Citation
Projected flood hazard  lines for Escambia County, Florida

Material Information

Title:
Projected flood hazard lines for Escambia County, Florida
Series Title:
Projected flood hazard lines for Escambia County, Florida
Creator:
Dean, Robert G.
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publisher:
Coastal & Oceanographic Engineering Dept. of Civil & Coastal Engineering, University of Florida
Language:
English

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text
UFL/COEL-98/004

PROJECTED FLOOD HAZARD LINES FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
by
Robert G. Dean and
Subarna Malakar

February 13, 1998
Prepared for:
Federal Emergency Management Administration Flood, Fire and Mitigation Branch 500 C Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20472




PROJECTED FLOOD HAZARD LINES FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
February 13, 1998
Prepared for:
Federal Emergency Management Administration
Flood, Fire and Mitigation Branch
500 C Street, S. W.
Washington, D. C. 20472
Prepared by:
Department of Coastal and Oceanographic Engineering
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611




TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................ iv
INTRODUCTION .......................................................1I
THE SETTING .........................................................1I
PROCEDURES .........................................................1I
RESULTS ............................................................. 3
Shoreline Change Rates ..................................3
Aerial Photographs With Projected Flood Hazard Lines ........................6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .......................................... 6
REFERENCE ......................................................... 10
APPENDICES
A DESCRIPTION OF THE THREE METHODS APPLIED TO DETERMINE
LONG TERM SHORELIE CHANGE RATES ...........................A-i
B LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE COORDINATES CORRESPONDING TO
THE DEP MONUMENTS IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY .......................B-i




LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE
I Location of County for Which Erosion Hazard Areas Were Mapped ............... 2
2 Plot of 3 Methods of Historical Shoreline Change Analysis Using the 1856-1979
D ata S et ...... .... .......... ....... ................ ...... ....... .... 4
3 Plot of 3 Methods of Historical Shoreline Change Analysis Using the 1911-1979
D ata S et ................ ...... ....... ...... .. ......... .. ... .... ...... 5
4 Histogram of Shoreline Change Rates Using Least Squares Method for the 18561979 D ata Set ........................................................ 7
5 Histogram of Shoreline Change Rates Using Least Squares Method for the 19111979 D ata Set ........................................................ 8
6 An Example of an Aerial Photo With 60 Year Erosion Hazard and FEMA Flood
Zones Drawn W ith Legend Code .......................................... 9
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
I Correlation Coefficients for the Three Methods Employed for Determination of
Shoreline Change Rates (1911-1979) ....................................... 3




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A study has been carried out to determine the erosion rates in Escambia County, Florida and to apply those rates to the projection of existing flood hazard zones a landward distance equivalent to 60 years of the erosion trend. The results are provided on a series of 42 aerial photographs at a scale of 1:5000. Each photograph is annotated to show the 60 year projected shoreline and the 60 year projected V-zone/A-zone boundaries and the associated gutter lines.
The shoreline changes were based on a shoreline position data base developed and maintained by the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). The individual data points are located at nominal shoreline spacings of 1,000 feet and include data from Monument R-1I to R-214. These shoreline position data were analyzed by three methods and for two different time periods. Although it was found that all three methods resulted in similar rates, two of the methods (least squares and end point methods) were in better mutual agreement than the third (Foster-Savage Method) and based partly on this comparison, a decision was made to apply the least squares method in this study. The two time periods analyzed were the total period of data availability (1867 to 1979) and the more recent period of 1911 to 1979. The shoreline change rates were reasonably similar for these two periods and it was decided to apply rates for the more recent period in order to emphasize the current trends. The average shoreline change rates in Escamnbia County are very small; however, there is a wide range of local shoreline change rates with the maximum local recession rate for the more recent period approximately -4.9 feet per year and approximately 10.9 feet per year for the maximum advancement rate. Although the shoreline position data base is based on the locations of the Mean High Water (MI{W), the reference elevation employed by the State of Florida for regulatory purposes is the so-called Seasonal igh Later Elevation (SHWE) which is at an elevation of 1. 5 times the mean tidal range above the Mean Hligh Water Elevation (MIIWE). The rationale for the SHWE is that its higher position on the profile than that of MIIW should result in a location that responds more like the long term shoreline change rate and less to individual storms and seasonal fluctuations.
With the aerial photographs, the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) and the long term erosion rates available, the annotated aerial photographs were prepared for the 41 mile shoreline of Escambia County. This entailed plotting the following information on the base maps: (1) The projected 60 year position of the SHWE (in those cases where the shoreline was stable or advancing, the shoreline was not projected), (2) The current flood hazard lines as transferred from Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS), and (3) The flood hazard lines projected landward by 60 years of the erosion rate at those shoreline locations where long term erosion existed.




