from ARRA federal funding through the USACE are the following:

 Picayune Strand Restoration

– complete the Merritt Pump Station construction, perform road removal and plug Merritt Canal

 Site 1 Impoundment

– construction of the L

- 40 Levee re inforcement and upgrading, installation of dam safety instrumentation and construction of an auxiliary spillway (S

- 530)

 Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics

– construct a mass rearing lab annex for growing and storing bio

- controls to an existing facility in Davie, Florida

 Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring Program

– additional monitoring contracts

to advance the acquisition of required scientific information or support deployment of critical monitoring infrastructure needs. Funds will be used for one

- time monitoring activities, support monitoring infrastructure deployment, and/or expand ongoing monitoring needed to fill knowledge gaps in understanding of pre

- existing conditions of the south Florida ecosystem during FY09 and FY10.

The Kissimmee River Restoration , a related non

- CERP Foundation Project, receive d $7.5

million in funding through the ARRA for the widening of C

- 37.

2.4.3 Expenditures Through Fiscal Year 2009

Federal sponsor (USACE) and local sponsor creditable expenditures for CERP impl ementation through the end of FY09, as shown in Table 2

- 3 , total approximately $370.5

million for USACE

, $378.1 million for SFWMD and $2. 15 million for other local sponsors. Note these expenditures do not include funds spent on land acquisition. During fiscal years 2005 to 2009, the federal government expended almost $259 million , while it is estimated that local sponsors spent approximately $270 milli on including estimated work

- in

- kind not yet submitted

. The submissions of requests for work

- in

- kind credit from the primary non

federal sponsor normally lag, as there is a delay in compilation and submission by the

SFWMD. There is also a review and verification process which is completed by the USACE once the requests are received.Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 27 October 2010 TABLE 2

- 3 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN

E X PENDITURES THROUGH F ISCAL YEAR 2009

C omprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Cumulative Expenditures Through Fiscal Year 2009 (1)

(in 1,000s)

CERP Federal

Sponsor Non

- Federal

Sponsors
TOTAL USACE SFWMD ( 2 ) Other

Projects (3) $ 165,147 $ 72,565 $ 2,154 $ 239,866

Adaptive Assessment & Monitoring $ 31,695 $ 25,622 $ 0 $ 57,317

Program Coordination $ 173,613 $ 85,657 $ 0 $ 259,270

Estimated Work

- in

- Kind,
not yet submitted (4) - $ 194,244 $ 0 $ 194,244

TOTAL $ 370,455 $ 378,088 $ 2,154 $ 750,697

Cost Share Percentage (%) 49.3% 50.4% 0.3% 100%

Note: (1) Actual expenditures, except for land expenditures, which is not the same as funds allocated. (2) Includes cumulative and creditable (approved) SFWMD submissions through a portion of FY07. FY08 and FY09 submissions are expected later in 2010. (3) Projects total also includes CERP Feasibility Studies and Pilots (4) An estimate of the submissions expected from the SFWMD for FY08 and FY09.

As noted above in Table 2

- 3

, the costs include program coordination and adaptive assessment and monitoring. Program coordination includes providing strategic direction for the sequence of project implementation, resource allocation, and goals against which progress of the restoratio n is measured, and the feedback processes to identify and address any shortfalls in progress. In addition, program coordination also includes the CERP projects which are managed at the programmatic level due to their interface with all of the projects

– M aster Recreation Plan, Public Outreach, Interagency Modeling Center, Information and Data Management, Quality Assurance Oversight Team and Environmental and Economic Equity. The work these projects have accomplished over the past five years and that are

e xpected over the next five years is described in Appendix B

.

The state and the SFWMD have expended $1.26 billion through December 2009 for advance land acquisition and other efforts which are expected to support CERP

. For land acquired and features constructed by the State that are consistent with the PIR authorized by Congress,

the non

- federal sponsor may receive credit for its efforts (see s ection 3. 2 ).Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 28 October 2010 2.4.4 Cost Estimate Update

The Plan presented to Congress in 1999 included a baseline cost estimate for projects (including pilot projects and feasibility studies) of approximately $7.8 billion at October 1999 price levels. In addition, the Plan also included a baseline cost estimate for AA&M of $387 million. This resulted in a total cost for the Plan of $8.2 billion to be cost shared 50/50 between the federal government and multiple local sponsors. As shown in the 2005 R eport to Congress, by updating the cost to October 2004 price levels (and including authorized changes), the total cost for the Plan was $10.9 billion. For this report the costs have been updated to October 2009 price levels and adjustments were made for changes authorized or currently proposed for authorization.

Table 2

- 4 below shows the overall CERP cost estimate at October 2004 and October 2009 price levels. Current cost estimates for the Plan are $13.5 billion at October 2009 price

levels.

TABLE 2

- 4 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN COST

ESTIMATE UPDATE SUMM ARY

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

Cost Estimate Update

Summary (in millions)

Oct 04 Price Level Oct 09 Price Level
Projects $ 9,881 $ 12,303

AA&M $ 496 $ 579

Program Coordination $ 500 $ 578

TOTAL $ 10,876 $ 13,461

The estimated cost of CERP was based on the best available information at the time. Appropriate contingency factors were used to reflect the uncertainties inherent at that stage of the program. The cost risk associated with each feature was appraised separately and, due

to the la ck of design information, was generic rather than site specific. It was anticipated that

the cost of the P lan would be modified as pilot projects and individual PIRs were completed.

T he cost estimate increase is due to: (1) $2.03 billion in price level (inflation) adjustments from October 2004 to October 2009, (2) $554 million in scope changes based on final decision documents ( Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir and C

- 111 Spreader Canal ) or for authorizations ( IRL

– S, Site 1 Impoundm ent, the ASR Pilots and Picayune Strand Restoration ).Section 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 29 October 2010 2.4.5 Cost Share Crediting for Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

Projects

WRDA 2000 Section 601 (e) provides that project costs may be shared amo n g the partners, i.e., USACE and its local sponsor . This is accomplished by the use of a ―cost

- sharing‖ provision within the Project Partnership Agreement.

WRDA 2000 made no provision to provide credit for any construction that the non

- federal sponsor undertakes in advance of the project authorization. Section 60 0 4 of WRDA 2007, amended Section 602 (e)(5)(B) of WRDA 2000 by adding that ―...credit is provided for work carried out before the date of the partnership agreement between the Secretary and the non

federal sponsor, as defined in an agreement betwee n the Secretary and the non

- federal sponsor providing for such credit.‖ In these cases, additional rules and requirements apply, and thus additional agreements may be needed.

2.4.6 Outreach and Assistance Activities

The USACE and the SFWMD have developed and implemented a wide array of creative and effective outreach programs and products, at both the program and the individual project level, for a variety of audiences, at various educational levels and in multiple languages (English, Spanish, and Creole). A calendar of meetings open to the public as well as project documents are made available to the public through www.evergladesplan.org

.

To ensure that impacts on socially and economically disadvantaged communitie s and individuals, including individuals with limited English proficiency, are considered during implementation of the Plan; and that such individuals have opportunities to review and comment on its implementation, efforts have been made to:

 Schedule and locate public meetings and workshops in locations readily accessible to

both low

- income and minority populations and to communities adjacent to CERP projects

 Provide translators for select meetings

A more detailed discussion of the Public Outreach Program

, including Environmental and Economic Equity activities and accomplishments

, is included in Appendix B

.

2.4.7 Recreation and Tourism

A significant part of recreation in south Florida is water based. As CERP projec ts are implemented, the impact to recreation opportunities will be addressed along with the additional recreation opportunities that may be made available by CERP . A Master Recreation Plan has been under development that will identify, by region, restorat ion compatible recreation suited for potential inclusion in CERP projects as they are planned and developed . This plan will ensure the public has the opportunity to directly enjoy the benefits from the Everglades restoration. The interagency team working on th is plan has identified existing recreation opportunities as well as potential recreation opportunities on a regionalSection 2 Accomplishments During the Past Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 30 October 2010 basis. The Master Recreation Plan will serve as a guidance document to be utilized by the PDTs for the incorporation of recreation planning, consistent with the goals and objectives of

CERP during their site

- specific design work. The plan is expected at the beginning of FY

2011.

2.4.8 Economic Benefits Achie ved

CERP has a direct impact on the regional economy, through the creation of jobs and contracting opportunities. The USACE and the SFWMD use established programs to ensure that small and minority

- owned businesses are aware of these opportunities and hav e opportunities to do business with their respective agencies. Information about contracting opportunities is distributed through many channels

- job fairs, site visits

, and expositions and workshops with potential contractors and small business owners.

The goal of the USACE Small Business Program is to ensure that all types of small businesses receive their fair share of government contract dollars. The USACE seeks to provide information to small businesses owned and operated by socially and economicall y disadvantaged individuals who have qualified for certification under the U.S. Small Business Administration Section 8(a) Program. This program is designed to provide business development assistance and technical assistance to help socially and economica lly disadvantaged American businesses gain access to the mainstream American economy. In order to identify businesses that are socially and economically disadvantaged, the USACE has an aggressive outreach program.Section 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 31 October 2010 3 THE NEXT FIVE YEARS

3.1 PROGRAM EXPECTATIONS

3.1.1 Construction

Construction is expected to start on several projects between mid

- 2010 and mid

- 2015 and

construction will be complete d on those that have already begun.

The Merritt Pump Station portion of Picayune Strand Restoration project began construction in 2010 and is partially funded with ARRA funds and should be completed within the next reporting period. The recently awarded first contract for the Site 1 Impoundment will be under construction and also completed within the next reporting period. The SFWMD expects to complete construction on the C

- 111 Spreader Canal

- W estern Project in June 2011. Construction completi on in 2012 is expected on the

Lakeside Ranch STA North and S

- 650 Pump Station,. The SFWMD also anticipates completing all relocations necessary for the C

- 44 component ( IRL

- S ). Portions of the proposed plan for Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase I) are also expected to be completed, including the Deering Estate s and Cutler Wetlands features between 2010 and

2012

– and associated monitoring activities to be underway from 2011 to 2015.

The State will be starting s ite clearing for the Caloosahatchee Rive r (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir in 2011. Installation and Testing of the L

- 31N (L

- 30) Seepage Management Pilot is also expected to begin in the upcoming five

- year period

.

As noted earlier, construction is anticipated to begin in 2010 on the following projects: the

C

- 44 portion of IRL

- S and the Faka

- Union Pump Station portion of the Picayune Strand

Restoration , which will all be completed and become operational in the upcom ing five

- year period. In addition, actions are expected to be initiated in support of the DECOMP

– Physical Model and the Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics plan , including a sub

lease agreement with the USDA along with completion of the mass Rearin g Facility.

D esign work on the following projects is expected during the next reporting period:

 Picayune Strand Restoration (remaining portions)

 Site 1 Impoundment (2 nd contract)

 IRL

- S

 C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western Project

 C

- 9 and C

- 11 features of the Broward County W ater Preserve Areas (W PAs ) project

 Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir (conversion of plans)

 DECOMP

- PIR 1Section 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 32 October 2010 3.1.2 Authorizations Expected

Potential project candidates for inclusion into the next WRDA for authorization include: Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir, C

- 111 Spreader Canal

– Western P roject , Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase I) and Broward County WPAs.

Other projects that may be proposed for in clusion in WRDAs over the next five years

include: Everglades Agricultural Area Storage Reservoirs, Lake Okeechobee Watershed,

DECOMP

– PIR 1 and North Palm Beach County

– Part 1.

3.1.3 Decision Documents

The PIRs scheduled to be completed in the next five yea rs include:

 Broward County WPAs

 Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands

 WCA 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement (DECOMP)

– PIR 1

 Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoirs (if pending litigation issues are resolved in a timely fashion)

 Lake Okeechobee Watershed

 North Palm Beach County

– Part 1

The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study is being converted to the Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Plan. In the next report period, it is expected that work will begin

on the PIR 2 and PIR 3 for DECOMP and a PIR for ENP Seepage Management

.

I t is expected that a project management plan will be completed and a PIR possibly initiated

for the Caloosahatchee Watershed project that will address the remaining needs of the Caloosahatchee River Basin. This pr oject follow s and builds upon the Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir project

.

3.1.4 Project Partnership Agreements Anticipated

Based on the current IDS, the USACE and SFWMD anticipate executing Project Partnership Agreements for the follo wing projects over the next five years:

 C

- 111 Spreader Canal [summer 2011]

 Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands

– Phase 1

 Broward County WPAs

 Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir

 WCA 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow EnhancementSection 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 33 October 2010 3.1.5 Protecting Water for the Natural System

The SFWMD priorities to protect water for the natural system for the next five years include the following:

 Complete rule development for the Kissimmee River and Chain of Lakes Water

Reservation in 201 0

 Adopt a Water Reservation rule in 2011 to support the CERP Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir project

 Initiate rule development for Biscayne Bay in 2010 to support the CERP Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase I) project

 Apply the Restriction Allocation Area rules (effective April 23, 2007) to demonstrate that the water provided to the natural system by the following two CERP projects,

C

- 111 Spreader Canal and Broward County WPAs, is protected

3.1.6 Expectations for Other South Florida Restoration Efforts

Foundation Projects

For ModWaters , the projected completion of the bridge construction and the road

- raising for the Tamiami Trail is in 2013. Dependent upon funding, in the next five years work is also anticipated related to Structure s S

- 345 A, B, and C, the Osceola Camp elevation, and the continued degradation of the L

- 67 Extension Canal, as well as continuing planning and design on other conveyance and seepage features. Installation of the spreader swale pilot is expected to be comp leted by the end of February 2011 with monitoring and assessment following for two years.

Completion of C

- 37 widening in the Kissimmee River Restoration project is scheduled for June 2012. The following features are anticipated to be awarded in the next f ive years: the CSX railroad bridge, oxbow excavation and embankment, the S

- 65E gated spillway addition, Pool D boat ramp construction, the S

- 69 Weir, and C

- 38 Reaches 2 and 3 backfilling.

There are four construction contracts remaining to complete the C

- 111 (South Dade) project : the North Detention Area; the L

- 31West Borrow Canal Backfill; the S

- 332B Pump Station;

and the S

- 332C Pump Station. Plans and specifications are completed for the North

Detention Area. The L

- 31 West Borrow Canal Backfill and S

- 3 32B Pump Station plans and specifications are under development. The construction schedule is dependent upon the Post Authorization Change Report and funding.

In addition to the above efforts, the National Park Service is currently completing a report on additional improvements needed for the Tamiami Trail. These improvements consist of 5.5 additional miles of bridging as well as road raising to allow unrestricted flow across the Trail. By removing this restriction at the southern end of the system, mor e water can flow south. This will help to reduce the harmful discharges to the northern estuaries while also providing much needed additional water to Everglades National Park, the southern coastal estuaries, and Florida Bay.Section 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 34 October 2010 State Initiatives Expected O ver the Next Five Years During the next five years the SFWMD expects to finalize model refinements and project identification toward preparing a f easibility s tudy for Fisheating Creek . They also will be completing design and construction of the C

- 43 water quality treatment and testing facility and start operation of the facility to conduct pilot

- scale and full

- size testing on nitrogen removal before design of the full project . The SFWMD will complete four water quality projects that are cost

- shared with M artin County.

The SFWMD will continue operation and maintenance of existing hybrid wetland treatment technology sites and evaluate for possible continued operation of existing sites and

construction of additional sites.

The SFWMD will continue and com plete

construction of the Compartment B and

C Build

- outs as part of their EAA STA Expansion, and will complete construction of pump stations and modifications to the

L

- 6 Canal and G

- 444 divide structure.

Though no longer having a federal interest, Lee County and the SFWMD have moved forward with the design and permitting of

Lakes Park Restoration identified in

CERP . Work is continuing for an

addi tional treatment area consisting of a

40

- acre filter marsh and flowway (Phase III) to address offsite stormwater issues. Construction of the filter marsh and the flowway are anticipated to begin in FY 2011 and to be completed by 2015

.

3.2 LAND NEEDS

Of the approximately 391,000 acres of land needed for potential CERP projects, sixty percent (approximately 233,277 acres) have been acquired, as of March 31, 2010, leaving 158,000 acres which still need to be acquired. As projects are authorized and when appropriate Project Partnership Agreements are fully in place, the State of Florida become s eligible for

credit

. Table 3

- 1 below depicts the credits anticipated for land. EAA stormwater treatment area compartment in Hendry CountySection 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 35 October 2010 TABLE 3

- 1 : ESTIMATED LAND CRE DITING FOR AUTHORIZE D PROJECTS

EXPECTED WITHIN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Estimated Land Crediting for Authorized Projects (1)
Expected within the Next Five Years

(in $1,000s)

CERP Project Federal Sponsor Non

- Federal

Sponsor (3)

TOTAL USACE SFWMD

Indian River Lagoon

– South

(Phase 1 only) (2) $ 0 $ 401,340 $ 401,340

Picayune Strand Restoration $ 38,085 $ 156,000 $ 194,085

Site 1 Impoundment $ 4,183 $ 4,183 $ 8,366

TOTAL $ 42,268 $ 561,523 $ 603,791

Cost Share Percentage (%) 7.0 % 93.0 % 100 %

Note: (1) This estimate is only for those projects which have been authorized and either have a PPA. Other land crediting may occur in the next five years if other projects are authorized. (2) These are only the estimates for the phase 1 portion of IRL

- S as construction on the other portions is not expected to begin in the next five years according to the IDS. (3) Portions acquired via Section 390 of the 1996 Federal Farm Bill.

3.3 EXPECTATIONS IN SCIE NTIFIC I NVESTIGATIONS

Over the next five years RECOVER will continue to inform CERP planning and implementation, particularly through the CERP A daptive M anagement (AM) program. CERP was authorized with broad goals and objectives, which were to be refined as new

information became available. One most substantial e ffort in which RECOVER will be

involved the coming years is to refine the vision of success for Everglades restoration

, to
make i t specific and measurable

, using information and knowledge gained since CERP’s

authorization. This effort is called the 2010 S hared Definition of Everglades Restoration (Shared Definition). The first step, completed in fiscal year 2010, was to compile new scientific information relevant to Everglades restoration. This document will be used to
reach consensus on a more specific, refined vision of success for Everglades restoration

. Finally, specific, measurable interim goals

- targets with desired endpoints based on the

refined vision will be developed. The results will help guide project teams and provideSection 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 36 October 2010 specific information for planning, implementation and operation of restoration projects. RECOVER anticipate s completing the efforts listed below, in concer t with the Shared

Definition effort

.

TABLE 3

- 2 : RECOVER’S ANTICIP ATED E FFORTS

RECOVER

MISSION

AREA/PROGRAM ANTICIPATED EFFORTS

Adaptive Management Program  Continue to systematically identify and address programmatic uncertainties

 Develop a programmatic AM Plan that will coordinate the pieces of CERP and include contingency options to optimize performance

 Continue to a ssist with the development of project

- specific AM plans as required by

the USACE

Adaptive

Assessment and Monitoring Program  Continue system

- wide monitoring and produce web

- based System Status Reports in

2012 and 2014 to report CERP’s performance

 Continue to c oordinate project

- specific monitoring plans with existing system

- wide monitoring

 Continue to improve information

- exchang e between scientists and managers and coordination among scien tifi c efforts

 Continue identification of management actions necessary to adjust CERP to meet desired performance expectations

 Update ecological models, hypothes e s, performance measures, and in terim and long

- term goals

Evaluation and Planning  Continue to c onduct regional evaluations for projects in the planning phase

 C ontinue to develop/refine models to evaluate CERP on a regional/system

- wide

basis

 Continue to update CERP baseline planning co nditions, as new information

becomes available

 Continue to p rovide scientific input for project sequencing contained in the IDS

 Continue to s tay abreast of climate change and integrate applicable information into

short

- and long

- term plans

 Continue to produce technical reports on climate change sensitivity data and model development

3.4 FUNDING NEEDS

Estimated funding needs to support CERP for FY10 through FY14 per current planning priorities and the IDS are shown in Table 3

- 3 . The initial MISP utilized a maximum of $200 million per year federal funding target. However, this has never represented the President’s budget requests and is not a commit ment by the federal government. The Secretary of the Army plans to implement projects through the normal budget process at the appropriate time, considering national priorities, and the availability of funding. At the time of this writing, the budget est imates for FY11 and FY12 have been submitted as part of the normal two

- year cycle budgeting process.

