Establishes funding request procedures, project ranking criteria, cost sharing procedures and project agreement requirements.

 

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Beaches and Coastal Systems

RULE NOS.:RULE TITLES:
62B-36.001Purpose
62B-36.002Definitions
62B-36.003Policy
62B-36.005Annual Funding Requests
62B-36.006Project Ranking Procedure
62B-36.007Project Cost Sharing
62B-36.009Project Agreements
PURPOSE AND EFFECT: Establishes funding request procedures, project ranking criteria, cost sharing procedures and project agreement requirements.
SUMMARY: Implement the new inlet management priorities and procedures set forth in Section 161.143, F.S., and make other changes to improve program implementation. Further, the amendments to the Chapter will incorporate recommendations made by the Beach Management Working Group.
SUMMARY OF STATEMENT OF ESTIMATED REGULATORY COSTS AND LEGISLATIVE RATIFICATION:
The Agency has determined that this will not have an adverse impact on small business or likely increase directly or indirectly regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate within one year after the implementation of the rule. A SERC has not been prepared by the agency.
The Agency has determined that the proposed rule is not expected to require legislative ratification based on the statement of estimated regulatory costs or if no SERC is required, the information expressly relied upon and described herein: The proposed amendments to Chapter 62B-36 do not impose a regulatory cost because the chapter sets forth how the Department ranks and distributes beach management funding assistance for local governments. Businesses are not eligible to receive such funding.
Any person who wishes to provide information regarding a statement of estimated regulatory costs, or provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative must do so in writing within 21 days of this notice.
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY: 161.101(21), 161.143(6) and 161.161(7) FS.
LAW IMPLEMENTED: 161.088, 161.091(1), (2), (3), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS.
A HEARING WILL BE HELD AT THE DATE, TIME AND PLACE SHOWN BELOW:
DATE AND TIME: April 19, 2013, 10:00 a.m.
PLACE: At the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, 4708 Capital Circle, Training Room, Tallahassee, FL, 32304. If preferred, a live Webinar will be available. Participants may register at https://www2.gotomeeting.com/register/694717602. The hearing will also be available via teleconference at: 888-670-3525, PIN 5509213632#.
Pursuant to the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, any person requiring special accommodations to participate in this workshop/meeting is asked to advise the agency at least 5 days before the workshop/meeting by contacting: Bureau of Personnel Services at [phone]. If you are hearing or speech impaired, please contact the agency using the Florida Relay Service, 1(800)955-8771 (TDD) or 1(800)955-8770 (Voice).
THE PERSON TO BE CONTACTED REGARDING THE PROPOSED RULE IS: Kamie Carney, Department of Environmental Protection, Mail Station #300, 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000, [phone], or [e-mail]

THE FULL TEXT OF THE PROPOSED RULE IS:

62B-36.001 Purpose.

The Beach Management Funding Assistance Program works in concert with local sponsors eligible governmental entities to achieve protection, preservation, and restoration, and nourishment of the sandy beaches fronting the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida, and for the management of inlets to replicate the natural drift of sand interrupted by improved, modified, or altered inlets. Annually, tThe Department requests funding from the Legislature to implement the program and when appropriations are made by the legislature, may enters into a cost sharing agreements with local sponsors eligible governmental entities for the implementation of beach and inlet management projects. This Rrule Chapter establishes funding request procedures, project ranking criteria, cost sharing procedures and project agreement requirements pursuant to Sections 161.088, 161.091, 161.101, 161.142, 161.143, and 161.161, F.S.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.01, 16B-36.001, Amended 12-25-03, _____________.

 

62B-36.002 Definitions.

(1) “Annual Funding Request and Local Long Range Budget Plan” is the document submitted by a local sponsor the eligible governmental entity which includes a detailed description for the next fiscal year’s funding request and a schedule for the disbursement of funds to be requested for beach or inlet management projects or related activities over a given period of time. Only projects consistent with the Strategic Beach Management Plan will be considered for funding. These projects will be ranked and placed on either the beach or inlet management list submitted to the Legislature for funding consideration.

(2) “Area of Inlet Influence” is the distance along the adjacent sandy shorelines where sediment transfer and shoreline location is physically altered due to the presence of the inlet and any associated structures or improvements which alter the natural functioning of the inlet. The area of inlet influence will be determined using a feasibility or an inlet management study.

(3)(2) “Beach Management” is protecting, maintaining, preserving, or enhancing Florida’s beaches. Activities included are including but not limited to, restoring or nourishing beach and dune systems, dune protection and restoration activities, restoration of natural shoreline processes, removal of derelict structures and obstacles to natural shoreline process in conjunction with restoration or nourishment, and inlet management activities to facilitate sand bypassing, construction of erosion control structures, as well as. These activities include feasibility, supporting engineering, design and environmental studies, and post-construction project monitoring, and mitigation, to support such activities and removal of derelict structures and obstacles to natural shoreline processes.