PROJECTED FLOOD HAZARD LINES
FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
INTRODUCTION
The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) is charged with the assessment of a wide range of hazards and with developing and implementing measures to achieve long term risk reduction for these hazards. Coastal areas are subject to hazards due to flooding and damage due to extreme storms and in some areas, tsunamis. In Florida, coastal hazards are the result of tropical and extra-tropical storms. In such areas, FEMA is responsible for a program in which numerical modeling is carried out using the historic meteorological data base and the bathymetry of the area of concern to establish extreme storm surges and the associated waves. This information is provided in the form of charts or maps with the hazard zones drawn as isolines denoting the elevations for lower structural members. These charts, denoted Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), are available for most coastal areas in the United States. In coastal areas with substantial erosion rates, the higher hazard zones will gradually be translated landward in the future unless shoreline stabilization measures are implemented. There is merit in recognizing these encroaching hazards in the management considerations and actions associated with these hazards. FEMA is currently evaluating economic and other impacts of considering the effects of progressive erosion in the hazard mapping and management process. This requires the landward projection of hazard areas based on appropriate local erosion rates. This report presents the results of one such pilot mapping effort for Escambia County, Florida to determine the long term erosion rates and to project landward the existing flood hazard zones in accordance with the long term erosion rates.
THE SETTING
Escambia County is located on the so-called Panhandle (west) coast of Florida and comprises portions of two barrier islands extending over an approximate 41 mile length, see Figure 1. The individual islands range in elevation from 6 ft to 20 ft NGVD. Escambia County is subject to hurricanes with the 100 year storm tide on the order of 11.0 ft. As is the case for many coastal counties in Florida, the shoreline change rates averaged over the entire county are small; however, at any particular shoreline location, the long-term shoreline change rates can deviate substantially from the County average. As an example, the shoreline change rates for the period 1856 to 1979 range from recession of approximately 4.3 feet per year to advancement of 8.0 feet per year.
PROCEDURES
The procedures applied may be considered in three steps. The first step required the determination of the long term shoreline change rates. For this purpose, use was made of the excellent shoreline position data base developed and maintained by the Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems (BBCS) of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). These data extend from Monument R- 1 to R-214.




V-' S aLa Rosa Sound u f o f M e x i c o

V,

Location of County for Which Erosion Hazard Areas Were Mapped.

Figure I




Generally, at each location, data are available for seven to nine dates, with most of the data availability after the 193 0's. The second step required the transfer of the existing flood hazard lines on a set of aerial photographs at a scale of 1:5,000. The third and final step was the translation of these lines by a distance equal to 60 years of the long term erosion rate.
RESULTS
Shoreline Change Rates
The FDEP shoreline position data base consists of shoreline positions at locations of fixed monuments along the shoreline. The spacing of these monuments is nominally 1000 feet and the monuments were first placed in Escambia County in 1973. The 41 mile shoreline is represented by 214 monuments and actually includes the western portion of Santa Rosa County. Shoreline position data are available for Escambia County for the period 1856 to 1979, a 123 year period. The shoreline positions in the FDEP data base are distances from a known monument location to the Mean High Water Line position. To evaluate the long term rates, three analysis methods were applied to the available data. These included: (1) the least squares method, (2) the method developed by Foster and Savage (1989), and (3) the end point method. The analysis of data was applied to the full set of data (185 6-1979) and to a more recent time period (1911- 1979). The results for these two time periods are presented in Figures 2 and 3. Referring to Figure 2 for the total period for which data are available, it is seen that in general, the three methods are in reasonable agreement; however, the Foster-Savage method (described in Appendix A) tends to predict more extreme shoreline change rates at some locations when compared to results from the other two methods. Referring to Figure 3 and comparing the results, the general observations and comments are similar except the overall agreement is better except for one isolated location. In order to intercompare the shoreline change results on a quantitative basis, the correlation coefficients were developed for the three methods with the results presented in Table 1. On the basis of the results in Table 1 and those in Figures 2 and 3, it was decided to utilize the results based on the least squares approach.
Table 1
Correlation Coefficients* for the Three Methods Employed for Determination of Shoreline Change Rates
(1911-1979)
Method Least Squares End Point Foste
Least Squares 1.00 0.91 0.72
End Point 0.91 1.00 0.79
Foster 0.72 0.79 1.00
*Note: To obtain r' values, it is necessary to square the values in this table.




