Corps Technical Capabilities and Collaboration

1
Corps Technical Capabilities and Collaboration

• Beth Faber
• USACE, Institute for Water Resources
• November 15, 2006

beth.a.faber_at_usace.army.mil
2
Overview

• Corps technical capabilities as related to the
• goals stated in Water Needs and Strategies for
• a Sustainable Future
• providing for sustainable water development in
  the West in response to the pressures of
  population growth
• addressing current challenges such as operating
  water systems with multiple uses water supply,
  ecosystems, flood protection, navigation
• solve problems with collaboration among
  stakeholders and all levels of govt

3
Outline

• Modeling Tools
• CWMS, Corps Water Management System
• WAT, Watershed Analysis Tool
• Collaborative Planning
• Shared Vision Planning, studies, experiences
• Collaborative Initiatives
• Sustainable Rivers Project

4
Outline

• Modeling Tools
• CWMS, Corps Water Management System
• WAT, Watershed Analysis Tool
• Collaborative Planning
• Shared Vision Planning, studies, experiences
• Collaborative Initiatives
• Sustainable Rivers Project

5
CWMS

• Corps Water Management System
• An integrated system of hardware, software, and
  communication resources supporting Corps
  real-time water control mission

6
CWMS Overview
Streamgages
Real-Time

• Improved Real-Time Water Management Decision
  Support for over 700 Multipurpose Reservoirs,
  Control Structures and Thousands of miles of
  Levees.
• Corporate Web-Based Information
• Standard Corporate Centrally Supported
  Hardware/Software
• From 40 Existing Unique Systems to one CWMS

Fully Integrated Hydrologic Models
Weather Radars
Operational decisions
Inundation Forecasts
7
From Data to Water Control Decisions
SERVERS
Weather Forecast
Data Processing Data Storage Modeling
Observed Data
Public and Cooperators
Field Office
Instructions
Water Control Decisions
8
CWMS Summary

• Comprehensive, integrated system for real-time
  water control decision support
• Complete data retrieval / verification / database
  system
• Full range of hydrologic / hydraulic modeling
  software to evaluate operational decisions and
  compare the impact of various what if?
  scenarios
• Client / Server architecture, with full set of
  visualization tools to evaluate data and model
  results

9
Watershed Analysis Tool (HEC-WAT)for Planning
10
Watershed Analysis Tool

• Watershed and water resources management studies
  identify problems and opportunities and analyze
  alternative solutions to address them.
• Studies require hydrologic, hydraulic, economic,
  environmental, and social impact assessments.
• Need an interface that will streamline and
  integrate the analytical process using the tools
  commonly applied by the multi-disciplinary teams
  of Corps offices.

11
Watershed Analysis Tool

• Coordinate and organize components of a water
  resources study
• Provide a central organized repository of
  data/models/results
• Designed to be used for multi-group and
  multi-agency as well as a single entity
• Improve coordination and communication across the
  study team
• Involve modelers early in the study process

12
HEC-WAT Model Integration

• Integrate model and tools used during the
  analytical process
• Hydrology - HEC-HMS
• Reservoir Operations - HEC-ResSim
• Hydraulics - HEC-RAS
• Economics - HEC-FIA
• Statistical HEC-SSP
• Future Additions HEC-EFM, HEC-FDA, GeoHMS,
  GeoRAS, RiverWare

13
Environmental
Hydrology
Reservoir
Flood Damage
Hydraulics
14
Alternative and Simulation Manager
15
Further Questions?

• Bill Charley
• Hydrologic Engineering Center, USACE
• william.j.charley_at_usace.army.mil
• [phone]
• Chris Dunn
• Hydrologic Engineering Center, USACE
• christopher.n.dunn_at_usace.army.mil
• [phone]

16
Outline

• Modeling Tools
• CWMS, Corps Water Management System
• WAT, Watershed Analysis Tool
• Collaborative Planning
• Shared Vision Planning
• Collaborative Initiatives
• Sustainable Rivers Project