(4)(3) “Contractual Services” are the provision of engineering, professional, or scientific services for eligible activities as otherwise described in this Cchapter. Such activities may be performed by a private company or individual, or, if approved by the Department, pursuant to subsection 62B-36.007(6) 62B-36.007(4), F.A.C., the local sponsor an eligible governmental entity.

(5)(4) No change.

(6)(5) No change.

(6) “Eligible Governmental Entity” is any state, county, municipality, township, special district, or any other public agency having authority and responsibility for preserving and protecting the beach and dune system.

(7) “Inlet” is a coastal barrier short narrow waterway including all related flood and ebb tidal shoals and the inlet shorelines, connecting a bay, lagoon, or similar body of water with the Gulf of Mexico, the Straits of Florida, or the Atlantic Ocean and all related flood and ebb tidal shoals and the inlet shorelines. Improved, altered or modified inlets are those where stabilizing rigid coastal structures have been constructed, or where inlet related structures or features such as channels have been constructed or are actively maintained and the channel depth is greater than the inlet system would support in a natural state.

(8) “Inlet Management” is comprised of actions taken to minimize, eliminate, or mitigate the effects of the inlet on the adjacent shorelines including feasibility, engineering, design, environmental studies, construction, and post-construction monitoring to support such activities.

(9) “Local Sponsor” is any state, county, municipality, township, or special district created pursuant to Part II Chapter 161 having authority and responsibility for preserving and protecting the coastal system, and any state, county, municipality, township, and inlet and navigational districts having authority and responsibility for  management of an inlet. The local sponsor is responsible for the balance of the non-state cost share.

(10) “Local Long Range Budget Plan” is a document that projects the ten-year planning needs for federal, state, and local governments necessary to implement the strategies outlined in the Strategic Beach Management Plan for a specific project. The document lists five years of anticipated project costs followed by the next five years of anticipated planning phases. The document is submitted by local sponsors to the Department along with annual funding requests.

(11)(8) “Project Agreement” is a contract executed between the Department and the local sponsor eligible governmental entity that explicitly defines the terms and conditions under which the project shall be conducted.

(12)(9) “Project Boundary” for ranking purposes, means the sandy shoreline fronting the Atlantic Ocean, Gulf of Mexico, or the Straits of Florida, of the beach management project and the first row of residential or commercial development immediately landward of the beach vegetation line or beach erosion control line, whichever is further landward. The first row of development may be separated from the shoreline by recreational amenities, roadways or parking areas as long as there is dedicated public access. The area of inlet influence shall be the project boundary for inlet projects.

(13)(10) “Project Phase” is a logical step required in developing and implementing a project. The following phases will be considered for funding: A typical project will normally include the following phases

(a) “Feasibility” – is the characterization of the erosion problem and constraints on remediation alternatives, development and analysis of alternatives to address the problem, including taking no action, data collection in support of the analysis, and selection of the cost-effective, environmentally sound alternative that avoids or minimizes adverse impacts.

(b) “Design and Permitting” – is the development of design studies, data collection, plans, specifications, permit applications, and financial planning final costs for the project.

(c)  “Construction” – is the execution of the selected project, including contractor services,  contract management, construction oversight, and construction-related monitoring required by permit or contract.

(d) “Post-Construction Monitoring” – is the collection and analysis of physical and project performance, biological and environmental data required by state or federal permits on an annual or periodic basis following the completion of the construction phase.

(14)(11) “Public Beach Access” is an entry zone and associated parking adjacent to a sandy beach under public ownership or control which is specifically used for providing access to the adjacent sandy beach for the general public. The access must be signed, maintained and clearly visible from the adjacent roadway. The parking spaces counted for eligibility must be within one-quarter mile walking distance of a lateral entry zone and available to the general public. The types of public beach access sites are:

(a) “Primary Beach Access” is a site with at least 50 100 public parking spaces and public restrooms;.

(b) No change.

(15)(12) “Public Lodging Establishment” is any business public lodging establishment currently licensed by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation in the classification of “hotel”, “motel” or “vacation rental condominium” and “resort condominium” with six or more units as designated by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, or campgrounds and fronting directly on the sandy beach.  Public Lodging Establishments must be located on the beachfront or within one quarter mile walking distance of a public access.

(16)“Sediment Budget” is the mass balance between inputs and outputs of sediment in the inlet system, including all related flood and ebb tidal shoals, inlet shorelines and inland waterways, and the adjacent open coast beaches within the area of inlet influence.