Legend Methods
. uq Average Shoreline Change Rat:e (Ft/Yr)
-r (--e Values Iidiuate Recesion)
0 4 4 6 -8-"
0 :2 4 6 81.'--'" ........

Nc. ie: 1

5 0 5 10
. . . . .. .
:' ".:"" "" " "" : ~ ~ .-" : [: -r : " 1 ""' - " '

.. 0
.... R 200
---P,- 190
H 180 *' 110
R-- 160 0
R- 350
o-11 o
- 0
--R-070 .. ..
R-050
R-040
-020 010
....n-01l

-i -I ,-.. -.... -- -. ....:..

Plot of 3 Methods of Historical Shoreline Change Analysis Using the 1856-1979 Data Set.

Figure 2

7-s :. .. .. ....

i -----




Legend Methods:
MD.es ......... END-PT
FOSTER

Scale.
R -210
R..... ..00
-R 190 -R- 180
S -- 170
eL
SR-- 160
R-- 150
-----R- 11- I
---~R.-. 10(
R 09(0
-I-070
..-- R-080
Pensacola
R-050 E R-040
wa R--3

Average Shoreline Change Rate (F'L/Yr)
(-ve Values Indicate Recession)

1~
)

... ---0 --- 10
0
0
0 P ,

_L.LLJ ... L.A.J....A_.!_ I

Figure 3 Plot of 3 Methods of Historical Shoreline Change Analysis Using the
1911-1979 Data Set.

--.-. ....... .....

I~ -

I I I I

.-..- ...




Although Figures 2 and 3 provide the local shoreline change rates, it may be useful to examine the results of the shoreline change analysis in different forms. The total average long and shorter term shoreline change values for the entire county are -0.4 and +0.9 feet/year, respectively for the two time periods based on the least squares method. Figures 4 and 5 present histograms of shoreline change rates based on the longer (1856 to 1979) and shorter (1911 to 1979) periods, respectively.
The shoreline change rates used in projecting the hazard zones were not modified for the presence of shore protection structures. The net longshore sediment transport in this area is from east to west. The eastern 5 miles of Perdido Key has been nourished, both in 1985 and in 1989 (Monuments R-40 to R-67 in 1989). This portion of Perdido Key is subject to erosional pressure due to the progressive deepening by dredging over the past century of Pensacola Pass for navigational purposes. Very little beach nourishment other than that noted on Perdido Key has been conducted in Escambia County. Additionally, there has been very little construction of shore protection devices.
Aerial Photographs With Projected Flood Hazard Lines
A complete set of aerial photographs was prepared for Escambia County with the hazard lines projected 60 years into the future based on the long term erosion rates as determined by the least squares method and as shown in Figure 3. The set consists of 42 aerial photographs with each photograph representing approximately 1.2 miles. The FDEP monuments are indicated on each aerial photograph. To provide references of the photographs to a standard system, the latitudes and longitudes associated with each of the FDEP monuments are presented in Appendix B. These monuments are numbered sequentially with Monument 1 located at the Western County line (at the Florida/Alabama border) and Monument 214 is located at the eastern limits of the portion of Santa Rosa County that is open to the public. Farther west, Eglin Air Force base is a secured area. The original "gutter lines" are indicated by solid lines with each color designating a particular gutter line. The dashed lines indicate the gutter lines projected by the 60 years of shoreline recession. For those areas with a long term advancement trend, the gutter lines were not shifted. Figure 6 presents an example aerial photograph and will be used to describe the series. The code used for interpretation of the lines on the aerial photographs is provided on each photograph as shown in Figure 6. Figure 6 is located midway on Perdido Key. Figure 6 encompasses approximately 6,000 feet of the 13 mile stretch of Perdido Key west from Pensacola Pass to the Alabama/Florida border. Referring to Figure 6, it is seen that Monument "36" is located near the western limit of the photograph and Monument "40" is located near the eastern end of the photograph. The red line is the 60 year projected position of the green SLIWL. The other solid and dashed lines are the current and projected flood hazard lines respectively, with the elevations associated with the lines corresponding to the seaward limits of these elevation zones.
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This study has developed the long term shoreline change rates for Escambia County, Florida and applied these rates by displacing the flood hazard lines landward by 60 years of the erosional trend.




