DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS 9900 SOUTHWEST 107th AVENUE, SUITE 203 MIAMI, FLORIDA 33176

REPLY TO ATTENTION OF March 27, 2018 Regulatory Division South Permits Branch Miami Permits Section

PUBLIC NOTICE

Permit Application No. SAJ-2018-00382-(SP-GGM)

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Jacksonville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1344) and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. §403) as described below:

APPLICANT: Miami-Dade County, Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources (DRER) c/o Mr. Jack Osterholt 701 N.W. 1st Court Miami, Florida 33136

WATERWAY AND LOCATION: The project would affect waters of the United States associated with the Atlantic Ocean. The project site is located at Atlantic Ocean, within Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve. The proposed project site is located approximately 2.4 nautical miles East, Northeast of Cape Florida Light House (located within Bill Bags State Park), in Section 02, Township 55 South, Range 42 East. The proposed project site would be referred to as “Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef”.

Directions to the site are as follows: From Bill Bags State Park, Cape Florida Light House, travel by vessel ENE for approximately 2.4 nautical miles, follow GPS coordinates provided in the attached map.

FOUR CORNER COORDINATES:

Corner Points: Latitude N Longitude W Latitude N Longitude W (DM) (DM) (DD) (DD)

Northwest 25 40.790° -80 06.792° 25.67983° -80.11320° Northeast 25 40.790° -80 06.737° 25.67983° -80.11228° Southwest 25 40.740° -80 06.792° 25.67900° -80.11320° Southeast 25 40.740° -80 06.737° 25.67900° -80.11228°

APPROXIMATE CENTRAL COORDINATES:

Latitude N Longitude W Latitude N Longitude W (DM) (DM) (DD) (DD)

Center Point 25 40.765° -80 06.765° 25.67942° -80.11275°

PROJECT PURPOSE:

Basic: To place suitable artificial reef material within U.S. waters to establish an artificial reef for shallow fisheries enhancement.

Overall: To establish an artificial reef by placing clean concrete and/or limerock material for fishery habitat enhancement to serve as shallow fishing area, offshore of Key Biscayne.

EXISTING CONDITIONS: The proposed project site is 300’ x 300’ (2.07acres) on size. The site depth is -23’ MLW. The proposed site is located, approximately 500’ east of any mapped benthic resources (Walker 2009). See enclosed submitted map and benthic report conducted on October 31, 2017 by Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources – Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) biologists on SCUBA. During the surveys, only barren sand was observed within the proposed project site and buffer areas. The closest mapped benthic resources are discontinuous seagrass beds approximately 500’ northwest of the project area. The entire footprint of the artificial reef site does not contain any consolidated hardbottom or corals.

The proposed artificial reef site will be an addition to the existing 8 permitted artificial reef sites offshore, managed by Miami-Dade County, and will serve as a shallow fishing site south of Government Cut. The Miami-Dade County Artificial Reef Program was established in 1981 and is administered by the County’s Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources – Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM).

PROPOSED WORK: The applicant seeks authorization to deploy approximately 2,000 cubic yards of suitable artificial reef material within a 300-foot by 300-foot (2.07 acres) area to establish an artificial reef. The proposed deployment area has a water depth of -23’ mean low water (MLW) and will maintain a vertical clearance of -15.3’ MLW from the top of the reef profile relative to the MWL. The proposed deployment area would be referred to as the Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Site.

Reef materials will be transported to the site via tugboat and/or barge. All future deployments at this site will be limited to natural or processed calcium carbonate materials such as limestone boulders, large concrete based materials such as connection/junction boxes, large sections of bridge decking or other construction

2 demolition, or pre-fabricated concrete artificial reef modules. Unsuitable material including vessels or barges will not be deployed.

AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION INFORMATION: The applicant has provided the following information in support of efforts to avoid and/or minimize impacts to the aquatic environment:

The applicant selected a site that is devoid of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV’s) and where there are no natural rock outcrops or hard bottom formations.

Furthermore, the applicant proposes to conduct a biological survey immediately prior to the deployment of any materials. Although no benthic resources were identified in the pre-application survey, if benthic resources such as hardbottom or seagrass are found during this survey, the target position will be altered to provide appropriate buffer, a minimum of 150 feet buffer will be maintained from all submerged aquatic resources (i.e. harbottom, corals). If adequate buffer distances are not available, the initial target site will be abandoned and another location evaluated.

In water surveys will also be conducted immediately post deployment to verify that material was deployed where intended and does not exceed navigational clearance requirements.

The deployment site shall be clearly marked with buoys before and during material placement to insure containment within the permitted site.

All work will take place during daylight hours.