(17)(13) “Statewide Long Range Budget Plan” is the document produced by the Department that projects the ten-year planning needs for federal, state, and local governments necessary to implement the Strategic Beach Management Plan. The document lists five years of anticipated project costs followed by the next five years of anticipated planning phases for all beach and inlet management projects statewide. the planning document used by the Department to schedule the disbursement of funds over a given period of time. It is developed in coordination with local sponsors based on their eligible governmental entities based on the Strategic Beach Management Plan and Local Long Range Budget Plans and is submitted to the Legislature annually as a companion document to the Local Government Funding Request.

(18)(14) “Strategic Beach Management Plan” is the Department’s adopted plan for management of the critically eroded shoreline of the state and those components of feasibility or inlet management studies that minimize the erosive effects of inlets and the related coastal system.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.02, 16B-36.002, Amended 12-25-03,____________.

 

62B-36.003 General Policy.

(1) No change.

(2) The Department shall annually review available information and revise the designations of critically eroded shoreline in the Critical Erosion Report. Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities shall be notified of any proposed changes and be given an opportunity to submit additional information to justify or refute proposed revisions.

(3) Beach and inlet management projects funded by the Department shall be conducted in a manner that encourages cost-savings, fosters regional coordination of projects, optimizes management of sediments and project performance, protects the environment, and provides long-term solutions. Appropriate feasibility studies or analyses analysis shall be required before design or construction of new projects.

(4) Beach and dune restoration and nourishment projects funded by the Department shall be accessible to the general public and access used to calculate eligibility shall be maintained for at least 10 years following completion of each construction event. the life of the project. Inlet sediment bypassing and the initial restoration of adjacent shorelines impacted by improved, modified or altered inlets, do not have to provide for public access, except for when an Erosion Control Line has been established. Shoreline segments shall be evaluated for public access as set forth in subsection 62B-36.007(1), F.A.C.

(5) No change.

(6) The goal of inlet management projects is to balance the sediment budget of the inlet system and the adjacent shorelines within the area of inlet influence. Inlet management projects will be evaluated based upon the criteria in Rules 62B-36.006 and 62B-36.007, F.A.C., and may be cost-shared with the local sponsor for up to 75 percent of the non-federal share.

(7)(6) Activities primarily related to navigation or other infrastructure improvements at inlets are, generally, not eligible for cost sharing. However, components of projects which mitigate critically eroded shoreline caused by alterations, modifications or improvements to inlets, implement components of the Strategic Beach Management Plan, and which do not increase impacts, are eligible for cost sharing of up to 50%  of the non-federal share for those components which:

(a) No change.

(b) Cost effectively place beach quality sand on the adjacent eroded beaches, such as the incremental cost of placing sand on the beach rather than in an offshore disposal area. The Department will cost share only in the incremental cost of placement of the material. The Department will not cost share in activities not mobilization and demobilization of equipment, design studies, or any other activity normal to the operation and maintenance of the inlet, such as mobilization and mobilization of equipment and design studies.

(8)(7) Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities are encouraged to consider existing inlet navigation maintenance activities as potential sources of sand when developing beach restoration or nourishment projects.

(9)(8) Non-federal beach Beach management projects shall be cost shared up to 50 percent of the total project cost. Projects authorized by Congress for federal financial participation in the Civil Works program of the United States Army Corps of Engineers shall be cost shared up to 50 percent % of the non-federal share. Beach management projects approved to receive Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance funding (Category G or equivalent subsequent program for designed, constructed and routinely maintained beaches) shall be cost-shared up to 50 percent of the local share after state and federal emergency funds are applied.  Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities shall pursue federal appropriations to the maximum extent possible in order to proportionally reduce state and local project costs. The Department will not cost share on the federal portion of an authorized project unless an immediate threat to upland properties and financial loss is demonstrated.

(10)(9) Upon notification from the Department of the 60-day submittal period, local sponsors eligible governmental entities shall submit an updated Annual Funding Request and Local Long Range Budget Plan. Annual funding shall only be requested for projects expected to be initiated or continued in that fiscal year.

(11)(10) The Department shall annually review and rank all projects requested by local sponsors eligible governmental entities for the next fiscal year on either the beach management or inlet management project lists, and maintain a current project listings in priority order. As part of the review, the Department shall seek formal input from local coastal governments, beach and general government associations, and other coastal interest groups, and university experts. The project listings shall also identify unranked projects and funds needed for statewide and regional management activities, state sponsored or co-sponsored demonstration projects, new feasibility and design studies, and a consolidated category for post-construction project monitoring required by state and federal permits. In determining the final project ranking, the Department shall consider likely available funding and include a primary and alternate list of all projects. The primary list shall include those projects where legislatively appropriated funding is anticipated to be adequate to fund the projects. The alternate list includes those projects where funding is not anticipated to be available. Funding that may become available due to savings or scheduling changes shall be made available in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year to projects on approved inlet management lists in the following order:

(a) Projects on the primary list that require additional funds to complete the project phase.