50 r-

40
30
20
Q
cin
a
-o
10
0
c? "? Q r o 9 c 9 0 c
o ) 0- cf ~~o o- m o
Shoreline Change Rate (ft/'yr) (-ve Values Indicate Erosion) Figure 4 Histogram of Shoreline Change Rates Using Least Squares Method
for the 1856-1979 Data Set.




50

4 0 -

0O C!) 0

~I
~ 0 .~) 0 '.'~ 0 0 0
C') ~i' (0 C'- 0) 0 N

Shoreline Change Rate (ft/yr) (-ve Values Indicate Erosion)
Histogram of Shoreline Change Rates Using Least Squares Method for the 1911-1979 Data Set.

Figure 5




Figure 8. Portion of Escambia County FIRM Panel 305 of 360, DEP Monuments R36-R40.
Legend: 60-YrErosionjl SLIWLIf V(15)1[ A(12)1 I A(10)|[ A(9)I
Figure 6 An Example of an Aerial Photo With 60 Year Erosion Hazard
and FEMA Flood Zones Drawn With Legend Code.
9




Two periods were considered in developing the erosion rates: (1) The full 123 year period of shoreline position availability (1856 to 1979) and, (2) the most recent 68 year period (1911 to 1979). Additionally three different methods for determining the shoreline changes from the available data were applied and intercompared. Based on examination of the results, the least squares results based on the shorter time period were applied to the displacement of the flood lines. Although, on average, the long term shoreline trend in Escambia County is small, the deviations from the County average are reasonably large ranging from a local erosional trend of approximately -4.3 feet per year to advancement of 8.0 feet per year.
The results are presented as a series of 42 aerial photographs at a scale of 1:5000. Each photograph is annotated with the positions of the shoreline projected with 60 years of the erosional trend, the current flood hazard lines and the flood hazard lines projected by 60 years of erosional trend. In areas where the shoreline trend is neutral or advancing, there are no projected shorelines nor projected flood hazard lines.
REFERENCE
Foster, E. R. and R. J. Savage (1989) "Methods of Historical Shoreline Analysis", Proceedings, Coastal Zone '89, Vol. 5, pp. 4434-4448.




APPENDIX A
DESCRIPTION OF THE THREE METHODS APPLIED TO DETERMINE
LONG TERM SHORELINE CHANGE RATES




APPENDIX A

DESCRIPTION OF THE THREE METHODS APPLIED TO DETERMINE LONG TERM SHORELINE CHANGE RATES
INTRODUCTION
The three methods used to determine long term shoreline change rates include: (1) The least squares method, (2) The method developed by Foster and Savage, and (3) The end point method. For purposes of completeness in this report, each of these three methods is described briefly below.
DESCRIPTION OF THE THREE METHODS
The three methods employed in the analysis herein are described below.
(1) The Least Squares Method
The least squares method is a formal procedure which establishes the "best fit" of an analytical relationship to a set of data. In the application here the analytical relationship is a straight line with two unknowns and thus requires at least two data points. If only two data points were available, the fit of the straight line to the data points would be exact and would be the same as the "end point" method. In the case in which there are more data points than free parameters in the analytical relationship, the method n-finimizes the sum of squares of the deviations between the data points and the analytical relationship. The method of least squares is described in many references and is commonly available as a subroutine in software packages.
(2) Method of Foster and Savage
This method was developed and proposed by Foster and Savage (1989) and provides a rational basis for taking into consideration the accuracies of the individual data points and the spacing of the data points in time. Basically, the method averages those possible end point rates that qualify based on consideration of the magnitude of the difference in shoreline position being realistic, ie not simply the result of errors in the data. Defining E, and E2 as errors in data at times t, and t2 respectively, the criterion for determining the rate is that the minimum time between data points to be considered is
(E 1 + E22)
T. R1




in which E, and E2 are the errors associated with the data at times tj and t2, respectively and R, is the end point rate for the location of interest. The average end point rate is then taken to be the average of all end point rates which satisfy the above criterion. It is noted that for N available data points, there are N(N-1)/2 possible combinations. For example, if there are 7 data points, there are 21 possible combinations of pairs of points that could yield valid end point rates if they all satisfied the above equation.
(3) End Point Method
This is the most simple method of the three and involves the calculation of the rate based on the first and last data points.