The applicant has also submitted the attached supplemental information which includes best management practices and micro-siting methods as part of their proposed work as to ensure accurate placement of artificial reef material.

COMPENSATORY MITIGATION: The applicant has provided the following explanation as to why compensatory mitigation should not be required: No impacts to submerged aquatic vegetation are proposed or anticipated therefore no compensatory mitigation is proposed.

CULTURAL RESOURCES:

The Corps is not aware of any known historic properties within the permit area. By copy of this public notice, the Corps is providing information for review. Our final determination relative to historic resource impacts is subject to review by and coordination with the State Historic Preservation Officer and those federally recognized tribes with concerns in Florida and the Permit Area.

3

ENDANGERED SPECIES:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has determined the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) or its designated critical habitat. Potential impacts to the endangered manatee were evaluated using The Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville District, and the State of Florida Effect Determination Key for the Manatee in Florida (Manatee Key), dated April 2013. Use of the Manatee Key resulted in the following sequential determination: A > B > C > G > N > O > P >5 “may affect, not likely to adversely affect”. Provided the applicant adheres to the standard manatee construction conditions during the in-water work, the key results in a may affect, not likely to adversely affect determination. Due to the programmatic concurrence obtained from USFWS on the Key, no further consultation with USFWS was required on this individual project.

The project site is located in waters that are potentially utilized by the smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata), Nassau grouper (Epinephelus striatus), and several species of swimming sea turtles, including the Loggerhead (Caretta caretta), Green (Chelonia mydas), Leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), Hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), and Kemp's Ridley (Lepidochelys kempit). The aforementioned species may be affected by being unable to use the area for forage or refuge habitat due to potential avoidance of construction activities caused by the deployment of artificial reef material. Because these species are highly motile and likely to leave the area during construction, the risk of injury from this type of construction activity is insignificant. Furthermore, the applicant agrees to adhere to the "Sea Turtle and Smalltooth Sawfish Construction Conditions". The Corps determined that the proposed project "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" the smalltooth sawfish, Nassau grouper and swimming sea turtles or their designated critical habitat. The Corps will request concurrence with this determination from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Protected Resources Division (PRD) pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended, via separate letter.

The Corps has also determined the project “may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect” for the Elkhorn coral (Acropora palmate), Staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis) and/or its designated critical habitat. The proposed project site falls within the species critical habitat; however, the proposed site is compose of sandy unconsolidated bottom, devoid of benthic habitats including seagrass, hardbottom or corals. Barren sandy areas of deployments are not suitable habitat for colonization of these species. Furthermore, the applicant has proposed to use BMP and the “Micro-Sitting Methodology” procedures to ensure all deployment occur only within unconsolidated sandy bottom. No benthic resources are currently present within the area proposed for deployment. The Corps will request the National Marine Fisheries Service’s concurrence with this determination pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act via a separate letter.

4

The Corps has determined that the project will have “no effect” on any other listed threatened or endangered species or its designated critical habitat.

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT (EFH): This notice initiates consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service on EFH as required by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 1996. The proposal would impact approximately 2.07 acres of sand bottom utilized by various life stages of shrimp, reef fish, stone crab; and coastal migratory pelagics. Our initial determination is that the proposed action would not have a substantial adverse impact on EFH or Federally managed fisheries in the Atlantic Ocean. Our final determination relative to project impacts and the need for mitigation measures is subject to review by and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service.

NOTE: This public notice is being issued based on information furnished by the applicant. This information has not been verified or evaluated to ensure compliance with laws and regulation governing the regulatory program. The jurisdictional line [has/has not] been verified by Corps personnel.

AUTHORIZATION FROM OTHER AGENCIES: Water Quality Certification may be required from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and/or one of the state Water Management Districts.

COMMENTS regarding the potential authorization of the work proposed should be submitted in writing to the attention of the District Engineer through the Miami Permits Section, 9900 Southwest 107th Avenue, Suite 203, Miami, Florida, 33176 within 21 days from the date of this notice.

The decision whether to issue or deny this permit application will be based on the information received from this public notice and the evaluation of the probable impact to the associated wetlands. This is based on an analysis of the applicant's avoidance and minimization efforts for the project, as well as the compensatory mitigation proposed.

QUESTIONS concerning this application should be directed to the project manager, Gletys Guardia-Montoya, in writing at the Miami Permits Section, 9900 Southwest 107th Avenue, Suite 203, Miami, Florida, 33176; by electronic mail at Gletys.Guardia­ [email protected]; or, by telephone at (305)526-2515.

