HomeMy WebLinkAboutC-7487-4 - PSA for 2024 Newport Harbor Shallow-Water and Deep-Water Eelgrass SurveyT
rL
cp
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH MARINE TAXONOMIC SERVICES, LTD. FOR
2024 NEWPORT HARBOR SHALLOW -WATER & DEEP -WATER EELGRASS
v SURVEY
THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and
entered into as of this 23rd day of July, 2024 ("Effective Date"), by and between the CITY
OF NEWPORT BEACH, a California municipal corporation and charter city ("City"), and
MARINE TAXONOMIC SERVICES, LTD., an Oregon corporation ("Consultant"), whose
address is 920 Rancheros Drive, Suite F-1, San Marcos, CA 92069, and is made with
reference to the following:
RECITALS
A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws
of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being
conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City.
B. City desires to engage Consultant to conduct a shallow -water survey (Zostera
marina) and a deep -water survey (Zostera pacifica) of eelgrass within Newport
Harbor. ("Project").
C. Consultant possesses the skill, experience, ability, background, certification and
knowledge to provide the professional services described in this Agreement.
D. City has solicited and received a proposal from Consultant, has reviewed the
previous experience and evaluated the expertise of Consultant, and desires to
retain Consultant to render professional services under the terms and conditions
set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties
as follows:
1. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date, and shall
terminate on July 23, 2026, unless terminated earlier as set forth herein.
2. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED
Consultant shall diligently perform all the services described in the Scope of
Services attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference ("Services"
or "Work"). City may elect to delete certain Services within the Scope of Services at its
sole discretion.
3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE
3.1 Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement
and Consultant shall perform the Services in accordance with the schedule included in
Exhibit A. In the absence of a specific schedule, the Services shall be performed to
completion in a diligent and timely manner. The failure by Consultant to strictly adhere to
the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, if any, or perform the Services in a diligent and timely
manner may result in termination of this Agreement by City.
3.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, Consultant shall not be responsible for
delays due to causes beyond Consultant's reasonable control. However, in the case of
any such delay in the Services to be provided for the Project, each party hereby agrees
to provide notice within two (2) calendar days of the occurrence causing the delay to the
other party so that all delays can be addressed.
3.3 Consultant shall submit all requests for extensions of time for performance
in writing to the Project Administrator as defined herein not later than ten (10) calendar
days after the start of the condition that purportedly causes a delay. The Project
Administrator shall review all such requests and may grant reasonable time extensions
for unforeseeable delays that are beyond Consultant's control.
3.4 For all time periods not specifically set forth herein, Consultant shall
respond in the most expedient and appropriate manner under the circumstances, by
hand -delivery or mail.
4. COMPENSATION TO CONSULTANT
4.1 City shall pay Consultant for the Services on a time and expense not -to -
exceed basis in accordance with the provisions of this Section and the Schedule of Billing
Rates attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. Consultant's
compensation for all Work performed in accordance with this Agreement, including all
reimbursable items and subconsultant fees, shall not exceed One Hundred Seventy
Three Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Four Dollars and 60/100 ($173,424.60),
without priorwritten authorization from City. No billing rate changes shall be made during
the term of this Agreement without the prior written approval of City.
4.2 Consultant shall submit monthly invoices to City describing the Work
performed the preceding month. Consultant's bills shall include the name of the person
who performed the Work, a brief description of the Services performed and/or the specific
task in the Scope of Services to which it relates, the date the Services were performed,
the number of hours spent on all Work billed on an hourly basis, and a description of any
reimbursable expenditures. City shall pay Consultant no later than thirty (30) calendar
days after approval of the monthly invoice by City staff.
4.3 City shall reimburse Consultant only for those costs or expenses specifically
identified in Exhibit B to this Agreement or specifically approved in writing in advance by
City.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 2
4.4 Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Extra Work performed
without the prior written authorization of City. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any
Work that is determined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project,
but which is not included within the Scope of Services and which the parties did not
reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement.
Compensation for any authorized Extra Work shall be paid in accordance with the
Schedule of Billing Rates as set forth in Exhibit B.
5. PROJECT MANAGER
5.1 Consultant shall designate a Project Manager, who shall coordinate all
phases of the Project. This Project Manager shall be available to City at all reasonable
times during the Agreement term. Consultant has designated Robert Mooney to be its
Project Manager. Consultant shall not remove or reassign the Project Manager or any
personnel listed in Exhibit A or assign any new or replacement personnel to the Project
without the prior written consent of City. City's approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld with respect to the removal or assignment of non -key personnel.
5.2 Consultant, at the sole discretion of City, shall remove from the Project any
of its personnel assigned to the performance of Services upon written request of City.
Consultant warrants that it will continuously furnish the necessary personnel to complete
the Project on a timely basis as contemplated by this Agreement.
5.3 If Consultant is performing inspection services for City, the Project Manager
and any other assigned staff shall be equipped with a cellular phone to communicate with
City staff. The Project Manager's cellular phone number shall be provided to City.
6. ADMINISTRATION
This Agreement will be administered by the Public Works. City's Director of Public
Works or designee shall be the Project Administrator and shall have the authority to act
for City under this Agreement. The Project Administrator shall represent City in all matters
pertaining to the Services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
7. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
To assist Consultant in the execution of its responsibilities under this Agreement,
City agrees to provide access to and upon request of Consultant, one copy of all existing
relevant information on file at City. City will provide all such materials in a timely manner
so as not to cause delays in Consultant's Work schedule.
8. STANDARD OF CARE
8.1 All of the Services shall be performed by Consultant or under Consultant's
supervision. Consultant represents that it possesses the professional and technical
personnel required to perform the Services required by this Agreement, and that it will
perform all Services in a manner commensurate with community professional standards
and with the ordinary degree of skill and care that would be used by other reasonably
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 3
competent practitioners of the same discipline under similar circumstances. All Services
shall be performed by qualified and experienced personnel who are not employed by City.
By delivery of completed Work, Consultant certifies that the Work conforms to the
requirements of this Agreement, all applicable federal, state and local laws, and legally
recognized professional standards.
8.2 Consultant represents and warrants to City that it has, shall obtain, and shall
keep in full force and effect during the term hereof, at its sole cost and expense, all
licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatsoever nature that is
legally required of Consultant to practice its profession. Consultant shall maintain a City
of Newport Beach business license during the term of this Agreement.
8.3 Consultant shall not be responsible for delay, nor shall Consultant be
responsible for damages or be in default or deemed to be in default by reason of strikes,
lockouts, accidents, acts of God, or the failure of City to furnish timely information or to
approve or disapprove Consultant's Work promptly, or delay or faulty performance by
City, contractors, or governmental agencies.
9. HOLD HARMLESS
9.1 To the fullest extent permitted by law, Consultant shall indemnify, defend
and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents,
volunteers and employees (collectively, the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any
and all claims (including, without limitation, claims for bodily injury, death or damage to
property), demands, obligations, damages, actions, causes of action, suits, losses,
judgments, fines, penalties, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, without limitation,
attorneys' fees, disbursements and court costs) of every kind and nature whatsoever
(individually, a Claim; collectively, "Claims"), which may arise from or in any manner relate
(directly or indirectly) to any breach of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, any
Work performed or Services provided under this Agreement including, without limitation,
defects in workmanship or materials or Consultant's presence or activities conducted on
the Project (including the negligent, reckless, and/or willful acts, errors and/or omissions
of Consultant, its principals, officers, agents, employees, vendors, suppliers, consultants,
subcontractors, anyone employed directly or indirectly by any of them or for whose acts
they may be liable, or any or all of them).
9.2 Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing herein shall be construed to require
Consultant to indemnify the Indemnified Parties from any Claim arising from the sole
negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. Nothing in this indemnity shall
be construed as authorizing any award of attorneys' fees in any action on or to enforce
the terms of this Agreement. This indemnity shall apply to all claims and liability
regardless of whether any insurance policies are applicable. The policy limits do not act
as a limitation upon the amount of indemnification to be provided by Consultant.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 4
10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
It is understood that City retains Consultant on an independent contractor basis
and Consultant is not an agent or employee of City. The manner and means of
conducting the Work are under the control of Consultant, except to the extent they are
limited by statute, rule or regulation and the expressed terms of this Agreement. No civil
service status or other right of employment shall accrue to Consultant or its employees.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to constitute approval for Consultant or any
of Consultant's employees or agents, to be the agents or employees of City. Consultant
shall have the responsibility for and control over the means of performing the Work,
provided that Consultant is in compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Anything in
this Agreement that may appear to give City the right to direct Consultant as to the details
of the performance of the Work or to exercise a measure of control over Consultant shall
mean only that Consultant shall follow the desires of City with respect to the results of the
Services.
11. COOPERATION
Consultant agrees to work closely and cooperate fully with City's designated
Project Administrator and any other agencies that may have jurisdiction or interest in the
Work to be performed. City agrees to cooperate with the Consultant on the Project.
12. CITY POLICY
Consultant shall discuss and review all matters relating to policy and Project
direction with City's Project Administrator in advance of all critical decision points in order
to ensure the Project proceeds in a manner consistent with City goals and policies.
13. PROGRESS
Consultant is responsible for keeping the Project Administrator informed on a
regular basis regarding the status and progress of the Project, activities performed and
planned, and any meetings that have been scheduled or are desired.
14. INSURANCE
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City, and prior to commencement
of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term
of this Agreement or for other periods as specified in this Agreement, policies of insurance
of the type, amounts, terms and conditions described in the Insurance Requirements
attached hereto as Exhibit C, and incorporated herein by reference.
15. PROHIBITION AGAINST ASSIGNMENTS AND TRANSFERS
Except as specifically authorized under this Agreement, the Services to be
provided under this Agreement shall not be assigned, transferred contracted or
subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City. Any of the following shall be
construed as an assignment: The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 5
of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Consultant, or of the interest of any general
partner or joint venturer or syndicate member or cotenant if Consultant is a partnership or
joint -venture or syndicate or co -tenancy, which shall result in changing the control of
Consultant. Control means fifty percent (50%) or more of the voting power or twenty-five
percent (25%) or more of the assets of the corporation, partnership or joint -venture.
16. SUBCONTRACTING
The subcontractors authorized by City, if any, to perform Work on this Project are
identified in Exhibit A. Consultant shall be fully responsible to City for all acts and
omissions of any subcontractor. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any contractual
relationship between City and any subcontractor nor shall it create any obligation on the
part of City to pay or to see to the payment of any monies due to any such subcontractor
other than as otherwise required by law. City is an intended beneficiary of any Work
performed by the subcontractor for purposes of establishing a duty of care between the
subcontractor and City. Except as specifically authorized herein, the Services to be
provided under this Agreement shall not be otherwise assigned, transferred, contracted
or subcontracted out without the prior written approval of City.
17. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
17.1 Each and every report, draft, map, record, plan, document and other writing
produced, including but not limited to, websites, blogs, social media accounts and
applications (hereinafter "Documents"), prepared or caused to be prepared by Consultant,
its officers, employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this
Agreement, shall become the exclusive property of City, and City shall have the sole right
to use such materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any
other party. Additionally, all material posted in cyberspace by Consultant, its officers,
employees, agents and subcontractors, in the course of implementing this Agreement,
shall become the exclusive property of City, and City shall have the sole right to use such
materials in its discretion without further compensation to Consultant or any other party.
Consultant shall, at Consultant's expense, provide such Documents, including all logins
and password information to City upon prior written request.
17.2 Documents, including drawings and specifications, prepared by Consultant
pursuant to this Agreement are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by
City or others on any other project. Any use of completed Documents for other projects
and any use of incomplete Documents without specific written authorization from
Consultant will be at City's sole risk and without liability to Consultant. Further, any and
all liability arising out of changes made to Consultant's deliverables under this Agreement
by City or persons other than Consultant is waived against Consultant, and City assumes
full responsibility for such changes unless City has given Consultant prior notice and has
received from Consultant written consent for such changes.
17.3 All written documents shall be transmitted to City in formats compatible with
Microsoft Office and/or viewable with Adobe Acrobat.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 6
18. CONFIDENTIALITY
All Documents, including drafts, preliminary drawings or plans, notes and
communications that result from the Services in this Agreement, shall be kept confidential
unless City expressly authorizes in writing the release of information.
19. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY INDEMNITY
Consultant shall defend and indemnify City, its agents, officers, representatives
and employees against any and all liability, including costs, for infringement or alleged
infringement of any United States' letters patent, trademark, or copyright, including costs,
contained in Consultant's Documents provided under this Agreement.
20. RECORDS
Consultant shall keep records and invoices in connection with the Services to be
performed under this Agreement. Consultant shall maintain complete and accurate
records with respect to the costs incurred under this Agreement and any Services,
expenditures and disbursements charged to City, for a minimum period of three (3) years,
or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to Consultant
under this Agreement. All such records and invoices shall be clearly identifiable.
Consultant shall allow a representative of City to examine, audit and make transcripts or
copies of such records and invoices during regular business hours. Consultant shall allow
inspection of all Work, data, Documents, proceedings and activities related to the
Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment to Consultant
under this Agreement.
21. WITHHOLDINGS
City may withhold payment to Consultant of any disputed sums until satisfaction of
the dispute with respect to such payment. Such withholding shall not be deemed to
constitute a failure to pay according to the terms of this Agreement. Consultant shall not
discontinue Work as a result of such withholding. Consultant shall have an immediate
right to appeal to the City Manager or designee with respect to such disputed sums.
Consultant shall be entitled to receive interest on any withheld sums at the rate of return
that City earned on its investments during the time period, from the date of withholding of
any amounts found to have been improperly withheld.
22. ERRORS AND OMISSIONS
In the event of errors or omissions that are due to the negligence or professional
inexperience of Consultant which result in expense to City greater than what would have
resulted if there were not errors or omissions in the Work accomplished by Consultant,
the additional design, construction and/or restoration expense shall be borne by
Consultant. Nothing in this Section is intended to limit City's rights under the law or any
other sections of this Agreement.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 7
23. CITY'S RIGHT TO EMPLOY OTHER CONSULTANTS
City reserves the right to employ other Consultants in connection with the Project.
24. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
24.1 Consultant or its employees may be subject to the provisions of the
California Political Reform Act of 1974 (the "Act") and/or Government Code §§ 1090 et
seg., which (1) require such persons to disclose any financial interest that may
foreseeably be materially affected by the Work performed under this Agreement, and (2)
prohibit such persons from making, or participating in making, decisions that will
foreseeably financially affect such interest.
24.2 If subject to the Act and/or Government Code §§ 1090 et seq., Consultant
shall conform to all requirements therein. Failure to do so constitutes a material breach
and is grounds for immediate termination of this Agreement by City. Consultant shall
indemnify and hold harmless City for any and all claims for damages resulting from
Consultant's violation of this Section.
25. NOTICES
25.1 All notices, demands, requests or approvals, including any change in
mailing address, to be given under the terms of this Agreement shall be given in writing,
and conclusively shall be deemed served when delivered personally, or on the third
business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, first-
class mail, addressed as hereinafter provided.
25.2 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from Consultant to City shall
be addressed to City at:
Attn: Director of Public Works
Public Works
City of Newport Beach
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
25.3 All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Consultant shall
be addressed to Consultant at:
Attn: Robert Mooney
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD.
920 Rancheros Drive, Suite F-1
San Marcos, CA 92069
26. CLAIMS
Unless a shorter time is specified elsewhere in this Agreement, before making its
final request for payment under this Agreement, Consultant shall submit to City, in writing,
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 8
all claims for compensation under or arising out of this Agreement. Consultant's
acceptance of the final payment shall constitute a waiver of all claims for compensation
under or arising out of this Agreement except those previously made in writing and
identified by Consultant in writing as unsettled at the time of its final request for payment.
Consultant and City expressly agree that in addition to any claims filing requirements set
forth in the Agreement, Consultant shall be required to file any claim Consultant may have
against City in strict conformance with the Government Claims Act (Government Code
sections 900 et seq.).
27. TERMINATION
27.1 In the event that either party fails or refuses to perform any of the provisions
of this Agreement at the time and in the manner required, that party shall be deemed in
default in the performance of this Agreement. If such default is not cured within a period
of two (2) calendar days, or if more than two (2) calendar days are reasonably required
to cure the default and the defaulting party fails to give adequate assurance of due
performance within two (2) calendar days after receipt of written notice of default,
specifying the nature of such default and the steps necessary to cure such default, and
thereafter diligently take steps to cure the default, the non -defaulting party may terminate
the Agreement forthwith by giving to the defaulting party written notice thereof.
27.2 Notwithstanding the above provisions, City shall have the right, at its sole
and absolute discretion and without cause, of terminating this Agreement at any time by
giving no less than seven (7) calendar days' prior written notice to Consultant. In the
event of termination under this Section, City shall pay Consultant for Services
satisfactorily performed and costs incurred up to the effective date of termination for which
Consultant has not been previously paid. On the effective date of termination, Consultant
shall deliver to City all reports, Documents and other information developed or
accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form.