A-2




APPENDIX B
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE COORDINATES CORRESPONDING
TO THE DEP MONUMENTS IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY




Lat deg, min, sec

Long: deg, min, sec

Mon-ID
R-001 R-002 R-003 R-004
R-005 R-006 R-007 R-008

52.68251 55.10845 58.15961
.73658
2.89593 3.09084 5.50260 6.99443
10.18609
11.76692 16.95487 17.76365
21.44298 22.18083 23.23598 25.87553
28.62366 30.33179 31.99867 34.23469
35.77404 37.59862 39.07224 40.00591
42.34819 41.97663 45.20067 45.07461
48.46901 50.45216 50.98753 54.19994
55.17637
.78953 1.48104 3.89907

4.64763 54.25376 39.33722 30.45793
19.18555 6.83373 54.34799 43.94785
31.26866 20.94658 5.62458 56.23023
42.94881 33.11430 23.67582 13.44765
.58116 50.98798 39.52365 27.82378
16.73481 5.65141 54.37915 43.43876
30.59330 20.23584 9.30764 56.36010
44.73347 31.80971 19.56050 9.14750
57.78692 44.22216 30.31542 19.12667

R-009 R-010 R-011 R-012
R-013 R-014 R-015 R-016
R-017 R-018 R-019 R-020
R-021 R-022 R-023
R-024
R-025 R-026 R-027 R-028
R-029 R-030 R-031 R-032
R-033 R-034 R-035 R-036




R-037 R-038 R-039 R-040
R-041 R-042 R-043 R-044
R-045 R-046 R-047 R-048
R-049 R-050 R-051 R-052
R-053 R-054 R-055 R-056
R-057 R-058 R-059 R-060
R-061 R-062 R-063 R-064
R-065 R-066 R-067 R-068
R-069 R-070 R-071 R-072
R-073 R-074 R-075

6.15046 9.29657 11.91495 15.66444
19.20108 22.25004 24.95966
26.56051
30.12769 31.24433 34.40866
37.06251
40.26641 41.80904 45.22623 49.86835
48.57354 52.03615 56.30761 56.11529
58.16606 59.96335
1.58359 3.47079
4.74241 5.79823 6.97850 10.22574
13.13481 22.14950 31.90692 38.97561
33. 62105 30.24630 29.58264 27.40134
20.12534 12.27952 15.08058

B-2

9.41776 58.08176 47.30069
34.98633
23.23180 12.32297 59.95906
49.38856
37.91088 28.14915 15.71081 5.20891
52.57447
41.93595 29.59547
17.37428
6.86466 55.46933 43.03282 31.17393
19.64620 8.17956 56.75909 45.78984
34.71302 23.03934
11.96976 3.01188
55.80611 51.33335 49.90326 57.86896
52.94934 41.32049 30.54593 21.99847
14.59010 5.51968 54.18126

30 19 30 19 30 19




30 19 13.13802

87 16 44.73234

R-076
R-077 R-078 R-079 R-080
R-081 R-082 R-083 R-084
R-085 R-086 R-087 R-088
R-089 R-090 R-091 R-092
R-093 R-094 R-095 R-096
R-097 R-098 R-099 R-101
R-102 R-103 R-104 R-105
R-106 R-107 R-108 R-109
R-110 R-111 R-112 R-113
R-114

6.85344 8.75077 5.13207 4.32230
3.58241 2.58222 2.19378 1.11789
4.00900 4.28991 5.24250 5.74411
5.87200 7.12666 7.73111 8.99245
10.27871 11.92683 13.23777 14.41686
15.99602 17.06546 18.41239 21.70588
23.57930 24.79785
26.96148 28.52785
30.41752 30.61886 31.72136 34.59083
35.68866
37.61715 38.43986 38.05002

