Coastal Restoration Team Mississippi River Reintroduction into Bayou Lafourche Special Joint Legislative Committee Meeting August 16, 2006 Special Joint Legislative Committee Meeting August 16, 2006 W GNV

Coastal Restoration Team 102 Years on the Bayou Potable Water Dilemma in Thibodaux Late 30’s/Early 40’s Walter Lemann Pump Station Built 1955 Bayou Lafourche Dammed st Report of Salt Water Intrusion 1906 EPA Proposed 2,000 cfs Siphon Project 1995 MRRBL Sponsored by EPA Funded by CWPPRA October 2001

Coastal Restoration Team Project Purpose To nourish and protect the marshes of the Barataria and Terrebonne Basins through the reintroduction of freshwater, sediments, and nutrients from the Mississippi River. The proposed project has the added benefits of ensuring long-term freshwater supply to the communities and industries served by the Bayou Lafourche Freshwater District, by limiting saltwater intrusion and enhancing water supply.

Coastal Restoration Team Task Force Stipulations LA Pays 50% of E&D The allocation of Phase 1 E&D funds does not Commit the Task Force to a Specific Level of Construction Funding Approved thru 30% design 30% Design Review Decision will be based on: –Updated Costs and Benefits of the project alternatives –An Assessment of existing and planned projects in the area on the benefits of the Bayou Lafourche project. –Preliminary cost and benefit allocations –A list of Preliminary Cost Sharing Sources Cost Sharing will be proportionally based on benefits received

Coastal Restoration Team Unique Achievements Outreach – focused on public concerns Special Joint Legislative Committee established Basin Wide Modeling –RMA Model – 2400 square miles –HEC RAS – Water Level Impacts Detailed Benefits Assessment –Salinity reduction/sediment-nutrient loading

Coastal Restoration Team RMA Model

Coastal Restoration Team Continuity Lines

Coastal Restoration Team Model Area by Basin

Coastal Restoration Team Run 05

Coastal Restoration Team Run 10

Coastal Restoration Team Run 10-5 Benefit Area

Coastal Restoration Team Screening of Alternatives 144 alternatives initially developed Alternatives screened on quantitative and qualitative criteria

Coastal Restoration Team Summary of Qualitative Rankings TABLE 4-9 SUMMARY OF QUALITATIVE SCORING Criteria Alternative Least Rise Maintenance Construction Impacts Dredge Volume Expandability Stormwater ControlFlood Control Diversion Flow PermittingROWEnviron mental Impacts Total ScoreN/A N/A

Coastal Restoration Team Summary of Quantitative Values TABLE 4-7 SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE VALUES Alternative Flow (cfs)Cost($)AAHUs Cost/cfs ($)Cost/AAHUAAHUs/cfs Water Level Impacts ($) 151,000170,000,000NA166,000NA 4,687, ,000261,000,0001,819256,000143, ,674, ,500331,000,0002,266216,000146, ,674, ,000184,000,0002,031190,00090, ,674, ,400251,000,0002,164179,000116, ,086, ,000379,000,0002,203190,000172, ,086,000 Least Rise1,000379,000,000NA379,000NA 1,164,000

Coastal Restoration Team Preferred Alternative Selection 38 selected: –Most cost efficient –Most AAHU’s per cfs (121,025 Acres) –Moderate water level impacts –Moderate construction/dredging impacts

Coastal Restoration Team Where are we now? Ph 1 Model Report And Water Level Analysis June/July 2005 Final Phase 1 Report November 2005 Review of Existing Data June 2003 Historical Water Level Analysis May 2004 Draft Ph 1 Report August 2004 Final Phase 2 Report March % Design Meeting May 9, 2006

Coastal Restoration Team Where are we going? Final Design? 30% Design Meeting May 9, 2006 CWPPRA Technical Committee Meeting June 14, 2006 CWPPRA Task Force Meeting July 12, 2006

Coastal Restoration Team July 12 th CWPPRA Task Force Stipulations 1.Identify a potential funding source for $2.5 M in Federal funds 2.Determine the impact of conducting an ITR on the work done to date 3.Investigate the legality of spending Federal monies without a determination of feasibility WRDA Bill passage? Funding Options?

Coastal Restoration Team

Coastal Restoration Team Calculated Acres Benefited

Coastal Restoration Team Next Steps: Drainage Analysis Operation/Maintenance Plan Marsh Creation Cost Estimate Updates Benefits Analysis (WVA) 95% Pump station design 95% Control structures design 95% Channel design Final Plans and Specification Completed Final EIS Identification of Construction Funding

Coastal Restoration Team ALT #38: BL, 2’-0’ RM29, 1000 cfs, $183 M Thibodaux Lockport Donaldsonville Existing Alt #38