IMPACT ON NATURAL RESOURCES: Coordination with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Marine Fisheries Services, and other Federal, State, and local agencies, environmental groups, and concerned citizens generally yields pertinent environmental information that is instrumental in determining the impact the proposed action will have on the natural resources of the area.

5

EVALUATION: The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefits, which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including cumulative impacts thereof; among these are conservation, economics, esthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, historical properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, floodplain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food, and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property ownership, and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. Evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will also include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA, under authority of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act or the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972. A permit will be granted unless its issuance is found to be contrary to the public interest.

The US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other Interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition, or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this determination, comments are used to assess impacts to endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity.

COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT CONSISTENCY: In Florida, the State approval constitutes compliance with the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan. In Puerto Rico, a Coastal Zone Management Consistency Concurrence is required from the Puerto Rico Planning Board. In the Virgin Islands, the Department of Planning and Natural Resources permit constitutes compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Plan.

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING: Any person may request a public hearing. The request must be submitted in writing to the District Engineer within the designated comment period of the notice and must state the specific reasons for requesting the public hearing.

6

Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Site

N A

Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef r&,A ......

...... ····· · .------__,...... · .· ...····... Section A-A :...... West t East 0 ----;------~~------...... ~ 5 ~

~...... w w 10 LL ...... z 15.3 FT. Proposed Minimum Depth .....~ :::c 15 ...... , 0.. w Area Avaitabte for ······ 20 ······ 0 Reef Construction

Bottom Profile ...... 25 ...... I I I I I I I I I ...... 0 so 100 150 200 250 300 DISTANCE IN FEET

'"'"'"",.,..,..,.,.,..,.,..,.~.,...,..,.,.,..,.,..,.,.,..,.,.,..,.,..,.,, .,.,..,.,,..,.,,....,.,.,.,.,,..,.,..,.,..,.,,....,.,,..,.,,..,.,...,,..,.,.,....,.,.,.,.,,..,.,...,,.,.,,.,...,.,,..,.,,..,.,..,. """·.,...,.,,..,.,.,..,.,..., ,.,..,....,.,.,.,..,,~...... ···················...... ····················...... ·················· ····················· ...... ························· ················································ ...... ··········································· ···· ······························ ...... ···················· ··············· ········································ ...... ··.·········...... ········...... ······...... ···...... ··········· ...... ·..····....·············..·.···...·········.·.···...·.···.·..··········.··..··..·.·.·...... ················· ...... ········································ ·········· ······················· ...... ·········..··...··...... ············...... ·······....··· ...... , ......

Legend Baitfish Artificial Reef Corner and Center GPS Points Latitude N LongitudeW Latitude N. Longit udeW ~ Biscayne National Park Point (DM) (OM) (DD) (DD) l ~~~ ~~~~j Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Northwest 25 40.790 80 06.792 25.67983 80.11320 Northeast 25 40.790 80 06.737 25.67983 80.11228 0 1,250 2,500 5,000 Feet Southwest 25 40.740 80 06.792 25.67900 80.11320 I I I Southeas t 25 40.740 80 06.737 25.67900 80.11228 1 inch = 2,500 feet Center 25 40.765 80 06.765 25.67942 80.11275

Miami-Dade County Bug Light Shoal MIAMl·· E Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources Artificial t!•Pl:ii1 Division of Environmental Resources Management Reef Site N MIAMI· ~ Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef GM~ao 'iiiii1' NOAA Chart 11465 A N ~.\:!rd" ~ Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Site ·-- _____ ,,., 2003 Laser Airborne De th Sounder Bath met A

25.67983 N ....-11------80.11228 w

cen.,­ 25.67942 N 80.11276.W

25.67900 N 80.11228 w

Legend I I BugUghtShoal_Poly Habitat Classification (Walker 2009) f.f~:::.:~};·.~ Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve Discontinuous Seagrass Attachment 4: Supplemental Information

Miami-Dade County Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Army Corp Permit Authorization Request SAJ-2018-00382

Supplemental Information

The following information is provided for issuance of a permit authorizing the construction of an artificial reef offshore of Key Biscayne in Miami-Dade County.

Block 18. The proposed artificial reef project would allow for the deployment of approximately 2,000cy of concrete and/or limerock material in a shallow site off of Key Biscayne. This site will be an addition to the existing 8 permitted artificial reef sites offshore managed by Miami-Dade County and will serve as a shallow fishing site south of Government Cut. The Miami-Dade County Artificial Reef Program was established in 1981 and is administered by the County’s Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources – Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM).

As depicted in Attachments 1-3, the proposed site is 300’ x 300’ covering 2.07acres. The site depth is -23’ MLW and will maintain a vertical clearance of -15.3’ MLW.