28. STANDARD PROVISIONS
28.1 Recitals. City and Consultant acknowledge that the above Recitals are true
and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Agreement.
28.2 Compliance with all Laws. Consultant shall, at its own cost and expense,
comply with all statutes, ordinances, regulations and requirements of all governmental
entities, including federal, state, county or municipal, whether now in force or hereinafter
enacted. In addition, all Work prepared by Consultant shall conform to applicable City,
county, state and federal laws, rules, regulations and permit requirements and be subject
to approval of the Project Administrator and City.
28.3 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach, of any term, covenant or
condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach
of the same or any other term, covenant or condition contained herein, whether of the
same or a different character.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 9
28.4 Integrated Contract. This Agreement represents the full and complete
understanding of every kind or nature whatsoever between the parties hereto, and all
preliminary negotiations and agreements of whatsoever kind or nature are merged herein.
No verbal agreement or implied covenant shall be held to vary the provisions herein.
28.5 Conflicts or Inconsistencies. In the event there are any conflicts or
inconsistencies between this Agreement and the Scope of Services or any other
attachments attached hereto, the terms of this Agreement shall govern.
28.6 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in
accordance with the meaning of the language used and shall not be construed for or
against either party by reason of the authorship of the Agreement or any other rule of
construction which might otherwise apply.
28.7 Amendments. This Agreement may be modified or amended only by a
written document executed by both Consultant and City and approved as to form by the
City Attorney.
28.8 Severability. If any term or portion of this Agreement is held to be invalid,
illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining
provisions of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect.
28.9 Controlling Law and Venue. The laws of the State of California shall govern
this Agreement and all matters relating to it and any action brought relating to this
Agreement shall be adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of
Orange, State of California.
28.10 Equal Opportunity Employment. Consultant represents that it is an equal
opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee
or applicant for employment because race, religious creed, color, national origin,
ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, sex, sexual orientation,
age or any other impermissible basis under law.
28.11 No Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any dispute or legal action arising under
this Agreement, the prevailing party shall not be entitled to attorneys' fees.
28.12 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall
constitute one (1) and the same instrument.
[SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE]
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 10
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed
on the dates written below.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Date: -7 / 10 / Z�
By: ag
A r n C. Harp
Ci Attorney
y
ATTEST:
Date:
By:►. �1.i jai
Brown
City Clerk
I04
~
- i
�'L FCc)
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a California municipal corporation
Date:
By:��
Will O'Neill
Mayor
CONSULTANT: MARINE TAXONOMIC
SERVICES, LTD., an Oregon corporation
Date:
Signed in Counterpart
Bv:
Robert Mooney
Vice President
Date:
Signed in Counterpart
By:
Robin Jones
Secretary, Chief Financial Officer
[END OF SIGNATURES]
Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services
Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates
Exhibit C — Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D — Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques for
Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 11
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed
on the dates written below,
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
Date:
BY: �,.f:;_. c���G'� i I P,�l
A ran C. Harp
Cit�Attorne
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH,
a California municipal corporation
Date:
By:
Will O'Neill
Mayor
ATTEST: CONSULTANT: MARINE TAXONOMIC
Date: SERVICES, LTD., an Oregon corporation
Date: i/ld /Zez
By: By:
Leilani I. Brown
City Clerk Vice President
Date: -f-»
By:
Ro i Jones
Secretary, Chief Financial Officer
[END OF SIGNATURES]
Attachments: Exhibit A — Scope of Services
Exhibit B — Schedule of Billing Rates
Exhibit C — Insurance Requirements
Exhibit D — Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques for
Eeigrass in Newport Harbor
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page 11
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page A-1
SCOPE OF SERVICES
The City is required to survey shallow -water eelgrass distribution in the harbor every two
years, and to survey deep -water eelgrass every four years as detailed in the City's Eelgrass
Protection and Mitigation Plan for Shallow Waters in Lower Newport Bay: An Ecosystem Best
Management Program' (EPMP 2015). Eelgrass is surveyed within three zones (based on
eelgrass presence and variation in overall abundance):
(1) Stable Zone, (2) Transitional Zone, and (3) Unvegetated Zone (See Figure 2). Each zone is
subject to different allowable annual temporary impacts to eelgrass that may be temporarily
impacted by routine maintenance dredging activities. Every two years, a shallow -water
eelgrass survey is conducted to track eelgrass distribution in relation to these established
zones and to assess long-term eelgrass trends within the harbor. Detailed information on the
distribution and abundance of eelgrass shall be documented in a comprehensive report that
will facilitate the designation and amount of allowable impacts while also assessing the
harbor's overall eelgrass health and total quantity. This current cycle will include the focused
deep -water survey.
Consultant shall conduct both the shallow -water survey (Zostera marina) and the deep -water
survey (Zostera pacifica) of eelgrass within Newport Harbor in Newport Beach, California.
Consultant will be responsible for deploying and storing any vessels or equipment related to
services, though it is possible, but not guaranteed, that a small slip or side -tie may be
available at the City's Balboa Yacht Basin marina or at Marina Park.
Geographic Extents
The extent of the shallow -water eelgrass survey shall, at a minimum, reflect the extents
presented on Figures 1 and 2 (attached). The eelgrass survey must also include the following
areas within Lower Newport Bay:
• Areas extending north of Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) to Dover Shores and the
Newport Aquatic Center.
• Shallow -water habitat fronting the Back Bay Science Center, the University of
California Irvine Rowing Team Crew Base, the public launch ramp at the Newport
Dunes, and docks fronting the Back Bay Bistro restaurant.
• Newport Dunes Marina and the full extent of the inner and outer De Anza Peninsula
(commencing immediately north of PCH).
• Unvegetated Eelgrass Zone (please consider alternate and more cost-effective
methodologies for this area).
The extent of the deep -water eelgrass survey shall, at a minimum, reflect the same extents
presented on Figure 3 (attached). It is important to note that the deep -water eelgrass survey
is immediately adjacent to, but not within, the shallow -water survey boundary.
The shallow and deep -water surveys should be noted as separate cost line items for clarity. It
should be assumed that the extent of eelgrass mapped in 2022 (Figure 4) provided full
coverage of the locations identified above and as reflected in Figures 1-3.
1 Eelgrass Protection and Mitigation Plan for Shallow Waters in Lower Newport Bay: An Ecosystem Best Management
Program (EPMP, City of Newport Beach, 2015). Accessible online at:
http://www.newportbeachca.gov/home/showdocument?id=21830
Prior to initiating eelgrass surveys, Consultant shall work closely with the City to confirm the final
geographic extents. Up to five additional shallow -water survey days are included at the option of
the City to account for any contingencies, changes to the geographic extents, or unforeseen City
requests.
Survey Methodology
Shallow -Water Survey
Assessing shallow -water eelgrass dynamics relies on the completion of quality and consistent surveys
and mapping. Parameters included in the eelgrass survey include: 1) spatial distribution, 2) areal
extent, 3) percentage of vegetated cover, and 4) the turion (shoot) density. The methodology shall
be consistent with the EPMP and in compliance with the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and
Implementing Guidelines (CEMP) 2.
The survey shall be conducted by qualified biologists consisting of a diver and a surface support
biologist in a kayak. The biologist diver shall first locate the beginning of an eelgrass bed and mark it
with a buoy. The surface support biologist shall then initiate tracking of the biologist diver with GPS
as the diver swims the perimeter of the individual eelgrass bed. Once the diver returns to the
beginning point, the GPS polygon area mapping shall be terminated. Eelgrass patches that are less
than two square meters in size shall be referenced as a GPS "point". Down -looking sonar shall be
used to augment the shallow- water eelgrass survey where shallow -water areas are too large to be
surveyed by diving or where diving conditions are too hazardous.
To assess eelgrass turion density, a minimum of 10 eelgrass turion counts shall be performed
visually via SCUBA and within each of the 23 eelgrass regions as defined in Figure 1 (230 turion
counts total). The diving biologist shall count the number of live, green shoots at the sediment/shoot
interface within a 0.07- square -meter quadrat. Turion counts shall be conducted along an
underwater transect between the shallow and deep edge of each eelgrass bed. The counting
methods shall be standardized prior to conducting the surveys to ensure the accuracy of counts
between different team members.
The following shall also be observed and noted during the survey: general eelgrass health, eelgrass
blade lengths and widths, sedimentary conditions, water visibility, water temperature, water depths,
and fauna and flora. Additionally, within the 230 areas where turion counts are conducted, the
biologist diver shall survey perpendicular through the center of the eelgrass bed to assess
presence/absence of Caulerpa.
Consultant shall refer to the City's GIS mapping site, and click on the various survey layers to
understand the extent of previous surveys. (Once on the site, click on Layers to find previous
surveys.)
2 National Marine Fisheries Service, 2014. California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines. October 2014.
Accessed online at the following link:
http://www.westcoast.fisheries.noaa.gov/publications/habitat/california eelgrass mitigation/Final%20CEMP%200ctober%2
02014/cemp oct 2014 final.pdf
Deep -water Survey
Additional Survey Requirements
Caulerpa
While completing the shallow -water eelgrass survey, Consultant shall also conduct a surveillance level
Caulerpo survey consistent with the Caulerpa Survey Protocol (updated as of October 2021)3. This is
inclusive of the more detailed survey within areas where turion counts are conducted.
While completing the deep -water eelgrass survey, Consultant shall also conduct a surveillance level
Caulerpo survey consistent with the Caulerpa Survey Protocol.
The final report shall include a section describingthe areas of more focused surveys or peripheral surveys,
and documenting the results. A Caulerpa Survey Report shall also be included and submitted per the
requirements of the Caulerpa Control Protocol.
Identified Debris
While completing both the shallow and deep -water surveys, the Consultant shall also survey and
document any large debris found. The identification shall be limited to objects including, but not limited
to, small derelict/sunken vessels, electronic equipment, dock/float debris, furniture etc. The final report
shall include a table with a brief description of the debris and GPS coordinates. The intent of the debris
identification effort is to support subsequent harbor clean-up efforts. Particular attention should be paid
to the public pier areas.
Eelgrass Restoration Method Study
In 2019, the City retained a Consultant to assess different eelgrass restoration methods and more
specifically to evaluate the relative effectiveness of eelgrass transplanting efforts utilizing both new and
traditional eelgrass transplanting methods. The goal was to build upon existing eelgrass transplanting
information by designing a study to evaluate the relative effectiveness in performance and cost of three
unique eelgrass transplanting methods: 1) traditional bare -root bundle planting; 2) transplanting eelgrass
remotely with frames (TERFs); and 3) transplanting eelgrass remotely with rope (TERR). The results of the
analysis were presented in a report, Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in
Newport Harbor, provided to the agencies as part of the RGP 54 annual report. Consultant's final report
shall include a discussion on how the study area sites are functioning. A copy of the study is included as
Exhibit D to this Agreement.
Reporting
Progress Updates
The Consultant shall be required to provide weekly progress updates to the City, and attend up to two in -
person preparation meetings at the City's office in Newport Beach or via video conference.
s https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/2021-12/caulerpa-control-protocol-v5.pdf
Maps
In compliance with the CEMP and consistent with the EPMP, eelgrass maps shall, at a minimum, include
the following:
• A graphic scale bar, north arrow, legend, and horizontal and vertical datum.
• A boundary illustrating the limits of the area surveyed.
• Bathymetric contours for the survey area, including both the action area(s) and reference site(s)
in increments of not more than one foot.
• The boundary of the defined eelgrass bed including an identification of area exclusions based on
physical unsuitability to support eelgrass habitat.
• The existing eelgrass cover within the defined eelgrass bed at the time of the survey.
• Separate habitat map of the deep -water survey.
• Electronic maps and all data files shall be submitted to the City as part of the final PDF report.
Transfer of data files will be coordinated with the City's GIS Division and will be compatible with
their system.
Final Report
Consultant's final report shall generally conform to previous eelgrass survey reports prepared for the City
and shall provide a detailed description of the survey coverage (acreage) and any interpolation methods
used in mapping. Information shall be presented relative to the established eelgrass zones presented in
Figures 1, 2 and 3. Eelgrass distribution and abundance shall be summarized and compared across
sampling areas. Eelgrass turion density shall be analyzed by station with a comparative analysis between
station and all previous surveys. Summary statistics for each eelgrass turion density station shall be
generated and shall include mean, standard deviation, number of samples, and minimum and maximum
values. Eelgrass density data shall be presented in the number of turions per square meters. Deep -water
eelgrass acreage calculation shall also be provided. Other marine life, including Caulerpa, and large
debris identification results shall also be generated and presented as part of the final report.
Schedule
As survey areas are completed, the data shall be submitted to the City in batches to aid in year -over -year
calculations as required in the annual report. The final report and all electronic files for both the shallow -
water and deep -water surveys shall be provided to the City by November 30, 2024.
Nell
Irv, i
�•. \\ 11 1 13-111101121
9 l J 16 Co ST rwv_w.-1 V �-
!/. " oe
os
06 07 - / ,, Ifr L�
—1 1 " --- I I �
UlOmss Aram,/Pol.h,,,.d A—g, 2016 S—V
-ot camsau Kri6nvnuuxt esA<ins
�f�
_Ox-rim, CA�NBe.+ua-TIQMm _ .
-OJ-E.Y bMu PmvauY-J.vl Aces
�Clr
-M-0md 0e6Avm
�,��
� 0a &bm IfmdGd of IYv a TS Awef
l -.
:K :Y fsna 060Aa»
- sr A 0amm PMhlfaf s?I Aetp
o"�
a imn e.en. a,mna.na T.an 6.m-6xsAa.,
QF
N.roala.mi usAaa: _
-�P �rc91sb ONv, •t6Aa.v
-n .naa Nv mu SvfMn
-
-tE mu OeAuv �uvmub J.eJAw»
�n'. L
-tl-Osier OVAnn vmntad. A01 Aays
�
i[�J�Ntyy�
� u-a.pnae.-o x6An9.
�,e-nmmnr, silt o;tAK.
\cam,
-te.ty.alY`Tm owAa.,
II \
� m.ne o,.ma aceAan, �
i �
�l
Asa aamaa i�.m.amanae,
.-e
®a.pv.vP Wau 9ays-en sorer. St.l Aaea
23 -•,
03
DE
,i
.�I
Eelgrass Acreage 2016: Newport Harbor
Figure 1. Eelgrass Acreage 2016: Newport Harbor
Table 2. City -Sponsored Shallow Water Eelgrass Surveys in Newport Harbor
Eelgrass in the
Plan Area
Survey Dates
(Acres)
Notes
December 2003
Largest shallow water eelgrass population recorded in the harbor to
to August
24.51
date. Water quality conditions ideal with low winter rainfall.
2004
December2006
Decline in eelgrass area, primarily around north Balboa Island,
to
18.87
Harbor Island, Linda Isle, and Upper Newport Bay.
October 2007
December
2009 to
Decline in transitional zones attributed to strong winter storms,
November
16.20
which contributed to high turbidity.
2010
Overall increase in eelgrass observed in Stable and Transitional
March 2012 to
22.76
Zones and additional survey conducted in the
April 2014
deep channel
=a,, � ,••rt,+Rr t ,9 y
Naxooi
Beach
Legend
Eelgrass Zones
- Stable Eolgrass Zone
OTransitional Eelgrass Zone
- U--elated Ealgras Zone
4�1
r,iYY.1 a'• fie° • '! .0
'I � &A
• lA,3a �4
� rH v
f.
N
3
31
c
ti
S• t
`
I O 6
Figure 2. Location of Stable, Transitional, and unvegetated eelgrass zones based on CRM
(2010).
Figure 2: Location of Stable, Transitional and Unvegetated Eelgrass Zones
Deep Water Eelgrass Survey Area
RGP 54 Plan Area
NHS
Deep Water Eelgrass Survey `
�y�'2Wo
Figure 3: Deep -water Eelgrass Survey Area
9
MARINE TAXONOMIC SERVICES, LTD.
Proposal to Perform the 2024 Newport Harbor Shallow
Water & Deep Water Eelgrass Survey
June 11, 2024
Prepared for:
Chris Miller
Manager— Public Works Department
City of Newport Beach
Prepared By:
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd. Coastal Resources Management, Inc.
920 RANCHEROS DRIVE, STE F-1 23 MORNING WOOD DRIVE
SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 LAGUNA NIGUEL, CA 92677
Point of Contact:
Robert Mooney, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist
760.331.7897, voice
760.738.1802, fax
robert@consultmts.com
Dear Selection Committee:
Introduction
Thank you for taking the time to review this proposal from Marine Taxonomic Services (MTS) for the
2024 Newport Harbor Shallow -Water & Deep -Water Eelgrass Survey in Newport Beach, CA (RFP 24-
79). MTS is an environmental consulting firm committed to providing innovative solutions to help our
clients create valuable scientific knowledge while promoting growth in a sustainable manner. Our
firm has extensive experience working in the eastern Pacific from the Arctic to Baja California with an
emphasis in southern California. As a small business, we can offer individualized service and cost-
effective solutions to fulfill project needs.