(b) Previously funded projects that require additional funds to complete the project phase.

(c) Projects on the alternate list in priority order.

(d) and for eEmergency situations as determined by the Governor pursuant to Section 161.111, F.S., or the Legislature Department.

(11) The Department, in consultation with the eligible governmental entity, has the discretion, pursuant to Section 161.101(20), F.S., to revise funding for projects identified on the primary or alternate list if it is determined by the Department that the project is not ready to be initiated during the fiscal year. If the Department revises funding for a primary list project, at the request of the eligible governmental entity, the project shall be included on the subsequent year’s primary list, regardless of prioritization pursuant to Rule 62B-36.006, F.A.C.

(12) Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities may design and construct beach management projects prior to the receipt of funding from the state and may subsequently apply for reimbursement from the Department pursuant to the procedure in subsection 62B-36.009(3), F.A.C.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(13),161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.111, 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6), 216.181 FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.03, Amended 4-27-86, Formerly 16B-36.003, Amended 12-25-03, ____________.

 

62B-36.005 Annual Funding Requests.

(1) Annual funding requests for cost sharing of beach management projects shall be submitted by the local sponsor eligible governmental entity to the Department. Projects previously submitted, but not funded, and projects with cost overruns may should be included. Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities who have received funding for projects in past fiscal years and who anticipate requesting funding in subsequent years shall update the Local Long Range Budget Plan as to costs and scheduling. The Local Long Range Budget Plan shall be consistent with the Strategic Beach Management Plan and have a 10-year minimum time frame. The submittal shall be in electronic format and include:

(a) No change.

(b) A map of the project area depicting the public beach access, the public parking within one quarter mile of each beach access, public restroom facilities, the public lodging establishments, and comprehensive plan designations for current land use of commercial and recreational properties facilities within the project boundary.

(c) Current license documentation on public lodging establishments within the project boundaries, including the number of units available, if used to document public access.

(d) A current or updated resolution from the local sponsor’s governing board eligible governmental entity which includes statements of their support of the project, willingness to serve as the local sponsor, and a statement of the extent of their ability and willingness to provide the necessary local funding share to implement the project.  For projects proposing regionalization, local sponsors must provide an executed interlocal agreement outlining the nature of regionalization.

(e) No change.

(f) The annual project cost estimates indicating the federal, state, and local cost share that indicate cost sharing by the eligible governmental entity, with sufficient supporting detail depicting costs of project phases.

(2) Annual funding requests for cost sharing of inlet management projects shall be submitted by the local sponsor to the Department. Projects previously submitted, but not funded, and projects with cost overruns may be included.  Local sponsors who have received funding for projects in past fiscal years and who anticipate requesting funding in subsequent years shall update the Local Long Range Budget Plan as to costs and scheduling. The Local Long Range Budget Plan shall be consistent with the Strategic Beach Management Plan and have a 10-year minimum time frame. The submittal shall be in electronic format and include:

(a) A map depicting the inlet;

(b) A description of the sediment budget and area of inlet influence from an adopted Inlet Management Plan or feasibility-level study;

(c) A detailed project description, including project boundaries by Department range monuments, methods used in conducting the project, and data or analysis to apply the ranking criteria required by Rule 62B-36.006, F.A.C.;

(d) A current or updated resolution from the local sponsor’s governing board which includes statements of their support of the project, willingness to serve as the local sponsor, and a statement of the extent of their ability and willingness to provide the necessary local funding share to implement the project;

(e) A schedule of activities by project phase; and,

(f) The annual project cost estimates indicating the federal, state, and local cost share, with sufficient supporting detail depicting costs of project phases.

(3)(2) The Department shall evaluate projects submitted to determine consistency with the Strategic Beach Management Plan eligibility, project ranking and priority, and the extent of cost sharing. Upon completion of the evaluation process, all eligible projects will be incorporated into the Department’s Statewide Long Range Budget Plan, which will be submitted to the Legislature along with the Department’s Local Government Funding legislative budget Rrequest that annually prioritizes prioritizing projects according to the criteria in Rule 62B-36.006, F.A.C.