17
Shared Vision Planning

• A tool for implementing Collaborative Planning
• Water Resource Decisions Today are Characterized
  by
• Demand for involvement by many stakeholders
• Technical expertise by a broad range of
  stakeholders
• Sequential review and revisiting of assumptions
  and completed technical studies
• Drawn out decision making

18
To survive in this environment, we need to

• Understand basic hydrology, ecology, economics,
  etc
• Accurately represent the linkages between these
  areas

• Understand the institutional setting
• Develop ways engage Stakeholders
• Build trust

Technical tools Process skills
Collaborative Planning
19
Collaborative Planning / Modeling

• Means involving stakeholders in the technical
• analysis
• in developing the data and technical
  relationships
• Builds understanding of the system
• Builds confidence in the analysis
• Builds trust between stakeholders

the process of building a model is a way of
working out a shared view of what is being
managed and how the managing should be done."
Kai Lee
20
Shared Vision Planning

• Definition Shared Vision Planning integrates
  tried-and-true planning principles, systems
  modeling and collaboration into a practical forum
  for making resource management decisions.
• What is Different?
• Collaboration at every stage of planning
• Integrated and collaborative nature of the
  modeling/evaluation
• Rigor of the public collaboration process

21
The Goals of SVP

• End Goals of SVP process are
• Build trust among stakeholders, experts and
  decision-makers
• Explicit recognition of differing interests and
  VALUES in the objectives and metrics
• Wide acceptance of relevant data and assumptions
  in the analysis AGREEMENT ON FACTS
• Ideally, AGREEMENT on ACTIONS

22
SVP relies on Structured Collaboration
Circle D

• Circles of Influence concept relies on team
  building.
• Concentric circles link representatives with
  differing levels of personal involvement

Direction
Direction
Information
Direction
Information
Information
A
B
C
Circle C All Interested Parties
Circle D Decision Makers
Circle A Model Building Team
Circle B Model Users, Validators
23
Model Characteristics Support Collaborative
Planning

• Integrated All stakeholder interests and their
  interactions are in one place
• User-Friendly capable of being used by multiple
  stakeholders and decision makers
• Understandable/Transparent assumptions, input,
  relationships, output
• Relevant to the interests and values of
  stakeholders and decision makers
• Adaptable/Flexible to changing conditions or
  evolving process

24
LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION
PARTICIPATORY TECHNIQUE
HIGH
Joint decision making
Consensus Building
Assisted Negotiations
Match Techniques to Intended Level of Involvement
Collaboration/Mediation
Agreeing to the decision
Facilitation/Interactive Workshops
Having meaningful influence upon the
decision
Task Forces/Advisory Groups
Public hearings
Being heard before final decision is made
Conferences, symposia
Being informed about decision being made
Public information
LOW
25
Is it a technical question or a question of
values?
Bad water management often occurs when facts are
confused with values, when means are confused
with ends, and when technical judgments are made
by citizens and politicians, while value
judgments are made by scientists and
professionals. -
William Lord, 1984
The most fundamental flaw in contemporary water
policy is that many value questions in which
ordinary citizens have a great interest are being
framed as technical questions - Helen
Ingram Anne Schneider, 1999
26
Collaborative Modeling Examples

• Drought Exercises for the Potomac River (DC)
  Interstate Commission for the Potomac River
• Middle Rio Grande River (NM) water allocation and
  ESA issues Sandia National Labs
• Roanoke River Hydrologics, Inc., TNC, U.Va
• Okavango River (southern Africa) Natural
  Heritage Institute
• Okanagon Watershed long term planning (U. British
  Columbia)
• USGS, EPA, BuRec, all have initiatives

27
Shared Vision Planning Developed and Advanced at
IWR

• Five Pilots in the National Drought study (1994)
• ACT-ACF (Tri-state Water War) late 1990s
• Rappahannock River (Va) 2000-01
• Lake Ontario Study (2001-2005)
• Mississippi Headwaters (2003 present)