Extensive Experience
The MTS Team has considerable experience with complicated environmental issues and can provide
innovative insights and problem resolution. We can effectively coordinate and serve as a liaison
between clients and regulatory agencies. Our knowledge base and field experiences allow us to
provide leadership and direction from a project's inception through fulfillment. We specialize in
providing sampling services for marine resource investigations including eelgrass monitoring and
mitigation, invasive species management, water quality monitoring, and focused marine and aquatic
organism surveys. In support of these activities, our staff relies on their experiences with study
design, field sampling, sample processing, data analysis, mapping, and reporting.
Proposed Services
We welcome the opportunity to work with the Harbor Resources Division (HRD) under the Public
Works Department of the City of Newport Beach in fulfilling its mission to "protect and improve the
resources of Newport Harbor, Upper Newport Bay, and the ocean beaches to ensure their proper
use and enjoyment by all things that derive life, recreation, or commerce from our City's most
important asset." By providing shallow -water and deep -water eelgrass surveys in Newport Harbor,
MTS can help the HRD obtain information that is invaluable to ensuring that the beneficial uses of
Newport Harbor can be obtained by all while protecting the resources that make Newport Beach so
special. Our staff hopes to help the HRD fulfill this mission by collecting high -quality eelgrass data
that can be used to maintain and improve the value of eelgrass resources in Newport Harbor while
allowing for sustainable growth. Our staff is some of the most qualified personnel to offer marine
biological surveys on the west coast. Our primary personnel for this work category have extensive
first-hand experience performing eelgrass monitoring and restoration in southern California.
The following technical proposal and cost proposal was developed with full understanding of your
past survey protocols under the California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and the Eelgrass Protection and
Mitigation Plan for Shallow Waters in Newport Bay. Our intention is to continue to utilize the high -
quality standards that were put into place under prior surveys to maintain a quality and consistent
data record. Additionally, MTS has been an active participant in many Newport Bay Caulerpa surveys
and is currently working on the Caulerpa prolifera eradication effort. MTS will be able to adapt the
MTS
harbor wide eelgrass survey to include a surveillance level (20%) search for Coulerpo within the
designated survey areas.
To ensure the quality and consistency with previous monitoring events, we have teamed with Coastal
Resources Management, Inc. (CRM). CRM has led or participated in all prior eelgrass survey events.
The inclusion of CRM means that the MTS Team offers the best means to ensure data quality and
consistency relative to the prior surveys. We believe the protocols put in place by CRM provide a solid
foundation for quality data collection and see little need to deviate from those standards. Maintaining
a consistent data set also preserves the integrity of the data such that any potential eelgrass
mitigation programs are not threatened with costly consequences.
I have the authority to enter into a binding agreement on behalf of MTS and provide an Advance
Notice Requirements Statement confirming MTS' ability to provide service on short notice. Please
see cover for contact information. I have reviewed all RFP documents, including the Q&A, and emails
that were provided during the bidding period.
Sincerely,
Robert Mooney, PhD
MT.S
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Contents
Introduction..................................................................................................................................................
i
ExtensiveExperience.....................................................................................................................................
i
ProposedServices.........................................................................................................................................
i
1 Service Offerings..................................................................................................................................1
1-1 Experience of Proposed Staff.......................................................................................................1
1-2 Firms' Relevant Experience..........................................................................................................1
1-2.1 Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd...........................................................................................2
1-2.2 Coastal Resources Management, Inc....................................................................................3
1-3 Approach to the Scope of Services...............................................................................................4
1-3.1 Implementation of Shallow Water Surveys..........................................................................4
1-3.2 Implementation of Eelgrass Study Site Surveys...................................................................5
1-3.3 Implementation of Deep -Water Surveys..............................................................................5
1-3.4 Management Approach........................................................................................................7
1-4 Service Offerings Summary..........................................................................................................9
2 Pricing.................................................................................................................................................10
3 Organizational Information................................................................................................................11
3-1 Key Personnel.............................................................................................................................11
3-1.1 Project Manager— Robert Mooney (MTS).........................................................................11
3-1.2 Field Manager —Grace Teller(MTS)...................................................................................12
3-1.3 Project Planning Deep -Water Survey and Quality Control — Rick Ware (CRM) ..................12
3-2 Contractor Relationships............................................................................................................13
4 References & Recent Project History.................................................................................................14
4-1 Recent Project History................................................................................................................14
4-2 Project Examples........................................................................................................................15
4-2.1 Marine Taxonomic Services — Project Examples / References...........................................16
4-2.2 Coastal Resources Management — Project Descriptions / References...............................21
5 Advance Notice Requirements Statement.........................................................................................24
6 Consultant Proposal Worksheet.........................................................................................................24
7 Acknowledgement of City's Standard Terms and Conditions............................................................24
Attachment A — Key Personnel Resumes...................................................................................................24
Attachment B — Required Submittal Forms................................................................................................24
MTS
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
1 Service Offerings
The below section is intended to illustrate to the City of Newport Beach our team's experience and
qualifications to provide eelgrass survey services in accordance with the RFP. In the sections below,
we provide our staff experience, corporate experience, and a brief overview of our proposed work
approach.
1-1 Experience of Proposed Staff
MTS is prepared to meet the unique demands of performing the shallow -water and deep -water
eelgrass survey in Newport Harbor. The work demands a team with a multitude of experiences
working with eelgrass to ensure that data are collected that are compatible with previous survey
efforts. Staff need to understand which techniques and technologies are appropriate under various
circumstances and how implementation of a specific strategy may best ensure quality and
consistency of data.
Our team for this project includes Mr. Rick Ware with Coastal Resources Management (CRM). CRM
will be responsible for transferring knowledge and lessons learned from prior work in Newport
Harbor to MTS staff. CRM will also participate in field data collection and provide data and report
review to ensure quality. In particular, CRM will be responsible for collecting all deep -water eelgrass
data using remote sensing techniques and will collect shallow water data in some specific areas using
the same techniques and, in a manner, similar to past surveys.
In addition to understanding the sampling methods, the successful team needs to have a strong
understanding of sampling design and statistics to ensure that data are appropriately collected and
analyzed in ways that are consistent with data usage. The MTS team provides these qualifications
and more. In turn, MTS helps the HRD ensure that its monitoring programs are run in a manner that
generate data that provide an unbiased view of eelgrass coverage and health for proper resource
management, while being sensitive to natural resources and their protection.
1-2 Firms' Relevant Experience
The MTS Team includes staff members from MTS and CRM. Relevant experience of the two firms is
provided below.
MT- 1
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
1-2.1 Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd. MTS was founded in 1980 and
incorporated in 1993. MTS is a small business with offices in
Corvallis, Oregon and San Diego, California. Though founded on
their expertise in marine taxonomy, MTS is a greatly expanded
environmental consulting firm that provides a wide range of
marine ecological services.
MTS built a reputation as a quality marine biological services
provider when the modern fields of marine ecology and
conservation were in their infancy. MTS is prepared to leverage
our 40-years of field experience to provide an expert team that
can lead the survey and reporting activities required by the
scope of work. MTS has extensive experience using teams on
field surveys and sample collections. We have worked with
private clients, local agencies, and governmental agencies. MTS' experiences make it uniquely suited
to support this Project. MTS has performed countless marine biological investigations in southern
California and Newport Harbor. These experiences include many eelgrass investigations.
MTS has twenty employees at offices in San Marcos, California; Lake Tahoe, California; and Corvallis,
Oregon and is fully equipped with a suite of marine habitat monitoring equipment including side -scan
and single -beam sonar, differential GPS, geographically registered underwater video equipment
(remote and towed), benthic sampling gear and fisheries sampling gear. MTS' scientific consulting
services include:
• Experimental design and sampling design for field biological studies
• Statistical data analysis
• Benthic sediment sampling
• Marine invertebrate identification
• Eelgrass mapping
• Eelgrass mitigation planning and implementation
• Sonar -based aquatic habitat mapping
• Aquatic invasive species control
• Coulerpo surveys
• Fisheries inventories
• Bathymetric surveys
• Salt marsh restoration
• Marine mammal surveys
• Biological monitoring of in -water construction
M. Ts 2
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
1-2.2 Coastal Resources Management, Inc.
Coastal Resources Management, Inc. (CRM), located in Long
Beach, California, is a certified Small Business Enterprise and
State of California registered S-Corporation. Founded in 1992
by Mr. Rick Ware, the firm was incorporated in 2006. CRM has
worked on projects along the West Coast of the U.S., as well as
in Alaska, Hawaii, Palau, Fiji, and the British Virgin Islands. CRM
is a recognized leader in eelgrass monitoring and restoration and has led numerous monitoring and
mitigation programs in southern California. CRM brings the MTS Team direct experience with the
previous harbor -wide eelgrass survey efforts in Newport Harbor as well as staff redundancy to ensure
timelines are met and data are collected in a manner consistent with previous efforts. The added
layers of expertise allow for QA/QC of work products and data between team members.
CRM conducts numerous types of field studies, including habitat mapping, biological sampling and
analysis for wetlands, bays, harbors, and open coastal environments; water quality sampling and
analysis; CEQA and NEPA environmental impact reports/environmental impact statements and
assessments; mitigation planning and monitoring studies for wetlands, bays, harbors, and open
coastal habitats; and technical report preparation. CRM's U.S. client base includes numerous
southern California cities such as Newport Beach as well as county governments, state and federal
agencies, and private entities.
CRM scientists are certified American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS) technical divers and
are certified by the National Marine Fisheries Service to conduct invasive algae (Caulerpa spp)
surveys. Mr. Rick Ware, CRM President and Senior Marine Biologist is well qualified to prepare CEQA
documentation related to embayments and nearshore marine habitats, having 39 years of experience
in the marine biological consulting field. The types of services that CRM provides include:
• Marine biological and wetland baseline ecological inventories;
• Focused surveys for invasive species;
• Focused surveys for sensitive species;
• California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
document preparation and consultation;
• California Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit and ACOE Section 10/404 Permit
acquisition assistance;
• Marine Managed Area (MMA) evaluations, research, and monitoring programs;
• Habitat mapping and marine biological surveys for sandy beach, rocky intertidal, seagrass
beds, benthic soft bottom and hard bottom, coral reefs, salt marshes, kelp beds;
• Vessel Support and Lease of CRM's 22 ft and 13.5 ft vessels
• Bioacoustical Surveys;
• Remote Underwater Video Surveys;
• Underwater Photographic Surveys;
• Marine Mammal and Sea Turtle Monitoring;
• Habitat restoration and mitigation program design, implementation, and monitoring for
seagrass beds, kelp beds, reefs, and salt marshes;
• Oceanographic surveys, water and sediment sampling, data analysis; and
• Oil spill contingency planning and damage assessment
MTS 3
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
1-3 Approach to the Scope of Services
1-3,1 Implementation of Shallow Water Surveys
Three methods are proposed to map eelgrass. The methods follow those of prior surveys (Coastal
Resources Management 2017) and the methods are consistent with guidelines within the California
Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (CEMP) and the Eelgrass Protection and Mitigation Plan for Shallow Waters
in Newport Bay (EPMP).
For shallow -water eelgrass habitat, the primary method will utilize biologist -divers using SCUBA and
a surface support vessel (generally a kayak) equipped with a differential global positioning system
(dGPS) to outline eelgrass bed areas. Each diver will be supported by a support vessel. The support
vessel will follow their diver and maintain communication with the diver. When the diver encounters
an eelgrass bed, the diver will notify the topside person via underwater communications equipment.
The diver will then swim the eelgrass boundary while the topside person follows and logs positions
with a dGPS.
In most regions, diver surveys will include the bayfloor from the low intertidal zone to about 30 feet
past the end of docks and piers except where the pierhead lines are irregular such as along Carnation
and China Cove where shallow -water eelgrass beds extend toward the navigational channel.
Where conditions are not safe to dive or where eelgrass beds are extensive or extend well beyond
the pierhead line, remote sensing techniques (side -scan sonar and possibly down -looking sonar) will
be used to survey for eelgrass. These methods are consistent with CRM (2017) and the sonar work
performed by this team will be performed by CRM. Sonar data will be validated through the use of
underwater video. These methods are provided in more detail below relative to the deep -water
surveys.
Additional survey elements will include documenting any large debris items observed in sonar records
or noted by divers. A table of coordinates and brief description will be provided in the report. Eelgrass
density will be monitored by randomly placing quadrats in eelgrass beds and counting leaf shoots
(turions) within each quadrat. Data will also be collected on eelgrass canopy height, water
temperature, other species present, and other environmental variables consistent with CRM (2017).
During the surveys, divers will perform an anticipated 20% coverage Caulerpa survey in accordance
with NMFS protocols. The primary means to observe for Caulerpa will be using Caulerpa certified
divers performing the eelgrass surveys in the shallow -water areas. While searching for and surveying
around eelgrass beds, divers will survey a significant amount of seafloor. Based on the current
understanding of Caulerpa presence in Newport Harbor, MTS plans to perform some additional
survey efforts specifically for Caulerpa. The diver tracks will be recorded regardless of whether the
diver encounters eelgrass. This information along with data on other Caulerpa survey efforts will be
reviewed. MTS will then choose areas for additional surveys to fill any gaps in the Caulerpa search. In
addition, divers will swim through eelgrass beds in those areas where eelgrass density assessments
are to occur. Training and intercalibration among divers will occur prior to commencement of data
collection. The MTS Team is prepared to meet all data collection requirements specified in the RFP.
MTS 4
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
The report deliverable will utilize the same report template as prior efforts (refer to MTS and CRM
2020 & 2022). The report template will be updated with the information from the current shallow -
water and deep -water eelgrass survey using all the same parameters and methods as the prior efforts
with some minor additions within the current effort. The consistency in data collection and reporting
will ensure that any existing and future eelgrass mitigation programs have data with confidence to
protect the resource. If confidence is lost in the data, mitigation programs can be faced with costly
implementation of additional data collection.
1-3.2 Implementation of Eelgrass Study Site Surveys
The goal of this task is to inform upon the success of the experimental eelgrass transplant effort
completed in 2019. Survey of the eelgrass study sites would inform the City as to the success of
various transplant methods three years after the transplant methods were deployed.
MTS will map eelgrass within the eelgrass study sites during the shallow water eelgrass surveys. MTS
will follow data collection methods utilized in the year 1 follow up survey of the eelgrass study sites
performed in 2020. MTS will lay transects across the study sites in the location of the experimental
eelgrass transplant area and collect information related to coverage and density.
Results from the evaluation of the eelgrass study sites will be summarized and included within the
report deliverable provided for the harbor wide survey effort.
1-3.3 Implementation of Deep -Water Surveys
The purpose of this task is to update the database of eelgrass distribution in Newport Bay Deep Water
Habitat (DWEH) in July 2024 using remote survey methods rather than diver survey, since large-scale
diver surveys conducted within active navigational channels in Newport Harbor can present
significant diver safety issues and can be extremely labor-intensive. Remote sensing techniques (side -
scan sonar and remote underwater video) eliminate these issues.
Deep Water Eelgrass surveys are necessary so that the City has a detailed and complete knowledge
of eelgrass bed resources within Newport Bay, as required for the implementation of the City of
Newport Beach "Eelgrass Protection and Mitigation Plan for Shallow Waters in Lower Newport Bay:
An Ecosystem Based Management Program". The Deepwater Habitat survey will update CRM
Deepwater Habitat Surveys conducted in 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2022 (CRM 2009, 2014, 2016,
MTS and CRM 2020, and 2022) that mapped 45.86 acres of eelgrass in the navigation channels in
2008, 45.92 acres of eelgrass in 2012, 51.5 acres in 2016, 37.94 acres in 2020, and 96.4 acres in 2022.
The 2022 map is shown in Figure 1.
For the FY 2022 Deep -Water survey, the MTS Team proposes to have CRM provide eelgrass habitat
surveys using side -scan sonar in the following locations:
• Side -scan Sonar
• Deepwater Side -scan Area 260 acres
• City Mitigation Area -3.5 acres
• Balboa Yacht Basin 2.5 acres
• Channels Surrounding Linda Isle (south and east) 11 acres
• Inner Linda Isle 8.5 acres
MTS 5
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
• Balboa Marina Channel/North Linda Isle Channel 4 acres
• Castaways 15 acres
• DeAnza West, to the Launch Ramp 30 acres
• DeAnza East 12 acres
• Dunes Marina
This work is consistent with the areal cover and the methods employed during previous studies and
consistent with the RFP (Figure 1). The intent is to survey for eelgrass with sonar methods in
expansive areas and areas where navigational channels pose a hazard for diving. Within all of these
areas diver surveys will provide eelgrass detail inside the pierhead line and will be used to validate
sonar methods. Note that many of the areas described above are beyond the boundaries shown in
Figure 1 and the RFP. They are consistent with the text of the RFP that describes performance of
eelgrass surveys in areas north of the PCH Bridge.