The ARRA funds are ear

- marked by the U. S. Army and the USACE for several CERP projects. If additional funding becomes available, some elements of projects that show demonstrable benefits to the natural system as well as significant stakeholder support could be sequenced earlier.Section 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 37 October 2010 TABLE 3

- 3 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN FUNDING REQUIRED T O S UPPORT THE INTEGRATED DELIV ERY SCHEDULE FROM

FISCAL YEAR 2010 THR OUGH FISCAL YEAR 201 4

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Funding Required from Sponsors to Support the Integrated D elivery Schedule for Fiscal Year 2010 through Fiscal Year 2014

(in millions)

Sponsor FY

10 FY

11 FY

12 FY

13 FY

14 5

- Yr Total

USACE $ 120.0 $ 112.7 $ 191.0 $ 113.0 $ 140.0 $ 676.7

SFWMD $ 130.9 $ 69.8 $ 69.0 $ 83.4 $ 92.8 $ 44 5

. 9

TOTAL $ 250.9 $ 182.5 $ 260.0 $ 196.4 $ 232.8 $ 1, 122.6Section 3 The Next Five Years

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 38 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankSection 4 Looking Forward

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 39 October 2010 4 LO OKING FORWARD

Despite the seemingly slow startup process for CERP , much has been accomplished thus far towards restoring the Everglades ecosystem. Thanks to the efforts of the State of Florida with funding support from the s tate, f ederal, and local levels, as much as 60 percent of the

land estimated to be needed for CE RP has been acquired. This is in addition to other large acquisitions made for the foundation projects and other local and state restoration/preservation efforts (see Appendix D for information on the F oundation P rojects ).

M eanwhile, the ongoing work by the USACE in partnership with the DOI on the ModWaters project and with the SFWMD on the other non

- CERP projects is already resulting in significant benefits to the ecosystem. Success of these interconnected Foundation and

su pporting projects are important to the success of CERP. In the northern part of the system,

the Kissimmee River Restoration project remains the showcase restoration project that demonstrates the ability of the natural system to recover. With more than 20 miles of the

historical river channel and more than 14,000 acres of floodplain already restored, the natural recovery of the river’s ecosystem has been astounding in terms of bio

- diversity and production. This has clearly demonstrated the ability of a natural system to heal itself once the hydrologic conditions upon which the ecosystem originally developed are restored.

Within the next five years, foundation projects such as the Kissimmee River Restoration, the

C

- 111 (South Dade), the WPB STA

- 1E/ C

- 51

, and the Modified Water Deliveries to ENP will be completed along with CERP projects such as the Site 1 Impoundment, much of the Picayune Strand Restoration project, the C

- 44 Reservoir compone n t of the IRL

- S project , and significant portions of the Broward County Water Preserve Areas projects. Other CERP projects

, or components of projects, will also be completed or nearing completion

– e.g. Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands (Phase I ) and the C

- 111 Spreader Canal

- Western P roject will be completed by the SFWMD, the Caloosahatchee River (C

- 43) West Basin Storage Reservoir, and the initial portion of the DECOMP project will be completed dependent on authorization and funding . These will begin to transform the management of water throughout the system providing mu ch needed storage, treatment, and re

- hydration to large areas of the ecosystem.

T he DECOMP project’s first PIR, that will be completed or underway, will lay the groundwork to transform the very manner in which water moves through the system, restoring man y of the historical characteristics of that flow and directly benefiting over 172,000 acres of the Everglades . The non

- CERP ModWaters p roject coupled with further improvements to the Tamiami Trail to accommodate historical high flows without damaging the roadway, will remove the constraints at the southern end of the ―managed‖ system and begin to allow more ―free‖ flow south without damage to the Everglades. The redistribution

of flow s across the Trail will restore flows to the historic Northeast Shark River Slough flowway, thus restoring the 109,000 acre ENP Expansion Area.

This in combination with adequate seepage control work on the eastern boundary (e.g. L

- 31N (L

- 30) Seepage Man agement Pilot, ENP Seepage Management)

, will allow higher water levels without increasing the risk of flooding in developed areas to the east. Together, the

C&SF C

- 111 (South Dade) and the CERP C

- 111 Spreader Canal projects will likewiseSection 4 Looking Forward

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 40 October 2010 redistribute and increase flows entering the Taylor Slough and panhandle portion of ENP thus restoring more natural hydro patterns to that area. This will not only enhance these portions of ENP but also positively impact the upper estuaries of Florida Bay by expanding

the fresh water interface and reducing hyper salinity events. Complimenting these efforts, the completion of the first p hase of the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands project will begin to

redistribute flows across the wetlands to Biscayne Bay and aid in protecti ng the remaining fragile coastal estuary.

Besides the physical progress made through construction and land acquisition noted above, the understanding of the science surrounding the ecosystem and its processes has also grown significantly thanks to a mu ltitude of efforts underway to better define the science and relationships within the ecosystem. This continued investigation into the characteristics and processes of the Everglades ecosystem has led to an understanding that the southern end of the pre

- d rainage system near Florida Bay may have been much wetter than originally

believed when CERP was first put together in 1999 . During a series of science workshops, a group of interagency scientists estimated the need for approximately 1.9 million acre

- feet of average annual flows entering the Everglades Protection Area from the north. Based on this

current scientific informat ion, t he DOI supports th e need for approximately 1.9 million acre

feet of average annual flows as well as the need for additional storage. Discussions are currently underway on how to incorporate this new information into system planning. This

water flow is viewed as the key to re

- establishing the enormous feeding grounds and rookeries that were legendary for that area as well as providing the additional influx of fresh water deemed vital for the survival of Florida Bay.

And last, in a period of econom ic recession and accompanying challenges, the restoration effort offers the opportunity to invest not only in the restoration and preservation of this unique treasure but also in the people, infrastructure, and economy of the region. The numerous projects included in the program will generate as many as 1000 new direct jobs

and many times more indirect jobs throughout the region. These employment opportunities will be both temporary for construction ( one to four years) and long term for infrastructure

ope ration and maintenance. This work has already had and will continue to have a substantial positive economic impact on the area.

In summary, the coming years provide an unparalleled opportunity for great accomplishments toward the restoration of this truly unique ecosystem. They also represent a great challenge to maintain the level of financial and other resource commitment required to move the program forward in a meaningful way. Timely authorizations and funding are critical to maintaining the rec ently established momentum. However, if financial issues can be adequately addressed at the National and s tate level

, solid, visible progress will be made toward achieving the overall goal of restoring this unique and world renowned environmental

treasure , America’s Everglades.Tab A References

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 41 October 2010 

### TAB A

- REFERENCES

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) (P.L. 111

- 5) (February 17, 2009).

CERP Guidance Memoranda

– (various)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/program_docs/cerp

- guidance

- memo.aspx

Department of Defense. ASA

- CW Memorandum: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP)

– Requirements for Project Implementation Reports (PIRs) and Other Implementation Documents ( May 27, 2010).

Department of Defense. ASA

- CW Memorandum: Subject: Design Agreement for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (March 24 2000)

.

Department of Defense. CECW

-- SAD Letter and Memorandum for the Record, Land Valuation and Crediting Po licy CERP Project (July 30, 2009)

.

Department of Defense. Programmatic Regulations for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan; Final Rule by the Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers Title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations ( CFR ) Part 385. Federal Register Vol. 68, No. 218. (November 12, 2003)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/progr_regs_final_rule.aspx

Design Agreement between the Department of the Army and the Sout h Florida Water Management District for the Design of Elements of the Comprehensive Plan for Everglades and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration (May 12, 2000)

. Amendment No. 1, (July 24, 2004)

. Amendment No. 2, (August 13, 2009)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/program_docs/progr_part_design_agree.aspx

Lacey Act

- P.L. 97

- 79, 95 Stat. 1073, 16 U.S.C. 3371

- 3378 (November 16, 1981), and

amended b y P.L. 100

- 653, 102 Stat. 3825 (November 14, 1988), and P.L. 98

- 327, 98 Stat. 271, (June 25, 1984). http://www.fws.gov/le/pdffiles/Lacey.pdf

Langeland

, K.A and Stocker, R.K. 1997

. Control of Non

- nativ e Plants in Florida’s Natural Areas. Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agriculture Sciences. University of Florida. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.

Larsen, L.G., N. Aumen, C. Bernhardt, V. Engel, T. Givnish, S. Hagerthey, J. Harvey, L. Leonard, P. McCormick, C. McVoy, G. Noe, M. Nungesser, K. Rutchey, F. Sklar, T. Troxler, J. Volin, and D. Willard. ―Recent and historic drivers of landscape change in the Everglades ridge, slough, and tree island mosaic. Critical Reviews in Environmenta l Science & Technology.‖ In review (2010).

Master Program Management Plan, Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, Final, (August 2000).Tab A References

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 42 October 2010 http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/program_do cs/mpmp.aspx

Master Agreement Between the Department of the Army and South Florida Water Management District for Cooperation in Constructing and Operating, Maintaining, Repairing, Replacing, and Rehabilitating Projects Authorized to be Undertaken Pursuant to the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (August 13, 2009)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/pm_docs/master_agreement/081309_master_agreeme nt_cerp.pdf

Milan, Hodges et al. 1999. Public Preferences and Economic Values for Restoration of the Everglades/South Florida Ecosystem.

National Research Council (NRC). 2006. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The

First Biennial Review

- 200 6 . Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration (CISRERP), National Academies Press. http://ww w.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12469

National Research Council (NRC). 2008. Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades: The Second Biennial Review, 2008. Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration (CISRERP), National Academies P ress. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12469

Norton D.A., 2009. Species Invasions and the Limits to Restoration: Learning from the New Zealand Experience.

Ogden et al. 2005. Ogden, J.C; Davis, S. M.; Barnes, T.K., Jacobs, K.J. and J.H. Bentile. 2005. Total System Conceptual Ecological Model. Wetlands 25(4). 955

- 999.

RECOVER. CERP Monitoring and Assessment Plan, Part 1. Section 4.0 Quality Assurance/Quality Control and Data Valida tion, Management, Evaluation and Reporting (January 15, 2004)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/recover/recover_docs/map/MAP_4.0_QAQC.pdf

RECOVER. Scientific and Technical Knowledge Gained in Everglades Restoration (1999

- 2009) DRAFT (June 2010).

RECOVER. System Status Report (2009)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/ssr_2009/ssr_main.aspx

Skla r et al. 2007. Chapter 6: Ecology of the Everglades Protection Area. 2007 South Florida Environmental Report.

South Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD )

. 2006 South Florida Environmental Report

– Volume I

, Chapter 9

.

SFWMD. 2009 South Florida Environmental Report

– FINAL

. Typical Exploratory

Well

InstallationTab A References

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 43 October 2010 https://my.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/portal/pg_grp_sfwmd_sfer/pg_sfwmd_sfer_prevreport

SFWMD. 2010 South Florida Environmental Report

- FINAL

– Chapter 3A: Status of Water Quality in the Everglades Protection Agency (March 1, 2010)

. https://my.sfwmd.go v/portal/page/portal/pg_grp_sfwmd_sfer/pg_sfwmd_sfer_home

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (SFERTF). Land Acquisition Strategy,

2009. http:// www.sfrestore.org/issueteams/latt/documents/

SFERTF . System

- wide Indicators for Everglades Restoration, 2008 Assessment

. http://www.sfrestore.org/scg/documents/index.html

SFERTF . New Scienc e: Advancing Understanding of the South Florida Ecosystem by the Working Group and Science Coordination Group

. ( May 2010 )

. http://www.sfrestore.org/new_science.html

State of Florida. Laws of Florida CHAPTER 2010

- 185. Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 318 and Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 572. ―An act relating to wildlife regulation; amending s. 379.231, F lorida S tatutes ; prohibiting the import or release of

nonnative animals in this state unless authorized by the Fish and Wildlife Commission...‖ (June 3, 2010)

. http://laws.flrules.org/files/Ch_2010

- 185.pdf

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

. Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) Project Comprehensive Review Study

- Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement. Jacksonville District Office; Jacksonville, Florida. (CERP or Restudy ). U.S. Army Corps of Engine ers. (1999). http://www.evergladesplan.org/pub/restudy_eis.aspx

USACE. Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) 2005 Report to Congress

- Final, (September 2006)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/program_docs/cerp_report_congress_2005.aspx

Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1992 [as amended through P.L. 102

- 580, December 29, 2000]. http://epw.senate.gov/wrda92.pdf

WRDA of 1996 (Public Law 104

- 303), 110 Stat. 3658, Section 528 ( October 12, 1996)

. http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/Omnibus/WRDA1996.pdf

WRDA of 1999 (Public Law 106

- 53), 113 Stat. 269, (August 17, 1999 )

. http://www.fws.gov/habitatconservation/Omnibus/WRDA 1999.pdf

WRDA of 2000 (Public Law 106

- 541), 114 Stat. 2572, Section 601, (December 11, 2000)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/wrda2000/wrda_docs/wrda2000_gpo.pdfTab A References

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 44 October 2010 WRDA of 2007 (Public Law 110

- 114), 121 Stat. 1041 (November 8, 2007)

. http://www.evergladesplan.org/wrda2000/wrda_docs/wrda_2007.pdf

Wittenberg, R. & Cock, M.J.W., eds. 2001. Invasive alien species: a toolkit of best prevention and management practices. Global Invasive Species Programme. Wallingford, Oxon, UK. CAB International.Tab B Abbreviations and Acronyms

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 45 October 2010

TAB B

- ABBREVIATIONS AND AC RONYMS

AA&M adaptive assessment and monitoring

AM Adaptive Management

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

ASA

- CW Assistant Secretary of the Army Civil Works

ASR aquifer storage and recovery

C&SF Central and Southern Florida

CERP Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan

CERP Master Agreement

Master Agreement between the Department of the Army and the South Florida Water Management District for Cooperation in Constructing and Operating, Maint aining, Repairing, Replacing and Rehabilitating Projects Authorized to be Undertaken Pursuant to the Comprehensive Everglades

Restoration Plan.

CISMA Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area

CISRERP Committee on Independent Scientific Review of Everglades Restoration

Progress

CREW Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed

DECOMP Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement

DOA U.S. Department of the Army

DOI U.S. Department of the Interior

DPM Decomp Physical Model

E&SF Everglades and South F lorida

EAA Everglades Agricultural Area

EEE Environmental and Economic Equity

ENP Everglades National Park

FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection

FY fiscal year

ICU Initial CERP Update

IDM Information and Data Management

IDS Integrated Delive ry Schedule

IG/IT(s) Interim Goals and Interim Targets

IMC Interagency Modeling Center

IRL Indian River Lagoon

IRL

- S Indian River Lagoon

– South

LOW Lake Okeechobee Watershed

MAP Monitoring and Assessment Plan

MISP Master Implementation Sequencing Plan

ModWa ters Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park

NEPA National Environmental Policy ActTab B Abbreviations and Acronyms

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 46 October 2010 NPS National Park Service

NRC National Research Council

OPE Other Project Element (CERP)

PBCWUD Palm Beach County's Water Utilities District

PDT Project Delivery Team

PIR Project Implementation Report

P.L. Public Law

The Plan Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Review Study Final

Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement , dated April 1, 1999

PPA Project Pa rtnership Agreement

PPCA Pre

- Partnership Credit Agreement

QAOT Quality Assurance Oversight Team

QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control

RECOVER REstoration COordination and VERification

Restudy Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Review Study Final

Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Impact

Statement , dated April 1, 1999

SAD South Atlantic Division

SFER South Florida Ecosystem Restoration

SFERTF South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

SFERTF

- WG South Florid a Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

– Working Group

SFWMD South Florida Water Management District

SFWMM South Florida Water Management Model

SMA square mile area

SSR System Status Report

STA stormwater treatment area

SWF CWP Southwest Florida Comprehensive Watershed Plan

TSP Tentatively Selected Plan

TTM Tamiami Trail Modifications

U.S. United States

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture

USFWS U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

WCA Water Conservation Area

WPA Water Preserve Area

WQTA water quality treatment area (State of Florida)

WRDA Water Resources Development ActTab C Land Acquisition Update

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 47 October 2010 

### TAB C

- LAND ACQUISITION UPD ATE MAP

FIGURE TAB

- C

- 1 : SOUTH FLORIDA ECO SYSTEM RESTORATION L AND ACQUISITION STRA TEGY (www.sfrestore.org)Tab C Land Acquisition Update

CERP 2010 Report to Congress 48 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendices

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices i October 2010 

## APPENDICIES

Appendix A CERP Project Information

Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

Appendix E Updated Cost Estimates by CERP ProjectAppendices

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices ii October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendices Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices iii October 2010 

### APPENDI CIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPENDIX A

- CERP PROJECT INFORMA TION

A.1 AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY REGIONAL ST UDY

........................ A

- 1

A.2 BISCAYNE BAY COASTAL WETLANDS

................................ ............................ A

- 1

A.3 BROWARD COUNTY WATER PRESERVE AREAS

................................ ......... A

- 2

A.4 CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER (C

- 43) WEST BASIN STORA GE

RESERVOIR.................................

.................. ..... ......... ... ... ...... .... ... . A

- 3

A.5 C

- 111 SPREADER CANAL

................................ ................................ ...................... A

- 3

A.6 WATER CONSERVATION A REA 3 DECOMPARTMENTA LIZATION AND

SHEETFLOW ENHANCEMEN T (DECOMP)

................................ ...................... A

- 4

A.7 EVERGLADES AGRICULTU RAL AREA RESERVOIR

................................ ... A

- 5

A.8 LAKE OKEECHOBEE WATE RSHED

................................ ................................ .. A

- 5

A.9 NORTH PALM BEACH COUNTY

– PART 1

................................ ......................... A

- 6

A.10 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA FE ASIBILITY STUDY

................................ ................ A

- 7

APPENDIX B

- CERP PROGRAM COORDIN ATION

B.1 PROGRAMMATIC REGULAT IONS

................................ ................................ ..... B

- 1

B.2 EVOLUTION OF THE INT EGRATED DELIVERY SCH EDULE

..................... B

- 2

B.3 RECOGNIZING CULTURAL RESOURCES

................................ ........................ B

- 2

B.4 MASTER RECREATION PL AN

................................ ................................ ............. B

- 3

B.5 INTERAGENCY MODELING CENTER

................................ ............................... B

- 3

B.6 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE

................................ ........................... B

- 4

B.7 INFORMATION AND DATA MANAGEMENT

................................ ................... B

- 8

B.8 QUALITY ASSURANCE OVERSIGHT TEAM

................................ .................... B

- 9

B.9 ENVIRONMENTAL AND EC ONOMIC EQUITY

................................ ............... B

- 9

B.10 PROGRAM COORDINATION FINANCIAL COSTS

................................ ........ B

- 10

B.11 OUTLOOK FOR ECONOMIC , TOURISM, RECREATIO N AND OTHER

BENEFITS

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ B

- 12Appendices Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices iv October 2010 APPENDIX C

- SCIENTIFIC INITIATIV ES

C.1 INCORPORATION OF ADA PTIVE MANAGEMENT

................................ ...... C

- 1

C.2 RESTORATION COORDINA TION AND VERIFICATIO N

............................. C

- 1

C.2.1 Planning and Evaluation

................................ ................................ ......................... C

- 1

C.2.2 Adaptive Management Program

................................ ................................ ............. C

- 2

C.2.3 Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring

................................ ................................ .... C

- 3

C.3 INTERIM GOALS AND IN TERIM TARGETS

................................ ................... C

- 4

C.4 METHODS FOR ASSESSIN G PERFORMANCE AND PR OVIDING

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

................................ ................. C

- 6

C.5 NEW SCIENCE

................................ ................................ ................................ ........ C

- 8

C.6 NON

- INDIGENO US (INVASIVE/EXOTIC) SPECIES

................................ ....... C

- 9

C.7 IMPACT OF CLIMATE CH ANGE AND SEA LEVEL R ISE

........................ ..C

- 10

C.8 EXPECTATIONS FOR THE SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYS TEM

RESTORATION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS

................................ ........ C

- 11

C.8.1 RECOVER Activities Anticipated over the Next Five Years

.............................. C

- 11

C.8.2 Addressing Invasive and Exotic Species

................................ .............................. C

- 13

C.8.3 Incorporating Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

................................ .............. C

- 15

APPENDIX D

- STATUS OF OTHER SOUT H FLORIDA EVERGLADES

ECOSYSTEM RESTORATIO N PROJECTS

D.1. THE FOUNDATION PROJE CTS

................................ ................................ .......... D

- 1

D.1.1 Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park Project

.................... D

- 3

D.1.1.1 8.5 Square Mile Area

................................ ................................ ......................... D

- 3

D.1.1.2 Tamiami Trail Modifications

................................ ................................ ............. D

- 4

D.1.1.3 Spreader Swale Pilot Test along Tamiami Trail

................................ ................ D

- 4

D.1.1.4 Conveyance and Seepage Control Features

................................ ....................... D

- 4

D.1.1.5 Everglades Restoration Transition Plan

................................ ............................. D

- 5

D.1.2 Kissimmee River Restoration

................................ ................................ ............ D

- 5

D.1.3 Central and Southern Florida: Modifications to the C

- 111 Project (South Dade)

................................ ................................ ................................ .................... D

- 7

D.1.4 Central and Southern Florida: West Palm Beach Canal Stormwater

Treatment Area

- 1E/C

- 51 West

................................ ................................ .......... D

- 8

D. 2. EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA: CRITICAL RESTORATION

PROJECTS PROGRAM

................................ ................................ ........................ D

- 8

D. 3

. OTHER SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATIO N PROJECTS

. D

- 10

D. 3 .1 Federal Initiatives During the Past Five Years

................................ .............. D

- 10Appendices Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices v October 2010 D. 3 .2 State and Local Initiatives During the Past Five Years

............... . ............ D

- 10

D. 3 .2.1 Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program

.. ........................D

- 11

D. 3 .2.2 C

- 43 Water Quality Treatment and Testing Facility

................................ ...... D

- 11

D. 3 .2.3 Fisheating Creek Feasibility Study

................................ ................................ . D

- 11

D. 3 .2.4 Hybrid Wetland Treatment

................................ ................................ ............. D

- 12

D. 3 .2.5 Local Cost

- Share Projects with Martin County

................................ ............. D

- 12

D. 3 .2.6 Everglades Agricultural Area Stormwa ter Treatment Area Expansion

......... D

- 12

D. 3 .2.7 L

- 63N Canal (Taylor Creek) Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project

............ D

- 13

D. 3 .2.8 Seminole Tribe

– Brighton Reservation Aquifer Storage and Recovery Pilot

Project

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. D

- 13

APPENDIX E

- UPDATED COST ESTIMAT ES BY CERP PROJECT

. . .. ... ... ...... . .E

- 1

LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES

Table A

- 1: Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Project Status

............................. A

- 9

Table B

- 1 : Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Expenditures for Program

Coordination

...... ...... ................................................................. B

- 11

Table C

- 1 : Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Adaptive Assessment and

Monitoring Expenditures through F iscal Y ear 2009

................................ ......... C

- 7

Table D

- 1: State Initiatives Update Past Five Years

................................ ........................... D

- 14

Table E

- 1: Updated Cost Estimates By CERP Project

................................ ......................... E

- 3

LIST OF APPENDIX FIGURES

Figure D

- 1 : Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

............... D

- 2Appendices Table of Contents

CERP 2010 Report to Congress Appendices vi October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 1 October 2010



### APPENDIX A

- CERP PROJECT INFORMA TION

Section 601(h) of Water Resources Development Act ( WRDA ) 2000 and § 385.40(c) of the Programmatic Regulations set forth reporting requirements for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). These include providing descriptions of planning, design, and construction wor k completed during the five

- year period covered by the report. As a quick reference, Table A

- 1 provides a listing of this work around CERP project

acc omplishments to date.

