1. Brevard County US 192 Solid
Waste Management Facility
Continuous Simulation Wetland Modeling April 23, 2013
Seth M. Nehrke,
P.E., D.WRE
APWA Florida State Conference

2. Agenda
• Project Overview
• Selection of Keystone Indicator Wetlands
• Model Updates
• Model Results
• Next Steps

3. Proposed Brevard County Solid Waste
Management Facility

5. Why Do We Model?
• Guide wetland mitigation decisions
• Aid in the design & permitting process
• Enhance the rate of wetlands survivability
• Optimize system operation and performance protocols

6. Existing Wetlands
Systems: 581 Ac

8. Effect of Shutting Off
Wells: Groundwater
Drops 0.5 Feet
Notes:
1) Potential groundwater effects on wetlands are based on
an anticipated 0.5' drop from a wells‐on to a wells‐off
condition
2) Anticipated Minor Affect (loss of minor amount of
fringing wet prairie component of polygon and/or minor
shift in vegetative cover to include reduced cover by
obligate/facultative wet species)
3) Anticipated Moderate Affect (loss of significant portion
of herbaceous component of polygon and/or moderate
shift of vegetative cover from obligate and facultative wet
species to
species less tolerant of inundation/saturation)
4) Anticipated Significant Affect (anticipated that the
majority of the polygon to shift to cover by facultative and
upland species and/or significant loss of other wetland
indicators ‐ i.e., reduction in hydric soils, loss of expected
hydrologic regime, etc.)

9. Keystone
Wetlands

10. Wetlands Distribution
Wet Freshwater Mixed
Prairie Marsh Cypress Hardwood
Adjacent to Proposed Development D‐O; F‐O D‐O; F‐M F‐O F‐M
Adjacent to Ex/Prop Ditch
E‐H; F‐D;
F‐O; G‐E
A‐T; C‐M;
C‐P/Q; E‐H;
F‐D; G‐E; I‐N
A‐T; C‐A; C‐M;
C‐P/Q; E‐H;
F‐O; G‐B; I‐N
C‐A; E‐H;
G‐B
In or Adjacent to Proposed Pond
A‐J; D‐O;
F‐D; F‐O;
G‐E
A‐J; B‐Q; C‐M;
C‐P/Q; D‐H;
D‐O; F‐D;
F‐M; G‐E; I‐N,
A‐J; B‐Q; C‐A;
C‐M; C‐P/Q;
D‐H, F‐O; G‐B;
I‐N
C‐A; F‐M; G‐
B
Removed from Proposed Development E‐H; I‐F E‐H; I‐F E‐H E‐H
Note: 16 Systems and all 8 community types are represented
Herbaceous Wooded
Geographic Location
Indicator Wetlands Distribution

11. Development of a
Comprehensive
Survey Plan

12. Update Hydrology
• Refine basins
• Dynamic soil storage
• Existing calibrated HSPF

13. Representative Hydrologic Year

14. Update Hydraulics
• Connectivity
• Evaporation
• Infiltration
• Use site‐specific information
when available

16. Multiple Community Systems
LABEL ACRES Community Type
I‐N 9.70 621 ‐ Cypress
I‐N 2.45 641 ‐ Freshwater Marsh
I‐N 3.79 641 ‐ Freshwater Marsh

17. Surface Water Driven

18. Keystone
Wetlands

19. Groundwater/Evaporation Driven

20. Reduced Stages

21. Keystone
Wetlands

22. Elevated Stages

23. Summary Results and Recommendations
WETLAND ID Phase I Conceptual Recommendation
A-J +0.5' to +1.5' +0.5' - 1.5' Construct connection to east
A-T Good Match Good Match N/A
B-Q Good Match Good Match N/A
C-A -1.0' to +0.5' -1.0' to +0.5' Modify proposed control structure from BP1
C-M +0.5' to +1.5' +0.5' to +1.5' Divert water to create wetlands
C-P/Q Good Match Good Match N/A
D-H Good Match Good Match N/A
D-O match to +0.5' match to +0.75' Divert water to create wetlands
E-H -0.5' -0.5' Construct ditch block in proposed ditches
F-D(N) Good Match N/A N/A
F-D(S) Good Match match to +/-0.25' N/A
F-M match to -0.5' match to +0.5' Could Connect to SWM4 in Phase I
F-O Good Match Good Match N/A
G-B +0.5' to +1.0' +0.5' to +1.0' Divert flow into adjacent ditch
G-E Good Match Good Match N/A
I-F Good Match Good Match N/A
I-N Good Match Good Match N/A

24. Next Steps
• Continuous simulation
• Design storm simulation
• Development of wetland
creation plan

25. Special Thanks to