Figure 1. Survey Area (Shown with the 2022 Deep -water Eelgrass Habitat Survey Results).
CRM will incorporate side -scan sonar technology linked with high -resolution underwater video.
Methods to be employed will be the same as utilized during the 2008, 2012, 2016, 2020, and 2022
side -scan sonar surveys (CRM 2009, 2014, 2016, MTS and CRM 2020, and 2022). It is extremely
important to utilize consistent methodology, equipment, personnel, and data analysis techniques
MTS 6
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
using remote survey methods, since the use of different instrumentation, personnel, and data
management systems, and comparing previously collected data can result in varying results. Thus,
our proposal to provide these services allows the City to make direct comparisons over time when
submitting the results of the survey to the regulatory agencies.
The remote sensing methods we employ are approved techniques to map eelgrass as outlined in the
California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy (National Marine Fisheries Service 2014). In addition, a proposed
NOAA Southern California Eelgrass Regional -Wide Monitoring Program will include a
recommendation that eelgrass habitat mapping efforts should be conducted using side -scan sonar
methods and where possible, be accompanied by the collection of bathymetric data.
The project deliverable will be an eelgrass habitat map of eelgrass along with a calculation of eelgrass
acreage found within Newport Harbor's Deep -Water Habitat. In accordance with the RFP, the MTS
Team will submit preliminary acreages and electronic data files (compatible with the City of Newport
Beach's GIS mapping system) associated with the deep -water eelgrass survey to the City. If necessary,
MTS and CRM can provide results of the deep -water surveys prior to finalization of the report; it will
take longer to complete the dive efforts than the sonar efforts. The results will also be incorporated
in the final report and all electronic files for both the shallow water and deep -water surveys shall be
provided to the City by November 30, 2024.
1-3,4 Management Approach
Effective communication is critical to the successful implementation of dive and survey programs at
the scale of this Project. The work effort will require teams to efficiently distribute survey efforts and
implement those surveys in a safe and timely fashion. As such, clear transfer of information from
Project objectives down to the daily assignment of tasks is critical to efficient, cost-effective Project
management.
The Project will require effective management to ensure team organization, task management,
adherence to the project goals, and timely reporting. MTS proposes to utilize a project manager as
the primary point of contact between the HRD project management team and the MTS Team. This
role will be established with a level of redundancy by supplying a field manager that is also capable
of taking over as project manager. If the field manager is not available for work, the project manager
will assume both roles. In this way, the team ensures a top -down management approach whereby
the HRD ensures that its goals, needs, and instructions are realized by the task leaders and their work
teams with maximum continuity among staff.
As the primary point of contact for the MTS Team, the project manager will be responsible for
communicating project challenges, safety concerns, and management decisions to the HRD in a
timely manner. The MTS project manager will coordinate with HRD staff and can provide status
updates on projects at any required interval to summarize current project status and present any
challenges or concerns. The project manager will provide immediate email and telephone notification
of significant safety concerns or other events that threaten the project or its efficiency. Any such
significant events and corrective actions will be additionally addressed during status reports.
MTS recognizes the level of commitment required by HRD staff to ensure the success of the multitude
of projects in progress at any given time. As such, MTS management will do all it can to effectively
MT-S
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
communicate with HRD management and its own team. We recognize that effective communication
is necessary to allow resource managers to understand working situations and provide for adaptive
management. It is also critical that the team's management structure allow for the safest and most
efficient means of deploying resources. MTS brings its decades of aquatic experience to this Project.
This means we can offer solutions where funds are spent efficiently and effectively. Aquatic
operations can be expensive so MTS makes it our priority to coordinate and manage the resources
effectively so that goals can be realized on time and within budget.
MTS, 8
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
1-4 Service Offerings Summary
The above personnel experience, corporate qualifications, and project examples illustrate that MTS
and teaming partner CRM have the expertise and materials required to successfully perform the
scope of work. MTS and CRM routinely perform remote sensing surveys to map marine habitats and
possess all equipment necessary to perform towed video, remotely operated vehicle, down -looking
sonar, and side -scan sonar surveys. Our staff has experience performing eelgrass surveys in Newport
Harbor and they understand how to safely and effectively operate within Newport Harbor. Our team
member CRM developed the protocols specified in the RFP for performance of shallow water and
deep -water eelgrass surveys. We intend to adhere to those methods to maintain a consistent dataset
that the City of Newport Beach can have confidence in. This will allow for consistency in project
planning within the regulatory context of Newport Harbor and prevent costly project delays
associated with inadequate data collection.
I"T-S 9
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
2 Pricing
Pricing information to complete the scope of work is provided in a separate file in accordance with
instructions within RFP 24-79. The separate bid document provides an itemized not to exceed budget
for the proposed work as well as a fee schedule for labor and equipment to be used within the terms
of the contract.
The budget includes three additional days of diver field work to cover areas needed to complete the
20% survey effort for Caulerpa and for surveying the experimental eelgrass survey sites. Depending
on how survey efforts are combined and completed during the eelgrass mapping effort it is possible
that all or a portion of the three additional survey days may not be used. Additionally, the budget
includes five contingency days should the City allow for additional budget to complete eelgrass
and/or Caulerpa surveys within the harbor at the discretion of the City. Finally, it should be noted
that we have included budget to cover significant area beyond the RGP 54 monitoring area. However,
this is intended to provide a consistent and detailed map of all eelgrass believed to exist within
Newport Harbor. Our team would be happy to discuss the pricing and budget and reduce the level of
effort and budget during the contract negotiation period.
MTS 10
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
3 Organizational Information
The below section is provided to illustrate key personnel to be assigned to this project from MTS and
CRM. We also detail the contracting relationship between MTS and CRM and our lead contact for
work with the HRD.
3-1 Key Personnel
The MTS Team consists of team members from both MTS and CRM. Dr. Robert Mooney will act as
the project manager and will be the primary point of contact for the City of Newport Beach. Ms. Grace
Teller will support Dr. Mooney as field manager responsible for ensuring that fieldwork is carried out
in a safe, efficient, and professional manner. Mr. Rick Ware with CRM will support the team with
training and quality control to ensure data collection methods are consistent with previous efforts.
He will also perform collection of down -looking sonar data, side -scan sonar data, quality control, and
reporting. The key personnel are highlighted below.
3-1,1 Project Manager —Robert Mooney (MTS)
Dr. Mooney is Vice President and Principal Scientist at MTS. He manages the MTS Consulting Division
and has full authority to represent MTS in all contractual matters. With over 20 years of experience
studying and mapping coastal marine resources, he is regularly called upon for his knowledge as a
scientist and researcher across multiple disciplines. His experience includes instruction of wildlife
biology, research methods, statistics, and sampling design at the university level.
Dr. Mooney will serve as a research and sampling team leader, responsible for eelgrass monitoring
program design, development of specialized instrumentation and survey equipment, and production
of time -synchronized and geographically referenced data sets. He has extensive experience with the
development of technology in the marine environment and continually seeks innovative
improvements for the efficient collection of quality data. He regularly works with bathymetric survey
instrumentation (single -beam and multi -beam sonar), tide loggers, side -scan sonar, sub -bottom
profilers, towed cameras, and remotely operated vehicles to map marine substrates and habitats.
Dr. Mooney has performed hundreds of surveys for eelgrass using side -scan sonar and SCUBA,
designed and led numerous eelgrass mitigation planning, transplantation and monitoring programs
and is recognized as regional leader in eelgrass monitoring and restoration. His understanding of
sampling theory and experimental design along with his experience performing eelgrass monitoring
and restoration in Newport Harbor makes him uniquely qualified to help the HRD achieve its eelgrass
management goals. Dr. Mooney also led the eradication effort for Caulerpa taxifolia in southern
California and co -leads the eradication effort for Caulerpa prolifera in Newport Harbor and San Diego
Bay. He and his team at MTS can be depended upon to properly implement Caulerpa monitoring
alongside surveys for eelgrass.
Dr. Mooney's exceptional knowledge of eelgrass resources in California and specifically in Newport
Harbor make him uniquely qualified to lead the 2024 shallow -water and deep -water eelgrass survey.
Dr. Mooney managed the 2018, 2020, and 2022 eelgrass surveys for Newport Harbor with assistance
from Rick Ware of CRM. He has been able to develop a research team at MTS that affords him the
ability to make certain that data are collected in accordance with appropriate sampling theory and
with equipment and techniques specific to site conditions. He understands that the methods
MTS 11
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
employed must be sensitive to the physical and biological environment within which work is
performed and that a single approach cannot be applied to all circumstances.
In addition to the 2018, 2020, and 2022 shallow -water eelgrass survey, Dr. Mooney's work in Newport
Harbor has included the recent multi -beam bathymetric mapping of Upper Newport Bay as part of
the year-10, post -restoration monitoring. Dr. Mooney was also contracted with Orange County Public
Works to further evaluate the performance of the sediment basins in Upper Newport Bay. While
working at another firm, he was responsible for bay -wide surveys in Newport Harbor and other
systems in southern California to assess their invasibility for the invasive alga, Coulerpa. Dr. Mooney
performed ecosystem modelling and implemented sonar surveys to map the bottom and eelgrass
habitat throughout Newport Harbor as part of that effort. He has performed numerous surveys for
eelgrass for construction projects in Newport Harbor over the past 20 years and has managed
eelgrass transplants within Newport Harbor.
3-1.2 Field Manager — Grace Teller (MTS)
Grace Teller is a senior project manager with a diverse background ranging from terrestrial to marine
and aquatic ecology. Ms. Teller serves as a marine scientist and project manager at MTS, responsible
for logistics and mobilization, operating and maintaining all instrumentation and survey equipment,
integrating collected data inputs into geographically referenced data sets, and compilation of report
deliverables.
During the past 10 years she has worked as a dive master and as a marine scientist. Ms. Teller has
worked in a diverse range of habitats where she has experience studying and mapping wildlife and
environmental resources. Her recent work has focused on physical and biological data collection in
marine and coastal ecosystems. Her work typically is focused on biological restoration and monitoring
programs. Ms. Teller is routinely consulted for her experience with eelgrass monitoring, water quality
monitoring, fisheries sampling, macroinvertebrate core collection, invasive species monitoring, tidal
monitoring, habitat mapping, and bathymetric surveys. She regularly performs surveys to document
biological resources and potential project impacts in the coastal estuaries and bays of California.
Ms. Teller currently manages offshore water quality projects for treated wastewater, including
collection of water column profile data and sampling of seawater at designated sampling stations
around the diffuser pipeline. She is responsible for managing construction monitoring for sensitive
species including marine mammals, sea turtles, and birds. Ms. Teller leads eelgrass monitoring efforts
throughout California. Ms. Teller led the shallow -water eelgrass field survey efforts for the City of
Newport Beach in 2018, 2020, and 2022.
3-1.3 Project Planning Deep -Water Survey and Quality Control - Rick Ware
(CRM)
Rick Ware is the Principal Scientist and President of CRM. He has over 40 years of experience
conducting marine biological resource surveys and evaluating the impacts of coastal development on
marine communities in California, Alaska, and the Pacific Basin. He is familiar with federal (NEPA),
State of California (CEQA), and California Coastal Commission guidelines and regulations and has
managed and/or participated in the preparation of numerous state and federal -mandated
environmental assessment and planning documents.
MTS 12
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Mr. Ware has conducted numerous types of field studies, including habitat mapping; biological
sampling and analysis for wetlands, bays, harbors, and open coastal environments; water quality
sampling; environmental impact assessments, mitigation planning and monitoring studies; and
technical report preparation. He is well versed in the taxonomy of Pacific Coast marine plants and
animals, the ecology of coastal marine communities, the environmental impacts of development, and
the restoration and monitoring of coastal resources. He regularly provides his marine biological
expertise on projects that require permits from the California Coastal Commission, the State Regional
Water Quality Control Board, EPA, and the U.S Army Corps of Engineers and is very familiar with the
environmental permitting process.
Mr. Ware has investigated seagrass ecosystems since 1978 throughout southern California. He has
supervised and conducted extensive eelgrass habitat mapping studies, eelgrass habitat impact
analysis, and eelgrass restoration/mitigation programs between Bodega Bay and San Diego County
embayments. He has been the principal investigator for eelgrass transplants in Morro Bay, CA, Los
Angeles Harbor, Alamitos Bay, Sunset Harbour/Huntington Harbour, and San Diego Bay. He
developed the program for performing harbor -wide surveys for eelgrass resources in Newport Harbor
and has performed all of the recent harbor -wide surveys. His leadership has created a robust eelgrass
dataset of significant importance to the management of Newport Harbor.
3-2 Contractor Relationships
MTS and CRM have entered into a teaming agreement to fulfill the scope of work. MTS will act as the
prime contractor. As prime contractor, MTS will be responsible for communicating project goals,
schedule, and completion of milestones with the City of Newport Beach HRD. MTS project manager
Dr. Robert Mooney will be the primary point of contact for any contracting or service requests under
the contract. CRM will act as a subcontractor to MTS in accordance with the teaming agreement.
CRM has previously provided support to train staff to ensure data collection methods are consistent
with previous harbor -wide eelgrass surveys. CRM will continue performing that role as necessary.
Additionally, CRM will also perform the sonar and camera survey work and will review data and map
products for quality control purposes.
MTS 13
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
4 References & Recent Project History
In the below section we briefly highlight relevant and recent project histories for MTS and CRM and
then provide detailed project references for a subset of projects.
4-1 Recent Project History
MTS and CRM pride themselves on providing a high level of field sampling, analysis, and reporting
expertise. The combination of experiences across multiple sites and habitats is ideal for the current
Project. The combination of needing to be field savvy while performing a technical task with
understanding of scientific principles makes this team uniquely qualified. A brief list of recent and
relevant experiences includes;
• Performing Caulerpa prolifera eradication at China Cove and Collins Island in Newport Harbor
in 2021, 2022, and 2023 (MTS)
• Performing Caulerpa prolifera eradication at Coronado Cays in Coronado in 2024.
• Performing the 2020 and 2022 shallow -water and deep -water eelgrass surveys for Newport
Harbor (MTS & CRM)
• Performing the 2018 shallow -water eelgrass surveys for Newport Harbor (MTS & CRM)
• Performing an assessment of potential eelgrass restoration sites for the Port of San Diego
(MTS)
• Performing baseline eelgrass monitoring for planning associated with dock reconfiguration at
101 Bayside, Newport Harbor (MTS)
• Implementing eelgrass restoration at Colorado Lagoon in Long Beach (MTS)
• Performing an assessment of the Santa Margarita River Estuary for Marine Corps Base Camp
Pendleton which included sonar and video eelgrass mapping via kayak (MTS)
• Marine biological assessment, essential fish habitat assessment, and eelgrass surveys for the
Coronado Cays Yacht Club, Coronado (MTS)
• Baseline eelgrass monitoring for temporary dock relocation at Channel Road Marina,
Newport Harbor (MTS)
• Eelgrass mapping, transplanting, and mitigation monitoring at Newport Marina, Newport
Harbor (MTS)
• Eelgrass mapping, transplanting, and mitigation monitoring at Balboa Marina and Balboa
marina West in Newport Harbor (MTS)
• Caulerpa surveys along Balboa Island for beach nourishment activities in Newport Harbor
(MTS)
• Performing eelgrass and bathymetric monitoring relating to marsh alteration to combat sea
level rise at Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge (MTS)
• Completing a baseline eelgrass inventory for redevelopment of Harbor Island West Marina,
San Diego (MTS)
• Performing eelgrass inventory and special studies in support of the proposed expansion of
Fifth Avenue Landing Marina, San Diego (MTS)
• On -call contractor for eelgrass monitoring in the Port of Los Angeles (MTS)
• On -call contractor for eelgrass monitoring for the Port of San Diego (MTS)
• Performance of eelgrass surveys for restoration of salt marsh habitat at ponds 10/11 in San
Diego Bay for the Southwest Wetlands Interpretive Association (MTS)
• Performing annual eelgrass mitigation site monitoring at multiple sites in San Diego Bay (MTS)
MTs 14
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
• Performing baseline and pre -construction eelgrass and Caulerpa monitoring at the Shelter
Island Boat Launch Facility (MTS)
• On -call contractor for eelgrass monitoring in the Coronado Cays, Coronado (MTS)
• Performing seafloor mapping for the post -restoration monitoring of Upper Newport Bay
(MTS)
• Performing harbor -wide eelgrass GIS mapping for the City of Newport Beach in Newport
Harbor between 2003 and 2016 (CRM)
• Performing 200 public use monitoring surveys for central Orange County areas of special
biological significance in 2012 (CRM)
• Conducted extensive eelgrass restoration in association with Orange County Coastkeeper
along the De Anza-Bayside Peninsula in Upper Newport Bay under grants from the California
Coastal Conservancy and NOAA between 2012 and 2015 (CRM)
• Conducted eelgrass and invasive algae surveys, prepared Essential Fish Habitat Impact (EFH)
analyses, and submitted detailed marine biological impact assessment technical appendices
for Balboa Marina and Balboa Marina West in Newport Harbor
• Retained by the City of Newport Beach and the California Department of Fish and Game to
conduct biological surveys, prepare a biological project description, a project impact
assessment and construction BMPs for the construction of the Back Bay Science Center,
Orange County Water Quality Laboratory, and Cal Fish and Game Headquarters, on
Shellmaker Island, Newport Bay, CA (CRM)
• Prepared a marine biological impact assessment, Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) technical
studies, and a mitigation plan to avoid impacts for eelgrass for the Aerie Dock Project (201-
207 Carnation Ave) in Carnation Cove, Newport Harbor (CRM)
4-2 Project Examples
The following project examples highlight the qualifications of the team members proposed for this
project. Information provided with the project examples can be used to obtain appropriate project
references.