Under normal procedures, in order for a CERP project to begin construction, it must be authorized and have a sign ed project partnership agreement (PPA). Projects that are in construction, authorized or have signed PPAs are discussed in the main body of the document. The projects discussed below are in various stages of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE ) Planning process or are studies that result in a report. The progress these projects have made over the past five years is d iscussed below.

A.1 AQUIFER STORAGE AND RECOVERY REGIONAL ST UDY

CERP includes use of Aquifer Storage and Recovery ( ASR ) technology on an unprecedented scale. This technology involves collection and treatment of excess surface waters that are then stored in underground aquifers for later recovery. Although ASR technology has been used successfully in Florida since 1983, c oncerns have been expressed about the proposed use of large

- scale ASR in south Florida. Many of these concerns were outlined in a report prepared by the ASR Issue Team of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force ( SFERTF )

.

The ASR Regional Stud y was designed to answer many of the questions concerning the feasibility of full

- scale ASR implementation. An interim report (June 2008) summarized

efforts from 2003

- 2007. Hydrology, water quality, engineering and eco

- toxicological data

were collected su ccessfully during the recharge phase of cycle

- 1 in the Kissimmee River ASR Pilot Facility. Additional data collection, modeling, assessment and evaluations will continue through 2012 with a final summary report summarizing the feasibility for the regional use of ASR technology for CERP

.

A.2 BISCAYNE BAY COASTAL WETLANDS

This project will expand and restore the wetlands adjacent to Biscayne Bay in Miami

- Dade County, enhancing the ecological health of Biscayne National Park.

In February 2008, the project was divided into two phases. Phase I consists of the design and construction of three essential components: Deering Estate s Flowway, Cutler Ridge Wetlands, and L

- 31 East Flowway to restore the quantity, quality, timing, and distribution of

freshwater to Bisc ayne Bay and estuary and Biscayne National Park. The entire project will capture, treat, and redistribute freshwater runoff from the watershed into Biscayne Bay, expand spatial extent and connectivity of coastal wetlands, and provide improved

recreational opportunities in Biscayne Bay and adjacent wetlands. It will also improveAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 2 October 2010 salinity distribution near the shoreline helping to reestablish productive nursery habitat for shrimp and shellfish.

Miami

- Dade County has already constructed a portion of the pr oposed Deering Estate s Flowway. The project team completed a draft Project Implementation Report ( PIR ) for Phase I and published it in the Federal Register in February 2010. As discussed in section

2.1.2 the Sout h Florida Water Management District ( SFWMD ) completed construction on

L

- 31 Culverts in 2010 and began construction on Deering Estates

. Cutler Wetlands is scheduled to begin construction in 201 1

. A review is currently underway in response to the request b y the local sponsor for a policy change regarding cost

- sharing for treatment of agrichemical soils within the project footprint. Upon receipt of policy decision, the project will proceed with either a re

- write of the PIR or a presentation to the Civil Wor ks Review

Board.

A.3 BROWARD COUNTY WATER PRESERVE AREAS

The Broward County Water Preserve Areas ( WPAs ) project contains three of the ten initially authorized projects identified in WRDA 2000: Water Conservation Area ( WCA ) 3A/3B Levee Seepage Management, C

- 11 Impoundment and Stormwater Treatment Area ( STA )

, and C

- 9 Impoundment and STA. The project was refined in the final PIR signed by the USACE District Engineer in June 2007. However, c ompletion of the PIR and design of project features was suspended pending resolution of the land crediting policy change request from SFWMD. The land crediting policy has since been resolved. The PIR is being rewritten based on the changes to the Master Agreement as well as the cost updat es for the real estate policy change and to reflect construction cost changes. Once the changes are incorporated, an Independent External Peer Review will be scheduled and conducted prior to submitting this project for WRDA consideration.

The project is designed to enhance the buffer between residential development and protected Everglades’ wetlands, capturing and diverting stormwater runoff and reducing underground seepage from the Everglades. It consists of three components all located along the easter n edge of WCA 3A/3B in Broward and Miami

- Dade counties.

(1) WCA 3A/3B Seepage Management Area is a 14

- mile

- long tract of wetlands adjacent to the Everglades. Increasing the water levels in this area will reduce groundwater seepage from WCA 3A and 3B. (2) C

- 11 Im poundment is a 1,500

- acre, above

- ground impoundment capable of holding a water depth up to approximately four feet. It will receive diverted untreated

stormwater from the western C

- 11 watershed, which would otherwise enter WCA 3A. The impoundment pool wi ll also assist in reducing groundwater seepage to improve groundwater levels in the Everglades. (3) C

- 9 Impoundment is a 1,650

- acre, aboveground impoundment capable of holding a water depth of up to approximately 4 feet. It will capture excess stormwater from the

western C

- 11 watershed. If the impoundment has capacity and there are no flows

from the C

- 11 Basin, then excess stormwater from the western C

- 9 Basin will be pumped into the impoundment for temporary storage and release. The impoundmentAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 3 October 2010 will assist in reducing groundwater seepage from the adjacent Seepage Management

Area and WCA 3B.

State Expedited Efforts While the PIR was suspended, the state moved forward under its expedited program to complete the Basis of Design Report for the WCA 3A/3B Seepag e Management Area and the

C

- 9 Impoundment. On C

- 11 Impoundment, the preliminary project design is 60 percent complete. The remaining design and construction for all three WPA components have been

transferred to the USACE.

A.4 CALOOSAHATCHEE RIVER (C

- 43) WE ST BASIN STORAGE

RESERVOIR

A Final PIR has been completed and the Chief of Engineer’s Report was signed in

March 2010. This project pr o poses a 170,000 acre

- feet reservoir to capture excess C

- 43

Basin runoff and store water releases from Lake Okeechobee and then release water to the Caloosahatchee Estuary when needed. The reservoir will also help to improve water quality by reducing salinity and nutrient impacts of runoff and improving environmental water supply deliveries to the Caloosahatchee Estuary.

A.5 C

- 111 SPREADER CANAL

This project is being implemented via two PIRs (a Western PIR and an Eastern PIR). The draft integrated PIR and Environmental Impact Statement for the Western PIR was completed in 2009. A signed Chi ef of Engineer’s Report is expected in fiscal year 2011. As

discussed in section 2.1.2

, a portion of thi s project is being expedited by the state. The PIR

includes a 590

- acre Frog Pond detention area and a second detention area (Aerojet Canal); with each having a 225 cubic feet per second pump station. These features will create a mound of groundwater to t he south and west, which will prevent groundwater seepage out of Everglades National Park ( ENP ) . Preventing groundwater seepage out of ENP will improve the quantity, timing and distribution of flows to Florida Bay via Taylor Slough. Hydroperiods and hydr opatterns within wetlands of the Southern Glades and Model Lands will be improved by construction of a new water control structure in the lower C

- 111, incremental operational changes at existing structure S

- 18C, changes in operations at the existing struct ure S

- 20, construction of an opening at existing structure S

- 20A for marine traffic, and installation of several additional access points along the C

- 110 Canal.

As metioned in s ection 2.1.3 , in addition to the Western PIR efforts, an in tegrated Design Document Report/ Environmental Assessment was prepared for the C

- 111 Spreader Canal Design Test. The test consists of operating a small scale spreade r canal and monitoring the effects on groundwater and surface water flows. This data will be used in the development and analysis of alternatives for the Eastern PIR and will help determine the location for the

Eastern PIR’s full

- size spreader canal, mini mize impacts to private lands, and maximize

restoration results.Appendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 4 October 2010 This integrated report received public comments between August and September 2008. The design test survey and hydraulic design were completed in 2008 and the scope of work for

the test wa s completed in January 2009 with a final document dated July 2009. A contract for the design test was awarded and operation of the test began in February 2010; testing will continue for two years.

A.6 WATER CONSERVATION A REA 3 DECOMPARTMENTA LIZATION

AND SHEETFLOW ENHANCEMEN T (DECOMP)

At a June 2 008 Feasibility Scoping Meeting , the Project Delivery Team ( PDT ) recommended an Incremental Adaptive Restoration strategy for the DECOMP project. An initial plan formulation summary was drafted and RECOVER has co mpleted its performance measure consistency review. Conceptual alternatives were modeled using the South Florida Water Management Model to determine which segment(s) of the Miami Canal yielded the most

benefits when backfilled. The RMA

- 2 (a model develop ed by Resource Management Associates for the USACE in 1973) was used to determine optimal plug length and spacing given variable fill quantities. These model results, along with additional considerations, were used to formulate a preliminary array of alte rnatives. The PDT used a structured screening process to reduce the preliminary alternatives to an array of six to be further analyzed using the Regional Simulation Model. The next step will be for the team to work on the modeling

and evaluation of the f

inal array of alternatives.

Due to the uncertainties surrounding the physical impacts associated with DECOMP, a temporary field test will be implemented to investigate the design of features for restoring sheet flow and for removing barriers to habitat co nnectivity in Water Conservation Area (WCA) 3. This test (also known as a Physical Model) is important because there are critical questions regarding design and effectiveness of decompartmentalization features that the project team cannot answer with curr ent knowledge or computer simulation models. The DECOMP Physical Model (DPM) will gather data to better understand the hydrological and ecological effects associated with different types of canal and levee modifications to benefit the Everglades, and to b etter understand how to design effective project features.

The DPM will take place along a small portion of the L

- 67A Levee and L

- 67C Canal Levee

in WCA 3 in northern Miami

- Dade County approximately ten miles north of S

- 333. It

consists of culverts in the L

- 67A Levee, a gap in the L

- 67C Levee and the complete and partial backfilling of segments of the L

- 67C Canal. These features will provide a controllable hydrologic connection between WCA 3A and WCA 3B delivering pulsed flows

at velocities of at leas t three centimeters per second over a period of days. DPM data and assessment of the effects of pulsed flows on hydrology, transport, vegetation and wildlife will guide planning, design and operational guidance for alternatives for both PIRs 2 and 3 of

th e DECOMP project.

The entire DPM includes planning and evaluation of test alternatives in an E nvironmental

A ssessment , baseline monitoring, installing test features, operation, post

- installation monitoring and removal of all DPM features following the t est period. The E nvironmental

A ssessment for the DPM was completed in April 2010 and installation is scheduled to beginAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 5 October 2010 in mid

- 2011. Data will be gathered over approximately four years. The USACE designed the project to be reversible so that following t he testing; the area will be returned to its pre

test condition.

A.7 EVERGLADES AGRICULTU RAL AREA RESERVOIR

The purpose of this project is to improve the timing of environmental deliveries to the Water Conservation Areas, including reducing damaging flood releases from the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) to the Water Conservation Areas. The features will also support reducing Lake Okeechobee regulatory releases to the estuaries, meeting Everglades Agricultural Area irrigation and Everglades natural syst em water demands, and mitigating flood risk for the Everglades Agricultural Area.

The Tentatively Selected Plan (February 2006), features a reservoir impoundment with a maximum normal pool storage depth of 12.5 feet with approximately 31,000 acres of abov e ground surface area. The reservoir is divided into two parts, Cell A

- 1 and Cell A

- 2, approximately 190,000 and 170,000 acre

- feet in size, respectively. In December 2006

, p rogram managers recommended that the Phase 1 PIR should be modified to focus on

im plementation of Cell A

- 1 (the 190,000 acre

- feet storage project and associated features). Work on the CERP project implementation report was suspended

.

State Expedited Efforts

T he A

- 1 reservoir has been planned to be part of the larger CERP EAA Storage Reservoirs project and is an above

- ground reservoir for water storage, with a capacity of 190,000 acre

feet at a maximum depth of 12.5 feet. The reservoir will be constructed on 16,700 acres of

land north of STA 3/4. The SFWMD awarded the EAA Reservoir c onstruction contract in June 2006, with a five

- year construction schedule. However, construction was suspended by the SFWMD Governing Board on June 1, 2008 ( due to litigation) and the construction contract was terminated on November 30, 2008. To date, th e seepage canal excavation phases have been completed and approximately 20 percent of the materials to build levee components have been produced.

A.8 LAKE OKEECHOBEE WATE RSHED

The Lake Okeechobee Watershed (LOW) is one of CERP ’s largest projects and affects approximately 1,800 square miles. It consists of four major planning areas, based on the four major tributary systems that naturally drain the lower portion of the watershed into Lake Okeechobee. The purpose of LOW is to increase aquatic and wildlife hab itat, regulate extreme highs and lows in lake staging (water levels), reduce phosphorus and other nutrient loading to Lake Okeechobee and reduce damaging releases to the surrounding estuaries. In addition, the LOW project will focus on rehydrating wetland s in and around the areas north of the lake and improve the ecological health of Lake Istokpoga. Storage and water quality improvement targets have been validated, incremental implementation and cost analysis have been ongoing and the plan formulation sec tion was revised. The LOW project tentatively selected plan ( TSP ) consists of six water storage and treatment features on a 52 square mileAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 6 October 2010 footprint along with a recommended Lake Istokpoga Regulation Schedule. The six features

are:

1. 32,000 acre

- feet reservoir in the Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough basin

2. 3,975 acre STA in the Taylor Creek/Nubbin Slough Basin projected to provide 15.8 metric tons of average annual phosphorus load reduction

3. 161,263 acre

- feet reservoir in the Kissimmee River Basin (C

- 41A and C

- 38)

4. 79,560 acre

- feet reservoir in the Lake Istokpoga Basin

5. 8,044

- acre STA in the Lake Istokpoga Basin expected to provide approximately 29.1 metric tons of average annual phosphorus load reduction

6. 3,730

- acre wetland restoration in Paradise Run

- oxbows of the Kissimmee River, and Lake Okeechobee littoral zone (wetlands)

The project has been delayed, since 2005, due to unresolved policy issues. The draft PIR will be completed and circulated for review following the resolution of the policy issues.

Team s are currently conducting cultural resources inventories, and will, in the near future, complete model verification.

State Expedited Efforts

As discussed in s ection 2.1.2 , the state is constructing the Lakeside Ranch Stormwater

Treatment Area. Construction for the STA North and the S

- 650 Pump Station (Phase 1) has begun. Design for Phase II (STA South and S

- 191A Pump Station) is currently underway.

A.9 NORTH PALM BEACH COU NTY

– PART 1

The North Palm Beach County

- Part I project area is approximately 480,000 acres and is located in northeastern portions of Palm Beach County and Southern Martin County. The proje ct, as identified in CERP (1999), is made up of six main components:

1. Pal

- Mar and J.W. Corbett Wildlife Management Area Hydropattern Restoration

2. L

- 8 Basin Modifications

3. C

- 51 and L

- 8 Reservoir

4. Lake Worth Lagoon Restoration

5. C

- 17 Pumping and Treatment

6. C

- 51 Pumping and Treatment

The purpose of the North Palm Beach County project is to improve the overall quantity, quality, timing and distribution of freshwaters, increase the spatial extent of natural areas and restore hydrologic and ecological connectiv ity, all in an effort to improve the ecosystem function across the entire area. The SFWMD has the technical lead on the project. The

F easibility S coping M eeting was completed in 2004.

As a result of that analysis, two of the original six elements iden tified in CERP , both the

C

- 51 and C

- 17 Pumping and Treatment, were removed from the overall project scope. Since

the F easibility S coping M eeting , the SFWMD has been modeling project components toAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 7 October 2010 develop an array of alternatives. Selection of the TSP is anticipated in F iscal Y ear (FY) 2010 and an Alternatives Formulation Briefing is scheduled for the end of 2010.

In partnership with the City of West Palm Beach, Indian Trail Improvement District, and Palm Beach County, the SFWMD completed the L

- 8 Reservo ir Testing project at the Palm Beach Aggregates site in March 2005. This test project provided the technical basis to confirm that the rock mining pits at the P alm B each A g g regates site could be effectively used for water storage. Based on the data collected during this project, the SFWMD, in partnership with the FDEP, moved forward with acquiring this storage facility in 2002

- 2003. Additionally, in 2008, the SFWMD conducted a tes t of the Flowway 1 concept to move regional water to the Loxahatchee River. The test was initiated in April 2008, but had to be suspended due to drought conditions and was re

- started in July 2008. Even though L

- 8

Reservoir water was unavailable at the ti me of the test, the test confirmed that if water is available from the regional sources of WCA

- 1 or the L

- 8 Reservoir, the G

- 161 and downstream structures can be successfully operated to deliver the required flows to the

Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee R iver.

By utilizing a phased approach to the construction, approximately 18,000 acre

- feet of discharge capacity has been made available for interim water management benefits in the

L

- 8 Basin area and this capacity will increase every year until full compl etion.

State Expedited Efforts

As discussed in s ection 2.1.2 , the L

- 8 Reservoir will improve water levels in the Loxahatchee Slough and increase f

reshwater deliveries to the Northwest Fork of the Loxahatchee River during dry periods by providing 47,000 acre

- feet of water storage

. Although c omponents that are complete include installation of the G

- 160 and G

- 161 structures , d esign and construction

of additional pumping capacity will be necessary to fully utilize the storage . The d esign and construction plan for L

- 8 additional storage capacity is complete

.

A.10 SOUTHWEST FLORIDA FE ASIBILITY STUDY

The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study was authorized to provide a framework to address the health of aquatic ecosystems; water flows; water quality; water supply; flood protection; fish and wildlife; biological diversity; and natural habitat. The study area encompasses 4,300 square miles including eleven municipalities. The study boundary also corresponds to the SFWMD Lower West Coast Water Supply Plan area.

The Southwest Florida Feasibility Study is being re

- named and packaged as the Southwest

Flo rida Comprehensive Watershed Plan (SWFCWP). This plan will address loss of habitat, fragmentation of natural areas, alteration of natural freshwater flows to wetlands and estuaries (altered surface water hydrology), invasion of exotics, loss of groundwate r recharge and water quality degradation in surface waters. In February of 2008, several SWFCWP iterations were reviewed by the multi

- agency PDT. A cost

- benefit analysis was completed on the components and the TSP determined in November 2008, as part of a feasibility study. A draft Integrated Feasibility Report was completed along with the E nvironmental I mpact
S tatement in July 2009. Agency Technical Review began in August 2009. During theAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 8 October 2010 development of the TSP a policy change occurred resulting in th e need to develop the TSP to the 30% design level. Due to funding constraints the policy requirement for 30% design was

not achievable. As a result the non

- federal sponsor and Jacksonville District worked with headquarters and determined that completion of the report as a watershed plan would accomplish the requirements of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. The PDT is currently repackaging the Integrated Feasibility Report into a watershed plan to be

submitted to Congress in 2013 which will n ot identify a TSP. The SWFCWP will outline potential projects with both federal and local interest that accomplish the goals authorized with the Southwest Florida Feasibility Study. The implementation of the SWFCWP will require identification of non

- fede ral sponsors as projects are designed and authorized for

construction.

