Project Implementation Reports

1
Project Implementation Reports
CERP PDT WORKSHOP
April 2002
2
Topics

• Background
• Legislative Requirements
• Project Goals and Objectives
• Plan Formulation and Evaluation

3
WHO???WHAT???WHERE???WHY???HOW???
Project Implementation Reports
4
Project Implementation Reports

• WHO???
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in partnership
  with a
• non-Federal Sponsor
• SFWMD (83 of the Projects)
• Others
• Florida Department of Environmental Protection
• Seminole Tribe
• Miccosukee Tribe
• Lee County
• Palm Beach County
• WHAT???
• WHERE???
• WHY???
• HOW???

5
Project Implementation Reports

• WHO???
• WHAT???
• Decision document
• State / Federal / Tribal and Local Government
  coordination
• National Environmental Policy Act Public
  Participation
• WHERE???
• WHY???
• HOW???

6
Project Implementation Reports

• WHO???
• WHAT???
• WHERE???
• Only applicable to CERP South Florida
• WHY???
• HOW???

7
Project Implementation Reports

• WHO???
• WHAT???
• WHERE???
• WHY???
• Congress said so
• More thoroughly investigate local solutions to
  system problems
•  HOW???

8
Project Implementation Reports

• WHO???
• WHAT???
• WHERE???
• WHY???
• HOW???
• Are you kidding? In 40 minutes Get Real!!!
• Much of what we will cover has been or will be
  presented one-on-one with PDTs

9
Legislative Requirements for Project
Implementation Reports
10
WRDA 2000Section 601 (h)(4)(A)

• The Secretary and the non-Federal sponsor shall
  develop project implementation reports in
  accordance with section 10.3.1 of the Plan
• In developing a PIR, the Secretary and the non
  Federal shall coordinate with appropriate
  Federal, State, tribal, and local governments
• A PIR shall -
• (I) be consistent with the Plan and programmatic
  regulations
• (II) describe how each of the requirements stated
  in (3)(B) is satisfied
• (III) comply with NEPA
• (IV) identify the appropriate quantity, timing,
  and distribution of water dedicated and managed
  for the natural system
• (V) identify the amount of water to be reserved
  or allocated for the natural system necessary to
  implement, under State law, subclauses (IV) and
  (VI)
• (VI) comply with applicable water quality
  standards and applicable water quality permitting
  requirements under subsection (b)(2)(A)(ii)
• (VII) be based on the best available science
• (VIII) include an analysis concerning the cost
  effectiveness and engineering feasibility of the
  project

11
State RequirementsChapter 373 Florida Statutes

• 373.026
• 373.470
• 373.1501
• Preparation of a Project Implementation Report to
  include
• Analyze and evaluate all needs to be met
  comprehensively
• Determine engineering feasibility
• Determine efficiency and cost effectiveness
• Determine project is consistent with applicable
  law
• Coordinate and minimize impacts on existing
  utilities/public infrastructure
• Identify increase in water supplies resulting
  from project
• Report is submitted to FDEP for approval

12
Additional WRDA 2000 Provisions Affecting PIRs

• Savings Clause
• Quantifying Water to be Reserved
• Operating Manuals

13
Savings Clause

• No elimination or transfer of existing legal
  sources
• Maintenance of flood protection
• No effect on Seminole Tribal Compact

14
Quantifying Water to be Reserved

• WRDA 2000
• Assurance of Project Benefits-
• President and Governor Agreement- January 9,
  2000
• the State shall ensure . . . that water made
  available by each project in the Plan shall not
  be permitted for a consumptive use or otherwise
  made unavailable by the State until such time as
  sufficient reservations for the restoration of
  the natural system are made under state law in
  accordance with the project implementation
  report. . . .
• Sec. 601(h)(4)(A)

15
Quantifying Water to be Reserved, cont

• Very important! The PIR only identifies the
  amount of water to be reserved
• Identifying the water to be reserved only occurs
  after initial plan selection
• The actual rulemaking for reservations of the
  water is performed by SFWMD or FDEP
• Guidance is being developed on specific
  information and details for PDTs

16
Operating Manuals

• Required by WRDA 2000
• Operations information necessary to
• specify project operations consistent with the
  quantification of water to be reserved
• comply with Savings Clause
• Step 3 in the Plan Formulation and Evaluation
  Procedures

17
Operating Manuals, cont.

• Operating Manual may include
• water control plans
• regulation schedules
• drought contingency plans
• operating criteria for project and/or system
  regulation
• Guidance being developed