MTS 15
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
4-2.1 Marine Taxonomic Services - Project Examples / References
China Cove Caulerpa Eradication and Surveys
Merkel and Associates, Inc. / California Regional Water Quality Control Board
Client Contact
Terri Reeder
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board
951.782.4995
Terri.reeder@waterboards.ca.gov
Total Project Cost
$420,000
MTS was contracted to perform Caulerpa eradication and
surveys in China Cove in Newport Beach, California. The
work was performed under two sub -contracts with Merkel
& Associates with funding provided by the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board and NOAA Fisheries.
The eradication was performed to address the presence of
approximately 200 square meters of seafloor infested with
Caulerpa prolifera (C. prolifera), distributed over roughly
1.2-hectare infestation area within China Cove. The
eradication effort served to remove C. prolifera effectively
and efficiently from the known infestation area.
MTS performed an initial localized eradication level diver
transect survey to determine and refine the known extent
of the C. prolifera infestation. Once the extent of infestation was refined, an initial localized removal effort
was performed by suction -assisted diver removal (June 2021). Additional divers were utilized during the
suction removal to selectively remove small patches of C. prolifera from eelgrass beds neighboring the
main C. prolifera bed. Following the suction -assisted diver removal, the infestation area was surveyed
again with eradication level surveys every 2 weeks following the removal effort (June 2021-February
2022). During these surveys, C. prolifera patches that had regrown from rhizoids or were missing in the
initial removal were removed by trained divers by hand and placed in collection bags designed to prevent
the loss of fragments. The location of subsequent collections of C. prolifera were recorded using mapping
software and a differential global positioning device.
Percentage of Work Duration of
Performed Contract
50% 2021-2022
MTS was responsible for coordinating with regulatory agencies including NOAA, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the City of Newport Beach. Additionally, MTS provided survey
supplies to complete the initial eradication level survey, initial removal effort, and subsequent eradication
level surveys after the removal effort.
Key Staff:
Robert Mooney, Principal Scientist
Seth Jones, Field Manager
Grace Teller, Field Manager
MTS 16
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Port of San Diego Eelgrass Restoration Site Identification Project
Port of San Diego Environmental and Land Use Management Department
Client Contact Total Project Cost Percentage of Work Duration of
Eileen Maher, Assistant Director $16,000 Performed Contract
619.686.6200 100% 2015
emaher@portofsandiego.org
MTS was contracted by the Port of San
Diego Environmental and Land Use
Management Department to implement
a study to identify sites that could be
utilized as potential eelgrass restroation
sites. The sites were to be identified
between Point Loma and the Mexico
border including San Diego Bay. The
project involved implementation of a
model to determine sites with the
greatest likelihood of suporting eelgrass
with minimal site modification. Field
verification surveys were performed to
validate the model and the data used to
generate the model.
1__. _ J ---
The project identified 18 potential eelgrass restoration sites. The sites included locations inside and
outside of San Diego Bay. The sites ranged from less than 1 acre to 80 acres. At each proposed location,
MTS developed a preliminary site plan. The site plans provided proposed depth contours necessary to
ensure successful restoration of eelgrass at each of the chosen sites. The site plans included cut or fill
volumes necessary to implement the restoration effort at each location. The produced document is
intended to guide resource managers as future decisions on the managment of eelgrass resources are
made.
MTS successfully completed project on schedule and within budget. The Port requested a fairly short
turnaround time for the deliverable and MTS met the challenge.
Key Staff:
Robert Mooney, Principal Scientist
Grace Teller, QA/QC Lead
MTS 17
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Shallow Water Eelgrass Resource Monitoring in Newport Bay,
Newport Beach, California
Client Contact
Chris Miller
Public Works Administrative Manager
City of Newport Beach Public Works
949.644.3043
CMiller@newportbeachca.gov
Total Project Cost Percentage of Duration of
$82,000 Work Performed Contract
100% 2020
MarineTaxonomic Services, Ltd. (MTS) and its
sub -contractor, Coastal Resources Management,
Inc, (CRM) was contracted by the City of Newport
Beach (City) to provide eelgrass-mapping services
in Newport Bay as part of the 2020 shallow -water
and deep water eelgrass assessment. The survey
consisted of mapping shallow -water eelgrass
habitat (SWEH) and deep water eelgrass habitat
(DWEH) in support of the City's Eelgrass
Protection and Mitigation Plan for Waters in
Region 27
Deep Water Sidzn Sonar
Lower Newport Bay: An Ecosystem Based
Management Program and the City of Newport Portion of Newport Bay eelgrass mapped during the
Beach Harbor Area Management Plan. MTS was
resource monitoring.
responsible for surveying the SWEH, data
analysis, and report composition. CRM completed the DWEH survey and provided MTS with survey results
from portions of SWEH and DWEH using sonar based methods beyond 20 feet (ft) bayward of all dock
structures and in areas where it was not safe to perform diver based surveys. This was the seventh SWEH
and DWEH survey since the program was initiated in 2003.
The purpose of this assessment was to provide the City with detailed information on the distribution and
abundance of eelgrass within Newport Harbor; including Lower and Upper Newport Bay. Monitoring and
maintaining a database of the Bay's eelgrass resources is essential for the City to manage these resources
and understand where proposed projects might have impacts. The data provided in this report will be
used by the City in support of their Regional General Permit (RGP) 54 issued collectively by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, the California Coastal Commission and the Water Board. MTS surveyed approximately
18 miles of shore line, resulting in 112.38 acres of eelgrass mepped within Newport Bay.
Key Staff:
Robert Mooney, Principal Scientist
Grace Teller, Associate Biologist, Lead Field Technician
Hannah Joss, Field Technician
Raelynn Heinitz, Field Technician
MZS 18
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Colorado Lagoon Eelgrass Restoration
L.A. Engineering
Client Contact Total Project Cost
Mitch Ward $35,000
Project Managing Engineer
626.454.5222 x 237
mward@laeng.net
MTS was contracted to perform an eelgrass transplant at
Colorado Lagoon in Long Beach, California. The transplant
was performed as part of a restoration project involving
upland, intertidal, and sub -tidal restoration. The
transplanted eelgrass served to provide mitigation for a
project in Alamitos Bay that had minor impacts to eelgrass.
MTS planted eelgrass beyond that necessary for mitigation
to create an eelgrass mitigation bank that can be used to
support future projects in Alamitos Bay and Long Beach that
have impacts to eelgrass. MTS strategically planted eelgrass
over approximately 0.5 acre such that eelgrass will grow and
expand into neighboring areas. This strategy will provide up
to 4.5 acres of eelgrass restoration available for banking.
This approach saved the City of Long Beach over $100,000 in
additional eelgrass planting.
Percentage of Work Duration of
Performed Contract
100% 2016-2017
MTS divers prepare to harvest
eelgrass.
MTS was responsible for obtaining permits from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW).
MTS worked with CDFW to develop a monitoring plan to ensure that eelgrass donor beds were not
significantly impacted by the project. MTS was responsible for all transplant elements including
delineation of transplant boundaries in accordance with the plan, preparing bare root bundles, planting,
and the post -restoration report.
MTS worked closely with the Colorado Lagoon design and construction team to ensure that the planting
efforts were initiated as soon as possible after site preparation. The work was performed on time and
within budget.
Key Staff:
Robert Mooney, Principal Scientist
Seth Jones, Field Manager
i11/IT 19
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Upper Newport Bay Post -Restoration Monitoring: Bathymetry and New Least Tern
Island Elevation Checks
Orange County Public Works
Client Contact Total Project Cost Percentage of Work Duration of
Rita Abellar $60,000 Performed Contract
Environmental Resource 100% 2015-2020
Specialist
714.955.0663
rita.abellar@ocpw.ocgov.com
The United States Army Corps of Engineers
implemented a restoration plan for Upper
Newport Bay. The construction was
completed in 2010 and resulted in
BwE
improved water flow through the system
DeplhFeet)
to increase beneficial uses associated with
�<.22
.22
��1z Z19�
9.18
the Upper Newport Bay. The post-
restoration monitoring plan called for
119 B
9 B - 9
periodic bathymetric surveys to evaluate
®59.�
the rate of sedimentation within the
a]9,B.B 2
system as well as biological monitoring to
mB,.2
M2, ^
evaluate the use of the system by wildlife.
0 s
,eye
Bathymetric monitoring is critical to
ensuring that the Upper Newport Bay
Results of the Year 5 multi -beam bathymetric survey
ecosystem is maintained in a manner that
relative to Year 3.
protects beneficial uses associated with
wetlands and wildlife. The United States
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) developed a monitoring program for the restoration project following
completion of construction. The monitoring program specified that post -restoration bathymetric
monitoring be performed in monitoring years 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10.
MTS was contracted by Orange County Public works to perform the Year 5 bathymetric monitoring and to
perform an elevation check of the New Tern Island that was constructed as part of the restoration. Prior
surveys had been performed by the Army Corps of Engineers and evaluated by a different consulting firm.
MTS was contracted after Orange County Public works assumed the monitoring program from the Army
Corps of Engineers. MTS performed the Year 5 bathymetric monitoring with a multi -beam sonar.
Following completion of the sonar survey, MTS calculated the amount of sediment that had accumulated
in the restoration area since the prior survey by comparing the surfaces generated by the MTS and the
prior Army Corps surveys.
Key Staff:
Robert Mooney, Principal Scientist
MTS 20
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
4-2.2 Coastal Resources Management -Project Descriptions/ References
USACE Los Angeles River Estuary Dredge Project and Material Disposal Area
Eelgrass Mapping Surveys (ACOE #W912PL-11-D-00151616)
Kinnetic Laboratories, Inc.
Client Contact Total Project Cost Percentage of Work Duration of
Kenneth Kronschnahl $45,993.00 Performed Contract
831-457-3950 100% 2014-2016
The US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles
District (Corps) performed maintenance
dredging of the Los Angeles River Estuary
(LARE) federal channel to its authorized design
depths to maintain safe navigability of the
channel between May and August, 2013 and
material dredged from the LARE federal
channel was transported via dredge scows to
the Cherry Avenue Nearshore Disposal Area
9 = J,
(Nearshore Placement Area) between May
18th, 2015 and August 5th, 2015. The team of Coastal Resources Management, Inc. (CRM) and Nearshore
and Wetland Surveys (NWS) was retained by Kinnetic Laboratories to conduct pre -and -post dredging and
dredge material placement eelgrass (Zostera spp.) surveys for the ACOE. CRM and NWS conducted the
eelgrass surveys in August 2014 and October 2015 using side -scan sonar and downlooking sonar
techniques. Extensive ground-truthing and Submerged Aquatic Vegetation (SAV) target verification of the
side -scan and downlooking sonar survey data was accomplished using a remotely deployed video camera
system. No eelgrass was mapped in the LARE; however, extensive eelgrass beds were mapped
immediately inshore of the dredge material placement area. The results of the post -construction eelgrass
survey indicated that the project did not affect eelgrass bed resources.
Key Staff:
Rick Ware, Principal CRM
MT-. 21
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
Newport Bay Eelgrass GIS Mapping Project
City of Newport Beach.
Client Contact
Total Project Cost
Percentage of Work
Duration of
Chris Miller
$312,000
Performed
Contract
949-644-3041
(since 2003)
100%
2003-2017
Coastal Resources Management (CRM) ''�' ►r �`.'
contracted with the City of Newport
Beach's Harbor Resources Division to %?a'
conduct eelgrass (Zostera marina) _
habitat mapping surveys and provide %� s
eelgrass ecological information for
Lower Newport Bay and Upper Newport — --
Bay as part of the City's preparation and
implementation of a long-term and
baywide eelgrass management plan and
Newport Bay -specific eelgrass
mitigation plan. These surveys mapped+�`�`'-'
the distribution, abundance, and long-term trends in eelgrass acreages, and the species of plants and
animals within eelgrass beds. CRM defined eelgrass zones in Newport Bay as stable, transitional, and
unvegetated eelgrass zones based upon the results of the surveys. To date, CRM conducted five biannual
surveys; 2003-2004, 2006-2007, 2009-2010, and 2013-2014, and 2016 and mapped between 65 and 105
acres of eelgrass in Newport Bay. CRM conducted eelgrass habitat mapping surveys using diver/DGPS
mapping methods in shallow water habitats. CRM and Nearshore and Wetland Surveys, Inc. conducted
deeper water and navigational channel eelgrass mapping surveys using side -scan and downlooking sonar.
Ground-truthing and target verification of the bioacoustical surveys were accomplished using remotely
deployed underwater video cameras, and secondly, diver verification. CRM's project reports and eelgrass
bed maps are on the City's public website, and are used by the City of Newport Beach resource managers
as part of their long-term bay eelgrass habitat management program. CRM also conducted bi-weekly
oceanographic studies (temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, salinity, oxidation/reduction potential, light
illuminance and light energy) in 2008-2009 to assist in determining the factors that affect eelgrass
distribution and abundance.
Key Staff:
Rick Ware, Principal CRM
MTTS 22
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
County of Orange Sunset Bay/Huntington Harbour Dredging Project Eelgrass
Mapping, Mitigation Planning, and Eelgrass Transplant Projects
County of Orange Public facilities Resources Department
Client Contact Total Project Cost Percentage of Work Duration of
Susan Broduer $150,000 Performed Contract
949-585-6448 100% 1996-1997
2013-2015
Moffatt & Nichole; Kim Garvey
562-426-9551
Under contract to the County of
Orange and Moffatt Nichol, CRM
conducted extensive marine
biological survey work and prepared
marine biological assessments for
County dredging projects in Sunset
Bay and Huntington Harbour, Ca
between 1996 and 2015. The
purposes of the studies were to (1)
define the existing distribution and
abundance of eelgrass in regions
where maintenance dredging
operations are required; (2) prepare
marine biological resource impact
assessments and Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) analysis forthe project environmental documents and permits; (3) prepare mitigation plans
to avoid and reduce potential impacts of the project on eelgrass; (4) monitor dredge operational impacts
on eelgrass habitat (5) conduct eelgrass transplant programs and (6) conduct five-year eelgrass transplant
monitoring programs per NMFS Eelgrass Mitigation Policies. Between 1996 and 2007, CRM conducted
eelgrass surveys using diver/DGPS techniques. CRM conducted baseline eelgrass surveys in 2013 for the
project's CEQA analysis and then conducted pre -construction eelgrass habitat mapping surveys in 2015
employing both diver/DGPS mapping methods and bioacoustical mapping methods. The bioacoustical
surveys utilized state-of-the-art side -scan sonar, downlooking sonar, and bathymetric survey equipment
and follow-up ground truthing/target verification of the side-scan/downlooking sonar data to provide an
accurate accounting of eelgrass beds and patches for project impact and mitigation analyses. Eelgrass
mapping information was entered and presented in ESRI ArcGIS mapping format. CRM also prepared a
beach nourishment ecological assessment for Sunset/Surfside beaches as part of the dredge material
disposal program for the project.
Key Staff:
Rick Ware, Principal CRM
MTS 23
MTS Bid for RFP 24-79 Eelgrass Survey 2024
5 Advance Notice Requirements Statement
MTS and CRM can begin work within two weeks of a notice to proceed. MTS and CRM are also
prepared to respond quickly to any additional work requests to utilize contingency funds for related
or similar work.
6 Consultant Proposal Worksheet
MTS and CRM have prepared a proposal worksheet detailing the costs associated with
implementation of the scope of work. That worksheet is provided as a separate document as
required by the RFP. Our primary proposal worksheet provides the costs to implement the scope of
work as described in the RFP. We have additionally provided a worksheet with optional bathymetry
costs. The RFP specifies that bathymetry be included on the eelgrass maps. MTS and CRM propose
to utilize whatever existing information the City can provide relative to bathymetry. However, we
have optionally provided costs to collect bathymetry data and produce contour lines within the
survey limits.