Note: All items checked in the following table on current CERP Project status ( Table A

- 1 ) are complete unless otherwise stated. An asterisk (*) indicates projects authorized for implementation under a Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) and may be subject to PIR approval by c ongressional committees.Appendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 9 October 2010

TABLE A

- 1 : COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTO R ATION PLAN PROJECT S TATUSAppendix A CERP Project Information

CERP 2010 Report to Congress A

- 1 0 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 1 October 2010



### APPENDIX B

- CERP PROGRAM COORDIN ATION

Successful implementation of CERP requires that consistent guidance be provided across the many plan elements and planning teams. This guidance includes strategic direction for the sequence of project implementation, resource allocation, and goals against which progress of the restoratio n is measured, and the feedback processes to identify and address any shortfalls in progress. The process to provide this guidance is referred to herein as program coordination. This includes efforts related to the Programmatic Regulations, the Integrate d Delivery Schedule, and several program level activities which span multiple projects and system

- wide issues

. For each of these areas, work completed during the last five years and work anticipated over the next five years is described in the sections be low.

Over the next five years, integration will continue to be a mainstay with numerous federal and state agencies including the SFERTF. Ongoing coordination and participation with other initiatives, such as the finalization of the White House Council on Envir onmental Quality recently proposed National Objectives, Principles and Standards for Water and Related Resource Implementation Studies (December 3, 2009) will undoubtedly interface with the large CERP program. Public and stakeholder engagement have been a nd will be instrumental in the future success of the CERP program.

B.1 PROGRAMMATIC REGULAT IONS

The Programmatic Regulations published in 2003 included clarification of the requirements from WRDA 2000 as well as additional requirements related to the impleme ntation of

CERP . As noted in the 2005 Report to Congress

, the SFWMD and the USACE had developed six draft Program

- Wide Guidance Memoranda, a draft Pre

- CERP Baseline, a

draft I nitial C ERP U pdate (ICU) , and a MISP in consultation with their federal, state a nd tribal partners and the SFERTF.

The Six Program Wide Guidance Memoranda continue to be revised and updated to reflect new information as it has become available. They are used as interim guidance for the various PDTs to ensure consistency among the various reports and projects. Also, the various aspects and requirements of PIR development and coordination as enumerated in the Programmatic Regulations are carried out for each project and report.

As provided for in WRDA 2000 and in §385.6 of th e Programmatic Regulations, the Secretary of the Army ―...shall review, and if necessary, review the regulations of this part at least every five years...‖ or, ―...whenever the Secretary believes that such review and revision is necessary to attain the goals and purposes of the Plan.‖ The revision process

must follow the federal rule

- making process; and the revised regulations will require concurrence by the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor of Florida before promulgation by the Secretary of the Army.

In accordance with these requirements, the USACE, in partnership with the state and the DOI, formed an interagency review team in 2009 to conduct the review and update the regulations. This includes an open, public process to ensure all stakeholders ha ve anAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 2 October 2010 opportunity to provide comment and input to any needed revisions to the regulations. It is anticipated that any revisions proposed to the regulations will be published in late 2010 for public review and comment. Following that review, the final rev ision to the regulations will be developed in coordination with other agencies and interests as required.

B.2 EVOLUTION OF THE INT EGRATED DELIVERY SCH EDULE

The IDS is a living document and will be updated as necessary to reflect major changes in

program aut hority, funding, or other pertinent decisions. The latest IDS can be found in Chapter 2, Table 2

- 1

. It was updated after consultation with the SFERTF , the Miccosukee Tribe, the Seminole Tribe, other state and local agencies, and stakeholders at large. U pdates to the IDS are expected in the near future to reflect the full impact of the increased federal funding for restoration as provided through the 2 010/2011 budget including the ARRA. The IDS will also highlight ongoing actions by the State of Florida and the SFWMD to advance implementation of portions of the Plan and continue the accelerated land acquisition

program.

Should the state’s negotiations to acquire property from U.S. Sugar Corporation in the EAA come to fruition, the impact of that acquisition and potential changes to CERP will also be assessed and addressed as appropriate.

B.3 RECOGNIZING CULTURAL RESOURCES

T o deal with the complex issues pertaining to impacts on cultural resources from CERP projects, the USACE, Jacksonville District took the lead with its partners in Everglades restoration through the creation of a Cultural Resource Coordination Team. This t eam is comprised of various stakeholders that include the SFWMD, the State Historic Preservation Officer, the State Archaeologist, the NPS and Tribal representation. Over the past five years the team has met to coordinate activities for 40 projects. The goals of this team approach are to ensure project completion, reduce duplication of efforts, and facilitate an expedited decision making process to the identification of cultural resources within CERP project areas. The group approach ensures that the mul titude of local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to cultural resources are met at various stages of project planning and implementation.

In addition, the team approach ensures that proper relationships are maintained with federally recognized t ribes as part of the State of Florida’s and federal trust responsibility. One of the major components for meeting this responsibility is coordination of projects under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. As part of an ongoing dialog

wi th the Miccosukee Tribe and the Seminole Tribe, consultation with appropriate tribal representatives occurs for upcoming and ongoing projects. Over the past five years, this working group has conducted nineteen Cultural Resource Surveys within the south F lorida CERP project area. The group approach has also allowed the team to work towards consistency on survey methods and policy.

The Cultural Resource Coordination Team will continue to meet to ensure that local, state, and federal regulations pertaining to cultural resources are met at the various stages ofAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 3 October 2010 project planning and implementation. In addition, relationship building an d communications will be maintained with federally recognized tribes as part of the State of Florida’s and federal trust responsibility by regularly meeting with appropriate tribal representatives to discuss upcoming and ongoing projects.

B.4 MASTER RECREATIO N PLAN

A significant part of recreation in south Florida is water based. As CERP projects are implemented, the impact to recreation opportunities will be addressed along with the additional recreation opportunities that may be made available by CERP . A Master Recreation Plan has been under development that will identify, by region, restoration compatible recreation suited for inclusion in CERP projects. This plan will ensure the public has the opportunity to directly enjoy the benefits from the Everglad es restoration. The interagency team working on the plan has identified existing recreation opportunities as well as potential recreation opportunities on a regional basis. The Master Recreation Plan is a guidance document to be utilized by the PDTs for the incorporation of recreation planning, consistent with the goals and objectives of CERP during their site

- specific design work.

The Master Recreation Plan is expected at the beginning of FY 2011. Therefore, over the next five years, it is expected that there will be continued support to the PDTs during their planning phase to ensure that recreation planning is included and consistent with the goals and objectives of CERP

.

B.5 INTERAGENCY MODELING CENTER

A collaborative state and federal interagency effort, the Interagency Modeling Center (IMC), was established in 2003 to provide a centralized pool of resources and expertise to promote greater efficiency and consistency in the hydrologic and ecologic modeling that supports CERP planning. It provides, coordinates, and oversees the modeling needs and

efforts for CERP both at the Program Coordination level and at the regional level. Modeling needs for individual project analyses are addressed by PDTs and consultants, but are coordinated through the IMC to ensure consistency with the regional model, for model selection, and appropriate application of project

- level models.

System

- wide computer models are important tools used to simulate south Florida hydrology and water management, and to evaluate the sy stem

- wide performance of the plan. The primary regional model covering most of the CERP domain is the South Florida Water Management Model (SFWMM). Sub

- regional models are used when finer detail for a portion of the CERP domain is needed, or when the pro ject is outside the domain of the SFWMM. Often, sub

- regional models are used in conjunction with the SFWMM. The Regional Simulation Model encompasses a family of next generation sub

- regional models that are beginning to be applied to certain basins to pr ovide more accurate representations of performance under CERP . Implementation of the Natural System Regional Simulation Model is intended to provide a superior representation of the pre

- drainage system and replace the current Natural System Model which is based on the SFWMM.Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 4 October 2010 The SFWMM is being updated to extend the period of record, update land use, topography, and enhance the model code. It was ported from Unix to Linux to facilitate simulations on computer clusters which has dramatically reduced comput er run

- times for SFWMM

simulations.

Since its inception, the IMC has performed thousands of regional model simulations to support CERP projects and RECOVER evaluations; and has responded to hundreds of requests from CERP projects for review of modeling st rategies, scopes of work and reports of project

- level model applications. In addition, IMC modelers provide liaison services to

PDTs and RECOVER to facilitate their interaction with the IMC.

The next five years are expected to be a period of continued de mand for regional and sub

regional model applications for planning and evaluation of CERP projects. Sub

- regional implementations of the RSM will be completed and deployed in the IMC for application to provide more accurate representations of the performan ce of CERP projects. Project

- level modeling will continue to be coordinated by the IMC to ensure consistency with regional models and for appropriate model applications. Ecological models which have been under development outside of the IMC will be imple mented in the IMC to facilitate the evaluation of ecological response to CERP projects.

B.6 PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ASSISTANCE

Public outreach is a vital part of CERP . Involvement and information are primary components and continue to play a key role in CERP im plementation. The primary objectives of outreach are to: (1) keep the public informed of the status of the program or project and key issues associated with restoration implementation, and (2) provide effective mechanisms for meaningful public participat ion during the restoration process.

The USACE, the SFWMD and FDEP have a multi

- faceted CERP public outreach program. Outreach strategies seek two

- way communication with all public sectors to broaden understanding and to instill a sense of stewardship am ong all Floridians and visitors. The partner agencies conduct outreach for system

- wide issues at the program level as well as customized outreach for each CERP project. While program and project outreach activities are considered separate, there is often overlap of materials, tools and techniques. Creative methods engage diverse groups: from school children to retirees; from those who need very basic information to those who require highly technical and scientific information; those who are socially or economically disadvantaged; and those who need their information in other languages, such as Spanish or Creole.

The agencies developed and executed a broad array of outreach involvement activities and information programs to include the general public, m inority groups, small businesses, and specific stakeholder audiences. The program has included public meetings and workshops; news media relations; creative information products; environmental education; print, electronic, interactive and Internet materia ls; and many other programs and products to ensure the public is engaged and involved in CERP . The main focus of the outreach efforts

is the 16

- county central and south Florida region, the area most affected by CERP . Yet,Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 5 October 2010 outreach activities and products also reach many people throughout the State of Florida,

nation and world.

Highlights of this very diverse CERP outreach program include:

 Launched the successful environmental education curriculum

– The Journey of Wayne Drop to the Everglades in 2005. Since then, have distributed 200,000 English

- language storybooks; 10,000 each Spanish and Creole storybooks; 10,000 DVDs and 5,000 teacher’s guides. All materials are available online. The USACE parti cipated in national and state teaching conferences to raise awareness of the products, as well as through other means. An update to the book is planned in 2010. Program materials also include bulletin board characters and other related products.

 Develope d and began distribution of Florida Panther Study materials, including curriculum for elementary and middle school students, a magazine and panther learning products. This program is expected to be fully launched in 2010.

 Executed Name That CERP Sound cam paign to raise awareness about wildlife of the Everglades. Included an interactive game, Web products, buttons, a screensaver and a tray liner.

 Distributed more than 500,000 promotional products since 2005, which includes Earth squeeze balls, backpacks, wristbands, eco

- friendly bags, fans, tattoos, beverage holders, hologram rulers, and many more. Products appeal to all ages and carry the CERP logo, web site and other information.

 Distributed 700,000 copies of the Community Outreach in Action newsletter since 2005, largely to African American readers. Approximately two new issues are distributed per year.

 Distributed 200,000 copies of the Spanish

- language Community Outreach in Action to predominantly Hispanic communities since 2005. The newsletter is d istributed approximately once a year in Spanish. Both English and Spanish language versions are also placed online.

 Produced an electronic newsletter about Everglades restoration, which is distributed six times a year. The name changed from CERP Report to Everglades Report in 2008, and the tone shifted from outreach to more hard news. This is sent to an e

mail list, placed online, and 200 of each issue are printed for community events. (A

total of 30 new issues have been created and distributed since 2 005.)

 Participated with CERP displays and materials at more than 80 community

sponsored events, and in more than 60 classrooms.

 Developed a public information campaign to further diversify involvement in Everglades restoration. The Livin’ with the Waters program is about a fictitious

African

- American family living in south Florida. Components include comics,

bookmark

- calendars, activity books, and upcoming play in 2010. New installments are released each February, in connection with Black History Month.

 Produced CERP screensavers for Kwanzaa each year since 2005, which apply the principles of Kwanzaa to Everglades restoration.

 Organize and host an event each May to diversify involvement and engage the Haitian communities in the Everglades restoration eff ort. In 2009, the USACEAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 6 October 2010 provided art lessons to students in an inner

- city after

- school program, with the original artworks later put on display in May.

 Translated presentations and other materials to Spanish and Creole, as needed.

 Organized and held CERP Earth Day events since 2005. Often these events involved collecting and displaying original artwork from local elementary schools. Since 2005, thousands of individual works of art have been created (on 4

- by 4

- inch paper tiles provided to the schools) an d displayed in the community in April.

 Maintained a network of touch

- screen kiosks in public places throughout the 16

- county CERP area. Thousands of people use the interactive kiosks each year to learn about the Everglades. The complete presentation is available in English and Spanish; the introduction is also available in Creole in some kiosks.

 Held more than 40 public meetings or workshops for CERP and related topics and

several well

- attended groundbreaking ceremonies for various south Florida project s.

 Distributed more than 60 news releases and Email notifications about CERP and related topics.

 Created and distributed two popular CERP mobiles about animals of the Everglades and the Florida panther.

 Maintained a recorded and updated toll

- free phone li ne: 1

- 877

- CERP

- USA. The line is available in English or Spanish and callers can leave a name to receive free print information in the mail.

 Participated in the Service Disabled Veterans Small Business Outreach Program by presenting topics on the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration program and ARRA funding.

 Completely revamped the domain and continually update the official CERP Web site with a greater emphasis on multimedia tools to help convey complex information in

easy

- to

- understand terms and the addi tion of more videos and interactive t o ols along with access to the public information product resources named above.

 Developed a mobile information van which has been in use since late 2008. The van operator has traveled thousands of miles to dozens of e vents with materials and a video presentation. It is in use many weeks per year focusing on CERP , Lake Okeechobee, and the Herbert Hoover Dike rehabilitation.

 Launched a billboard campaign in late 2009 about non

- native plants and animals.

Billboards sta rted appearing around the State of Florida in 2010 as part of a public service campaign and tie into the existing ―Don’t let it Loose‖ campaign.

 Continued to update segments for the Everglades Radio Network at http://www.dep.state.fl.us/ern/ which broadcasts along ―Alligator Alley.‖

 Developed a comprehensive historic exhibit on permanent display in the lobby at West Palm Beach headquarters of the SFMWD. Encompassing 15 panels, the exhibit tells the story of th e Everglades ecosystem

– with a focus on water

management

-- in pictures and text in a timeline dating from prehistoric times through December 2008. An additional nine

- paneled exhibit highlights the

Kissimmee

- Okeechobee

- Everglades ecosystem with a snapshot in time of yesteryear, a synopsis of the impacts to the system and how this vast and unique ecosystem is being restored today.

As required by Section 601 (k) of WRDA 2000, programs at the federal and state levels ensure that small and minority

- owned businesses are aware of opportunities with theAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 7 October 2010 USACE and the SFWMD and are provided opportunities to participate in CERP contracting opportunities under section 15 (g) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644 (g)). The USACE and SFWMD developed a Public Outreach Program Management Plan for CERP between 2000 and 2003 with public input to describe long

- range outreach goals throughout

the life of CERP

.

The WRDA 2007 amended section 601 (k) of WRDA 2000, to support those requirements with an allowance for the Secretary of the Army to expend up to $3,000,000 per fiscal year (beginning after September 30, 2004) for public outreach, educati on and business assistance.

In addition to the CERP activities listed above, the SFWMD sponsored the Everglades: An

American Treasure , a Newspapers

- In

- Education (NIE) printed curriculum; delivered to every 7th and 9th grader in Monroe, Miami

- Dade, Browa rd and Palm Beach counties. The educational supplement is also used as the basis for annual teacher training workshops. Support materials at the workshops include curriculum for middle and high school teachers, along with Everglades restoration updates a nd other science

- based information.

In 2009, a popular field studies component was added to the workshops and conducted onsite at the Loxahatchee Impoundment Landscape Assessment (LILA). LILA is a working model of the Everglades ecosystem located at the Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee National Wildlife refuge. This 80

- acre living laboratory

– developed in 2000 by the USACE, U.S Fish and Wildlife Service ( USFWS ) and the SFWMD

– supports CERP by defining the hydrology (water depth and flow) that sustains a healthy Everglades. This field opportunity, along with the ―Everglades: An American Treasure‖ curriculum, creates an Everglades education package to meet a significant part of the CERP education outreach requirement. It is aligned with the Florida Sunshi ne State Standards and the Florida Comprehensive

Achievement Test based studies.

Between 2004 and 2009, the SFWMD sponsored 27 Everglades education workshops, directly reaching 515 teachers and more than 51,000 students. In 2009, a virtual LILA tour

was developed to bring the Everglades into the classrooms of those who had to forego field trips due to economic restraints.

The SFWMD launched a complete redevelopment of its existing Web site ( www.sfwmd.gov ) in 2009 with a completion date of July 2010. Realizing the internet is now a primary venue for public information, the agency is enhancing the site with a greater emphasis on multimedia with a focus on Everglades ecosystem restoration by renaming and

rep opulating a major section called Protecting and Restoring Ecosystems. Tapping in to social media connections (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube) is another example of how both the SFWMD and USACE are constantly looking for opportunities to increase use and explore alternative communication methods in order to reach varied audiences.

As projects start to break ground, it is expected that there will be even more interest and involvement for CERP outreach and assistance. Planning will continue on the spe cific CERP projects throughout the 16

- county area, with each requiring local outreach efforts, particularly to socially and economically disadvantaged individuals

– or those havingAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 8 October 2010 limited English proficiency. Pilot projects for ASR and seepage management will conclude, requiring the communication of the results to the public. For many, CERP will become more tangible as construction activities increase, bringing associated job and contracting opportunities.

B.7 INFORMATION AND DATA MANAGEMENT

The CERP Infor mation and Data Management (IDM) Programmatic activity is a combination of information services and systems which support the CERP program. These services support the project and program level activities of CERP , as well as other South

Florida Restoration Programs. The functional areas of CERP IDM services include, but are not limited to, infrastructure management, electronic document management, scientific and electronic data management, geographic information systems, quality control/quality

assurance o f data and World Wide Web management.

The south Florida restoration effort operates a common information system, the CERPZone, used to collaborate during the planning, engineering, construction, and post

- construction phases of the program. This system i s accessible, upon request, to all Program/ PDT members from the USACE, Jacksonville District, the SFWMD, and other federal, state, local, and tribal government agencies. This system allows sharing of information by all participating agencies thereby avoi ding duplication, increasing efficiency, and providing reliable short term and long term repositories for CERP data. Over the last two reporting periods over twenty

- five tools have been developed or made available in the CERPZone. The tools range from a document management system, to an internet accessible electronic storage/sharing area, to web

- meeting tools, to tools for identifying and approving tasks for team members and contractors. The system currently has over 1000 users and is comparable to a com puter system for a mid

- size company.

The IDM program is responsible for maintaining all the equipment needed to run this system, including the programming and equipment necessary for the public website EvergladesPlan.org. The IDM program is also respon sible for lifecycle management of all

data and documents associated with CERP

.

A period of even more interest in the storage and retrieval of data for CERP is anticipated. As projects are constructed, monitoring of the performance of the project and its affect on the south Florida system will require comparisons between data taken in previous years and recent data. This will likely lead to even more interest in the quality standards and procedures established for CERP by Quality Assurance Oversight Team ( QAOT ) . As data is compared between pre and post construction, the quality standards and procedures will ensure that the data is comparable. As data is compared other issues may also arise that will need to be addressed. In addition, collaboration will become even more significant as projects move into construction and operations.Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 9 October 2010 B.8 QUALITY ASSURANCE OVERSIGHT TEAM

As implementation of CERP moves forward, the critical need for establishing a Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) program to ensure the accuracy, precision, and reliability of CERP data and monitoring became evident.

The Quality Assurance Oversight Team (QAOT) is an i nterdisciplinary, interagency body; however responsibility for QAOT rests jointly with the USACE and the SFWMD, as the sponsoring agencies. The QAOT is responsible for providing guidance on, and evaluating the implementation of, the CERP Quality Systems w ith the goal of providing guidance such that data collected meet or exceed the data quality objectives of each project. This includes developing and providing guidance on procedures, QA/QC requirements and data validation for CERP monitoring activities. The guidance can be found in the Quality Assurance System Requirements manual, which is available on the public Web site ( www.evergladesplan.org/pm/ ), and through the CERP Guidance Memoranda. In addition,

th e QAOT is the forum to develop consistency regarding data quality and the QA/QC processes among the various entities involved with hydrological, meteorological, water quality, and biological monitoring activities.