28
A Quick Example Mississippi Headwaters
Reservoir Operation

• Reservoir Operating Plan Evaluation (ROPE) for
  six Corps reservoirs - co-sponsored by the Corps
  and Forest Service
• System Objectives originally flood protection
  and navigation, now recreation and environment
• Modeling used simulation and optimization
• District lead, IWR - HEC assist

29
Applying Circles of Influence concept to
Mississippi ROPE
B
A
C

• Circle A
• Modelers from Corps (District, IWR, HEC
  contractors)
• Face-to-face, email, Web-meetings
• Circle B
• Interagency working groups on Flood
  Control/Erosion Control Recreation Tribal
  Committee Public Involvement and Education
  Cultural and Historic Hydropower/Other Uses and
  Environmental.
• Working groups developed technical information,
  validated representation in the optimization and
  simulation models, and iteratively developed and
  evaluated plans in workshop settings with Circle
  A team
• Circle C
• The most interested members of the public, tribal
  leaders, recreational lake groups
• Periodic Meetings with Circle A team
• Circle D
• Decision-Making practices with District
  Engineer and Forest Service Supervisor

30
Mississippi ROPE study used Stella linked
w/HEC-PRM Excel
31
Further Questions?

• Hal Cardwell
• Institute for Water Resources, USACE
• hal.e.cardwell_at_usace.army.mil
• [phone]

32
Outline

• Modeling Tools
• CWMS, Corps Water Management System
• WAT, Watershed Analysis Tool
• Collaborative Planning
• Shared Vision Planning, studies, experiences
• Collaborative Initiatives
• Sustainable Rivers Project

33
Sustainable Rivers Project

• A partnership between the US Army Corps of
• Engineers and The Nature Conservancy
• MISSIONS
• The Nature Conservancy preserve biodiversity
• Corps of Engineers water resource management,
  ecosystem restoration
• Sustainable Rivers Project
• Re-operate dams to improve the health and life of
  rivers, while maintaining or enhancing project
  benefits.

34
(No Transcript)
35
Bill Williams River, AZ
Western Hydrology, EXTREMES

• High eco-value
• Intact native hardwood forest
• 340 species of birds observed in refuge

36
Bill Williams River Participation
37
Timeline for Developing Ecosystem Flow
Recommendations
Jan 2004
Jan 2004 - Jan 2005
Ongoing
March 2006 (partial)
March 2005
38
Bill Williams Eco Flow Workshop
Floods
Aquatics

• Flow Components
• Flood Flows
• Low Flows

Low Flows
Floods
Unified Floods
Unified Flow Requirements
Riparian- Birds
Full Group
Low Flows
Unified Low Flows

• Flood Flows defined by
• Purpose
• Magnitude
• Frequency
• Timing

• Duration
• Rate of Change
• Contingencies
• Uncertainties

Floods
Riparian- Mammals
Low Flows
over 50 scientists, engineers, and natural
resource managers - representing more than twenty
institutions - working together to reach
consensus on a set of flow requirements in only
two and half days
39
(No Transcript)
40
Experimental Releases(March 2006)
41
Ongoing Monitoring(Field work after the March
2006 release)
42

• Accomplishments
• Involving scientists in water management
  decision-making
• Use of environmental cues in water management
• Defining ecosystem flow recommendations
• Linking of flow component to biotic strategy and
  
• Recognition of uncertainties sets stage for
  experimentation
• Modeling support for Sustainable Rivers sites
• Challenges
• Relating operational changes to ecosystem
  response
• Encouraging water management policy to be more
  adaptive (programmatically)
• Fostering avenues for science to affect policy

43
Further Questions?

• John Hickey
• Hydrologic Engineering Center, USACE
• john.t.hickey_at_usace.army.mil
• [phone]
• Andy Warner
• The Nature Conservancy
• awarner_at_tnc.org
• [phone]