7 Acknowledgement of City's Standard Perms and
Conditions
MTS and CRM acknowledge and agree to the City's standard terms and conditions as outlined in RFP
24-79 for the 2024 Newport Harbor Shallow -Water & Deep -Water Eelgrass Survey. MTS has
requested some exceptions relative to insurance limits.
Attachment A - Key Personnel Resumes
Key personnel resumes are provided on the following pages.
MTSI 24
D
Robert Mooney — Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
Vice President and Principal Marine Scientist Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
Dr. Mooney has over 20 years of experience studying and KEY QUALIFICATIONS
mapping estuarine and coastal marine resources. His recent work
has focused on physical and biological data collection for long-
term post -restoration monitoring programs, including the
restoration of Upper Newport Bay and Bolsa Chica. For these
projects, Dr. Mooney has been the task leader or key participant
in multiyear sampling elements including eelgrass monitoring,
water quality monitoring, fisheries sampling, macroinvertebrate
core collection, tidal monitoring, and bathymetric surveys to
track inlet conditions. He regularly performs surveys to document
biological resources and potential project impacts in the coastal
estuaries and bays of California. In San Diego Bay, he directed a
5-year program to determine the post -dredging recovery time of
benthic and epibenthic fish and invertebrate communities in
comparison to undredged areas. He has arguably managed more
eelgrass monitoring surveys in San Diego Bay than any other
person over the past 20 years. Many of his projects are
documented in complex reports that Dr. Mooney either authored
or co-authored. He is skilled in the acquisition and management
of spatial datasets for developing GIS-based mapping products.
Dr. Mooney serves as research team leader at WITS, responsible
for study design, logistics and mobilization, operating and
maintaining all instrumentation and survey equipment, and
integrating collected data inputs into time -synchronized and
geographically referenced data sets. He has extensive experience
with the use of side -scan sonar and GIS for eelgrass mapping and continually seeks innovative
improvements to the quality and efficiency of data collection. He regularly works with
bathymetric survey instrumentation, tide loggers, side -scan sonar, sub -bottom profilers, and
towed and remotely operated vehicles to map marine and estuarine substrates and habitats.
PERMITS
Education
Doctor of Philosophy, 2001, Conservation Biology, University of British Columbia, British
Columbia
Bachelor of Science (Magna cum laude), 1994, Biological Sciences, California State Polytechnic
University, Pomona
M.Ts 25
Representative San Diego Bay Eelgrass Project Experience
• Performed eelgrass surveys for Sheraton San Diego Hotel and Marina.
• Managed bathymetry, sub -bottom survey, and eelgrass surveys for San Diego Yacht Club.
• Project Manager for design of sediment remediation habitat cap, eelgrass mitigation
planning, eelgrass transplant, and eelgrass monitoring for the Sediment Remediation at
the Former Campbell Shipyard Project.
• Project Manager for eelgrass mitigation planning, eelgrass transplant implementation,
and eelgrass monitoring for Marine Group Boat Works.
• Managed the creation of a predictive model for eelgrass occurrence based on operational
parameters of the South Bay Power Plant to support NPDES permit requirements.
• Project manager for the 2004 San Diego Bay -Wide Eelgrass Inventory.
• Co -managed the 2008 San Diego Bay -Wide Eelgrass Inventory.
• Managed the annual collection of eelgrass monitoring data for the US Navy eelgrass
mitigation sites and maintained the eelgrass bank ledger for those sites.
• Performed eelgrass surveys to support the 2004/2005 San Diego Bay Channel Deepening
Project
• Project Manager for the eelgrass surveys to support the monitoring of the US Navy's Pier
Rehabilitation Project at Naval Amphibious Base Coronado.
• Project Manager for the eelgrass surveys to support the installation and rehabilitation of
the US Navy's marine mammal training center at Naval Base Point Loma.
• Project Manager for eelgrass surveys to support construction activities at the US Navy's
submarine base at Naval Base Point Loma.
• Project Manager for eelgrass surveys to support construction activities at the US Coast
Guard Base San Diego.
• Project Manager for eelgrass surveys to support construction at Coronado Yacht Club.
• Project Manager for eelgrass surveys to support construction activities for the US Navy at
Fiddler's Cove.
• Project Manager for the eelgrass transplant for the Port of San Diego at the Chula Vista
"borrow pit".
• Project Manager for the eelgrass survey in support of environmental cleanup of the A-8
anchorage for the Port of San Diego.
• Project Manager for the eelgrass surveys, mitigation planning, and eelgrass transplant in
support of construction activities at Grape Street Pier for Hornblower Cruises and Events.
• Project Manager for the eelgrass surveys, mitigation planning, and eelgrass transplant in
support of construction activities for the installation of new docks for San Diego Harbor
Excursions.
• Project Manager for the eelgrass surveys in support of the Coronado Bridge Seismic
Retrofit Project.
• Field Manager for the City of Coronado eelgrass mitigation site creation and eelgrass
transplant in Glorietta Bay.
• Project Manager for the baseline bathymetry, biological surveys, and eelgrass surveys for
the Chula Vista Yacht Club
MTS 26
• Project Manager for eelgrass surveys in support of the Shelter Island Boat Launch Facilities
Improvement Project.
• Project Manager for baseline eelgrass survey in support of redevelopment of Harbor
Island West Marina
• Project Manager for eelgrass and marine biological assessment in support of
environmental review for the expansion of Fifth Avenue Landing Marina
• Project manager for dozens of other small eelgrass related projects in San Diego Bay over
the last two decades.
MT-S 27
Grace Teller — Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
Marine Scientist and Project Manager Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
Ms. Grace Teller has a diverse background ranging from
terrestrial to marine and aquatic ecology. During the past 10 KEY QUALIFICATIONS
years she has worked as a dive master and as a marine scientist.
Ms. Teller has worked in a diverse range of habitats where she
has experience studying and mapping wildlife and environmental
resources. Her recent work has focused on physical and biological
data collection in marine and coastal ecosystems. Her work
typically is focused on biological restoration and monitoring
programs. Ms. Teller is routinely consulted for her experience
with eelgrass monitoring, water quality monitoring, fisheries
sampling, macroinvertebrate core collection, invasive species
monitoring, tidal monitoring, habitat mapping, and bathymetric
surveys. She regularly performs surveys to document biological
resources and potential project impacts in the coastal estuaries
and bays of California.
Ms. Teller currently manages offshore water quality projects for
treated wastewater, including collection of water column profile
data and sampling of seawater at designated sampling stations
around the diffuser pipeline. Ms. Teller leads eelgrass monitoring
efforts throughout California. She is responsible for managing
construction monitoring for sensitive species including marine
mammals, sea turtles, and birds.
Ms. Teller serves as a marine scientist and assistant project
manager at MTS, responsible for logistics and mobilization,
operating and maintaining all instrumentation and survey
equipment, integrating collected data inputs into time -
synchronized and geographically referenced data sets, and
compilation of report deliverables.
Education
PERMITS
Master of Science, 2016 Biological Oceanography, Scripps Institution, University of California
San Diego, San Diego
Bachelor of Science, 2013, Environmental Conservation and Resource Management, University
of Washington, Seattle
28
Representative Recent Project Experience
Pillar Point Harbor Eelgrass Management (2019), Half Moon Bay, CA
Ms. Teller performed side -scan sonar to determine the extent of eelgrass present within the Pillar
Point Marina. She facilitated creation of eelgrass maps for the mitigation plan written by MTS for
foreseen impacts to the mapped eelgrass resources relative to proposed changes at Pillar Point
Marina.
Evaluation of Eelgrass Restoration Techniques in Newport Harbor (2019-Ongoing), Newport
Beach, CA
The City of Newport Beach was required to conduct an eelgrass transplanting methods study as part
of their dredge contract. MTS created a work plan and provided staff and a small vessel to fulfill the
needs of the transplant study. Ms. Teller harvested and transplanted eelgrass using three
methodologies. The study was designed to assess the effectiveness of each transplanting method
along with the cost and labor involved with utilizing each method on a per unit basis. She will perform
a follow up survey one year after the transplant effort to evaluate the success of each transplanting
method.
CCHOA On -Call Support Services (2016-Ongoing), Coronado, CA
Ms. Teller assists the Coronado Cays Homeowners Association by providing marine environmental
services and helping with project permitting support. She had been part of environmental monitoring
services including performing eelgrass surveys, marine biological assessment, essential fish habitat
assessments, and construction monitoring as necessary to support over -water construction projects
and the environmental permitting associated with those projects.
Marine Group Boat Works Baseline Eelgrass Survey (2019), San Diego, CA
Ms. Teller provided eelgrass mapping services for a proposed dredge project at the Marine Group
Boat Works facility in National City, California and a proposed mitigation site in Chula Vista, California.
She compiled all results from the survey in a report that was provided to the client. The intent of the
survey was to provide resource information to regulatory agencies for planning purposes.
Eelgrass Mitigation and Monitoring Services (2018-Ongoing), San Diego, CA
Ms. Teller conducted eelgrass monitoring at three sites in San Diego Bay. She assisted in permitting
needs and creating a monitoring plan for the future eelgrass transplant effort. For the Shelter Island
Boat Launch Facility, she was responsible for conducting pre and post -construction eelgrass surveys
and for the eelgrass transplant effort after construction was complete. Additionally, MTS was
contracted to conduct eelgrass mitigation site monitoring for five years at the SIBLF, Campbell
Shipyard, and the Chula Vista Borrow Pit. She is currently responsible for managing side -scan sonar
and eelgrass survey efforts across these monitoring sites. At the end of each survey effort she is
responsible for drafting reports summarizing the survey results to The Unified Port of San Diego.
29
Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge Pier Realignment Project Eelgrass Monitoring (2019-
Ongoing), Orange County, CA
Ms. Teller was assisting with dive verification of the sonar record for eelgrass, but now manages field
related activities including collection of side -scan sonar data and deployment of the diver for eelgrass
mapping verification and density collection. Additionally, she provided a map of the survey results to
the Client and compared current results to previous survey findings.
Eelgrass Mitigation and Monitoring Services for Shelter Island Boat Launch Facility (2019-
Ongoing), San Diego, CA
Ms. Teller conducted monitoring of the SIBLF post construction. Additionally, she harvested eelgrass
for transplant within the SIBLF mitigation site. She planted and conducted a 0-month survey of the
facility. She provided a report summarizing survey results to the client for permitting purposes. MTS
is responsible for a 6 month and annual monitoring for 5 years post -transplant of the mitigation site.
Pier 6 Dredging — Eelgrass and Caulerpa (2019-2020), San Diego, CA
Ms. Teller utilized side -scan sonar and SCUBA to identify and map eelgrass resources and look for
Caulerpa taxifolia within the project site. She summarized the results from the survey and provided
it to the client for the intent to inform regulatory agencies.
1316 W. Bay Street Dock Construction Project (2020), Newport Beach, CA
Ms. Teller was responsible for performing a pre -construction eelgrass and Caulerpa survey in support
of permit needs related to the dock construction project.
Marine Biological Monitoring for the Anacapa Wharf Replacement Project (2020), Landing
Cove, Anacapa Island, CA
As assistant project manager, Ms. Teller provided diver services at landing cove for the wharf
replacement at Anacapa, CA. MTS conducted a thorough biological survey for fish, invertebrates,
kelp, and non -kelp algae within the vicinity of the wharf replacement. The goal of the survey was to
identify pre -construction conditions and compare to conditions observed upon project completion
for impact to habitat or wildlife.
Caulerpa Surveys for Small Dredge Projects in Newport Beach (2022), Newport Beach, CA
As project manager, Ms. Teller provided guidance to lead field teams to perform numerous surveys
for Caulerpa spp. within Newport Harbor, in Orange County, California. MTS provided a small dive
vessel, and all gear necessary to complete Caulerpa surveys within dredge footprints. Ms. Teller was
responsible for providing review of summary reports after each survey was completed.
Eelgrass and Caulerpa Survey for Port of San Diego Wharf 2/5/7 (2023), San Diego, CA
As project manager, Ms. Teller provided vessel support for an eelgrass and Caulerpa survey for the
Port of San Diego Wharf 2/S/7 Mitigation and Facilities Improvements Project. MTS was tasked with
mapping and reporting on eelgrass resources found within the Project area. MTS provided a small
research vessel as well as all survey equipment.
30
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page B-1
Marine Taxonomic Services. Ltd.
Chris Miller
Public Works Manager
City of Newport Beach, CA
June 25, 2024
Re: Cost Proposal for RFP No. 24-79: 2024 Newport Harbor Shallow Water & Deep Water
Eelgrass Survey
Dear Mr. Miller:
The attached cost proposal supports Marine Taxonomic Services response to the subject RFP. We
have made no formal exceptions with regards to the RFP. However, we are hopeful that the City
would be able to help facilitate areas where we can keep our small support vessel overnight when
performing survey work. We have not included launch and dock fees in our proposal to provide you
with the best possible value. Again, we take no formal exceptions and understand if no
accommodation with regards to equipment storage can be made.
Please also note that in accordance with the language in the RFP we have provided for 5 additional
field survey days in our budget. Those 5 days are called out as a separate task and totals are provided
with and without the additional days for your evaluation. Our costs table (Table 1) provides the costs
to perform the surveys as stipulated in the RFP. We have also provided a separate schedule of fees
showing our proposed rates for labor and equipment for the term of this contract.
If you have any questions about this cost proposal, do not hesitate to contact me at 760.331.7897 or
via email (robert@consultmts.com). I look forward to the opportunity to work with you on this
project.
Sincerely,
Robert Mooney
Principal Consultant
SAN DIEGO I OREGON I SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
920 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE F-1 I SAN MARCOS CA 92069 1 760.410.8392
W W W.MARINETAXONOMICSERVICES.COM
Table 1. Base cost to perform the scope of work.
SR.SCIENTIST
FIELD
TECHNICIAN
ASSOCIATE
SCIENTIST
DIRECTCOSTS
Rates
Units
Units
Units
Units
Totals
TASK 1. DIVER SURVEY MOBILIZATION & TEAM CALIBRATION
LOGISTICS AND EQUIPMENT PREP
R. Mooney (PM)
$137.00
4
$548.00
G.Tel Ier(FM)
$111.00
12
$1,332.00
Mileage
$0.670
160
$107.20
Technician
$68.00
12
$816.00
CITY COORDINATION
R. Mooney
$137.00
4
1
$548.00
SUBTOTAL
$3,351.20
TASK 2a. DIVER SURVEY FIELD WORK
DIVER SURVEY (40 DAYS)
R. Mooney (PM)
$137.00
24
$3,288.00
G.Tel Ier (FM)
$111.00
420
$46,620.00
Technician
$68.00
420
$28,560.00
SCUBA
$42.00
42
$1,764.00
Small Vessel
$150.00
42
$6,300.00
Kayak
Incl.
42
$0.00
dGPS
$40.00
42
$1,680.00
Mileage
$0.670
5040
$3,376.80
DATA MANAGEMENT
G.Tel Ier(FM)
$111.00
45
$4,995.00
GIS Techni ci an
$111.00
58
$6,438.00
Technician
$68.00
54
$3,672.00
SUBTOTAL
$106,693.80
TASK 2b. CONTINGENCY FIELD DAYS
DIVER SURVEY (5 CONTINGENCY DAYS)
G.Tel Ier(FM)
$111.00
50
$5,550.00
Technician
$68.00
50
$3,400.00
GISTechnician
$111.00
5
$555.00
SCUBA
$42.00
5
$210.00
Small Vessel
$150.00
5
$750.00
Kayak
Incl.