In order to assure the quality of the data collected, the QAOT reviews monitoring plans and scopes of work, performs laboratory audits and performance evaluations, and participates in field observations. Between six and ten laboratory audits were done each year starting in

2006 as well as at least one performance valuation. Several field observations in biological, ecological and hydrological areas were accomplished over the last three years.

B.9 ENVIRONMENTAL AND EC ONOMIC EQUITY

The USACE ( and other federal agencies ) is required to ―...make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low

- i ncome populations...‖ and to develop an agency wide environmental justice strategy ( 59 F.R. 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) . Additionally, programs, policies, and activities that substantially affect human health or the environment, operate ―in

a manner that ensures t hat such programs, policies, and activities do not have the effect of excluding persons (including populations) from participation in, denying persons the benefits of, or subjecting persons to discrimination under, such programs, policies, and activities, because of their race, color, or national origin.

The Environmental and Economic Equity (EEE) Program’s purpose is to ensure that the CERP civil works projects are implemented in ways that do not result in disproportionate impacts on any community(s); an d to assure that all Americans, including the unique cultural and ethnic diversity of south Florida’s populations, live in safe, healthful and aesthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings. The CERP EEE Program Management Plan deals with the social, cultural, behavioral, historical and/or economic subjects involved with CERP. The plan's purpose is to maximize the potential benefits

, both system

- wide and project

- specific, resulting from CERP activities and to minimize any adverse social orAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 10 October 2010 economic im pacts that may arise. The USACE and SFWMD co

- chair the CERP EEE Program.

The USACE and the SFWMD attempted to identify acquisition policies, procedures and regulations which can be utilized by both agencies to procure services and award

construction cont racts. However, no simple unified procedures were found and consequently, each agency is using their own procedures. While the initial intent was to award a significant share of CERP construction projects to local small businesses, the magnitude of certa in construction projects did not always make this possible. However, subcontracting and employing local small business community members was accomplished to the highest extent possible.

The EEE program strategy therefore focuses on evaluating individual and cumulative

system

- wide changes in socio

- economic, socio

- ecological and human health effects to ensure that a healthy and safe environment exists, and that associated benefits are realized and maintained for all projects located in the south Florida Eve rglades

-- including any impacts to minority populations or low

- income populations. To that end, the partners will operate in accordance with the following principles:

 Promote partnerships with all stakeholders

 Identify and address the impacts of CERP ac tivities on the people of south Florida including minority and low

- income populations, and the Miccosukee Tribe and the

Seminole Tribe

 Create an Advisory Board dedicated to ensuring that the EEE mandate is fulfilled within the USACE, Jacksonville District, and overseeing the implementation of, and compliance with socio

- economic and environmental justice and E xecutive

O rder 12898

 Coordinate with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ’s E nvironmental J ustice office, sponsors, stakeholders, other federal, state, and local offices

 Foster environmental and economic equity in future CERP and non

- CERP projects, as appropriate

 Create and maintain an internal administrative process for EEE program activities

The EE E P roject M anagement P lan is undergoing revision that will result in more effective and more meaningful community engagement and participation and should be finalized later in 2010. Efforts in education and training, community engagement, partnering with community

- based organizations, and providing assistance to small businesses will be refined and expanded to include gathering of updated census data and advanced training courses. In addition, contracting to small local businesses will be expanded for the longer term maintenance of constructed CERP projects. The EEE program may eventually cover

both CERP and non

- CERP projects.

B.10 PROGRAM COORDINATION FINANCIAL COSTS

As discussed in s ection 2.4.3 , Program Coordination includes several program level activities as well as costs for the preparation of the Master Program Management Plan, theAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 11 October 2010 Master Agreement, the Agreement signed by the P resident and Governor, development of Interim Goals, report on Miami Dade ASR, reports to Congress occurring, at a minimum, every five years, annual reports to the public, and coordination with Army Audit and others

on work

- in

- kind efforts by the sponsors. Other efforts which are essential to effectively executing the program and ensuring effective coordination among parties include Fish and Wildlife Coordination activities for program level actions, preparation of the special report on Exotic Species, and preparation of special agreements. Also parts of these programmatic costs are the development of the more than 50 C ERP G uidance M emoranda for PDTs, development and update of standard schedule and budget controls and procedures such as standardized projec t templates and milestones. A breakdown of the costs for the program

level activities

– Public Outreach, Environmental and Economic Equity, Information and Data Management, Interagency Modeling Center, Master Recreation Plan and RECOVER

– as well as progr am management is included in Table B

- 1

.

TABLE B

- 1 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN

EXPENDITURES FOR PRO GRAM CO ORDINATION

CERP Program Activity Actual Expenditures Through FY09 (1)
(in 1,000s)

(USACE and SFWMD)

Program Management $ 132,291

Public Outreach $ 17,427

Environmental & Economic Equity $ 1,836

Information and Data Management $ 30,542

Interagency Modeling Center $ 34,535

Master Recreation Plan $ 2,751

RECOVER $ 39,887



### TOTAL $ 259,270

Note:
(1) Expenditures are through FY09 for the USACE; but, do

not include SFWMD Work

- in

- Kind for FY08 or FY09

.Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 12 October 2010 B.11 OUTLOOK FOR ECONOMIC, TOURIS M, RECREATION AND OT HER

BENEFITS

CERP recognizes the interconnectedness of the natural system and development, by also providing for other water related needs of the region, including water supply and flood protection. This interconn ectedness can be used to describe "sustainability" in integrating environmental and development issues. Sustainability development is meeting the needs of the present without endangering the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

Severa l state statutes directly or indirectly address sustainability. For example, Chapter 373,

F lorida S tatutes , provides that minimum flows be established for watercourses to a limit beyond which would be harmful to the water resources or ecology of the area and water may be reserved for the protection of fish and wildlife or the public health and safety. The water reservation process is used to reserve the water created by a CERP project for the natural system. CERP implementation is also aimed at getting t he water right

-- at the right place, at the right time, in the right quantity and of the right quality. Getting it right enables a natural system to support more wading birds, alligator, panthers and other wildlife; restore short hydroperiod wetlands, im prove flows to estuaries and help to control the spread of invasive exotic plants.

CERP is helping to restore and support sustainable natural resource based economies that include hiking, biking, wildlife viewing, camping, hunting, fishing, and canoeing. Additionally, CERP will help to provide a sustainable water supply for new development that maintains and enhances water elevation and capacity by providing water storage capacity in areas where it has been diminished, without reducing flood management.

CERP projects and non

- CERP foundational projects work in tandem supporting restoration efforts by creating various benefits. These benefits include active and passive recreational activities, water storage, a more natural hydrology, restoration of natural areas that can now support fish and wildlife in numbers that can be safely harvested or just enjoyed. Acquisition of conservation land also supports economic sustainability. Protecting natural areas and maintaining fish and wildlife resources supports n atural resources based businesses such as tourism or charter boat fishing, as well as groundwater recharge supporting water supply for other developed regions.

One illustration can be made with a popular national pastime

– bird

- watching. It is generating an estimated $477 million in retail sales in Florida every year. According to a

state report, non

- consumptive bird use (non

- hunting activities) supported more than 19,000 jobs in Florida in 2006, and wildlife viewing activities generated more than $3 bil lion statewide that year.

In Economic Benefits of Land Conservation: A Case for Florida Forever (2009), the Nature Conservancy concluded that ―healthy native habitats and species are an integral component of the foundation of Florida’s tourism industry

– Florida’s single most important economic engine. During 2006, wildlife viewing alone had a total economic impact of $5.2 billion and supported a minimum of 51,000 jobs. Fishing and hunting accounted for a robustAppendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 13 October 2010 industry of more than $8 billion in 2006 and helped support almost 85,300 jobs... and ...

based on FY 2007

- 2008 data, the Florida state park system had an overall direct economic impact of more than $1 billion on local economies throughout the state.

Defenders of Wildlife ― A Preliminary Assessment of the Economic Benefits of Land

Conservation Areas in Florida” (2008) calculated economic impacts of ten areas protected through Florida Forever and other state acquisition programs. Total value of ecosystem services was estimated to be more than $1.8 bi llion per year and stated that ―Greater economic value can be gained from conservation areas that are well managed and restored and by preventing overly intensive uses that diminish the natural and economic values‖ finding that the value of these services will increase in the future as fewer natural areas are available for protection.

A case study by the same group entitled ― Economic Benefits of Conserving Natural Lands”

examined economic values from an 825

- acre area in Collier County near Big Cypress National Preserve and Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge. This study concluded that the economic value of the benefits flowing from these natural lands that accrue to humans in a given year (e.g. carbon sequestration, water supply, recreation, scenic views) ranged from $145 million to $315 million (in 2004 dollars). Highest values came from water provision (via recharge, through infiltration and percolation of rainwa ter that provides most of the public water supply.

Another Defenders of Wildlife study ― Assessing the Wealth of Nature in Indian River County” (2006) found that the annual value of ecosystem services derived from lands purchased by the county amounted to $23.4 million, including $19 million derived from freshwater wetlands, $3 million from coastal strand and $600,000 from forests and scrub. The annual value of services from all county public lands amounted to $768 million. A University of Florida Gaines ville, Food and Resource Economics Department “Public Preferences and Economic Values for Restoration of the Everglades/South Florida Ecosystem ‖ report (1999

– Milan, Hodges et al) found that the average household was also willing to pay $59 to $79 per yea r for the restoration of the Florida Everglades.Appendix B CERP Program Coordination

CERP 2010 Report to Congress B

- 14 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 1 October 2010



### APPENDIX C

- SCIENTIFIC INITIATIV ES

C.1 INCORPORATION OF ADA PTIVE MANAGEMENT

Adaptive Management (AM) is a structured management approach that links science to

decision

- making in order to improve the probability of restoration s uccess. AM is rooted in science and helps achieve goals and objectives by providing an efficient process to address the risk and uncertainty inherent within ecosystem restoration. Specifically, AM can help address questions about how best to achieve rest oration goals or about the effects of proposed actions. AM encourages flexibility to be incorporated into plans and designs to account for uncertainty by providing options to adjust given actual future conditions. The AM process also encourages stakehold er engagement and interagency collaboration, which can lead to a better understanding of the issues that need to be addressed to implement individual projects or the overall CERP. By using AM to address uncertainty, information learned is used to adjust a program or project to better meet restoration goals, thus improving performance.

An AM program has been developed for CERP , and many of the critical components of AM are in place, including a scientifically rigorous monitoring and assessment program to analyze and understand responses of the system for implementation of CERP

. More information on the Adaptive Management program is discussed in s ection C.2.2

.

C.2 RESTORATION COORDINA TION AND VERIFICATIO N

Restoration Coordination and VERification (RECOVER) is the scientific arm of CERP

, ensuring that science remains a fundamental and overarching element throughout the ongoing planning and implementation of the Plan. RECOVER is a partnership among federal, state and local agencies, and tribal governments, designed to organize and provide the highest quality scientific and technical support to guide design and implementation of the Plan. RECOVER conducts evaluations and assessments and applies that informati on in ways that are most effective in supporting CERP objectives and to ensure that CERP system

- wide goals and purposes are achieved. RECOVER communicates and coordinates the results of its evaluations and assessments, and provides opportunities for stake holders to review its work products. Through its role in the AM program, RECOVER contributes to the ongoing process of assessment and refinement of the Plan. During this reporting period, RECOVER played a major role in developing and implementing system

- wide tools and guidance, and also provided scientific expertise to project implementation.

C.2.1 Planning and Evaluation

In addition to its monitoring and assessment roles, RECOVER is also responsible for system

wide planning and evaluation. RECOVER evaluates , using numerical modeling and other tools, the performance of project and program plans and designs to ensure that they are fully linked to the system

- wide goals and purposes of CERP . In its planning role, RECOVER identifies and provides analyses regardi ng potential improvements in the design and operation of CERP , consistent with the CERP objectives, and strives for consensus regarding scientific and technical aspects of CERP

.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 2 October 2010 Performance measures are planning tools used to determine the degree to which proposed alternative plans are likely to meet restoration objectives, or implemented plans have met restoration objectives. RECOVER developed a set of performance measures to ev aluate

CERP on a regional/system

- wide basis, based on CERP

- specific conceptual ecological models and the Florida Statutes. RECOVER has also continued to update and refine these performance measures as necessary throughout this reporting period.

RECOVER p rovides consistency across project teams by maintaining and updating the current CERP baseline and future without planning assumptions. RECOVER also coordinates with projects on planning conditions, and in particular coordinated with the DECOMP and EAA pr ojects during this reporting period to better define what constituted conditions for the next added increment. In its regional evaluations RECOVER reviews every project’s final array of alternatives and reports on how well each alternative performs

in the context of the whole system. During this reporting period, RECOVER prepared regional evaluations for 12 CERP projects.

In 2005 RECOVER published an Initial CERP Update (ICU) report, which simulated CERP with updated models and input data, including rece nt climatic information, topography and land use projections. The ICU report also contains performance measures and targets that have been revised based on continued research and improved understanding of species and ecosystem requirements. As expected, the hydrologic modeling results of the ICU modeling identified some of the same performance shortfalls and strengths in the Restudy. There were some areas where performance improved over the Restudy, but also some other areas that got

worse. At the end o f the technical update of the CERP model, it was recommended in the ICU Report that a system

- wide approach to address performance shortfalls be implemented and restoration targets for the natural system be reexamined based on independent lines of

evidence (i.e. separate from model

- based targets).

C.2.2 Adaptive Management Program

The CERP AM Program is a structured management approach that links science to decision

making in order to improve the probability of restoration success. Substantial progress has

be en made over the past five years in both creating an AM framework and integrating the principles and activities of AM into CERP at both the program and project levels. A CERP AM Strategy was developed in 2006 to outline a framework for linking monitoring and assessment activities to management decisions and to plan updates and revisions at both program and project levels. In 200 7, Guidance Memorandum #6 identified assessment activities to support AM implementation. In 2010, a draft CERP AM Integration Guide was developed as a more detailed companion document to the CERP AM Strategy and is designed to assist managers/decision

- mak ers, scientists, and CERP PDTs understand and integrate AM into CERP planning, design, construction, operations, and maintenance. This guidance will assist project teams in developing AM plans (i.e., contingency plans), as required by 2009 USACE guidance interpreting Section 2039 of WRDA 2007.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 3 October 2010 Project

- level AM plans have been developed for several projects to outline how AM will be integrated. Those projects include: DECOMP

- PIR 1, DECOMP

- Physical Model, C

- 111 Spreader Canal, Biscayne Bay Coastal W etlands, and Melaleuca Eradication and Other

Exotics.

C.2.3 Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring

The AA&M Program, which is managed by RECOVER, is designed to provide system

- wide and regional monitoring and assessment that ensures CERP goals and objectives will be met throughout implementation of the Plan. The CERP Monitoring and Assessment Plan (MAP, Part 1: Monitoring and Support Research) was developed in 2004 and includes 36 current monitoring components throughout the Everglades and south Florida ecosyste m, using scientific expertise from 25 entities

-- including federal, state, and local agencies, universities, non

- governmental organizations, private contractors and others). The MAP was updated in 2009 to reflect changes in the monitoring plan which had occurred during the intervening five years. As such, the MAP 2009 represents a focused representation of current ongoing monitoring funded under the AA& M Program. Along with key monitoring, the MAP includes ongoing research focused on key hypotheses tie d to ecosystem condition.

The AA&M Program tightly links monitoring, assessment, and decision

- making and ensures that scientific information collected from the monitoring program is useful to managers and

decision

- makers. The last five years (2005

- 2009) focused primarily on implementing the MAP and culminated with the development of the 2009 System Status Report (SSR). The SSR plays an important role within CERP by describing the scientific findings of the MAP and using this information to assess the pro gress towards meeting restoration targets and interim and long

- term goals.

With several CERP projects breaking ground in 2009 and 2010, the AA&M Program is poised to report ecosystem responses (both expected and unexpected) resulting from the first phas e of CERP implementation. The science from the AA&M Program will be used to guide future planning, implementation, and operation of CERP . The accomplishments of the last five years (2005

- 2009) can be parsed out into two categories: (1) key products; and (2) key scientific findings. Development of these products and implementation of the MAP have also led to a significant number of lessons learned, which will help guide the AA&M Program in the future. Key scientific findings are discussed in s ection 2.3.1 Key products produced are discussed below.

The peer reviewed C onceptual E cological M odel s, (published in a special issue of the journal

Wetlands Vol. 25 (Issue 4) in 2005, illustrate links among societal actions, environmental stressors, and ecological responses and provide a basis for developing and testing hypotheses about natural system responses.

As mentioned above, the MAP 2009 incorporate s changes from 2004

- 2009 and includes organization around hypothesis clusters instead of single hypotheses, flexibility to address project

- level monitoring and assessment, and recognition of the challenges to sustainability of long

- term monitoring programs . The latest version of the MAPAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 4 October 2010 ( http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/recover/recover_map.aspx ) is available on

- line. The MAP, Part 2 outlines the process and necessary framework for ass essing MAP data and addresses the integration of data at different spatial and temporal scales, the use of statistical methodologies for trend analysis and change detection, and the reporting process required to translate scientific findings into informati on useful to managers in the decision

- making

process.

The SSR is a comprehensive report, currently projected to be published twice every five years by RECOVER, which addresses the overall status of the ecosystem relative to system

level hypotheses, performance measures, and restoration goals. The 2006 SSR represented the initial application of the MAP, Part 2 for analyzing monitoring data collected by the MAP. The 2007 SSR was RECOVER’s first full technical assessment and provides estimates of pre

- CERP conditions for ecosystem indicators monitored by the MAP. The 2007 SSR clearly documented that sustained multi

- year monitoring is a prerequisite for establishing sound estimates of pre

- CERP conditions and trends, once projects are implemented. The 2 009 SSR provides an integrated assessment of MAP and non

- MAP data. The assessment was synoptic, systematic, and spanned multiple spatial scales, and in some cases decades worth of information. The 2009 SSR will be posted on an interactive Web

page access ible from www.evergladesplan.org that allows managers, stakeholders and scientists with varying interests and degrees of technical expertise to easily find the information they need.

As suggested by CISRERP, the AA&M program is implementing a data management approach that encompasses all MAP and relevant non

- MAP data in coordination with IDM. This data management system provides fully functional data preservation, documentation,

and a ccess capabilities and partial functionality exists in the areas of data integration, processing, and modeling, which support the development of the SSR. RECOVER scientists also teamed with the SFERTF’s Science Coordination Group to develop the Stoplight Indicator Report, a suite of system

- wide indicators that provide a broad assessment of the Everglades and south Florida ecosystem. The indicators were peer

- reviewed and published in a special issue of Ecological Indicators . Future efforts will aim to com bine the Stoplight Indicator Report with the SSR, providing a clear picture of both the status (e.g., stoplight analysis) of ecosystem indicators and the stressor

- response functions (e.g., hypothesis cluster analysis) that explain indicator responses to CE RP implementation.

C.3 INTERIM GOALS AND IN TERIM TARGETS

Interim Goals (IGs) provide a means to evaluate the restoration success of the Plan, by tracking restoration performance and progress, providing a basis for reporting that progress at specified interva ls of time, and for periodically evaluating the accuracy of predictions of system responses to the effects of CERP . The IGs can be expressed as either predictions of ecosystem response to CERP implementation, or as desired levels of performance and reflec t incremental accomplishments towards achieving CERP goals.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 5 October 2010 Interim Targets (ITs) are defined as anticipated incremental improvements in water supply (agriculture, municipal/industry) and other socioeconomic indicators also over the course of CERP impleme ntation.

IGs/ITs were established by the Interim Goals Agreement (2007) and the Agreement on Interim Targets (2007). During the initial years of CERP , efforts focused on identification of indicators for IGs/ITs and development of tools to estimate prog ress. RECOVER’s initial set of IGs and ITs was based on hydrologic modeling of the 1999 CERP plan.

In February 2005, the RECOVER interagency team provided its final set of recommendations to the USACE, the U.S. DOI, and the SFWMD in ―The RECOVER

Team's R ecommendations for IGs/ITs for the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan.‖ An agreement between the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Interior, and the Governor of Florida, containing the IGs, was completed in early 2007. The Interim Targets Agreement was signed by the Secretary of the Army and the Governor of Florida, also in

2007.

The current Interim Goals Agreement contains 29 indicators as well as qualitative and quantitative interim goal statements that describe restoration goals for th e hydrology, water quality and ecology of the Everglades ecosystem. The Interim Targets Agreement contains eight indicators describing goals for water volume, water supply, flood protection and surface water storage capacity. The status of these indicato rs is tracked by a number of monitoring programs, most importantly the RECOVER Monitoring and Assessment Plan. In addition to the RECOVER MAP, individual agency monitoring programs provide information on the status of these interim goals and interim targe ts indicators.

