F4B - 1 BU ILDING STRONG SM Flood Damage Reduction Module F4: Reformulation – Optimization, Incremental Analysis and Selection of the NED Plan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Mitigation is a mind set. Storage in the basement.
Advertisements

Session 131 Comparative Emergency Management Session 13 Slide Deck.
Identify Problems, Planning Objectives and Constraints.
The Role of Levees in the National Flood Risk Management Program Pete Rabbon June 19, 2008 Hazards Caucus Alliance.
Economic Guidance Summary The Basis for Benefit-Cost Analysis in the Corps.
Multipurpose Projects Module M2: Cost Allocation BU ILDING STRONG SM.
Flood Risk Management Plan Formulation, Project Development, & Stakeholder Issues.
Plan Formulation: General
F1B - 1 BU ILDING STRONG SM Flood Risk Management Module F1: Authorities and Policies.
FDR1 - 1 Flood Risk management History/Mission/Policies.
Water Quality Trading Claire Schary Water Quality Trading Coordinator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Seattle, WA Region 10, Seattle,
Introduction to Theories of Public Policy
MEASURING ENVIRONMENTAL VALUE IN NONMONETARY TERMS: A REVIEW Richard Cole Institute for Water Resources U. S. Army Corps of Engineers May 2008.
REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS AND VALUE Chapter 5. CHAPTER TERMS AND CONCEPTS Agents of production Amenities Demand Demography Economic forces Fiscal policy Gross.
Flood Risk Management Program Ed Hecker, Chief, Office of Homeland Security National Levee Summit February 2008 St Louis, MO.
NFIP ESA ComplianceImplementing a Reasonable and Prudent Alternative – FEMA Region 10 ESA and the National Flood Insurance Program Implementing a salmon.
ISO General Awareness Training
COMPREHENSIVE FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT : Promoting Wise Uses of Floodplains CA Department of Water Resources/ CIFMCG Workshop July 2006.
Western States Energy & Environment Symposium October 27, 2009.
Wetlands Mitigation Policy Sudbury Wetlands Administration Bylaw April 27, 2015.
New Directions in Water Policy: Environmental Perspectives on NFIP, Floodplain Mapping and Federal Water Resource Policies David R. Conrad Sr. Water Resources.
Health Systems and the Cycle of Health System Reform
Mitigation and Community Sustainability Virginia Mitigation Summit, 2004.
1 Building Strong! THE ECONOMIST’S ROLE Ken Claseman Senior Policy Advisor for Economics Office of Water Project Review HQUSACE
Flood Risk Management Program Rolf Olsen Institute for Water Resources U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Ecosystem Restoration Module ER4: Cost Effectiveness/Incremental Cost Analysis and the NER Plan BU ILDING STRONG SM.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Flood Risk Management Approaches As Being Practiced in Japan, Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States.
N AVIGATING THE T URN : F LOOD R ISK A SSOCIATED WITH L EVEES Sam Riley Medlock, J.D., CFM Association of State Floodplain Managers May 2011.
BUILDING STRONG SM Plan Formulation: General Module G-1: What is plan formulation?
Module 11 STEPS 4 & 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study & Report Certification Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
Roles of Economists and New Analytical Requirements
Sept. 23 NWC Boston Yes We Can! (We already have in Texas)
Relevant, Ready, Responsive, Reliable 1 Addressing the Flood Risk Challenge.
1 Slide1 THINGS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND ABOUT LEVEES: CURRENT INITIATIVES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS Presentation to Association of State Flood Plain Managers.
1 Environmental Planning in the Army Corps of Engineers Ch 2 Mod 5 Relationship of the NEPA to Principles & Guidelines
Ecosystem Restoration Module ER1: Authorities and Policies.
Stakeholder consultations Kyiv May 13, Why stakeholder consultations? To help improve project design and implementation To inform people about changes.
Multipurpose Planning Module M1: Multi-purpose Plan Formulation – Policies and Constraints BU ILDING STRONG SM.
Integrated Risk Management Charles Yoe, PhD Institute for Water Resources 2009.
Harbors Module NH1: Authorities and Policies. NH1 - 2 BU ILDING STRONG SM Student Learning Objectives Student will be able to:  Describe the Federal.
1 Slide1 Examples in Communicating Flood Risk: National Flood Risk Management Initiative Presentation to National Flood Risk Management Policy Summit U.S.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Decision Authority l All permit decisions, scope of analysis, 404(b)(1), mitigation, alternatives, jurisdiction -- Corps.
The Clean Water Act © Dr. B. C. Paul (Jan. 2000).
M4 - 1 BU ILDING STRONG SM Multi-Purpose Projects Module M4: Telling the Plan Formulation Story.
Building Strong! May Deep Draft Navigation Cost Sharing Jeremy LaDart Office of Water Project Review HQUSACE.
Harbors Module NH2: Problem Identification, Inventory and Forecast, and Determination of Objectives and Constraints.
© 2009 Barnes & Thornburg LLP. All Rights Reserved. This page, and all information on it, is the property of Barnes & Thornburg LLP which may not be reproduced,
BUILDING STRONG SM Northwestern Division Presented by Lori Rux Chief, Program Support Division June 11, 2009 BPA Direct Funding for Corps Hydropower Projects.
Flood Risk Management Cosgrove Creek Section 205 Planning Basics.
Harbors Module NH3: Formulation – Measures, Strategies and Plans.
“Non-Typical” Economic, Environmental, and Other Flood Risk Management Benefits.
Catharine Cyr Ransom Principal The Accord Group. Stafford Act Structured approach to disasters Partnership between local, state, Federal governments Authority.
FEMA’s Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration -- Leading the Nation to Build a Stronger, Smarter, Safer America MITIGATION WORKS Sandra K. Knight,
USACE Flood Risk Management and Silver Jackets Workshop Sandra K. Knight, PhD, PE, D.WRE Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, FEMA August.
David Moser USACE Chief Economist
Federal Interagency Floodplain Management Task Force.
California Water Plan Update Advisory Committee Meeting January 20, 2005.
Community Wildfire Protection Planning: HFRA and Beyond.
California’s Flood Future Recommendations for Managing the State’s Flood Risk Flood Risk Management & Silver Jackets Workshop August 21, 2012.
March Urban Flood Risk Management. March Objectives Understand the Nature of Flooding & Flood Damage Alleviation Understand the Nature of.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Step 6: Selection Of The Recommended Plan Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Mark Xu NRCS 67th Annual SWCS International Conference.
Environmental Planning in the Army Corps of Engineers Relationship of the NEPA to Principles & Guidelines 1 Ch 2 Mod 5
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Miles City, Montana Section 205 Gwyn M. Jarrett - Project Manager Omaha District April 27, 2016.
Risk Controls in IA Zachary Rensko COSC 481. Outline Definition Risk Control Strategies Risk Control Categories The Human Firewall Project OCTAVE.
K1 Proposed National Levee Safety Program An Introduction for the Tribal Assistance Coordination Group May 12, 2011.
PRINCIPLES & GUIDELINES
Continuing Authorities Program
Levees, Liability & Mitigation
Issues & Policies in US Politics
Presentation transcript:

F4B - 1 BU ILDING STRONG SM Flood Damage Reduction Module F4: Reformulation – Optimization, Incremental Analysis and Selection of the NED Plan

F4B - 2 BU ILDING STRONG SM Student Learning Objectives The Student will be able to:  Use initial formulation information to develop/revise new formulation strategies  Describe the role of incremental analysis in plan formulation for flood damage reduction  Distinguish induced flooding from induced damages and know the importance of each to plan formulation

F4B - 3 BU ILDING STRONG SM How do we help this town? High ground behind red line Town limits

F4B - 4 BU ILDING STRONG SM Which do we choose? High ground behind red line Levee/Wall? Detention pond? Town limits Channel Modification? Non- Structural Measures?

F4B - 5 BU ILDING STRONG SM Initial Formulation (we have only just begun) -$15M$85M$100MChannel $20M$80M$60MLevees/Walls -$20M$20M$40MPond $10M$40M$30M Non- Structural Measure NED Cost NED Benefit Net NED Benefit

F4B - 6 BU ILDING STRONG SM And we look at it all again  Fist or last positioning of measures  Dependencies  Combinability  Incremental Analysis

F4B - 7 BU ILDING STRONG SM Increment Defined  An increment is any part of a plan that can be eliminated without jeopardizing the proper function of the remaining parts of the plan.  Thus, different levels of project performance are not increments.  WRDA 1986 Definition of Separable Element. “For purposes of this Act, the term "separable element" means a portion of a project-- (1) which is physically separable from other portions of the project; and (2) which-- (A) achieves hydrologic effects, or (B) produces physical or economic benefits, which are separately identifiable from those produced by other portions of the project.”

F4B - 8 BU ILDING STRONG SM Another Example - What’s An Increment? High ground behind red line Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Levee alignment Levee tie-back options Town limits

F4B - 9 BU ILDING STRONG SM Separable Increments of a Flood Damage Reduction Plan Plan IncrementNED Costs NED Benefits Net NED Benefits Levee A (1)$21M$20M-$1M Levee B (1&2)$40M$70M$30M Levee C (1,2 &3)$60M$80M$20M

F4B - 10 BU ILDING STRONG SM Separable Increments – Did we miss an opportunity the first time? Plan IncrementNED Costs NED Benefits Net NED Benefits Levee D (2)$21M$50M$29M Levee E (3)$20M$10M-$10M Levee F (2 &3)$39M$60M$21M

F4B - 11 BU ILDING STRONG SM Identifying the NED Plan  Without-project damages  With project damages  Benefits are damages reduced  Net benefits are benefits less project costs (total life cycle costs, including environmental mitigation)  Compare across project scales and between alternatives to determine plan that yields greatest NED benefits  Decision-makers always have the final say

F4B - 12 BU ILDING STRONG SM Environmental Consequences  Flooding is natural; flood damage reduction is not  Flood damage reduction measures can have environmental consequences  Some are intended, some are not  Some are anticipated, some are not  Some are beneficial, some are adverse  Unanticipated, unintended consequences may be the worst type

F4B - 13 BU ILDING STRONG SM Flood Plain Management Issues  Induced flooding is not the NED issue  Induced damages are the issue  Avoiding or mitigating for induced damages are part of project costs and must be considered in plan formulation  Induced flooding is an NFIP/EO issue that must be disclosed in the documentation Where does the water go?

Flood Protection Levee Lock Haven, PA Do you think this property could be affected?

F4B - 15 BU ILDING STRONG SM FEMA and NED Formulation Issues  National Flood Insurance Program participation assumed  FEMA coordination essential and a matter of policy  FEMA buyout land restrictions on Corps measures  Locally desired protection (especially 100-year)

F4B - 16 BU ILDING STRONG SM Take Away Points  Incremental analysis is required to identify the NED Plan.  While a study may recommend a locally preferred plan, the NED Plan establishes the limit on the Federal investment.

F4B - 17 BU ILDING STRONG SM Where We are Going  Next, we’ll start on Navigation  The first module will cover the authorities and policies related to the development of navigation projects.

F4B - 18 BU ILDING STRONG SM Challenge Question:  How is the formulation criterion of acceptability incorporated into the formulation process?  How acceptable does the NED plan have to be?  Who does it have to be acceptable to?