18
Example of the next generation of operating
manualsLake Okeechobee Regulation Schedule (WSE)

• Includes long-range climatic forecasting
• Decision tree (if this, then do that)
• Stage/position analysis (monitoring) to
  demonstrate probable outcomes leading to
  operational decisions

19
TYPICAL PIR PROCESS
Issues Recommendations
Pre-ApplicationConference
DraftCAR
IPR
FSM
PAL
AFB
IPR
PrepareDraftPIRw/NEPADocument
TentativelySelectedPlan
Prepare PMP
InitiatePIR
FinalCAR
DEPReview and Approval
SponsorLetter ofIntent
30 DayState AgencyReview
DENotice
FWS
Corps
Public andAgencyReviewof DraftPIR
WashingtonLevelReviewof PIR
Release Draft PIR
PrepareFinal PIRw/NEPADocument
ReleaseFinalPIR
Chief ofEngineersReport
Review byASA (CW)andOMB
RODSigned
TransmitPIRtoCongress
State / Sponsor
20
Develop BaseConditions and Models
21
Goals Objectives for the Restudy

• GOAL Enhance Ecologic Values
• Objectives
• Increase the total spatial extent of natural
  areas
• Improve habitat and functional quality
• Improve native plant and animal species
  abundance and diversity
• GOAL Enhance Economic Values Social Well Being
• Objectives
• Increase availability of fresh water
  (agricultural/municipal industrial)
• Reduce flood damages (agricultural/urban)
• Provide recreational navigation opportunities
• Protect cultural archeological resources and
  values

22
Project Goals and Objectives

• Same as the Restudy
• Project Example
• System-wide Objective Improve Habitat and
  Functional Quality
• Elsewhere in the system downstream
• Local Objective Improve Habitat and Functional
  Quality
• Within footprint of project boundary

23
Plan Formulation and Evaluation

• Define Measures (Components)
• Develop Planning Cost
• Estimates (Real Estate,
• Construction, OM)
• Evaluate Measures (compare
• with and without plan
• conditions)
• Conduct Incremental Cost
• Analysis
• Compare Alternative Plans
• Conduct Environmental
• Assessments

RECOVER

• Conduct System-Wide
• Evaluation of Plans

24
Terminology
Scale
System (CERP)
Project
25
Restudy Formulation Evaluation Process
Conceptual Plan
PM Impact Analysis (Sept-Apr)
First Alternative
SFWMM Model Run
Develop Components
ESM
Alternative Development
Screening Conclusions
Detailed Impact Assess- ment (May-Jun)
CEA
Feasibility Report/CERP
LEC Results
26
Project Formulation

• CERP - individual projects were selected based on
  their synergistic effect to the overall plan
• Projects - formulated to achieve local and
  system-wide goals and objectives as defined by
  CERP
• Must consider different measures, components,
• features, and project scales within the
  project area
• Structural and non-structural approaches
• Initial alternative defined by Yellow Book

27
Project Evaluation/Assessment

• 3-step process
• Select Plan based on the project that reasonably
  maximizes the projects contribution toward the
  system-wide benefits of CERP compared to cost

28
Step 1Optimize System-wide Benefits

• Ensures the system-wide goals and objectives
  defined by the Comprehensive Plan are achieved
• Define the project features that optimize system
  performance and system-wide benefits
• Costs and benefits measured at the system-wide
  level for each of the alternative plans
• Selected project will be the plan that reasonably
  maximizes the projects contribution toward the
  system-wide benefits of CERP compared to cost

29
Step 1 System-wide BenefitsFuture Condition
Assumptions
30
Step 2Assessing Incremental Benefits
Attributable to the Project

• Assessment measures the contribution of the
  project to system-wide benefits output
• Quantify and describe the incremental costs and
  benefits of the selected project
• Costs and benefits are incremental to the total
  CERP project

31
Step 2 Incremental BenefitsFuture Condition
Assumptions
32
Step 3Assess Interim Operations

• Establish baseline year for operations
• Develop interim operational strategies
• various operations should be considered to make
  the plan more efficient as an interim project
• Assess local impacts
• Evaluating the output of the selected project
  together with authorized projects provides an
  assessment of local and system-wide impacts due
  to interim operations

33
Step 3 Interim Operations AssessmentFuture
Condition Assumptions
34
Draft Policy Paper

• Provide direction to the PDTs and RECOVER
• Supplements current planning guidance
• (ER 1105-2-100)
• Addresses specific issues such as with- and
  without-project condition assumptions and
  evaluation methodologies
• Provides guidance rather than dictum (variations
  from this guidance should be discussed during
  policy review meetings)