Per the Programmatic Regulations, both IGs and ITs are to be reviewed, and progress reported, every five years: the current timeframe puts this review and reporting in 2012. The 2012 RECOVER Assessment Report is the technical vehicle for reporting on progress on achievement of the IGs. Information on progress toward restoration will be provided at that time to agency managers, the State and Congress, for consideration in the overall planning and implementation of CERP . Further descripti on of the activities needed to complete this assessment is provided in the following sections.

Many of the major components of the initial IGs are captured within the RECOVER SSRs and the SFERTF’s stoplight indicators. However no explicit assessment of p rogress in meeting IG/ITs occurred during the reporting period as of September 30, 2009, because no CERP full projects were as yet constructed. The National Research Council (NRC) continues to maintain interest in the future development of IG/ITs, especia lly with the NRC’s 2008 report highlighting that although the south Florida ecosystem has demonstrated significant resilience, it continues to decline as projects are delayed.

Although there has not been a formal assessment of progress in meeting the IG s/ITs, RECOVER has made great progress in continuing to improve the predictability of expected environmental responses through work on performance measures and models and by using the data from the Monitoring and Assessment Plan (MAP) to refine predictive tools. AlongAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 6 October 2010 with key monitoring, the MAP includes ongoing research focused on key hypotheses tied to ecosystem condition.

In 2009 RECOVER finalized the Band 1 Report, which predicts and evaluates the performance of ten initial CERP projects by simulating projects and associated operations in order to answer the question ―How far towards restoration of the south Florida ecosystem will the Band 1 projects get us?‖ The report revealed several important performance results

to inform future CERP and non

- CERP planning activities related to regional groupings of projects and AM.

 Regional groupings of projects provide measurable predicted restoration benefits using RECOVER system

- wide performance measures

 Using these groupings will help CERP staff ev aluate major CERP project alternatives as part of the CERP project approval process

 AM provides the means to address uncertainties related to system

- wide performance among multiple regional goals and objectives in order to optimize total system

benefits

Although projects to date have been implemented on a project by project basis, these findings are being considered in discussions on the IDS and project justification.

C.4 METHODS FOR ASSESSIN G PERFORMANCE AND PR OVIDING

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

After ten years of ongoing monitoring and research on the south Florida ecosystem, a large body of new scientific information is now available, and several efforts to employ this knowledge to better articulate the goals and objectives of CERP have been initiate d.

The AA&M Program is designed to provide system

- wide and regional monitoring and assessment that ensures CERP goals and objectives will be met throughout implementation of the Plan. The cumulative expenditures for AA&M, including executing the MAP, a re detailed in Table C

- 1

.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 7 October 2010 TABLE C

- 1 : COMPREHENSIVE EVE RGLADES RESTORATION PLAN

ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT AND MONITORING

EXPE NDITURES THROUGH FIS CAL YEAR 2009*

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring Expenditures Through Fiscal Year 2009*

(in 1,000s)

FY Expenditures Cumulative Expenditures USACE SFWMD (1)

2001 $ 742.8 $ 562.5 $1,305.3

2002 $ 853.5 $ 1,139.0 $ 3,297.8

2003 $ 812.5 $ 3,429.8 $ 7,540.2

2004 $ 3,455.6 $ 4,673.9 $ 15,669.6

2005 $ 5,280.1 $ 5,240.8 $ 26,190.6

2006 $ 5,477.2 $ 4,543.0 $ 36,210.9

2007 $ 5,290.4 $ 6,033.2 $ 47,534.5

2008 $ 4,250.9 (2) $ 51,785.4

2009 $ 5,53 8

. 2 $ 57,3 23.6

TOTAL $ 31, 701

. 3 $ 2 5 ,622. 2 $ 57, 323.6

Note: (1) SFWMD totals include ―cumulative creditable‖ expenses (2) FY08 and FY09 SFWMD estimates are not as yet available.

* Subject to audit

The SFERTF has developed a series of information briefs that describe the synthesis of new science, current activities on climate change related to restoration, and strategic management and coordination, along with recommendations for controlling invasive exotic species. The DOI’s ENP South Florida Natural Resource Center started a freshwater synthesis project that incorporates agency and stakeholder participation.

And in an effort to better articulate the goals and objectives of CERP , a draft has been developed for a document, entitled Scientific and Technical Knowledge Gained in Everglades Restoration (1999

- 2009), which will summarize the large body of monitoring and research, engineering advances, and modeling tools pertinent to the Ev erglades and south Florida ecosystem that have become available since 1998. This document will help inform a larger effort, known as the 2010 Shared Definition of Everglades Restoration which has been

undertaken to fine

- tune the goals and objectives of CE RP that were somewhat uncertain at the time of authorization, and which were a basis for including AM in the Plan.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 8 October 2010 In addition, continuing studies of the historical water movement patterns and geomorphology of the Everglades indicate that the Everglades w ere much wetter than originally thought, that is more water flowed south over more extended periods of time. Recent scientific synthesis efforts done by the SFERTF determined that additional flows to the Everglades and southern estuarine systems would be needed to achieve desired ecologic benefits (SFERTF ―New Science‖). During a series of science workshops, a group of interagency scientists estimated the need for approximately 1.9 million acre

- feet of average annual flows entering the Everglades Protecti on Area from the north. Based on this current scientific information, the DOI supports the need for approximately 1.9 million acre

- feet of average annual flows as well as the need for additional storage. This information is now being considered in more

de tailed planning for restoring flows to the central Everglades as well as aiding in determining the freshwater needs of Florida and Biscayne Bays.

CERP and RECOVER monitoring have led to modified recommendations for managing WCA 3A for apple snails and Ev erglades snail kite. CERP monitoring has provided science that has guided more wildlife

- friendly reservoir designs. And ecosystem monitoring funded by CERP/RECOVER over the years has led to ecologist inclusion at weekly water management meetings where op erational decisions are being made.

The 2006 RECOVER report on IGs identified needed ecological models. These models serve as predictive tools for additions to the initial set of IGs. Goals need to be updated as improved scientific information and ecol ogical modeling resulting from assessment and monitoring activities becomes available, or CERP Modification Reports deem necessary and reflect Plan implementation scheduling on the IDS.

Information learned from the AA&M Program (described below), as well as information learned about system responses to CERP implementation, will aid in efforts to assess the IG/ITs, provide evaluation of CERP progress, and revise IG/ITs in the future. Total system performance measures should be incorporated and cause

- and

- ef fect patterns described in the Total System Conceptual Ecological Model (Ogden et al. 2005) are being used to develop these performance measures. These metrics would support the assessment of one or more hypotheses included in the MAP. By developing and making these explicit linkages, RECOVER would assure that the assessments being conducted in the SSR would provide the data required for evaluating the IGs. The SSR mechanism will provide the scientific base for

the assessment and evaluation of the IGs.

C.5 N E W SCIENCE

Hydrological and ecological monitoring in the Everglades during the past decade has enabled us to characterize the ecosystem prior to CERP implementation. The AA&M program is designed to detect and understand both positive and negative ecol ogical responses to changes in climate and water management. Positive changes provide evidence that many ecological components in the Everglades still have the capacity for restoration. The 2009 SSR provided the scientific information necessary to valida te hypothesis clusters, and to begin to refine and assess IGs, and develop the flexibility required to evaluate the effectiveness of CERPAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 9 October 2010 restoration and support a robust AM program. The latest SSR and its findings can be found

at: http://www.evergladesplan.org/pm/ssr_2009/ssr_main.aspx

.

C.6 NON

- INDIGENOUS (INVASIVE /EXOTIC) SPECIES

While efforts of the CERP and RECOVER programs have made it clear that restoration

i nvolves numerous factors (e.g., water quantity, water quality, abundance of flora and fauna), the potential impact of invasive species has emerged as a high priority for CERP planning. Invasion of south Florida’s natural habitats by non

- indigenous plant a nd animal species has significantly changed the ecosystem, particularly by displacing native species. Successful restoration of a healthy south Florida ecosystem will depend not only on modifications to the C&SF system, but also on control of invasive, no n

- indigenous plant and animal species.

Many different techniques are used to control invasive plants and animals in south Florida (Langeland and Stocker, 1997; Wittenberg and Cock, 2001). Agencies typically use tools in an integrated fashion with the goa l of minimizing impacts of invasive species by the most

cost

- effective and environmentally sound means. A detailed account of invasive species management tools and strategies is presented in Chapter 9 of the 2006 South Florida Environmental Report

– Volum e I . An update and annotations for those species considered serious threats to Everglades restoration, with species impacts and a status report for high

priority species, are presented in Chapter 9 of the 2010 South Florida Environmental Report

– Volume I

. There are two dozen priority species identified for the south Florida ecosystem.

Numerous groups and agencies are involved with non

- indigenous species management in

Florida. In 2006, the SFWMD, USACE and the NPS co

- hosted the Everglades Invasive Speci es Summit, where attendees recognized the need for a more defined commitment to cooperation among agencies and organizations. The Everglades Cooperative Invasive Species Management Area (CISMA) partnership was formalized in 2008 with a

Memorandum of Under standing among the SFWMD, USACE, NPS, USFWS and the Florida

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission recognizing the need for cooperation in the fight against invasive species. Currently, Everglades CISMA consists of 19 cooperators and partners, spanning the full spectrum of jurisdictions, including tribal, federal, state, local, and

non

- governmental conservation organizations. By sharing information, technology, and resources, Everglades CISMA seeks to elevate the successes of individual invasive specie s programs while simultaneously implementing regionally based control strategies. Early detection and rapid response of emerging threats is a central focus for Everglades CISMA.

Everglades CISMA has conducted region

- wide aerial mapping of invasive plan ts, created a

web

- based invasive species reporting system (available on www.evergladescisma.org ),

drafted an E arly D etection and R apid R esponse Implementation Plan, and conducted rapid response efforts aimed at the controlling the sacred ibis ( Threskiornis aethiopicus ), Nile monitor; and most recently, kripa ( Lumnitzera racemosa ), an Asian tree found in mangroves and adjacent upland fringe.

Coordination between multiple state and federal agencies has been a cr itical requirement as different species and projects are involved. Management of different species is oftenAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 10 October 2010 conducted by differently

- empowered agencies. For instance, the USACE manages floating weeds wherever they occur in Lake Okeechobee, since the mobi le nature of these plants threatens navigation in the Okeechobee Waterway. The USACE mandates do not empower that agency to manage other invasive plants found elsewhere in Lake Okeechobee. The SFWMD manages these plants with internal and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission funding.

Special considerations arise, particularly with regard to endangered species. For example, during the past decade, Everglade snail kite ( Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeous ) populations have fallen precipitously in Florida. Interagency coordination of aquatic plant control has included development of guidelines to avoid adverse impacts upon the bird’s populations. Also, plant managers in Lake Okeechobee remain aware that control operations must avoid disturbing the endangered Okeechobee gourd ( Cucurbita okeechobeensis okeechobeensis ). From a regulatory perspective, invasive plant control efforts within SFWMD facilities, such as the STAs, need to proceed within the constraints and requirements of the FDEP permits

fo r their operation and mandates under the Everglades Forever Act.

To complement existing south Florida invasive plant control programs, the development and spread of biological control agents, usually insects, will be increased under the CERP

Melaleuca Era dication and Other Exotics

– Implement Biological Controls project. (See

s ection 2.1.5 for information about this project)

In December 2009, the USACE, Jacksonville District and federal and state partners unveiled a new public service campaign highlighting the statewide proble m of invasive species at the U.S. Department of Agriculture ( USDA ) Invasive Plant Research Laboratory in Fort Lauderdale. The campaign promoted public awareness and education and was called the ―Don’t let it Loose‖ campaign. It was developed with support from the DOI U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service bureaus. This campaign features the Nile monitor, the Burmese python and the sailfin catfish. A new Web site, www.dontletitloose.org , an d the CERP toll

- free number (1

- 877

- CERP

- USA) provide additional information. This campaign and other education tools are also available at http://www.nps.gov/ever/naturescience/florida invaders.htm . Billboard space was donated by the Florida Outdoor Advertising Association.

C.7 IMPACT OF CLIMATE CH ANGE AND SEA LEVEL R ISE

The exact pace, extent and magnitude of possible climate change impact on south Florida are largely unknown at this time. This is in part because of the difficulty to scale global and regional trend models down to predictions at the local level, the long timeframes involved, and the confounding effects of changing meteorological variables on habitats and species.

Some climate change predictions point to extended droughts, uncertain recharge for the Everglades wetlands, reduced water availability and higher sea levels for south Florida. Even the more modest projections of sea level rise suggest a significant impact on the low

lying Everglades, the highly transmissive Biscayne Aquifer, and the near

- coastal built

environment.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 11 October 2010 Everglades restoration is an important adaptation response to climate change. The impending natural resource alterations that will likely resu lt from climate change should not be viewed as an excuse for delay or inaction, but rather as motivation to avoid irreversible losses and restore the health and natural resilience of the ecosystem (NRC 2008).

Through an inter

- agency effort the SFERTF de veloped an information brief that highlighted and synthesized current activities related to climate change and the relationship to ecosystem restoration (www.sfrestore.org /climate_change.html). In addition, scientists and planners

involved in CERP are mon itoring the latest developments in climate change. Federal, state and local agencies are involved in a variety of activities concerning climate change

– from hosting conferences to developing models to preparing papers and making recommendations

on resear ch and model needs. The USACE released interim guidance in 2009 concerning incorporating sea level change into USACE projects and expects further guidance to be released soon. The CERP Guidance Memorandum concerning sea level rise is being revised

to tak e into account the latest guidance. The USACE is also working with partner agencies on a series of technical reports to facilitate collaborative information sharing, specifically regarding climate change sensitivity data and model development.

The DOI C limate Science Centers and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives form the cornerstone of an integrated approach to climate change science and adaptation. This strategy will serve the Department’s land, fish, wildlife, water marine, tribal and cultural

herit age managers, as well as for our federal , state, local, Tribal, non

- governmental organization , private landowner, and stakeholder partners. The south Florida ecosystem is part of the Southeastern Climate Change Center and also the Peninsular Florida Lan d scape Conservation Cooperative

.

C.8 E XPECTATIONS FOR THE SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYS TEM

RESTORATION OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS

IGs/ITs, established in the IGs Agreement and in the Agreement on ITs will be updated as improved scientific information and ecological modeling resulting from assessment and monitoring activities, or CERP Modification Reports deem necessary. They will also be revised to incorporate improved CERP modeling information produced and to reflect updated Plan implementation scheduling from the Integrated Delivery Schedule (IDS).

Building upon the current effort to capture knowledge gained since 2000 (Scientific Knowledge Gained document), an initiative, the 2010 Shared Definition of Everglades Restoration, will be undertaken to fine

- tune the go als and objectives of CERP . This effort is anticipated to be complete by the end of FY 2011 and results will be used to update IGs/ITs, as well as system

- wide performance measures used by RECOVER to perform programmatic evaluations and assessments and by project and operations to support plan formulation.

C.8.1 RECOVER Activities Anticipated over the Next Five Years

Over the next five years RECOVER contributions will continue to inform CERP planning and implementation efforts, particularly through its role in the CERP AM program. As information is gained from the AA&M Program on the ecosystem responses to CERP , it wi llAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 12 October 2010 be used to inform future planning and to guide adjustments. RECOVER efforts to conduct

system

- wide monitoring and assessment, compile new knowledge gained, and provide guidance on AM will remain essential.

Evaluation and Planning

During the next rep orting period the following initiatives are anticipated to be undertaken by RECOVER Evaluation and Planning:

 Continue to review each project’s final array of alternatives and reports on how well each alternative performs in the context of the whole system for the remaining projects in the planning phase

 Conduct programmatic evaluations that evaluate the effects of CERP at the system scale, similar to what was done with the Band 1 Technical Report

 Continue to develop and refine performance measures to eval uate CERP on a regional/system

- wide basis as necessary throughout this reporting period

 Following completion of the 2012 SSR and in compliance with the 2003 Programmatic Regulations requirement, RECOVER will develop an Assessment Report to evaluate whether the goals and purposes of the Plan are being achieved and to determine whether improvements to the Plan are warranted

 Continue to update CERP baseline planning conditions, as new information becomes

available. RECOVER will also continue to coordinate wit h projects on the planning

conditions

 Provide scientific support to be used as the basis for project sequencing contained in

the IDS

Implementation of the Adaptive Management Program

As the CERP AM program matures from development to full implementation d uring the next reporting period several initiatives are anticipated to be undertaken. CERP has been implementing portions of an AM program at the programmatic level for several years, yet the pieces have never been recognized as components of a larger pro gram. Consequently, a Programmatic AM Plan that will tie all the pieces of CERP together and indicate how they fit together is being developed. The final document is anticipated to be published during FY 2011. In addition, specific guidance will be prov ided on integrating AM into the existing planning process at both the project and program levels.

The ultimate goal of the AM program is improved decision making through learning; in this case learning can be defined as using the information derived from the AA&M program to

assist in decision

- making and ultimately refinement of CERP . A specific process for linking results of the AA&M monitoring efforts (i.e., learning) into specific management actions is recognized as a need to be addressed during the ne xt reporting period. An AM workshop was held with CERP leadership in spring 2010 to initiate this process, which could take several years to optimize, while management transitions from planning and design to a new approach to decision making and program i mplementation that incorporates new information from project

- construction and operation.

To be in compliance with newly issued USACE guidance, AM plans will be prepared to the appropriate scope based on the complexity and scale of each CERP project at the appropriateAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 13 October 2010 time during the next reporting period. Each plan will be tailored specifically for the needs of each project, but at a minimum will outline the monitoring necessary to verify performance of the project and link new learning with future decisi on making regarding operational considerations and contingency options to optimize performance.

Continuity of Adaptive Assessment and Monitoring

Capitalizing on the progress made during the 2005

- 2009 period, the next five years of the

AA& M Program will be critical in providing scientific information about ecosystem responses to guide the planning and operation of CERP . This is especially important given the recent groundbreaking on a number of restoration projects in 2009 and 2010. There fore, success in achieving the restoration goals of CERP depends on the long

- term sustainability of the AA&M Program. In the context of AM, new scientific information will be used to update the conceptual ecological models, hypothesis clusters, performanc e measures, interim and long

- term goals, and/or modeling tools. As the AA&M program was only authorized for ten years, reauthorization language has been proposed for a WRDA 2010 in order to be effective in providing the science for the AM process.

In add ition to continuing the progress made by the AA&M Program over the past five years, efforts will focus on the following:

 Continue development of SSRs beginning in 2012

 As CERP projects are implemented, coordinate project

- level monitoring plans with existing system

- wide monitoring to guide project design and operation

 As CERP projects are implemented, utilize existing and future monitoring efforts to revise IGs and report on progress towards achieving them

 Continue to develop and evolve techniques to improve information

- exchange between scientists and managers and improve coordination among science efforts

 Continue identification of management actions necessary to adjust CERP to meet desired performance expectations

 Continue appropriate levels of sta keholder engagement in development of AA&M Program products

All of these activities will provide sound science necessary for implementation of the CERP AM Program.

C.8.2 Addressing Invasive and Exotic Species

Non

- indigenous species are rarely eradicated from the natural areas they invade, thus ―successful control‖ can be defined as limiting the effects of biological invasions such that the basic physical and biological function of ecosystems, as well as their natural biological diversity, is not significantly impaired. Ecosystems resulting from restoration will contain new species groups and biotic interactions relative to their pre

- disturbance state, and these new biotic components and interactions are certain to include exotic species (Norton, 2009).

The CE RP Melaleuca Eradication and Other Exotics project ( s ection 2.1.5 ) is one example of

what CERP is doing to address this potential issue.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 14 October 2010 In the co ntext of Everglades restoration, it is important to understand that invasive species will continue to exert pressure on native species and ecosystem functions in the restored condition and that without a long

- term commitment to invasive species management, the accomplishments of restoration efforts might be greatly reduced. Fortunately, the importance of this issue continues to be elevated among state and federal agencies, public and private universities, state and federal task forces, and various other or ganizations. In fact, an inter

agency effort by the SFERTF developed an information brief on invasive exotics that outlined current strategies and efforts and proposed additional ways to control and manage invasive exotics ( http://www.sfrestore.org/information_brief/Final_Apr_06_10_Exotics.pdf ). The consensus of these parties is that control and management of invasive non

- indigenous species is a critical component of ecosys tem restoration in south Florida that involves all stages of a project from planning through design and construction to operations and

maintenance.