5
$0.00
GPS
$40.00
5
$200.00
Mileage
$0.670
600
$402.00
SUBTOTAL
$11,067.00
TASK 3. DOWN LOOKING SONAR & VIDEO DATA COLLECTION FOR SHALLOW WATER
MOBILIZATION
R. Ware
$137.00
8
$1,096.00
Equipment&ODCs
$2,988.60
1
$3,791.60
FIELD SURVEY
R. Ware
$137.00
48
$6,576.00
DATA ANALYSIS AND MAPPING
R.Ware $137.001
30
$4,110.00
SUBTOTALI
$15,573.60
TASK 4. SIDESCAN SONAR & VIDEO/DIVER DATA COLLECTION FOR DEEP -WATER
MOBILIZATION
R. Ware
$137.00
12
$1,644.00
Equipment
$10,247.00
1
$10,247.00
FIELD SURVEY
R. Ware
$137.00
40
$5,480.00
DATA ANALYSIS + REPORT PREP
R.Ware $137.00
80
$10,960.00
SUBTOTALI
$28,331.00
TASK 5. FINAL REPORT
Report Preparation
R. Mooney (PM)
1 $137.00
8
$1,096.00
G.Tel Ier(FM)
1 $111.00
48
$5,328.00
GISTechnician
1 $111.00
8
$888.00
SUBTOTAL
$7,312.00
TASK 6. QA/QC PROGRAM OVERSIGHT
Program Oversight
R. Ware
1 $137.00
8
$1,096.00
SUBTOTAL
$1,096.00
TOTAL (without Contingency Field Days)
$162,357.60
TOTAL (with Contingency Field Days)
$173,424.60
SAN DIEGO I OREGON I SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
920 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE F-I I SAN MARCOS CA 92069 1 760.410.8392
W W W.MARINETAXONOMICSERVICES. COM
PROJECT MANAGER
FIELD MANAGER
TECHNICIAN
GIS TECHNICIAN
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
SCHEDULE OF FEES
City of Newport Beach
RFP No. 24-79
CONSULTING AND LABOR RATES
VEHICLES AND VESSELS
VEHICLE MILEAGE (2024 IRS rate)
SMALL VESSEL
y,...
DIFFERENTIAL GPS
SCUBA DIVE GEAR
GENERAL FIELD EQUIPMENT
SPECIALIZED DIVE SUPPORT EQUIPMENT
SAN DIEGO I OREGON I SOUTH LAKE TAHOE
920 RANCHEROS DRIVE SUITE F-1 I SAN MARCOS CA 92069 1 760.410.8392
WWW.MARINETAXONOMICSERVICES.COM
$137 / hour
$111 / hour
$68 / hour
$111 / hour
$0.67 / mile
$1S0 / day
Included
$40 / day
$42 / day
EXHIBIT C
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS — PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
1. Provision of Insurance. Without limiting Consultant's indemnification of City,
and prior to commencement of Work, Consultant shall obtain, provide and
maintain at its own expense during the term of this Contract, policies of
insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory
to City. Consultant agrees to provide insurance in accordance with
requirements set forth here. If Consultant uses existing coverage to comply and
that coverage does not meet these requirements, Consultant agrees to amend,
supplement or endorse the existing coverage.
2. Acceptable Insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance
company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact
business of insurance in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders'
Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VII (or larger) in
accordance with the latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise
approved by the City's Risk Manager.
3. Coverage Requirements.
A. Workers' Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers'
Compensation Insurance providing statutory benefits and Employer's
Liability Insurance with limits of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000)
each employee for bodily injury by accident and each employee for
bodily injury by disease in accordance with the laws of the State of
California. U.S. Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Act (USL&H)
shall be required for employees performing services covered by said
Act.
Consultant shall submit to City, along with the certificate of insurance, a
Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of City, its City Council,
boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees.
B. General Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain commercial
general liability insurance, and if necessary excess/umbrella liability
insurance, with coverage at least as broad as provided by Insurance
Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than two million
dollars ($2,000,000) per occurrence, four million dollars ($4,000,000)
general aggregate. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises,
operations, personal and advertising injury, and liability assumed under
an insured contract (including the tort liability of another assumed in a
business contract).
C. Automobile Liability Insurance. Consultant shall maintain automobile
insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01
covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of Consultant
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page C-1
arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this
Contract, including coverage for any owned, hired, non -owned or rented
vehicles, in an amount not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000)
combined single limit for each accident.
D. Water Pollution Liability. Consultant shall provide Water Pollution
Liability for both sudden and accidental and gradual and continuous
pollution events with limits no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000)
each loss and in the aggregate. The policy shall not exclude any
hazardous materials for which there is exposure.
E. Professional Liability (Errors & Omissions) Insurance. Consultant shall
maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be
performed in connection with this Agreement, in the minimum amount
of two million dollars ($2,000,000) per claim and four million dollars
($4,000,000) in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity
date, or retroactive date must be before the Effective Date of this
Agreement and Consultant agrees to maintain continuous coverage
through a period no less than three years after completion of the
Services required by this Agreement.
F. Excess/Umbrella Liability Insurance. If any Excess or Umbrella Liability
policies are used to meet the limits of liability required by this contract,
then said policies shall be "following form" of the underlying policy
coverage, terms, conditions, and provisions and shall meet all of the
insurance requirements stated in this contract, including, but not limited
to, the additional insured and primary & non-contributory insurance
requirements stated herein. No insurance policies maintained by the
City, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered
hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the
Consultant's primary and excess/umbrella liability policies are
exhausted.
4. Other Insurance Requirements. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed
to contain, the following provisions:
A. Waiver of Subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured
pursuant to this Contract shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against
City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents,
volunteers and employees, or shall specifically allow Consultant or
others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these
requirements to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. Consultant
hereby waives its own right of recovery against City, and shall require
similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its
subcontractors.
B. Additional Insured Status. All liability policies including general liability,
products and completed operations, excess/umbrella liability, pollution
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page C-2
liability, and automobile liability, if required, but not including professional
liability, shall provide or be endorsed to provide that City, its City Council,
boards and commissions, officers, agents, volunteers and employees
shall be included as additional insureds under such policies.
C. Primary and Non -Contributory. Consultant's insurance coverage shall
be primary insurance and/or the primary source of recovery with respect
to the City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents,
volunteers and employees. All liability coverage shall apply on a primary
basis and shall not require contribution from any insurance or self-
insurance maintained by City.
D. Notice of Cancellation. All policies shall provide City with thirty (30)
calendar days' notice of cancellation or nonrenewal of coverage (except
for nonpayment for which ten (10) calendar days' notice is required) for
each required coverage.
5. Additional Agreements Between the Parties. The parties hereby agree to
the following:
A. Evidence of Insurance. Consultant shall provide certificates of insurance
to City as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along
with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers' compensation
and other endorsements as specified herein for each coverage. All of
the executed documents referenced in this Contract must be returned
to City within ten (10) regular City business days after the date on the
"Notification of Award". Insurance certificates and endorsements must
be approved by City's Risk Manager prior to commencement of
performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with
City at all times during the term of this Contract. The certificates and
endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person
authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen
(15) days prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of
insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or
extended shall be filed with the City. If such coverage is cancelled or
reduced, Consultant shall, within ten (10) days after receipt of written
notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with the City
evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been
reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or
companies. City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies
of all required insurance policies, at any time.
B. City's Right to Revise Requirements. The City reserves the right at any
time during the term of the Contract to change the amounts and types
of insurance required by giving Consultant ninety (90) calendar days'
advance written notice of such change. If such change results in
substantial additional cost to Consultant, City and Consultant may
renegotiate Consultant's compensation.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page C-3
C. Right to Review Subcontracts. Consultant agrees that upon request, all
agreements with subcontractors or others with whom Consultant enters
into contracts with on behalf of City will be submitted to City for review.
Failure of City to request copies of such agreements will not impose any
liability on City, or its employees. Consultant shall require and verify that
all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements
stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City is an additional
insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage,
subcontractors shall provide coverage with a format at least as broad as
CG 20 38 04 13.
D. Enforcement of Agreement Provisions. Consultant acknowledges and
agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of City to inform
Consultant of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no
additional obligations on City nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
E. Requirements not Limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features
or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on
coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage
normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given
coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a
given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive,
or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the
Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the
City requires and shall be entitled to coverage for higher limits
maintained by the Consultant. Any available proceeds in excess of
specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available
to the City.
F. Self -Insured Retentions. Any self -insured retentions must be declared
to and approved by City. City reserves the right to require that self -
insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible.
Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these requirements
unless approved by City.
G. City Remedies for Non -Compliance. If Consultant or any subconsultant
fails to provide and maintain insurance as required herein, then City
shall have the right but not the obligation, to purchase such insurance, to
terminate this Agreement, or to suspend Consultant's right to proceed
until proper evidence of insurance is provided. Any amounts paid by
City shall, at City's sole option, be deducted from amounts payable to
Consultant or reimbursed by Consultant upon demand.
H. Timely Notice of Claims. Consultant shall give City prompt and timely
notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from
Consultant's performance under this Contract, and that involve or may
involve coverage under any of the required liability policies. City
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page C-4
assumes no obligation or liability by such notice, but has the right (but
not the duty) to monitor the handling of any such claim or claims if they
are likely to involve City.
Consultant's Insurance. Consultant shall also procure and maintain, at
its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its
own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and
prosecution of the Work.
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page C-5
EXHIBIT D
Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques
for
Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
Marine Taxonomic Services, LTD. Page D-1
MARINE TAXONOMIC SERVICES, LTD.
Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques for
Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OFFICE
920 RANCHEROS DRIVE, STE F-1
SAN MARCOS, CA 92069
December 18, 2020
Prepared for:
City of Newport Beach: Public Works
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
F..
>n
cyjj Fo RN�P
Prepared By:
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd.
OREGON OFFICE
2834 NW PINEVIEW DRIVE
ALBANY, OR 97321
Marine Taxonomic
LAKE TAHOE OFFICE
1155 GOLDEN BEAR TRAIL
SOUTH LAKE TAKOE, CA 96150
Marine Taxonomic Services Ltd. 2020. Evaluation of Various Restoration
Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor. Prepared for Chris Miller,
Public Works Manager, December 18, 2020.
Robert Mooney, PhD
Principal Scientist
Participating Marine Taxonomic Services Ltd. Team Members;
Biologist and Report Draft — Grace Teller, MSc.
Technician II — Hannah Joss, BSc.
Technician I — Raelynn Heinitz
Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
Contents
1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................1
1-1 Goals and Objectives.....................................................................................................................
3
2 Project Background...............................................................................................................................4
2-1 2019 Eelgrass Transplant..............................................................................................................4
2-1.1 Traditional Bare Root Method..............................................................................................4
2-1.2 TERFs Method.......................................................................................................................4
2-1.1 Transplanting Eelgrass Remotely with a Rope (TERR)..........................................................4
3 Methods................................................................................................................................................7
3-1 Eelgrass Mapping..........................................................................................................................8
3-2 Eelgrass Transect Percent Cover...................................................................................................
8
3-3 Eelgrass Density............................................................................................................................
8
3-4 Eelgrass ANOVA............................................................................................................................
8
4 Results...................................................................................................................................................9
4-1 Eelgrass Mapping..........................................................................................................................9
4-2 Eelgrass Transect Percent Cover...................................................................................................9
4-3 Eelgrass Density..........................................................................................................................16
4-4 Eelgrass ANOVA..........................................................................................................................16
5 Discussion............................................................................................................................................17
6 Recommened Next Steps....................................................................................................................18
7 References..........................................................................................................................................19
MTV.
Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
December 2020
Figures
Figure 1. Site map showing the location of Newport Harbor within the City of Newport Beach ................ 2
Figure 2. Eelgrass transplanting methods pre -transplant (green) and post -transplant (red)......................5
Figure 3. Eelgrass transplanting methods per transplant area. As seen in Area 6, transect lines marked in
red (left) indicate where eelgrass was planted by transplanting eelgrass remotely with a rope.
The blue squares (center) indicate where eelgrass was planted utilizing TERF devices, and
transect lines marked in green (right) indicate where eelgrass was planted using traditional
bare -root bundle methods.............................................................................................................6
Figure 4. Map of Area 1 eelgrass survey results.........................................................................................10
Figure 5. Map of Area 2 eelgrass survey results.........................................................................................11
Figure 6. Map of Area 3 eelgrass survey results.........................................................................................12
Figure 7. Map of Area 4 eelgrass survey results.........................................................................................13
Figure 8. Map of Area 5 eelgrass survey results.........................................................................................14
Figure 9. Map of Area 6 eelgrass survey results. Eelgrass was not observed in Area 6 .............................15
Figure 10. Average eelgrass density across transplant methods for all areas surveyed. Note that no
eelgrass was found in Area 6........................................................................................................16
Tables
Table 1. Table of eelgrass coverage mapped within 1-meter of either side of the transect ........................ 9
Table 2. Table of eelgrass percent coverage along each transect................................................................ 9
Table 3. ANOVA table comparing total coverage by eelgrass within a 1-meter buffer of the transect ..... 16
Table 4. ANOVA table comparing eelgrass percent cover across eelgrass transplant methods................16
MTS iv
Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
December 2020
Format Page
MTS.
Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
December 2020
Evaluation of Various Restoration Techniques
for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor
December 18, 2020
1 Introduction
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd. (MTS) was contracted by the City of Newport Beach to
evaluate various restoration techniques for eelgrass (Zostera marina) in Newport Harbor, in
Newport Beach, CA (Figure 1). Newport Harbor is located within the city limits of Newport
Beach, California, and is bordered by three coastal cities: Huntington Beach to the northwest,
Costa Mesa to the north, and Laguna Beach to the southeast. The City of Newport Beach (City)
is obligated under its approved eelgrass plan "Eelgrass Protection and Mitigation Plan for
Shallow Waters in Lower Newport Bay: An Ecosystem Based Management Program" (October
2015), to "test, and/or improve methods to collect and use eelgrass seeds for deployable seed
bagging and to construct or use eelgrass TERFST`" devices."
As such, the following study was devised to evaluate the success and efficiency of various
eelgrass transplanting methods for mitigating necessary harbor maintenance dredging projects.
Specifically, MTS was contracted by the City to develop an eelgrass restoration techniques
evaluation study, with the intent of evaluating the relative effectiveness of eelgrass
transplanting efforts utilizing both new and traditional eelgrass transplanting methods. To the
extent practical, MTS built upon existing eelgrass transplanting information by designing a
study to evaluate the relative effectiveness in performance and cost of three unique eelgrass
transplanting methods: 1) traditional bare -root bundle planting 2) transplanting eelgrass
remotely with frames (TERFs), and 3) Transplanting eelgrass remotely with rope (TERR).
MTS 1
N
L
a+
C
3
0
s
0.
mm
C
w
!'I
L
U.
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
1-1 Goals and Objectives
The goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of eelgrass transplanting
methods. Traditional bare -root planting methods require substantial inputs of dive labor to
implement, however success rates are often high so long as conditions are favorable to growth.
TERFs are devices that do not require the utilization of SCUBA, have been put into limited use,
and are also known to be effective (OC Coastkeeper 2015 and Short et al. 2002); however not
much is known regarding their rates of success when compared to traditional transplanting
methods. Finally, TERR as described in the methods section of this report allows for both rapid
deployment across potential habitat areas, and reduced time spent diving. This method may
also allow for increased spatial deployment to take advantage of any variables in microhabitat
that may allow eelgrass to establish in localized areas where conditions are favorable. On the
other hand, this study marks the first time this method has ever been attempted in the field,
and the first time where the effectiveness and efficiency of this method can be determined.
The objective of this study is to measure and compare the survey results of each of the eelgrass
transplanting methods mentioned above following implementation of the experiment in June
2019.
MTSI 3
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
2 Project Background
2-1 2019 Eelgrass Transplant
During the 2019 eelgrass dransplant, MTS and CRM staff prepared harvested eelgrass for each
of the three transplanting methods (bare root, TERFs, and TERR) to be deployed across six
transplant areas within Newport Bay (Figure 2 and Figure 3).
2-1.1 Traditional Bare Root Method
To prepare eelgrass turions for transplanting using traditional methods, 8 individual turions
were bundled together with cotton twine and biodegradable paper stakes just above the
rhizomes of each of the eight turions. These bundles were then attached to a PVC "holder" for
ease of transport and management of units while the diver delivered and planted units by hand
on the seafloor. Each PVC holder was loaded with 15 bundles and would be saved for later once
all 15 bundles where removed from the holder by the diver and planted along the seafloor.
Photographs illustrating how a single bundle would look before being placed inside the PVC
holder, then how the same bundle would look planted on the seafloor once transplanting was
complete, can be seen in Figure 3.
2-1.2 TERFs Method
To prepare eelgrass turions for transplanting using the TERFs method, 2 eelgrass turions were
tied together just above the rhizomes with small, paper wrapped steel wire bread ties to make
a single bundle. Twenty such bundles were tied again using small, paper wrapped steel wire
bread ties to an approximately 0.5 x 0.5-meter wire basket. Each bundle was tied in random
locations across the bottom of the wire basket, with eelgrass turions oriented upwards inside of
the wire basket. Finally, before the basket was taken by boat and placed on the seafloor, two
bricks, one for each of the two shorter sides of the rectangular basket, were zip -tied to the
outside walls of each basket. Photographs illustrating how a single wire basket with 20 bundles
looked before being transplanted, along with how each basket would look on the seafloor
following transplanting, is shown in Figure 3.
