US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® US Army Corps of Engineers Watershed Authorities, Policies and Procedures Michael Greer Regional Technical.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Introduction to Water Resources Planning. WELCOME.
Advertisements

Global Congress Global Leadership Vision for Project Management.
Economic Guidance Summary The Basis for Benefit-Cost Analysis in the Corps.
Slide1 Managing Flood Risk U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Steven L. Stockton, P.E. Director of Civil Works U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 14 July 2009 Presentation.
Presented to: 2010 Airports Conference By: Sue McDonald With slides by Tom Klin, CH2M HILL Date: March 3, 2010 Federal Aviation Administration Cumulative.
US Army Corps of Engineers Northwestern Division Northwestern Division 1 System Flood Control Review: Regional Agency Review Briefing Lonnie Mettler Northwestern.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Vertical Team Roles & Responsibilities Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Lecture(2) Instructor : Dr. Abed Al-Majed Nassar
Watershed Management Framework Mission of watershed management –Coordinate and integrate the programs, tools, and resources of multiple stakeholder groups.
Community Planning & Capacity Building Recovery Support Function Presented By: Michelle Diamond Community Planning & Capacity Building Coordinator FEMA.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Missouri River Flood Task Force (MRFTF) Concept Briefing
Urban-Nexus – Integrated Urban Management David Ludlow and Michael Buser UWE Sofia November 2011.
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.
Our mission ead and execute environmental programs and provide expertise that enables Army training, operations, acquisition and sustainable military communities.
National Disaster Recovery Framework. National Disaster Recovery Framework Reasons for establishing the Framework Past large-scale recovery efforts revealed.
Module 12 STEPS 6 & 7 Negotiation of PMP/FCSA and Execution of Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Overview
Briefing to the Central Valley Flood Protection Board on Status of the FCSA July 12, 2013 Central Valley Integrated Flood Management Study.
Critical Role of ICT in Parliament Fulfill legislative, oversight, and representative responsibilities Achieve the goals of transparency, openness, accessibility,
US FOREST SERVICE REGIONAL ROUNDTABLE Planning Rule Revision Photographer: Bill Lea.
Module 19 STEP 9 Completion of the Feasibility Study Module 19 STEP 9 Completion of the Feasibility Study Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
Module 24 STEPS 17, 18, & 19 Project Implementation Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® North Atlantic Coast Comprehensive Study U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Storm Risk Management Planning.
Overview of NIPP 2013: Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience October 2013 DRAFT.
BUILDING STRONG ® 1 US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® America’s Water Resources: A View to the Future Presentation to National Waterways Conference.
Module 27 Continuing Authorities Program Module 27 Continuing Authorities Program Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
The Power of Water A Regional Perspective on Water Resource Challenges and Opportunities Lester S. Dixon Director of Programs, South Atlantic Division.
Public Participation and the Advisory Committee Process A Collaborative Partnership For Water Resources Toni M. Johnson, Chief Water Information Coordination.
Module 11 STEPS 4 & 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study & Report Certification Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
Water Supply Planning Initiative State Water Commission November 22, 2004.
Status of the National Drought Commission (and update on the “Drought Bill”) Presented to the Interdepartmental Committee for Meteorological Services and.
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
Conclusions and Next steps Conclusions and Next steps EVD Preparedness Meeting: January 2015.
Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan Presentation – March 12, 2013 HLVRCD.