(4)(3) Funding requests shall be evaluated and ranked on the basis of information provided by the eligible governmental entity, except where such data is superseded by better quality information obtained by the Department. Local sponsors will be provided 21 days to review the project’s proposed ranking and provide clarification to support their requested award of scores. Failure to provide all required information and documentation relating to eligibility and ranking criteria will result in the request being declared ineligible or receiving reduced ranking points. Failure to provide accurate information will lead to termination of the project’s eligibility for funding for the requested fiscal year.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.05, Amended 4-27-86, Formerly 16B-36.005, Amended 12-25-03,____________.

 

62B-36.006 Project Ranking Procedure.

(1) Beach Management Projects.  Local sponsor funding requests Eligible projects requesting funding for beach management projects in the upcoming fiscal year will be ranked in priority order for the Department’s legislative budget request. Projects previously ranked for a construction phase will retain their project score through the monitoring phase. Eligible projects will receive be assigned a total point score by the Department based on the following criteria:

(a) Severity of erosion. The severity of erosion score is determined by the average rate of erosion for the project length area over 30 years based upon the Department’s long term data base for the project length at 2 points per foot of erosion, rounded to the nearest whole foot, for a maximum total of 10 points. The Department will use historical MHW data files contained in the Department’s Historic Shoreline Database to calculate the average rate of erosion for up to a 30 year period after 1972, but prior to any beach fill placement in the project area. Linear least square fit to the data will be used to determine the erosion/accretion trend.  For those project areas where inadequate data prevents the calculation of an average rate, then the rate may be obtained from a published study document used in the design of the project.

(b) Threat to upland structures. The percent of shoreline developed property containing structures at or seaward of the projected 25-year return interval storm event erosion limit within the project boundaries at or seaward of the projected 25-year return interval storm event erosion limit times ten, rounded to the nearest whole number, for a maximum total of 10 points.  The Department will determine the threat to upland structures by application of the -Dean CCCLr, SBEACH (Storm-induced BEAch CHange Model) or comparable numeric model using a 25-year return interval storm tide hydrograph on the most recent beach-offshore profile data at each R-monument in the project area as determined by the Department and provided in “Erosion Due to High Frequency Storm Events,” which is incorporated by reference.  SBEACH results shall be supported with documentation on objectives, data used, model configuration and parameter selection, calibration/validation, applications of forcing conditions and any assumptions made in the modeling analysis.  Copies of “Erosion Due to High Frequency Storm Events,” by the University of Florida, dated November 22, 1995 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02423 and the “SBEACH-32 Users Interface Manual” dated January 10, 1996 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02424, “SBEACH Report 1” dated July 1, 1989 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02425, “SBEACH Report 2” dated May 1 1990 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02427, “SBEACH Report 3” dated May 1, 1993 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02428, “SBEACH Report 4” dated April 1, 1996 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02429, and “SBEACH Report 5” dated August 1, 1998 http://www.flrules.org/Gateway/reference.asp?No=Ref-02430 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which are incorporated by reference, may be obtained at the following web site: www.dep.state.fl.us/beaches.

(c) Recreational and economic benefits. The percentage of linear footage of property within the project boundaries zoned commercial, or recreational, or Public Lodging Establishment, or the equivalent, in the current local government land use map times ten, rounded to the nearest whole number, for a maximum total of 10 points. Un-designated properties will be considered designated or zoned the same as the adjacent property designations.  Street ends will be considered recreational if they provide access to the beach, in accordance with 62B.36.002(14).

(d) Availability of federal funds. Projects with United States Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Congressional authorization for the requested project phase shall receive 5 points.  Projects with a current United States Army Corps of Engineers pProject Cooperation aAgreement executed for the requested project phase or projects listed in a United States Army Corps of Engineers work plan or current federal budget document with available federal funds shall receive 5 points. ; Federal Emergency Management Agency nourishment projects (Category G or equivalent subsequent program for designed, constructed and routinely maintained beaches) with approved Project Worksheets shall receive 5 points. Maximum total for availability of federal funds is 10 points.

(e) Local sponsor financial and administrative commitment. Local governments sponsors who have a designated long term funding source for dedicated to the restoration and management of a the beach project as defined in a 10-year comprehensive financial plan shall receive 2 points; local sponsors who provide funding for the beach project via a funding source established by referendum or legislative authority will receive 2 points; local sponsors who provide additional funding from a third party, other than the federal government, shall receive 1 point for a 10 percent reduction or 2 points for a 25 percent reduction of the non-federal share obtained from a third party, for up to 2 shall receive 3 points; those with staff dedicated for administrative support shall receive 1 point; those with a 100 percent 75% or better compliance record for submitting quarterly reports and billings correctly and on time over the previous state fiscal year shall receive 2 points; local sponsors who hold active state and federal permits for the proposed project will receive 1 point; local sponsors who have secured local funds will receive 1 point, for a maximum total of 10 points. 1 point for a maximum total of 5 points.