Also helpful will be the proposed revisions to the USDA, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service regulat ions on the importation of plants for planting and propagation (nursery stock), familiarly known as Q

- 37. These revisions propose to establish a new category of plants, ―Not Authorized Pending Plant Risk Analysis.‖ A similar effort is underway for proble matic animal species. In January 2009, new federal legislation was introduced (HR 669, Non

- native Wildlife Invasion Prevention Act) that calls for the Secretary of the Interior to ―establish a risk assessment process to prevent the introduction
into, and establishment in, the United States of non

- native wildlife species that will cause or are likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to other animal species’ health

or human health.‖

In the absence of proactive regulations that prevent intro ductions of potentially invasive species, agencies and the public must rely on the Lacey Act (42 U.S.C. § 18), which allows the USFWS to regulate international wildlife trade and addresses threats to native wildlife resources. In February 2009, Senate Bil l 373 was filed, which amends the Lacey Act and declares large constrictor snakes as an injurious species. On December 10, 2009, the full Environment and Public Works Committee met to consider SB 373 and adopted an

amendment in the nature of a substitute to add the nine species of constrictor snakes addressed in the October 13, 2009, U.S. Geological Survey risk assessment. A companion bill, HR 2811, was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee in July 2009. On March 11, 2010, the US FWS announced that it would move forward with the official administrative process of banning the importation, export and interstate transport of nine species of constrictor snakes

--- the same nine species being considered in

SB373/HR2811.

The Florida non

- native wildlife bill signed into law on June 3, 2010 by the Governor and is effective July 1, 2010, bans the species currently listed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission as Reptiles of Concern (ROCs). The law adds language to civil

a nd criminal penalties and allows the agency to levy fines. At their spring 2010 meeting, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission voted to move forward on draft rulemaking that would move the species currently listed as ROCs into the Conditional Species l isting. This is a more restrictive listing that would prohibit personal possession; but would still allowAppendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 15 October 2010 commercial breeding and export out of Florida. This rulemaking is seen as implementing the provisions of the bill discussed above.

C.8.3 Incorporating Climate Change and Sea Level Rise

While there is uncertainty in the specifics of how climate change will manifest in south Florida, it is prudent to prepare now for the significant changes that lie ahead. Most importantly, we must recognize that the trad itional planning method of assuming ―stationarity,‖ that the future climate is likely to be similar to past, is obsolete. Land use and infrastructure planning in developed areas will require a long

- term approach that recognizes increasing water levels. G ravity

- based drainage infrastructure will be less effective at higher sea levels, increasing the risk of flooding, and placing greater emphasis on alternative water supplies.

A major theme for future land and water management in the face of climate change will be to restore and maintain the resilience of the Everglades ecosystem. Ecosystem resilience can be enhanced through increased water flows through the Everglades and incr eased storage. Increased flows into the southern estuaries may help reinstate widespread organic soil formation and maintain the freshwater head in order to mitigate the effects of sea level rise and saltwater intrusion. Increased water storage will reta in excess wet season runoff, increase overall water availability, and reduce the effects of drought in both the natural and

built environments.

An integrated cross

- agency approach is critical for these efforts to be successful. Logical next steps for co ordination include exploring common planning factors (sea level rise, precipitation), resolving which models are best suited for the Everglades ecosystem, and reducing uncertainty through regional resolution of larger scale climate change models.

Other st eps could improve tools for local and regional decision

- making, such as climate change risk assessment methods.

Scientists and planners involved in CERP will continue to monitor the latest developments in climate change and look for ways to integrate ap plicable information into both the short

- and long

- term plan. The agencies involved in CERP are working towards a consensus on the best way to account for climate change while incorporating the latest guidance. In addition, the

initial volume of the fift h Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report is expected in 2014 and will provide updated long range climate change forecasts (including updated sea level rise forecasts) relevant to selection of long

- term regional climate change adaptation strategie s for the Everglades and south Florida.Appendix C Scientific Initiatives

CERP 2010 Report to Congress C

- 16 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 1 October 2010 

### APPENDIX D

- STATUS OF OTHER SOUT H FLORIDA EVERGLADES

ECOSYSTEM RESTORATIO N PROJECTS

While the primary focus of this report is on the past and future accomplishments of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) implementation, it is useful to also look at the broader South Florida Ecosystem Restoration (SFER) Program to better u nderstand the

context in which the CERP exists. The SFER program consists of close to 200 federal, state, and local restoration projects that are designed to improve the conditions of different aspects of the greater Everglades ecosystem. CERP components represent about one

- third of these projects.

D.1 THE FOUNDATION PROJE CTS

CERP identified several Foundation Projects prior to 1999, and builds upon them for the success of the overall ecosystem ( Figure D

- 1 ) . Achievement of the full suite of CERP benefits depends on their successful completion.

Major Foundation Projects include the federally authorized Kissimmee River Restoration project, th e Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park (ENP) project, Central and Southern Florida (C&SF) Modifications to the C

- 111 (South Dade) and the West Palm

Beach Canal STA

- 1E/C

- 51West projects, and the Everglades and South Florida (E&SF)

Critical Restoration projects. These together with other state efforts, such as the Everglades Construction project, formed this important foundation for CERP and are briefly described in this Appendix along with their current status.

For the significant work tha t has already been accomplished and progress that has been made in implementing these projects, some of which are already providing benefits to the natural system, much credit is due to the multitude of agencies and stakeholders who have been

involved and also for coordination from the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force (SFERTF).Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 2 October 2010 FIGURE D

- 1 : OTHER SOUTH FLORI DA EVERGLADES ECOSYS TEM

RESTORATION PROJECTSAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 3 October 2010 D.1.1 Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park Project

The Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park project (ModWaters) is a key

cornerstone to the foundation of CERP . Many CERP projects that will deliver water to this area are dependent upon this project to complete the goals of restoration. Co mpletion of the ModWaters project is the federal government’s highest restoration priority. Authorized by Congress in 1989, the ModWaters project authorizes the USACE, in consultation with the DOI, to construct modifications of the C&SF Project water mana gement system and related operational changes and ―to the extent practicable, take steps to restore the natural hydrological conditions within the park‖ improving water deliveries to ENP.

The USACE 1992 General Design Memorandum and Environmental Impact S tatement, Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park, Central and Southern Florida Project for Flood Control and Other Purposes project design for ModWaters , and subsequent supplements, specify the construction of structural features with the in tended purpose of restoring conveyance between Water Conservation Areas (WCAs) north of ENP and the Shark River Slough, the lifeline of ENP. The combined features upon completion will improve conditions for 190,000 acres of habitat, aid in the recovery of threatened and endangered species, and lay a foundation for future restoration efforts under CERP

.

The WRDA 2000 also placed conditions on the federal support for the DECOMP project:

(iv) MODIFIED WATER DELIVERY

- No appropriation shall be made to cons truct the Water Conservation Area 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement Project (including component AA, Additional S

- 345 Structures; component QQ Phase 1, Raise and Bridge East Portion of Tamiami Trail and Fill Miami Canal within WCA 3; compo nent QQ Phase 2, WCA 3 Decompartmentalization and Sheetflow Enhancement; and component SS, North New River Improvements) or the Central Lakebelt Storage Project (including components S and EEE, Central Lake Belt Storage Area) until the completion of the pr oject to improve water deliveries to Everglades National Park authorized by section 104 of the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 (16 U.S.C. 410r

- 8).

D.1.1.1 8.5 Square Mile Area

In the 8.5

- square

- mile area (8.5 SMA) lands were acquire d and construction was completed

in 2008. The future ModWaters and C

- 111 component implementation includes increased water flows and levels in ENP. The Las Palmas residential area, previously referred to as 8.5 SMA, now has perimeter levees and a seepage collector canal intended to mitigate for the

increased flood risk. The new S

- 357 pump station will remove water from the seepage collector canal to prevent increased water levels in residential areas, while allowing for increases on the adjacent ENP land s separated by the protection levee. Land preparations necessary for operation, including debris and invasive vegetation removal have been ongoing. The USACE developed a Draft Environmental Assessment of the Interim Water

Control Plan and released it for additional public comments in May 2009. One

- year operational testing and monitoring of the 8.5 SMA project features began May 29, 2009. Monitoring data from testing the operations showed an area of concern in the southwestAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 4 October 2010 corner of the Las Palmas commu nity. Additional testing is expected through 2010. Project features (levee, seepage canal, flowway, and detention cell) will be transferred to the SFWMD for operations when the testing is completed.

D.1.1.2 Tamiami Trail Modifications

The Tamiami Trail Modifications (TTM) project includes construction of a one

- mile eastern bridge with reinforcement of the road to allow a maximum operating stage of 8.5 feet in the

L

- 29 Canal (i.e., all structural inputs shall be stopped when the canal re aches 8.5 feet). It is also proposed that all structural inflows into the L

- 29 Canal be stopped when the canal stage is 7.8 feet or greater if a named storm or rainfall in excess of six inches is expected (pre

storm drawdown). The TTM project described i n the Integrated Limited Reevaluation Report and Environmental Assessment, with amendment, was approved by the Assistant Secretary of the Army

– Civil Works on August 1, 2008. On September 28, 2009, USACE awarded the $81 million contract, using funding fr om both the NPS and the USACE, to

construct the one

- mile bridge and reinforce an additional 9.7 miles of Tamiami Trail roadway; thus allowing higher water levels in the adjacent L

- 29 Canal and in turn into the ENP. The groundbreaking for the Tamiami Trail Bridge project took place December 4, 2009 and construction began in March 2010. Projected completion of the bridge construction and

the road

- raising is in 2013.

D.1.1.3 Spreader Swale Pilot Test along Tamiami Trail

A pilot project to install spreader swales i mmediately south of two culverts sets found along

a 10.7

- mile stretch of the Tamiami Trail at the northeastern boundary of the ENP was proposed to determine if swales would increase hydrologic flow into ENP and if so,

determine the level of increased conve yance. The NPS, in collaboration with the USACE completed an Environmental Assessment and executed a Finding of No Significant Impact on March 23, 2009. Hydrologic modeling and pre

- installation monitoring were conducted by the University of Miami. The m odeling was favorable and a public meeting was held on January 20, 2010. After considering comments, the ENP superintendant decided to implement the spreader swale pilot on February 1, 2010. The team has prepared a letter report, received a special use p ermit to install and monitor the swales from ENP, and submitted an environmental resource permit application to FDEP. Once all permits are in place, it is anticipated that the existing Tamiami Trail contract will be modified to include

installation of the spreader swales. Two 1000 feet by 30 feet swales will be installed south of two culvert sets in an effort to enhance flow across the trail. Installation is expected to be completed by the end of February 2011. Monitoring and assessment will occur in a t wo

- year period after installation.

D.1.1.4 Conveyance and Seepage Control Features

The status of the conveyance and seepage control features outlined in the 1992 General Design Memorandum are as follows.

 Spillway structures S

- 355A and B in the L

- 29 Levee (complete)Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 5 October 2010  S

- 333 modifications (complete)

 Tigertail Camp elevation (complete

- raised to 12.00 ft. with 1st floor elevations of at least 12.5 feet)

 Pump Station S

- 356 between L

- 31N Canal and L

- 29 Canal (for M odWaters

- complete)

 Structures S

- 345 A, B, and C through the L

- 67A and C Levees (pending)

 Structures S

- 349 A, B, and C in the L

- 67A Borrow Canal (pending)

 Osceola Camp elevation evaluation (pending)

 Degradation of the L

- 67 Extension Canal and Levee (4 of 9 miles degraded)

 S

- 331 Command and Control (com plete

- added telemetry & remote control of conveyance features )

Changes to the TTM project, as described above, required adjustments to the remaining

conveya nce and seepage control features. The extent of design modifications is currently being evaluated along with the potential for additional L

- 29 structures to release water

introduced into WCA

- 3B. The USACE is investigating design modifications and t he related National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA ) documentation will be released for public

comment onc e the necessary modifications have been determined.

D.1.1.5 Everglades Restoration Transition Plan

The Everglades Restoration Transition Plan is an interagency effort to update the Interim Operational Plan for Protection of the Cape Sable Seaside Sparrow. The USACE is coordinating with the US Fish and Wildlife Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act on a new biological assessment and in turn a new biological opinion as the

I nterim Operational Plan biological opinion expires in November 2010. Pro posed adjustments to I nterim Operational Plan for multi

- species management are being analyzed by an interagency group and will be reviewed with respect to NEPA requirements. This effort is being undertaken in collaboration with ENP and other stakeholders. A NEPA scoping letter was sent out in December 2009 to begin public coordination. Completion of the final NEPA document and implementation of a modified operational plan are expected in late 2010.

D.1.2 Kissimmee River Restoration

As the headwaters of the Everglades system, the health of the 3,000

- square

- mile Kissimmee River basin is crucial to the health of the south Florida ecosystem. That health will be

en sured by the reestablishment of more natural flow characteristics in the Kissimmee River by reestablishing historic hydrologic conditions, recreating the historical river/floodplain connectivity, recreating the historic mosaic of wetland plant communities, and restoring the historic biological diversity and functionality.

The SFWMD has acquired 102,061 acres of land needed for this restoration. More natural flow has been reestablished for a 22 mile section of the Kissimmee River, including 4 miles

reconn ected in 2009, 4 miles in 2007 and 14 miles in 2001. Several species, including the Ring

- necked Duck, American Avocet and Black

- necked Stilt, have returned to the Kissimmee after an absence of 40 years.Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 6 October 2010 Currently , 13 of 22 miles of canal C

- 38 have been backfilled; 22 of 43 miles of historic river channel have been restored; and 6,500 acres of floodplain wetlands have been restored. A Post Authorization Change Report to increase the Section 902 limit is being prepared and is scheduled for completion for summer 2010.

Completed Reach 4 backfilling for the Kissimmee River Restoration

The following features have been completed: C

- 38 reach 1 backfilling (2001), C

- 35 maintenance dredging (2001), S

- 65 enlargement (2001), S

- 65A gate extension (2001), C

- 36 widening (2003), US highway 98 bridge openings (2004), S

- 84/84 spillway addition (2007 ), radio tower (2007), S

- 65DX2 grade control structure (2007), C

- 38 reach 4A backfilling (2007), S

- 68 spillway addition (2009), and C

- 38 reach 4B backfilling (2009).

The following features are currently under construction: Istokpoga Canal improvements,

S

- 65DX1 retrofit and River Acres flood reduction.

The contract for C

- 37 Widening, from 70 to 90 feet, was awarded February 16, 2010. Recovery funds are being used to enlarge Canal 37 in Polk and Osceola Counties. Work began in March 2010 includes inc lude excavation, placement of revetment, removal and disposal of excavated or dredged material, design, layout and construction of upland disposal area, turbidity control and monitoring, ensuring appropriate permits and seasonal dredging. Completion is sch eduled by June 2012.Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 7 October 2010 The following features have yet to be awarded due to the required sequencing of work: CSX railroad bridge (2010), Oxbow excavation and embankment (2010), S

- 65E gated spillway addition (2011), Pool D boat ramp construction (2011), S

- 69 Weir (2011), and C

- 38 Reach 3 backfilling (2012), and C

- 38 Reach 2 backfilling (2012).

A comprehensive evaluation program for tracking environmental response to the restoration is in place to gauge the success of meeting goals for ecological integrity for the river and the floodplain. This program predicts and tracks resulting ecological changes that are expected, including changes in hydrology, water quality, and major biological communities such as plants, invertebrates, fish, and birds. Evaluation research is required to be continued by the SFWMD for at least 5 years following completion of the final phase of construction (projected for 2015), or until environmental responses stabilize.

D.1.3 Central and Southern Florida: Modifications to the C

- 111 Pr oject (South

Dade)

While completion of the Modified Water Deliveries to Everglades National Park project will provide significant benefits directly to the ENP, the Modifications to the C

- 111 project, also

known as C

- 111 (South Dade) will improve hydrologi c conditions in Taylor Slough, located in the eastern panhandle of the ENP. This project will also maintain flood protection for development and agricultural interests in south Miami

- Dade County. Both of these projects will also significantly enhance res toration of the remaining Everglades outside of the ENP by reducing damaging high water levels and allowing flows that are more natural in the Everglades ecosystem to the north of the ENP.

Two interim pump stations and one permanent pump station have bee n completed, along

with construction of the firs retention/detention zone features , replacement of the Taylor Slough Bridge, and removal of portions of the spoil mounds along lower C

- 111. The S

- 331

Command and Control Center and levees that form the reten tion/detention zone are complete

and were turned over to the sponsor , SFWMD

.

A construction contract was awarded in 2007 to complete earthwork for the retention/detention zone. This zone will be used to create a hydrologic barrier between ENP

and the L

- 3 1N canal to reduce seepage losses from ENP. A construction contract to extend the hydraulic ridge north of the retention/detention zone and to contain discharges from the 8.5 Square Mile Area STA component of the M odWaters project is anticipated in 2011.

A Post Authorization Change Report (PAC) and an Engineering Documentation Report are under development and scheduled to be transmitted in FY10 to Headquarters. Approval of the PAC report is necessary in order to amend the Project Partnership Agreement. There are four construction contracts remaining to complete the project: the North Detention Area; the

L

- 31West Borrow Canal Backfill; the S

- 332B Pump Station; and the S

- 332C Pump Station. Plans and specifications are completed for the North Detention Are a. The L

- 31 West Borrow

Canal Backfill and S

- 332B Pump Station plans and specifications are under development.Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 8 October 2010 D.1.4 Central and Southern Florida: West Palm Beach Canal Stormwater

Treatment Area

- 1E/C

- 51 West

The construction of C

- 51/STA

- 1E was substantially completed by the USACE in June 2004. The STA1E works, pumping station S

- 319 and S

- 362, Canal C

- 51 enlargement, and gated

structure S

- 155A are completed and were transferred to the SFWMD for operations in 2005. Additional design and construction of other L

- 40 improvements, that were requested, still need a post authorization change to move forward. Maintenance issues and minor repairs have been addressed that required de

- watering access and a mechanical change on another structure to finalize inspections. A field test for treatment with periphyton has also been underway

. Preliminary s mall scale studies indicated a periphyton

- based s tor mwater

t reatment a rea may be a cost effective way to greatly reduce phosphorus levels.

D.2 EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA: CRITICAL RESTORATION

PROJECTS PROGRAM

The Everglades and South Florida (E&SF) Ecosystem Restoration Critical Projects Program was authorized by WRDA 1996, with modification in WRDA 1999. These projects were required to produce immediate, independent, and substantial restoration benefits, and to be consistent with the Conceptual Plan of the Governor’s Commission, which was created to promote a sustainable south Florida ecosystem. Seventy

- five million dollars in federal funds was authorized for appropriati on to be matched by local sponsors, while the maximum federal expenditure on any one project was capped at $25 million. To assist with implementation of these E&SF projects, $7 million in federal funds for land acquisition were

transferred to the state th rough a grant administered by the DOI. The WRDA 2007 raised this federal program cap from $75 million to $95 million; and the project cap from $25 million to $30 million for Seminole Big Cypress.

During the initial reporting period, the Department of Com munity Affairs, the SFWMD, the Seminole Tribe of Florida, and the USACE completed the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity Study , the East Coast Canal Structures Project , and the Western C

- 11 Water Quality Improvement project while making substantial constructio n progress on others.

Cost estimates for the projects have increased since the start of the program because of inflation escalation, unexpected site conditions, design modifications necessary to meet the project goals, and bids for construction being hig her than those estimated. Under current federal appropriation authority, federal contributions will not be sufficient to share

construction costs with the SFWMD on Southern CREW

, Lake Trafford Restoration , and

Tamiami Trail Culverts . SFWMD is proceeding with construction on all or a portion of these projects with its own funding.

Construction of the western portion of the Tamiami Trail Culverts (Phase I), located south of the Picayune Strand Restoration project (formerly known as Southern Golden Gate

E states) , started in June 2004 and was completed in March 2006. Implementation was accomplished with SFWMD (culvert construction) and Florida Department of TransportationAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 9 October 2010 (road resurfacing) funds. This work was incorporated into the Picayune Strand Restor ation

PIR and as such was cost shared under that authorization.

Lake Trafford , the largest lake south of Lake Okeechobee has a surface area of 1,494 acres, and is located in north Collier County. It is the headwaters for the Corkscrew Swamp Sanctuary to the southwest, the Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) to the west, and the Fakahatchee Strand system including the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge, to the south. The lake has poor water quality, extensive muck accumulations, lost

nativ e submerged plant communities, experienced periodic aquatic weed infestations, and

had numerous moderate fish kills.

The USACE completed plans and specifications, but at that time there was insufficient funding to award a contract. The SFWMD assumed 100 % of the cost of converting the detailed design and the construction with the intent of receiving credit and/or reimbursement upon project completion and approval by the USACE. The SFWMD began the first phase of dredging Lake Trafford in 2004. A second m uck

- removal effort that began in November 2006 for the near shore area was placed on hold because of drought conditions in 2007. The SFWMD resumed dredging muck from Lake Trafford in July 2009 with a $7.4 million investment from its Governing Board. To d ate, the SFWMD has removed 3.15 million cubic yards of muck and invested $14.5 million to improve water quality at the lake. The Florida

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and Collier County Tourist Development Council have also provided financial assistance to SFWMD for the project.

Southern Corkscrew Regional Ecosystem Watershed (CREW) will restore historical sheetflow in the project area and reduce excessive freshwater discharges (which include nutrients and pollutants) to Estero Bay during the rainy season. Ninety

- three percent of land has been acquired and construction is twenty

- five percent complete. Final design and construction of the Southern CREW project, made part of the Plan in WRDA 2000, will be completed by the SFWMD. Final design w ill be completed in FY 2012 and physical construction should be completed in FY 2013. Monitoring will continue through FY 2015.