2-1.1 Transplanting Eelgrass Remotely with a Rope (TERR)
To prepare eelgrass turions for TERR, 8 turions were threaded equally spaced from one another
along each meter of polyester rope. Polyester rope was chosen due to its negative buoyancy
(density 1.38 g/cm3). Turions were threaded securely in place at their base while keeping the
rhizomes fully exposed. This was repeated across the entire 30-meter-long polyester rope,
which was coiled into a 5-gallon bucket so it could be easily unraveled and placed on the
bottom from a small boat. Photographs illustrating how a section of rope looked with braded
eelgrass bundles before and after placement is shown in Figure 3
MTS 4
r
ro
LL
i
Ln
a
a = K1
ro
�iR iF
1
q
L
,n
-o m a
w oc
s LA
di c
C cu
L C a
H
or -
0
N
O
N
N
E
U
N
M
C
m
f0
3
N .-
m a
fG y
OA �
LL
Ol LU
W
tw
G1 H
• C
L
3 •N
d }
m
u p
v
o
a E
N
3 c
i -0
- 4+
G) d O
Y d O
m i OJ
E a, L
L .0
a, M
0
c c
m � L
L L Y
Y d tw
w u 7
L �
cu
Q w �
C L C
tr a
m
v m
Q � 3
a
m
c a o0/i
c
C N L
L � y
C T
G — v
VI 41 O
O O
�+
L C
E '^IA
ao
f0
C
� � L
fL0 C y
r � Y
N a L
f0
L m E
o �
� � v
C
� L
= L Y H
i2 a 41
0
0
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
3 Methods
The initial deployment of eelgrass transplant methods was performed in Newport Harbor
between June 24 — June 28, 2019 by MTS staff with support from Rick Ware with Coastal
Resources Management (MTS 2019). During that time, each of the three transplant methods
were implemented along transects. The transects were marked with PVC stakes so that they
could be relocated and accurately evaluated during this monitoring effort.
MTS utilized SCUBA diver methods to survey the eelgrass transplant areas on August 3, August
4, September 16, and September 17, 2020 (Figure 3). Transplants Areas 1, 2, and 3 were
surveyed in August (Figure 4, Figure 5, Figure 6). Transplant Areas 4, 5, and 6 were surveyed in
September (Figure 7, Figure 8, Figure 9). Transplant Areas were located throughout Newport
Harbor in localized areas where conditions were determined to be favorable and may allow for
eelgrass to establish.
During each survey, the diver mapped all eelgrass within 1-meter of either side of the transect,
collected measurements for percent coverage along the transect, and collected density
measurements within eelgrass beds mapped within 1 meter of the transect. Results of density
and percent cover for eelgrass were statistically analyzed by a one-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA).
The diver collecting eelgrass data was accompanied by a dive tender (topside on kayak),
equipped with underwater communication, differential geographic positioning system (dGPS),
and a tablet equipped with mapping software. For each transect surveyed, a surface marker
buoy was deployed at the start point (recorded in 2019). The diver used the surface marker as a
reference to descend to the seafloor and search for the underwater marker, either a vertical
PVC pipe anchored at the start/end of the bare root and TERR transects or the first TERF of a
TERF transect. Once the start point was found, the diver anchored a fiberglass measuring tape
to the seafloor and communicated to topside personnel that the start point had been located.
In the event that the underwater marker could not be found, the diver anchored the fiberglass
measuring tape within 1 meter of the start point recorded in 2019. Once the fiberglass tape
measure was anchored, topside personnel placed the dGPS over the diver's bubbles and
recorded the transect start point. The diver then used a compass to navigate underwater to the
end of the transect. Upon nearing the end of the transect, topside personnel communicated
that the end was reached, and the diver searched for the underwater maker at the end of the
transect. Once the end point was located, the fiberglass measuring tape was anchored and
topside personnel collected the end waypoint using the same methods as was done for the
start point. Once the tape measure was secured to the seafloor, eelgrass coverage and density
data were collected. The distance along the tape measure between the start and end point was
considered the transect and believed to be the best interpretation of the original eelgrass
planting treatment area.
MT-S 7
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
3-1 Eelgrass Mapping
The diver swam along the transect looking for eelgrass within 1 meter of either side of the
transect. Once an eelgrass bed or patch was located, the diver used underwater voice
communications to notify the dive tender that eelgrass was located. The dive tender gave the
diver a buoy mounted with a dGPS and connected to the dGPS using mapping software. The
diver then swam the perimeter of the eelgrass bed as the dive tender plotted the boundary
using the mapping software. Once back to the start point, the diver continued along the
transect looking for additional eelgrass beds to delineate. Results of this mapping effort were
plotted using ArcGIS mapping software. All eelgrass within 1 meter of either side of the transect
was included in each area map.
3-2 Eelgrass Transect Percent Cover
Along each transect, the diver towed a buoy mounted with a dGPS. When the transect directly
cut through eelgrass, the transect was considered covered by eelgrass along that portion of the
transect. However, if the transect was next to, but not cutting through eelgrass, that portion of
the transect was considered unvegetated. For each instance where the transect cut through
eelgrass, the diver communicated the start/end for each eelgrass section to the dive tender
who then recorded the location using the mapping software. Percent coverage by eelgrass
along each transect surveyed was calculated. The values calculated for percent cover reflect the
difference in eelgrass cover between pre -transplant and post -transplant surveys. There was
approximately 1 meter of pre-existing eelgrass in Area 1 along the bare root transect (MTS
2019).
3-3 Eelgrass Density
Eelgrass density was measured every 10-feet along each 100-foot transect. Density was
measured by placing a 1/16th square meter quadrat next to the transect at each discrete
interval. If eelgrass was encountered within a quadrat the number of turions or eelgrass shoots
were counted. If eelgrass was not encountered within a quadrat a value of zero was recorded.
Average eelgrass density was compared for similar sampling methods between each area
surveyed.
3-4 Eelgrass ANOVA
An ANOVA was performed to statistically evaluate the cover and density of eelgrass across the
three treatment groups utilized for this study. The goal of the ANOVA was to determine
whether or not statistically significant differences exist between observed success rates of the
traditional method, the TERF method, or TERR method. These data were combined with the
cost data from MTS 2019 to determine cost per unit effort of successfully established eelgrass.
MTS 8
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor December 2020
4 Results
4-1 Eelgrass Mapping
Eelgrass was mapped along transects within each transplant area, except for Area 6 because
eelgrass was not observed at this location during the survey (Table 1, Figure 4 through Figure
9). Eelgrass may not have been successful in this area as it was fathes from the harbor mouth
where success by eelgrass has historically been more depressed (MTS 2020). Eelgrass was most
successful in Areas 1 and 4. Not all TERFs were located during the survey effort. In cases where
TERFs were not located, a search effort was made within 2 meters of the recorded deployed
waypoint. When the TERF was not recovered, it was assumed that the TERF was either buried,
moved (e.g. by anchor), or not visible within 2 meters of the deployment location recorded in
2019. Only 5 TERFs were found in Area 1 and Area 2, 4 TERFs were found in Area 6, and all
TERFs were located in Area 3 and Area 5.
Table 1. Table of eelgrass coverage mapped within 1-meter of either side of the transect.
square meters
Bare Root 39.7 0.9 7.0 17.5 4.5 0.0
TERR 3.9 6.0 1.3 61.8 14.0 0.0
TERF 4.0 5.4 0.1 37.4 2.2 0.0
4-2 Eelgrass Transect Percent Cover
Eelgrass percent cover along each transect was comparable to eelgrass mapping efforts where
transects with greater eelgrass cover mapped also had a higher coverage by eelgrass along the
transect.
Table 2. Table of eelgrass percent coverage along each transect.
Eelgrass Percent Cover
percent W
Bare Root
63%
2%
12%
30%
12%
0%
TERR
6%
2%
4%
100%
32%
0%
TERF
14%
11%
0%
74%
6%
0%
MTV 9
0
N
O
N
L
E
C)
U
N
0
L
O
L
2
L
O
Q
z
C
Ln
Ln
L
on
v
w
L
O
N
v
7
L
U
41
O
L
O
N
cu
N
O
L
bn
C
co
W
0
L
0
L
ro
4-1
L
O
Q
3
v
z
c
m
L
_to
w
L
0
N
L
u
v
H
0
N
O
N
L
Qi
-C
C
cu
U
4J
0
L
L
Y
L
0
Q
3
v
z
V)
V)
M
L
Lao
a
w
L
O
N
a
u
U
v
C
0
F'
f0
L
0
N
N
0
m
W
c
w
Aw-
7
N
Jf. tA
0
Q:
Q
cn
P�
O
N
O
N
L
E
cu
0
Ln
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor November 2020
4-3 Eelgrass Density
Eelgrass density was typically greatest in areas where eelgrass coverage was highest, Area 1 and
Area 4 (Figure 10). Greater eelgrass density tended to be associated with the transplant area
opposed to the transplant method. In Areas 1, 2, and 4 where eelgrass was successfully
established, bare root and TERF transplant methods tended to have greater measured eelgrass
density than TERR method.
Average Eelgrass Density Across Transplant Methods
200
■ Area 1
180
■ Area 2
160
s Area 3
°1 140
w
Area 4
E
m 120
■ Area 5
Cr 100
■Area 6
4
�, 80
N
aG 60
40
20
Bare Root
TERR
TERF
Transplant Method
Figure 10. Average eelgrass density across transplant methods for all areas surveyed. Note that no eelgrass was
found in Area 6.
4-4 Eelgrass ANOVA
The ANOVA calculated for eelgrass cover within the 1-meter buffer and transect percent
coverage did not result in finding a significant difference between eelgrass transplant methods
(Table 3 and Table 4). The lack of observed significant difference is likely attributed to the wide
range in coverage values reported for each transplant method. The wide range in reported
values results in no single method statistically standing out from the rest.
Table 3. ANOVA table comoarine total coverage by eelgrass within a 1-meter buffer of the transect.
Among groups 2 120.171 60.085 0.180 0.837
Within groups 15 4994.818 332.988
Tota 1 17 5114.989
Table 4. ANOVA table comparing eelgrass percent cover across eelgrass transplant methods.
Percent Cover
Among groups 2 0.013 0.007 0.069 0.934
Within groups 15 1.446 0.096
Total 17 1.459
MTV. 16
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor November 2020
5 Discussion
The eelgrass transplant data provide information pertaining to the success of three different
eelgrass transplant methods, bare root, TERR, and TERF. The collected data allow resource
managers to evaluate the transplant areas in combination with the cost of each transplant
method to determine the appropriate transplant method for waters within Newport Harbor.
In summary, the costs described by MTS in 2019 determined that traditional bare root bundle
planting was more expensive than alternative methods due to the additional costs related to
diving ($177.38 per transect / $5.91 per unit). The TERFs and modified TERR methods were less
expensive than bare -root planting primarily due to the reduced time spent diving ($94.26 per
transect / $3.14 per unit; $152.29 per transect / $5.08 per unit, respectively).
The results provided within this report indicate that the eelgrass transplant success in Newport
Harbor was not largely dependent upon the transplant method and was more dependent upon
transplant area. Ultimately, the success of each planting technique varied dependent upon site
conditions. While successful coverage was apparent along some of the transects in Areas 1 and
4, the ANOVA analysis across transplant methods did not indicate that any method was
significantly different (better or worse) than other method. This is understandable given the
high variation within each transplant method studied. While significant differences were not
calculated for cover, density measurements indicate that a greater density can be reached
within 1 year using bare root or TERF transplant methods. The data provided within this report
indicates that transplant area is of greater importance than transplant method. Thus, transplant
method selection ultimately comes down to cost and appropriateness of method deployment
based on the selected transplant area. TERR methods were less expensive and the successful
eelgrass coverage using this method in Areas 1, 4, and 5 is notable.
Recovery of TERFs and TERR transects was challenging and required more time to search for
items lying on and below the seafloor. TERFs were typically heavily covered with invertebrate
organisms making retrieval and cleaning of the TERF planting units more difficult than
anticipated. Should TERFs be utilized as a transplant method in the future consideration should
be taken to utilize material that can stay underwater (i.e. non -painted crates that can act as an
artificial reef until decomposed). TERR transect lines became embedded in the sediment to a
point where finding and recovering the TERR was impossible; use of jute twine or other
decomposable material would eliminate the need for recovery. In shallower transplant sites,
Area 1 and 3, the PCV markers anchoring the line on one end were broken to the point where
the rope could have come off and shifted position since deployment; it is possible that these
TERRs were caught by anchors or other items in contact with the seafloor. However, the ropes
were highly imbedded into the sediment and hard to determine the exact position along the
seafloor. Should the TERR method be used in the future the area of deployment should be
considered; the method is best suited to areas where there is minimal potential for bottom
disturbance by human activities or areas should be selected where water depths are deep
enough to not be easily contacted by humans or vessels.
M_LS 17
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor November 2020
Transplant site condition and size of transplant should be taken under consideration when
selecting an area for eelgrass transplant using bare root, TERR, or TERF transplant methods.
Planting bare root bundles on 1-m centers within a transplant area ensures significant bottom
coverage throughout the area being transplanted. The other two evaluated methods attempt
to cover a given area at varying intensity but without diving. TERFs tend to clump the eelgrass
transplant effort into what can be thought of as multiple small eelgrass patches. In so doing,
when one TERF fails, it can leave a considerable amount of bare space within the transplant
area dependent upon the level of effort (number of TERFs) employed during the transplant.
Another consideration relative to transplant methods is recovery of the materials placed in the
water. In the case of bare root planting, it is standard practice to layout a rope grid on the
bottom to aid divers to navigate the site. The need for gridding is dependent upon the scale of
the project with larger projects being able to justify the costs because of time savings due to
divers being able to track where they have planted under what are typically low visibility
conditions. This grid is typically recovered immediately following planting. The other methods
evaluated need to be left in place for eelgrass to establish. This means subsequent effort is
required to revisit the site and recover materials. This is an important additional consideration
that will vary based on the scale and goals of the transplant program.
6 Recommened Next Steps
Through the establishment of this transplant program eelgrass resources have been created
within Newport Harbor. Through this effort the City of Newport Beach has successfully
established 205.6 square meters of eelgrass over the period studied. As such, it is
recommended that the City of Newport Beach consider ways to utilize this established eelgrass
for past or future mitigation needs.
This program was an initial evaluation of eelgrass transplant techniques and serves as an
example to build from. Additional monitoring surveys could be conducted to determine the
longer term success of the established eelgrass resources. Monitoring surveys could be
conducted during the biannual monitoring of shallow water eelgrass habitat within Newport
Harbor. If such monitoring is performed in accordance with the CEMP and coordination with
regulatory agencies, it may be possible to develop eelgrass mitigation banks.
Additional alternative transplant methods could be considered and evaluated at the discretion
of the City of Newport Beach and in consultation with regulatory agencies. The methods
employed in this report could be modified to use biodegradable materials. Additionally, use of
eelgrss seeds, particularly in deeper depth transplant areas (Eriander et al. 2016), could be
evaluated.
MTS 18
Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor November 2020
7 References
Eriander et al. 2016. Assessing methods for restoration of eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) in a cold
temperate region. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. V.479, pg 76-88.
MTS. 2020. 2020 Monitoring of Eelgrass Resources in Newport Bay, Newport Beach, California.
Prepared for Chris Miller, Public Works Manager. December 2020.
MTS. 2019. Evaluating Various Restoration Techniques for Eelgrass in Newport Harbor.
Prepared for Chris Miller, Public Works Manger. August 2019.
MTS. 2018. 2018 Monitoring of Eelgrass Resources in Newport Bay, Newport Beach, California.
Prepared for City of Newport Beach Public Works. Contract C-7487-1. Prepared by
Marine Taxonomic Services, Ltd. December 20, 2018.
NOAA Fisheries. 2014. California Eelgrass Mitigation Policy and Implementing Guidelines. NOAA
Fisheries West Coast Region. October 2014.
OC Coastkeeper. 2015. Upper Newport Bay eelgrass Restoration Project: Final Report. Prepared
for: California State Coastal Conservancy, Oakland, California, and the NOAA Restoration
Center, Long Beach, California. In Association with: Coastal Resources Management,
Inc., Long Beach, California. Prepared August 2015.
Short, F. T., C. A. Short, and C. L. Burdick. 2002. A Manual for community -based eelgrass
restoration. Jackson Estuarine Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 2015. Department of the Army Regional General Permit
54. Newport Bay Maintenance Dredging and Dock/Bulkhead Repair and Replacement
Program. Permit Number SPL-20130020-SME. Issued December 215t, 2016.
MT- 19
t
C
OC
!
i
I
i
I
i
I
I
i I
I
j
I
I
� I
t
i
I
II
I E
ai
CD
4
�
yN
z
z
ai
®
Lo
Z7
ixx3.
W
LLI
f5
t+
w
4�
U
U
b�
I
�C
�
W
T
LL
LU
Q
e
®
2
LU
H
LL
L
j
i
et��77
p
I
N
O
M
CL
CL
L1J
z
N
i
C
�
SOS
c
LO!
2
a
iv
5
ri
ro
U
Z
v
m
t.1
sa
ci
w
U
o