(f) Previous state commitment. Projects where the Department has previously cost shared, reviewed, and approved a feasibility or design phase shall receive 1 point; projects to enhance, or increase the longevity of a previously constructed project shall receive 34 points; and projects that will nourish a previously restored shoreline shall receive 5 points; projects where previously approved appropriations for a project phase could not be encumbered and were released in their entirety by the local sponsor due to the project timelines shall receive 1 point, for a maximum total of  10 points.

(g) Project performance.  Performance points shall be based upon the expected life of a project, as documented in a feasibility study for restoration projects and or on the average actual nourishment interval for nourishment projects.  Projects with a three-year nourishment interval shall receive 1 point, plus 1 point for every additional year of the expected or actual life with a ten-year or more nourishment interval receiving a maximum of 8 points; projects with an average cost/per mile/ per year below the average cost/per mile/per year of all projects requesting construction funding for a given year shall receive 2 points.  Cost calculations will include sand placement only; design, mitigation, structures and monitoring costs will not be included with a maximum total of 10 points.

(h) Mitigation of inlet effects. Projects that implement strategies in the Strategic Beach Management Plan for sediment bypassing or supplemental nourishment to adjacent beaches needed to mitigate deficiencies in the annual sediment budget shall receive points based upon the percentage of the target average annual bypass volume to be achieved by the supplemental nourishment times 10 for a maximum total of 10 points.

(i) Innovative technologies. Projects to address erosion that are economically competitive with nourishment, that will not adversely affect the conservation of fish and wildlife, including endangered or threatened species, or their habitats, and environmentally sensitive and that are designed to demonstrate an innovative application of existing technologies shall receive 3 points; projects that have been documented to be effective and demonstrate technologies previously untried in the state shall receive 25 points for a maximum total of 5 points.

(j) Enhance nesting sea turtle refuges. Projects that are adjacent to or within designated nesting sea turtle refuges shall receive 5 points.

(k) Regionalization. Projects where two or more local sponsors who manage governmental entities couple their projects together for contracting to reduce contracting costs shall receive 5 points.

(l) Significance. Projects shall receive points based upon the project length at one point per mile, rounded to the nearest whole number, for a total maximum of 10 points; projects entering the construction phase will receive 1 point; projects with a severity of erosion calculation greater than two (2) feet per year shall receive 1 point; projects with greater than 25 percent of the shoreline length designated as commercial,  recreational, or public lodging establishment shall receive 1 points and projects with greater than 50 percent of the shoreline length designated as commercial, recreational, or public lodging establishment shall receive 2 points, for a total of two points; projects with greater than 50 percent of the shoreline length containing threatened upland structures shall receive 1 point; for a total maximum of 15 points.

(m) In the event that more than one project receives the same number of points, the Department shall assign funding priority to that project most ready to initiate construction.  Factors considered in the award of priority include project phase, construction schedule, the status of state and federal permits, acquisition of easements, securing of local and federal funding, construction bidding schedule, and establishment of an Erosion Control Line.

(2) Inlet Management Projects. Local sponsors requesting funding for inlet management projects for the upcoming fiscal year will be ranked in priority order for the Department’s Local Government Funding Request. Eligible projects will be assigned a total point score by the Department based on the following criteria:

(a) Estimated annual quantity of beach quality sand reaching the updrift boundary of the improved jetty or inlet channel, quantified at the rate of one point per 20,000 cubic yards per year, for a total maximum of 10 points.

(b) Balancing the sediment budget. Annual average bypassing volume to be placed on the adjacent eroding shorelines divided by the annual bypassing objective as determined by the Inlet Management Plan or department approved study times 20 for a maximum of 20 points.

(c) Cost effective alternatives. The proposed annualized increase in bypassing of material from within the inlet system divided by the unmet annual bypassing objective times 10, for a maximum of 10 points. The unmet annual bypassing objective is equal to the annual bypassing objective less the current annualized bypassing volume using material from within the inlet system.

(d) Local sponsor financial and administrative commitment. Local sponsors who have a designated long term funding source for the management of an inlet project as defined in a 10-year comprehensive financial plan shall receive 2 points; local sponsors who provide funding for the beach project via a funding source established by referendum or legislative authority will receive 2 points; local sponsors who provide additional funding from a third party, other than the federal government, shall receive 1 point for a 10 percent reduction or 2 points for a 25 percent reduction of the non-federal share obtained from a third party, for up to 2 points; those with a 100 percent compliance record for submitting quarterly reports correctly and on time over the previous state fiscal year shall receive 2 points; local sponsors who hold active state and federal permits for the proposed activities will receive 1 points; local sponsors who have entered into an interlocal agreement with regional partners for the purpose of joint inlet management will receive 1 points for a maximum total of 10 points.