Block 23: Avoidance and Minimization While a variety of artificial reef materials have been employed in the creation of the County’s reef sites over the years, present and future reef materials are restricted to those which meet material suitability requirements and will minimally have a life span in excess of 25 years. At this location, only natural or processed calcium carbonate materials would be deployed such as limestone boulders, large concrete based materials such as connection/junction boxes, large sections of bridge decking or other construction demolition, or pre-fabricated concrete artificial reef modules. Unsuitable material including vessels or barges will not be deployed.

All reef material deployments will be prepared as necessary to meet the criteria established by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and will be inspected (if applicable) by that agency prior to deployment. Artificial reef preparation may include, but is not limited to, the removal of all asphalt, creosote, petroleum, or other hydrocarbons, toxic residues, and any loose or buoyant materials that might break free during deployment. The preparation of artificial reefs will also follow the guidelines set forth in the following best management practice (BMP) documents:  Guidelines for Marine Artificial Reef Materials 2nd Edition (Association of the Gulf and Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commissions 2004)  National Artificial Reef Plan: Guidelines for Siting, Construction, Development, and Assessment of Artificial Reefs (NOAA 2007)  Guidelines and Management Practices for Artificial Reef Siting, Usage, Construction, and Anchoring in Southeast Florida (Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative, Lindberg and Seaman (editors), 2010)

Based on Miami-Dade County’s experiences during Hurricane !ndrew in 1992, where various types of artificial reef material moved or were damaged, a storm stability analysis is performed for each proposed artificial reef prior to deployment. State law requires a stability analysis based on a 20-year Attachment 4: Supplemental Information

storm. All artificial reef deployments will be evaluated based on specific characteristics of a 20 or 25 and a 50-year storm event to provide the necessary safeguard against material movement. The Lin Stability model distributed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) and the Miami- Dade stability model developed by Coastal Systems International will be utilized to assess the stability of each individual artificial reef prior to deployment. If a proposed artificial reef is not indicated to be stable at the site depth, the material will not be deployed.

In addition to the pre-application survey described in Attachment 5 below, a biological survey will also be conducted immediately prior to the deployment of any materials. Biological surveys will be conducted by DERM marine biologists using SCUBA. Each survey will initially consist of the placement of an anchored marker buoy at the proposed target reef location. Divers will then conduct a survey for any resources within a 150’ minimum radius of the marker buoy. Although no benthic resources were identified in the pre-application survey, if benthic resources such as hardbottom or seagrass are found during this survey, the target position will be altered to provide appropriate buffer distance from resources. If adequate buffer distances are not available, the initial target site will be abandoned and another location evaluated.

Reef materials will be transported to the site via tugboat and/or barge. On site, the vessel transporting the materials will be positioned directly adjacent to the previously established buoy, and held in position either by anchoring/spudding, with dynamic positioning using tugboat(s), or combination of tugs and anchors. Once a stable configuration at the target buoy is achieved the material will be deployed. Concrete and boulder materials will be offloaded using heavy equipment such as cranes or loaders. Please see Attachment 6 for further detail regarding “Micro-Siting Methodology.”

In water surveys will also be conducted immediately post deployment to verify that material was deployed where intended and does not exceed navigational clearance requirements. Adjustments to location or material height off the substrate are made if necessary. The dimensions and relief of the new artificial reef area are measured and, if the size of the reef allows, the perimeter is traced by divers towing a surface GPS unit. This information will be incorporated into a material placement report and submitted to Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission.

Attachment 5: Benthic Resources Surveys

Miami-Dade County Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Project

As requested in Section C, Part 2.2, this report contains information on the existing resources within and immediately adjacent to the proposed Bug Light Shoal Artificial Reef Site. The proposed site was established approximately 500’ east of any mapped benthic resources (Walker 2009). Nine north-south transects were established within adjacent to the proposed permit area to verify the absence of benthic resources. These transects were surveyed on October 31, 2017 by Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources – Division of Environmental Resources Management (DERM) biologists on SCUBA. The biologists swim in a general north-south direction towing a GPS attached to a surface float to mark the actual survey path. During the surveys, only barren sand was observed. The proposed project location and survey paths are shown in Figure 1. The closest mapped benthic resources are discontinuous seagrass beds approximately 500’ northwest of the project area.

Attachment 5: Benthic Resources Surveys

Figure 1. Benthic resource surveys for the Baitfish Artificial Reef.

MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (DERM)

Artificial Reef Best Management Practices Micro‐siting Methodology for Placement of Reef Materials

Detailed Artificial Reef Micro‐Siting Methods to Protect Naturally Occurring Hardbottom, Coral Reef, and Other Benthic Communities

The Methodology involves three elements: I. Material Stability Analysis II. Proposed Artificial Reef Site and Target Deployment Location Selection III. Inspection of the Proposed Target Deployment Location

The detail for each element is as follows:

I. Material Stability Analysis. All artificial reef material to be placed will be evaluated with FWCC Division of Marine Fisheries Management “Artificial Reef Stability Analysis” software by Paul Lin or equivalent software. The analysis will evaluate the stability of the material no less than a 20 year (return event) storm. The size, relative shape (ship, culvert, boulder), and weight will be used by the software to assess the stability of the material for horizontal movement (sliding) or overturning. Only depths in which the material is determined to be ‘stable’ will be considered for location of the artificial reef.

II. Proposed Artificial Reef Site and Target Deployment Location Selection. The deployment location the artificial reef material will be selected based on the type and purpose of the material and known locations of natural benthic communities and existing artificial reef material. A. A permitted artificial reef site will be selected for receipt of the material depending on factors such as: 1. Depth required for stable placement of the material; 2. Size of the material; 3. Use of the material (mitigation based, benthic habitat, fisheries habitat); and 4. Factors associated with the specific reef material (i.e., a specific fishing club donation, mitigation for habitat impacts in adjacent areas, etc). B. Using GIS software (ArcView® or ArcGIS®) and the best available bathymetric data (Laser Airborne Depth Sounder Surveys, side scan sonar, etc.) will be utilized to find a target deployment location within the larger artificial reef site. Coordinates for the target location are recorded and provided to field personnel to conduct an ‘On‐Site’ inspection (see Section III). Alternate target locations will also be identified. The target site will be:

Page 1 Revised March 2010

1. A suitable area clear of benthic habitats including seagrass, hardbottom or existing artificial reefs. 2. A sufficient distance from other material to provide a buffer upon deployment depending on deployment methodology and give site conditions (i.e., strong current).

III. Inspection of the Proposed Target Location. The method for ‘inspection’ of the proposed target location is dependant on the site depth. For all materials, a minimum of 150 feet buffer will be maintained from all hardbottom and coral reef habitats. A. For proposed sites in less than 150 feet, a DERM dive team with biologists experienced and trained in evaluation and assessment of marine benthic habitats and coral reef communities will conduct a visual assessment of the target location and surrounding areas for the presence of existing benthic (natural or artificial) habitat and cultural resources or artifacts that would indicated the presence of a potentially significant shipwreck or other historic property. 1. If existing benthic habitat or cultural resources or artifacts are not found, the center point of the site will be determined by floating a ‘taught‐line’ buoy to the surface and recording the location of the position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS). 2. Should any existing benthic habitat or cultural resources be found within the target site (inclusive of the buffer zone), the adjacent areas will be surveyed to determine if a suitable area exists to modify the target deployment location. When a suitable adjacent area is located, the center point of the new location will be determined by floating a ‘taught‐line’ buoy to the surface, and recording the location of the position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS). 3. Should any existing benthic habitat or cultural resources be found at the primary target site and adjacent areas, an alternate target site will be surveyed to determine if a suitable area exists. When a suitable secondary target area is located, the center point of the new location will be determined by floating a ‘taught‐line’ buoy to the surface, and recording the location of the position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS). B. For proposed sites in greater than 150 feet, DERM personnel with experience in interpretation of bathymetric fathometer output will conduct a grid of north/south and east/west fathometer tracings of the proposed area. The number of transects to be conducted will depend on the size of the material in consideration. The fathometer will have a “zoom” function that will allow for displaying only the last 20 feet above the bottom. With this resolution, areas of hardbottom with benthic growth or significant relief are discernable from flat sand bottom and will be detected by the operators. 1. If areas of hardbottom with benthic growth or significant relief are found, the center point of the site will be determined by recording the location of the center point of the surveyed position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS).

Page 2 Revised March 2010

2. Should any hardbottom areas of hardbottom with benthic growth or significant relief be found within the target site (inclusive of the buffer zone), the adjacent areas will be surveyed to determine if a suitable area exists to modify the target deployment location. When a suitable adjacent area is located, the center point of the new location will be determined by floating a ‘taught‐line’ buoy to the surface, and recording the location of the position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS). 3. Should any existing benthic habitat or cultural resources be found at the primary target site and adjacent areas, an alternate target site will be surveyed to determine if a suitable area exists. When a suitable secondary target area is located, the center point of the new location will be determined by floating a ‘taught‐line’ buoy to the surface, and recording the location of the position with a differential global positioning system (DGPS).

Page 3 Revised March 2010