Construction was initially completed on the Ten Mile Creek Water Preserve Area project by June 2006. During the processes tha t occur in preparation to transfer the project to the sponsor (SFWMD) for full operations, concerns were raised about some aspects of the project. In September 2007, the USACE and the SFWMD immediately began identifying all issues and planning a course of action toward remediation and the delivery of a quality project. This process identified additional project needs and their associated costs, which were significant. As holder of the FDEP permit for construction, the USACE is responsible

for the facilit y. The USACE has placed the facility in a passive operating state in order to limit project expenditures. The FY10 budget bill allows the USACE to exceed the spending cap by $3.5 million. The $3.5 million will be used to complete a post authorization ch ange report and to fund maintenance and upkeep of the facility until 2013.

Construction for the Lake Okeechobee Water Retention and Phosphorus Removal Nubbin Slough and Taylor Creek portion was physically complete in 2006. The interim

construction and te sting phase, begun in 2007, is still in progress due to low water conditionsAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 10 October 2010 and other issues. After a pipe leak during a routine test late in 2008, additional construction

needs were identified . Testing will resume once these modifications are complete.

Seminole Tribe Big Cypress Water Conservation Plan construction of the East Side Conveyance Canal System was completed in July 2003. Construction of the Basin 1 features was completed in June 2008 with transfer to the sponsor expected in 2010. Construction of the Basin 4 features is scheduled to begin in 2010.

The Critical Projects have produced better to ols for evaluating the effects of local public policies in the Florida Keys related to dry

- season water table, reduced fresh water losses from the Pennsuco Wetlands, and reduced discharges of nutrients and other pollutants from populated areas into Water C onservation Area 3A.

As the remaining projects are completed, they are expected to restore more natural flows into estuaries, filter nutrients from flows into Lake Okeechobee, regain lost freshwater storage, and rejuvenate wetlands in South Central Florid a.

D.3 OTHER SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATIO N PROJECTS

D.3.1 Federal Initiatives During the Past Five Years

The US FWS received $2.2 million in ARRA funding for projects planned at refuges and field offices in the Everglades, and the NPS received $21.1 million for projects planned at parks in the Everglades. This was in addition to the $118. 7 million appropriated by Congress in 2009 for Interior activities in the Everglades. Many of the projects will be fundamental components of restoration, and work with CERP to meet restoration goals, including invasive exotics control and hydrologic improvements. Examples of projects that NPS and US FWS are able to undertake due to this increased Federal funding are:

 Replace two failed dams at Everglades National Park to pr event salt water intrusion into Cape Sable.

 Remove invasive animals and vegetation at the Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge and replace it with native vegetation in partnership with the State and County.

 Inventory and monitor plant and animal population s critical to ensuring the biological integrity of the Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuge Complex.

 Conduct invasive species control and s outh Florida marsh and mangrove swamp restoration and enhancement through the US FWS South Florida Coastal Program

o ffice.

 Repair and rehabilitate facilities, trails, and utilities at multiple parks and refuges; ensuring resource protection, and energy efficiency.

D.3.2 State and Local Initiatives During the Past Five Years

The State of Florida and the SFWMD continue to i nitiate, support and construct not only projects in the CERP, but also other project initiatives that support the overall CERP effort (see Table D

- 1 ) . Several of these programs are detailed below

.Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 11 October 2010 D.3.2.1 Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program

Another State

- led initiative is the Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program. This is an interagency initiative focusing on the water storage and water treatment needed to help improve and restore Lake Okeechobee and the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee Watershed and downstream estuaries. Three watershed plans were developed by the SFWMD in coordination with FDEP and the Florida Department of Ag riculture and Consumer Services

, and in cooperation with local governments and other stakeholders.

 Lake Okeechobee Watershed Construction Project

- Phase II Technical Plan, submitted to the Florida Legislature in February 2008

 River Watershed Protection Plan for the Caloosahatchee Watershed submitted to the Florida Legislature i n January 2009

 River Watershed Protection Plan for the St. Lucie Watershed submitted in January

2009

D.3.2.2 C

- 43 Water Quality Treatment and Testing Facility

The C

- 43 Water Quality Treatment Area (WQTA) and Testing Facility project will investigate and test wet land

- based strategies for reducing concentrations of total nitrogen and other constituents including total phosphorous and total suspended solids. The full project will include a 1,345

- acre water quality treatment area (WQTA) and a 200

- acre Test Facility. The Test Facility will be designed in 2010 and constructed in 2011 as Phase 1 of the WQTA. This facility will test different combinations and characteristics of constructed wetlands for treating TN, including different types of vegetation in the treatme nt cells, hydraulic loading rates, and treatment processes with regard to their efficacy at reducing TN and/or its constituents. Phase I will provide the opportunity to develop construction, start

- up, and operational procedures. The purpose of the Test F acility is to develop wetland

- based strategies for nitrogen removal to protect/improve water quality in the downstream estuarine ecosystems. It is anticipated that the project will generate strategies that can be applied to estuaries throughout the SFWMD.

D.3.2.3 Fisheating Creek Feasibility Study

This project was initiated by the State of Florida under the Northern Everglades and Es tuaries Protection Program. The purpose of the feasibility study is to identify the best mix of storage and water quality featu res to improve the hydrology and water quality within the sub

watershed.

 Completed Phase I investigation of available information and the work plan development

 Plan formulation, evaluation and selection for Phase II are currently under wayAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 12 October 2010 D.3.2.4 Hybrid Wetlan d Treatment

This project was initiated by the State of Florida under the Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program. It combines the use of a floating wetland and chemical treatment system to remove nutrients from the source water. This proje ct was jointly initiated in 2007 by the

SFWMD and F lorida D epartment of A griculture and C onsumer S ervices to demonstrate the technical feasibility and cost effectiveness of this technology.

 Construction of four sites (Nubbin Slough, Ideal Grove, Mosquito Creek and Wolff Ditch) providing phosphorus concentration reduction ranging from 60 to 90 percent

 Completion of two sites at Lemkin Creek in 2009, are treating base flows of four cubic feet per second

 Design and construction phase of an additional site (Grassy Island) during 2010

D.3.2.5 Local Cost

- Share Projects with Martin County

The State of Florida, the SFWMD, and Martin County have initiated the implementation of four water quality improvement projects under a unique cost share agreement as part of the

N orthern Everglades and Estuaries program.

The four projects funded in this Martin County partnership are:

Phase III of the Old Palm City Stormwater Quality Improvement project, which will develop a neighborhood stormwater quality management system inclu ding

construction of two STAs The final component of the Manatee Pocket Dredging project, to improve the water quality in Manatee Pocket of the St. Lucie Estuary The North River Shores Sewer System, to provide sanitary sewer service to approximately 450 single

- family and multifamily parcels of land in the North River Shores area. The project will enhance water quality in the North Fork of the St. Lucie River by eliminating nutrient loading from septic systems The Manatee Creek water quality retrofit, to provide additional water quality treatment for drainage from 833 acres of residential, commercial and industrial development that discharges into the Manatee Pocket of the St. Lucie Estuary

They were implemente d through a cost

- sharing approach using State, SFWMD and local

cost

- share funding to improve water quality in the St. Lucie Estuary. These projects will provide water quality treatment through construction of stormwater detention/retention areas

and marsh filtration areas prior to discharge.

D.3.2.6 Everglades Agricultural Area Stormwater Treatment Area Expansion

This project

, being constructed by the State of Florida

, will expand the size and enhance the performance of existing STAs in reducing stormwater phos phorus levels and helping achieve state water quality standards for the Everglades. This project will add a total of approximately 18,000 acres of treatment wetlands to the existing EAA STAs.Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 13 October 2010  Completed initial expansions of 6,000 acres at STA

- 2 (Cell 4 ), STA

- 5 (Flow

- way 3)

and STA

- 6 (Section 2) in 2007

 Completed Compartment C Build

- out design and permitting; construction began in April 2009

 Completed Compartment B Build

- out design and permitting; construction began in

June 2009

 Construction of pump stations started in September 2009

 Modifications to L

- 6 Canal and final design for G

- 444 divide structure are complete. Construction is delayed due to permit process issue.

D.3.2.7 L

- 63N Canal (Taylor Creek) Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project

This project c onsists of reactivating an existing ASR system that was constructed and briefly operated 20 years ago by the SFWMD. Since that time, the system has been inactive. Project tasks will include mechanical evaluations of the existing system, permitting, desig n studies, construction of new appurtenances and eventual operation and maintenance of the system. The following activities have been completed during the past five years:

 Tested mechanical integrity testing of the well system

 Completed pilot water treat ment design studies

 Completed permit applications for construction of an ASR system

 Constructed a new Floridan aquifer monitoring well, in compliance with new regulatory criteria

 Finalized design for the reactivation components

 Petitioned for an Aquifer Ex emption to test the system without disinfection

D.3.2.8 Seminole Tribe

– Brighton Reservation Aquifer Storage and Recovery Pilot

Project

The Seminole Tribe of Florida and the SFWMD are partnering on construction of a pilot ASR system at the Brighton Reservati on, north of Lake Okeechobee. The objective of the project is to assure the Tribe of an alternative water supply during times when low lake levels make delivery to that part of the system difficult. The project involves permitting, design,

construction a nd testing of the ASR system, the costs of which will be shared by the Tribe and the SFWMD. The following activities have been completed during the past five years:

 Constructed an exploratory/test well

 Evaluated location and project site

 Completed prelim inary design and geotechnical evaluations

 Completed draft U.S. Environmental Protection Agency permit applicationsAppendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 14 October 2010 TABLE D

- 1 : STATE INITIATIVES UPDATE P AST FIVE YEARS



## State Project Design and Specs/Study Begun Design and

Specs/Study Completed Regulatory

Authorization

Obtained Construction or

Installation and Testing Begun Construction

or Installation and Testing Completed

Acme Basin B Discharge:

Phase 1

Phase 2 

 

 

 

 



Lakeside Ranch STA:

Phase I

Phase II 

    

Picayune Strand Restoration *     

C

- 111 Spreader Canal

- Western Project    



Fran Reich Preserve (Site 1 Impoundment) * 

   

C

- 44 Reservoir/STA Project: *

Two Reservoir and STA Test Cells

C

- 44 Reservoir/STA Repackaging Relocation Work 



 

 

  

Caloosahatchee River ( C

- 43 ) West Basin Storage Reservoir:

Test Cells Reservoir Design 

 

   

Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands

- Phase 1:

L

- 31E Culverts Deering Wetlands

Cutler Wetlands 



 



 



 

 

Broward County Water Preserve Area: * WCA 3A/3B Seepage Management Area

C

- 11 Impoundment

C

- 9 Impoundment 



 



   Appendix D Status of Other South Florida Everglades Ecosystem Restoration Projects

CERP 2010 Report to Congress D

- 15 October 2010



## State Project Design and Specs/Study Begun Design and

Specs/Study Completed Regulatory

Authorization

Obtained Construction or

Installation and Testing Begun Construction

or Installation and Testing Completed

L

- 8 Reservoir Project:

G

- 160/G

- 161 Structures Design/Construction Plan for L

- 8 Additional Storage Capacity 

 

   

Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir A

- 1   

 

C

- 43 Water Quality Treatment and Testing Facility 

   

Fisheating Creek Feasibility Study: Phase I (Investigation of available info and work plan dev.) Phase II (plan formulation, evaluation and selection) 

 

  

Hybrid Wetland Treatment Technology : Nubbin Slough, Ideal Grove, Mosquito Creek Wolff Ditch

Lemkin Creek (two sites) Additional site (Grassy Island) 



 



 



 

 



Local Cost

- Share Projects with Martin County    



E verglades A gricultural A rea S tormwater T reatment A rea Expansion: Compartment C Build

- out Compartment B Build

- out Pump Stations

L

- 6 Canal Modifications/G

- 444 Divide Structure 





 





 





 





 

L

- 63N Canal (Taylor Creek) ASR Project   

 

Seminole Tribe

- Brighton Reservation ASR Pilot Project  



* Project transferred to USACE for remaining design and/or constructionAppendix E Updated Cost Estimates By Project

CERP 2010 Report to Congress E

- 1 October 2010 

### APPENDIX E

- UPDATED COST ESTIMAT ES BY CERP PROJECTAppendix E Updated Cost Estimates By Project

CERP 2010 Report to Congress E

- 2 October 2010 This page intentionally left blankAppendix E Updated Cost Estimates By Project

CERP 2010 Report to Congress E

- 3 October 2010

TABLE E

- 1 : UPDATED COST ESTIMAT ES BY CERP PROJECT

Changes in Cost Estimates (Costs in $ 1,000s and Project Component Alignment per CERP Guidance Memo 002.03) WBS Proj #

CERP Component Project Name 2005 Report to Congress
(1 Oct 04

Price Levels) Current

Cost

Estimate
(1 Oct 09

Price Levels) Difference Difference

Due to

Inflation Difference

Due to Other ( Scope, Authorization, etc.)

1 A, W, OPE Lake Okeechobee

Watershed 556,374 661,524 105,150 105,150

4a D_P1 Caloosahatchee River

(C

- 43) West Basin Storage

Reservoir 254,309 570,484 316,437 316,437

4 b Caloosahatchee Watershed 262

5 D_P2 C

- 43 Basin Aquifer Storage

and Recovery 260,652 304,185 43,533 43,533

33 PILOT C

- 43 Aquifer Storage and

Recovery PILOT 6,784 8,723 1,939 1,939

6 DDD Caloosahatchee Back

pumping with Stormwater

Treatment 96,962 114,640 17,678 17,678

7 B, UU Indian River Lagoon

- South 1,262,709 1,694,302 431,593 431,593

8 G_P1 Everglades Agricultural

Area Storage Reservoir 512,186 596,439 84,253 84,253 9 G_P2

10 CCC Big Cypress

-

L

- 28 Interceptor

Modifications 49,994 59,098 9,104 9,104

11 II & RR Flows To NW & Central

WCA 3A 35,424 41,259 5,835 5,835

23 EEE Flows to Eastern Water

Conservation Area 7,833 9,127 1,294 1,294

26 S Central Lake Belt Storage

Area 150,982 691,441 108,456 108,456 *

48 YY WCA 2B Flows to

Everglades National Park 524,373 109,554 17,184 17,184 *

12

a QQ_P1, SS WCA 3

Decompart mentalization

and Sheetflow Enhancement

- Part 1

246,075 145,803 23,534 23,534 *

12

b QQ_P2 WCA 3

Decompartmentalization

and Sheetflow Enhancement

-- Part 2 107,811 17,401 17,401 *

12

c QQ_P3
(prev. QP2) WCA 3

Decompartmentalization

and Sheetflow E nhancement

-- Part 3 39,824 6,428 6,428 *

ZZ 940 1,112 172 172 *

14 KK Loxahatchee National

Wildlife Refuge Internal

Canal Structures 8,834 10,323 1,489 1,489

15 DD Modify Holey Land Wildlife

Mgt. Area Operation Plan 0 0 0

16 EE Modify Rotenberger

Wildlife Mgt. Area Operation Plan 0 0 0

17 K_P1, GGG, X, Y, OPE North Palm Beach County

-

Part 1 517,571 615,714 98,143 98,143

18 LL, K_P2 North Palm Beach County

-

Part 2 198,847 233,009 34,162 34,162

* Cost changes for these projects were assigned to inflation as the only change was the re

- grouping of features.Appendix E Updated Cost Estimates By Project

CERP 2010 Report to Congress E

- 4 October 2010 WBS Proj #

CERP Component Project Name 2005 Report to Congress
(1 Oct 04 Price Levels) Current

Cost

Estimate
(1 Oct 09 Price Levels) Difference Difference

Due to

Inflation Difference

Due to Other (Scope, Authorization, etc.)

20 V V_P1 PBC Agriculture Reserve

Reservoir 100,720 124,765 24,045 24,045

21 V V_P2 PBC Agriculture Reserve Aquifer

Storage & Recovery 48,369 56,542 8,173 8,173

3 GG Lake Okeechobee Aquifer Storage

& Recovery 1,223,431 1,432,270 208,839 208,839

32 PILOT Lake Okeechobee ASR PILOT 21,796 44,657 12,743 12,743

34 PILOT Hillsboro ASR PILOT 10,118

40 M_P1 Site 1 Impoundment 47,456 128,350 80,894 80,894

22 M_P2 Hillsboro Aquifer Storage and

Recovery 102,396 119,091 16,695 16,695

24 CC Broward Co. Secondary Canal

System 15,062 17,777 2,715 2,715

43 U

Everglades National Park Seepage Management 377,001 485,662 108,661 108,661 * 27 V, FF, BB

49 XX_P1 WPA Conveyance 321,574 357,714 36,140 36,140

25 XX_P2 North Lake Belt Storage Area 298,852 357,436 58,584 58,584

35 PILOT Lake Belt In

- Ground Reservoir

Technology PILOT 26,023 29,715 3,692 3,692

36 PILOT L

- 31 N (L

- 30) Seepage

Management PILOT 11,267 17,146 5,879 5,879

28 FFF / OPE Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands 372,184 457,627 85,443 85,443

29 WW C

- 111 Spreader Canal 114,007 137,234 23,227 23,227

30 OPE Picayune Strand Restoration 349,422 458,525 109,103 109,103

31 OPE Florida Keys Tidal Restoration 1,414 1,427 13 13

38 OPE Acme Basin B Discharge 24,241 24,241 0

39 OPE Strazzulla Wetlands 67,390 67,390 0

45 R, Q, O Broward County Water Preserve

Areas (WPAs) 392,755 485,543 92,788 92,788

46 T C

- 4 Control Structures 2,729 3,190 461 461

90 OPE Miccosukee Tribe Water

Management Plan 28,310 33,207 4,897 4,897

91 OPE Winsberg Farm Wetlands

Restoration 16,736 16,736 0

92 OPE Restoration Of Pineland &

Hardwood Hammocks in C

- 111

Basin 689 802 113 113

93 OPE Henderson Creek

- Belle Meade

Restoration 5,622 5,622 0

94 OPE Lakes Park Restoration 5,928 6,567 639 639

95 OPE Melaleuca Eradication And Other

Exotic Plants 6,554 3,718 (2,836) (2,836)

* Cost changes for these projects were assigned to inflation as the only change was the re

- grouping of features.Appendix E Updated Cost Estimates By Project

CERP 2010 Report to Congress E

- 5 October 2010 WBS Proj. #

CERP

Component Project Name 2005 Report to Congress
(1 Oct 04 Price Levels) Current

Cost

Estimate
(1 Oct 09

Price Levels) Difference Difference

Due to

Inflation Difference

Due to Other (Scope, Authorization, etc.)

96 OPE Seminole Tribe Big Cypress

Reservation Water

Conservation Plan 87,206 102,344 15,138 15,138

97 HHH West Miami

- Dade Reuse 505,325 592,046 86,721 86,721

98 BBB South Miami

- Dade Reuse 419,858 492,183 72,325 72,325

37 PILOT Wastewater Reuse

Technology PILOT 34,547 37,049 2,502 2,502

OPE Southern CREW 42,691 53,533 10,842 10,842

OPE Lake Trafford Restoration 17,787 20,821 3,034 3,034

FEAS Southwest Florida

Feasibility Studies 8,100 18,000 9,900 9,900

FEAS Florida Bay Florida Keys

Feasibility Study 4,100 6,500 2,400 2,400

FEAS Comprehensive Integrated

Water Quality Plan 8,100 8,100 0

44 Aquifer Storage and

Recovery Regional Study 70,421 85,806 15,385 15,385

TOTALS 9,881,030 12,303,970 2,422,940 1,869,133 553,807

* Cost changes for these projects were assigned to inflation as the only change was the re

- grouping of features.**Central and Southern Project** 

### Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan



## 2010 **Report to Congress**

**Government Entities Involved in Everglades Restoration**

**Federal**

Executive Office of the President

Executive Office of the President, Council on Environmental Quality

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service

U.S. Department of Army, Corps of Engineers

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Interior: Bureau of Indian Affairs;

F ish and Wildlife Service; Geological Survey; National Park Service; and Office of the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Task Force

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Safety, Energy and Environment

U.S. Environmental P rotection Agency

**Tribal**

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida

Seminole Tribe of Florida

**State**

Executive Office of the Governor

Florida Department of Agriculture:

Division of Forestry; and Institute for Agricultural Studies

Florida Department of Community Affairs

Florida Department of Environmental Protection

Florida Department of Health

Florida Department of Transportation

Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

South Florida Water Management District

South Florida Water Management Dist rict, Water Resources Advisory Commission

Southwest Florida Water Management District

St. Johns River Water Management District

**Local Counties**

Broward, Charlotte, Collier, Glades, Hendry, Highland,
Lee, Martin, Miami

- Dade, Monroe, Okeechobee, Orange,

Osce ola, Palm Beach, Polk, St. Lucie