(e) Previous state commitment. Projects where the Department has previously cost shared, reviewed, and approved a feasibility or design phase shall receive 1 point; projects to enhance, or increase the longevity of a previously constructed project within the area of inlet influence shall receive 3 points; projects that will nourish a previously restored shoreline within the area of inlet influence shall receive 5 points; projects where previously approved appropriations for a project phase could not be encumbered and were released in their entirety by the local sponsor due to the project timelines shall receive 1  points, for a maximum total of  10 points.

(f) Inlet management plan. 

1. Proposed projects that have an existing Inlet Management Plan or completed Inlet Management Study accepted by the Department that defines the sediment budget, quantifies the volumetric bypassing objective and contains specific management strategies shall receive 5 points.

2. Projects where the Department has received and approved an update to an existing Inlet Management Plan in the form of a current inlet management study/sediment budget analysis within the previous 10 years or proposes to conduct an update to an existing inlet management plan shall receive an additional 5 points.

3. Projects proposing to develop a new inlet management study to be submitted to the Department for adoption of an Inlet Management Plan shall receive 15 points.

4. Maximum total for an inlet management plan is 15 points.

(g) Enhanced project performance. The increased nourishment interval shall be estimated by the annual bypassing volume divided by the annual beach nourishment volume needed by a beach project within the area of inlet influence multiplied by 5 for a total of 5 points.

(h) Availability of federal funds. Projects with United States Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Congressional authorization for the requested project phase shall receive 5 points. Projects with a current United States Army Corps of Engineers project agreement executed for the requested project phase or projects listed in a United States Army Corps of Engineers work plan or current federal budget document shall receive 5 points; federal Emergency Management Agency projects (Category G or equivalent subsequent program for designed, constructed and routinely maintained beaches) with approved Project Worksheets shall receive 5 points. Maximum total for availability of federal funds is 10 points.

(i) Inlet Management studies will be ranked using only the criteria listed in (a), (d), (e), (f), and (h).  Ranking of inlet management studies will be normalized based on the total point value of the above referenced criteria. 

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.06, Formerly 16B-36.006, Amended 12-25-03,____________.

 

62B-36.007 Project Cost Sharing.

(1) Until the unsatisfied unmet demand for restoring and repairing Florida’s beaches is met satisfied, the Department intends to cost share in equally the costs of beach management projects with local sponsors. governmental entities, except where actual cost savings from regional coordination can be demonstrated pursuant to subsection 62B-36.007(2), F.A.C. Cost sharing will only be applied to the portion of the project necessary to benefit shoreline designated by the Department as critically eroded. The Department shall cost share up to 50 percent of the total costs for non-federal beach management projects. The Department shall will cost share up to 50 percent % of the non-federal share of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works projects.  The Department shall cost share up to 50 percent of the non-federal and state emergency fund share for projects approved to receive Federal Emergency Management Agency Public Assistance funding (Category G or equivalent subsequent program for designed, constructed and routinely maintained beaches).  State cost share is subject to adjustment for the level of public accessibility calculated for beach management projects using the following criteria:

(a) Primary beach access sites shall be granted eligibility for one-half mile in each shore-parallel direction from the access site plus the shoreline length of the access site. Additional eligibility shall be granted at a rate of 50 linear feet per parking space for up to one-half mile in either shore parallel direction.

(b) Beachfront pPublic lodging establishments shall be granted eligibility based upon 50 feet of shoreline eligibility per unit the percentage of units available to the public, rounded to the nearest 10%, times the property’s beachfront footage. Maximum eligibility may not exceed the beach front width of the property.

(c) Secondary beach access sites shall be granted eligibility for the shoreline length of the access site. Additional eligibility shall be granted at a rate of 50 linear feet per parking space for up to one-quarter mile in either each shore parallel direction at a rate of 52.8 linear feet per parking space, provided.: 

1. Public lodging establishments not located on the beach front but located within one quarter mile of a secondary public access point may contribute to the eligibility for that public access site at the rate of 50 feet of shoreline eligibility per rental unit available to the public. Maximum eligibility may not exceed the street-side frontal width of the property.  Parking is located within one-quarter mile of the secondary beach access site. ; and

2. Bicycle parking located within one quarter mile of a secondary access site may be granted eligibility for that public access site at the rate of 12.5 feet per designated bicycle parking spot.  Bicycle parking spots used for eligibility may not exceed 200 feet per public access site.  Parking is clearly signed or otherwise clearly designated as parking for the general public on an equal basis.