30 19 38.69426

32.21572 21.12724 11.30648 1.04097
49.51637 38.14433 27.18601 16.65366
5.94358 55.12513 42.16691 31.24469
19.38625 7.50761 56.46689
45.11758
33.59769
21.89367 10.79800
.14087
48.76852 36.57749 25.56097
3.70243
51.31476 40.84793
29.61069 18.63528
6.21195 55.59594
45.17553 35.28368
24.46208
13.07221 2.53267 52.95339

87 9 40.79970




19 40.93025 19 43.77947 19 45.24540

R-115 R-116 R-117
R-118 R-119 R-120 R-121
R-122 R-123 R-124 R-125
R-126 R-127 R-128 R-129
R-130 R-131 R-132 R-133
R-134 R-135 R-136 R-137
R-138 R-139 R-140 R-141
R-142 R-143 R-144 R-145
R-146 R-147 R-148 R-149
R-150 R-151 R-152 R-153

46.31933 50.10255 51.83438 53.98726
55.34780
57.81747 59.35941
.17241
3.15123 5.22318 7.35455 8.92426
10.24409 13.24418 15.25690 17.44784
19.07515 21.11910 22.79666 25.47337
28.19624 29.44653 36.88620 34.50994
36.42703 38.68338
43.53781 43.13210
44.75950
47.21651 49.20016 51.34892
53.39980 55.25032
56.81552 58.98450

B-4

30.18678 19.56451 7.23716
58.52878 47.87833
33.98122 25.28855
14.17915
.57813 52.13997 41.26257
30.00745
18.03897 8.63160 57.92799
46.78537
35.81116 25.33866
14.02749
3.38339 52.82862
40.14811 29.92788
18.68851 8.23947 58.07475
44.77261
33.70142 22.15094 11.33564 59.93830
48.40393
37.51879 25.85499
14.70761
3.83869 51.32206 40.70724
29.46714




R-154 R-155 R-156 R-157
R-158 R-159 R-160 R-161
R-162 R-163 R-164 R-165
R-166 R-167 R-168 R-169
R-170 R-171 R-172 R-173
R-174 R-175 R-176 R-177
R-178 R-179 R-180 R-181
R-182 R-183 R-184 R-185
R-186 R-187 R-188 R-189
R-190 R-191 R-192

.42059 2.97688 4.88675 7.13142
9.56361 11.07549 13.76985 15.87190
17.58769 19.15423 21.26641 23.33144
24.82252
26.46650 28.36268 30.27529
32.16985 33.49667
35.54156 37.37735
39.68426 41.49236 43.77782
45.99477
48.33806 50.08373 52.22369
53.94604
55.75360 57.57730 59.79092 1.17263
3.36060 5.64458 7.97604 9.93580

30 22 11.97407 30 22 14.04091 30 22 16.32796

B-5

18.12676 6.71799 55.08844 44.44056
33.24794 22.22433
10.72418 59.31154
48.18149 36.41109 26.93771 15.00849
3.12741 52.23763
41.65951 29.85870
18.30990 6.71104 55.21575 45.08084
34.11849 23.73720
11.68373
.29631
49.15308 38.73125 27.69546
16.14396
4.88560 53.27788
42.00081 30.72018
18.46175 7.81686 57.05169 46.01037
35.00939 24.27445
12.18605




30 22 17.57458

86 54 58.56060

R-193
R-194 R-195 R-196 R-197
R-198 R-199 R-200 R-201
R-202 R-203 R-204 R-205
R-206 R-207 R-208 R-209
R-210 R-211 R-212 R-213
R-214

30 22 54.77814

20.03024
21.47465 23.65206 25.67535
27.59530
29.13290 30.37712 32.95445
34.61376 36.14381 37.75342 39.35864
44.82585
42.61587 48.60422 47.67055
48.24822
49.15244 50.82697
52.52166

86 51 .44867

B-6

49.57178 38.74126 27.05074
15.29638
4.42288 52.80209 42.30736 30.80290
19.35174 8.12002 56.61465 46.46505
34.50556
18.58181 10.40682 54.67775
46.40002 34.67728 22.80584
15.04562