3. Mass transit, such as buses or trolleys, may be granted eligibility for that public access site at the rate of one parking space per bus stop located within one quarter mile of the public access site. Bus stops used for eligibility may not exceed 200 feet per public access. In order to qualify, mass transit must be accessible to the general public, operational year round and must allow for the transportation of personal recreational items for beach use. 

(d) through (e) No change.

(f) The department shall pay up to 100 percent of the costs of approved beach management projects when construction and maintenance are on lands with public beach access of which the state is the upland riparian owner and such lands are managed by the state.

(2) For inlet management projects, the Department shall cost-share 75 percent of the non-federal cost with the local sponsor for eligible components, pursuant to Section 161.143(3), F.S.

(3)(2) Cost savings, which occur due to the planned geographic coordination or sequencing of two or more projects between local sponsors eligible governmental entities, may qualify for additional reimbursement. Geographic sequencing means combining two projects together for the purpose of construction contracting. In order to determine the increase in the state’s cost share the projects shall be bid jointly and separately to demonstrate the cost savings of combining the projects and request reimbursement for the demonstrated cost savings following completion of the project phase. The cost share shall be adjusted not to exceed the state’s maximum cost share amount of 75 percent of the eligible costs.

(4)(3) All costs of physical and biological environmental and performance monitoring required by state and federal the Department’s permits with the governmental entity or a permit issued to the US Army Corps of Engineers, are eligible for cost sharing.

(5) A local sponsor may voluntarily agree at any time that an appropriation cannot be used and provide the Department with written agreement that such funds shall be available for reallocation.

(6)(4) The Department will cost share for private contractual services necessary to conduct the project. Services may be contracted to a local sponsor governmental entity if the Department is shown evidence that the local sponsor’s entity’s proposal is cost effective, of sufficient professional quality, and otherwise in the general public interest. In determining whether contractual services are cost effective, the Department shall consider cost estimates provided by the local sponsor governmental entity from fully qualified private companies or individuals. Specific contractual services performed by or for local governments shall be subject to specific accountability measures and audit requirements and be consistent with the principles of Chapter 287, F.S., for competitive bidding and opportunity.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20) 161.142(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), 161.143(1), (2), (3), (4), (5), 161.161(1), (2), (6) FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.07, Amended 4-27-86, Formerly 16B-36.007, Amended 12-25-03, ____________.

 

62B-36.009 Project Agreements.

(1) The Department and the local sponsor eligible governmental entity will execute a project agreement when funds are available and the project is ready to proceed. The project agreement shall include the following:

(a) through (c) No change.

(2) The Department’s annual financial obligation under the agreement shall be contingent upon a legislative appropriation and continued availability of funds. Funds not expended in a timely manner are subject to reversion or re-appropriation to the General Revenue Fund.

(3) Local sponsors Eligible governmental entities may design and construct beach management projects which are consistent with this rule and Chapter 161, F.S., prior to the receipt of funding from the state pursuant to Sections 161.101 and 161.161, F.S., and may subsequently apply for reimbursement from the state within three years of the completion of construction pursuant to Section 161.101, F.S., provided that:

(a) The local sponsor eligible governmental entity and the Department have entered into a project agreement, which approves the project and establishes the basis for reimbursement before the project phase commences. No reimbursement shall be granted for work accomplished prior to the date of the agreement unless specifically set forth in the agreement;

(b) The project has been subject to review by the Department in the design or and construction phases and the project has been found to be consistent with the intent of Chapter 161, F.S., for project eligibility and cost effectiveness;

(c) No change.

(d) The project has been prioritized as required in Sections 161.101(14) 161.101(9) and 161.143(2), F.S., and is subject to legislative appropriation; and

(e) Complete Ddocumentation of all costs are provided to the Department, pursuant to the requirements of the State’s Auditor General.

Rulemaking Specific Authority 161.101(21), 161.143(6), 161.161(7) FS. Law Implemented 161.088, 161.091(1), 161.101(1), (2), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16), (17), (18), (19), (20), 161.143(2), (3), (4), 161.161(1), (2), (6), 216.181, 287.057 FS. History–New 6-10-83, Formerly 16B-36.09, Formerly 16B-36.009, Amended 12-25-03, __________.

NAME OF PERSON ORIGINATING PROPOSED RULE: Mark Thomasson, Division of Water Resource Management, Division Director
NAME OF AGENCY HEAD WHO APPROVED THE PROPOSED RULE: Herschel T. Vinyard Jr., Secretary
DATE PROPOSED RULE APPROVED BY AGENCY HEAD: March 13, 2013
DATE NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE DEVELOPMENT PUBLISHED IN FAR: December 12, 2008