Progress on Coordinating CBP and Federal Leadership Goals, Outcomes, and Actions Principals’ Staff Committee Meeting 2/16/12 Carin Bisland, Associate Director.
Advancing Cooperative Conservation. 4C’s Team An interagency effort established in early 2003 by Department of the Interior Secretary Gale Norton Advance.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® PLANNING GUIDANCE Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Integrated Regional Watershed Management Plan Presentation – November 21, 2013 HLVRCD.
CHESAPEAKE BAY PROGRAM PARTNERSHIP MANAGEMENT BOARD MEETING MAY 9, 2012 ANNAPOLIS, MD Social Science Action Team: Incorporating Social Science into the.
NOAA Restoration Center Implementing the Gulf Regional Sediment Management Master Plan …responding to an ongoing emergency, improving responses to new.
Programmatic Regulations PDT Workshop COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN April 18, 2002.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11 AUTHORIZATION AND APPROPRIATION OR “It Takes Two to Tango"
PP 4.1: IWRM Planning Framework. 2 Module Objective and Scope Participants acquire knowledge of the Principles of Good Basin Planning and can apply the.
Draft GEO Framework, Chapter 6 “Architecture” Architecture Subgroup / Group on Earth Observations Presented by Ivan DeLoatch (US) Subgroup Co-Chair Earth.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Planning Products & Milestones Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
2009 OSEP Project Directors Meeting Martha Diefendorf, Kristin Reedy & Pat Mueller.
Implementation of critical studies necessary to promote better planning and efficient management of hydropower projects in an Int’l River Basin context.
Is the Mid-Atlantic Region Water Rich? Presentation to 5 th Mid-Atlantic Regional Planning Roundtable November 7, 2008 Joseph Hoffman, Executive Director.
Rebuilding the System Reducing the Risk California Water Plan Plenary Session October 22-23, 2007.
California Water Plan Update Advisory Committee Meeting January 20, 2005.
PROJECT PLAN: The Nature Conservancy Corps of Engineers ICPRB Presentation Potomac Watershed Roundtable January 9, 2009.
US Army Corps of Engineers Sacramento DistrictIntroductionIntroduction Sacramento River Bank Protection Project: Phase II Supplemental Authorization –
 Four Main Sections:  (a) Plan (Unit Level) Monitoring Program  (b) Broader Scale Monitoring Strategies  (c) Timing & Process  (d) Biennial Evaluation.
Deerin Babb-Brott, Director National Ocean Council Office National Boating Federation 2013 Annual Meeting.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Building Strong Collaborative Relationships for a Sustainable.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® OVERVIEW OF THE CIVIL WORKS PROCESS Planning Principles & Procedures – FY 11.
PERKINS IV AND THE WORKFORCE INNOVATION AND OPPORTUNITY ACT (WIOA): INTERSECTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES.
RECOVER PDT Workshop COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN April 18, 2002.
FROM PRINCIPLE TO PRACTICE: Implementing the Principles for Digital Development Perspectives and Recommendations from the Practitioner Community.
US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® Step 6: Selection Of The Recommended Plan Planning Principles & Procedures – FY11.
Regional Sediment Management Policy and Implementation Workshop April, 2009.
Growing Smarter Pennsylvania’s Land Use Agenda. Percent of Land Developed in Pennsylvania Source: Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department.
Executive Order Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure Project Reviews Priority Issues.
Environmental Planning in the Army Corps of Engineers Relationship of the NEPA to Principles & Guidelines 1 Ch 2 Mod 5
1 PSRC and Comprehensive Plan Updates City of Duvall Joint Planning Commission / City Council Duvall, WA March 5, 2014.
Origin  On October 18, 1997 – 25 th Anniversary of Clean Water Act – Federal agencies were asked to rededicate their efforts to cleaning up the Nations.
Introduction to the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) June 10, 2016 Carol Rivera– Program Manager An Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
BUILDING STRONG SM Revitalizing and Expanding Partnerships Charles E. Shadie, P.E. Senior Hydraulic Engineer Mississippi Valley Division U.S. Army Corps.
Presentation transcript:

US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG ® US Army Corps of Engineers Watershed Authorities, Policies and Procedures Michael Greer Regional Technical Specialist Buffalo District 23 June 2011

BUILDING STRONG ® Increasing Demands for:  Integrated problem solving  Studies and projects that address multiple purposes and interests  Inclusive processes that engage stakeholders  Collaborative partnerships -w/multiple players (to leverage and address interconnectedness)  “System approaches” that address interconnectedness of projects, activities, players

BUILDING STRONG ® In CW Watershed Planning  Think problem solving, not projects  Identifying actions and priorities involves more than projects - ► Program integration for better problem solving, and greater implementation synergies – w/in Corps and w/others ► Integrate all Corps programs in the watershed existing project management and operation, rehab, DMMPs, Regulatory activities, studies

BUILDING STRONG ® 4 Corps Watershed Guidance and Policy  Planning Guidance Letter No. 97-8, Watershed Management, Restoration and Development, dated 3 July 1997 (Section 503 0f WRDA 96)  PGL 61 - Application of a Watershed Perspective to Corps of Engineers Civil Works Programs and Activities (27 Jan 1999)  Implementation Memo for Sec 202, WRDA Watershed and River Basin Assessments, 29 May 2001, Amended Sec 729 of WRDA 86  Implementation Memo for Section 2010 of WRDA 2007 – Watershed and River Assessments, March 7, Also amended Section 729 of WRDA 86  ER (Planning Guidance Notebook, 22 April 2000) - Including Appendix F revision #2, dated 31 January 2007

BUILDING STRONG ® 5 Corps Watershed Guidance and Policy  Section 22 of WRDA 74, as amended by Section 2013 of WRDA 07 – Appendix G of ER  EC , Planning in a Collaborative Environment (projects)  Section 5002 of WRDA 2007, Watershed Management (no guidance yet)  EC dated 15 January 2010  Annual Budget EC

BUILDING STRONG ® 6 Watershed Principles PGL #61  Sustainability  Coordinated planning and management  Interagency cooperation  Leveraging resources/program integration  Interdisciplinary teams  Public Involvement  Trade-off evaluation  Forecast future water resource demands  Adaptive Management

BUILDING STRONG ® 7 Planning in a Collaborative Environment EC  To enhance collaborative approach to water resources management ► Watershed / system vs. site specific ► Multiple purposes / multiple partnerships  To integrate others’ expertise, programs and financial support/leveraging of resources  To fully utilize flexibility and authority of Principles and Guidelines  Applies to project development in a watershed context  (New Principles and Guidelines will reflect these concepts)

BUILDING STRONG ® 8 EC Watershed Plans  Provides guidance on watershed planning for Integrated Water Resources Management  Emphasizes Systems Approach, Collaboration (Partnerships), Leveraging of Resources, Larger Geographic Areas  Follows Six Step CW Planning Process Framework  Output – Watershed or Strategic Plan  May identify potential Corps projects for further study  Have an interim Assessment (Study) Agreement Model

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans Watershed Planning for IWRM - Identifies needs from any source - Develops a joint vision of a desired end state regardless of agency responsibility - Identifies potential Corps projects consistent with mission areas - Uses Corps planning capability to facilitate collaborative planning to identify technically sound, environmentally sustainable, and economically efficient means to achieve multiple goals. 9

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans Systems Approach - Many competing demands and systems in a watershed - Land and water resources - Cumulative effects of any action in the system must be considered - Achieve interdependent, long term holistic solutions 10

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans  Public Involvement, Collaboration, and Coordination - Three related but different activities - Purpose of all three is to maintain open channels of communication - Appendix B of ER Shared Vision Planning - CEQ Handbook - Corps cannot relinquish its statutory decision-making responsibility 11

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans  Leverage Resources - Allow Federal and non-Federal programs to work together over time -Share data, expertise, program, and funding with other Federal, State, Tribal and local governments - Use limited resources in a more integrated fashion to achieve a greater sum 12

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans  Follow Six Step Planning Process Framework - Define Study Area - Identify Problems and Opportunities - Inventory and Forecast Conditions - Evaluate and Compare Alternative Approaches (2 steps) - Plan or Strategy Selection 13

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans  Benefit Evaluations  Cost Estimates  Engineering  NEPA and Environmental Compliance  Real Estate  Data Quality and Model Quality Assurance 14

BUILDING STRONG ® EC Watershed Plans  Study Process - Initial Assessment to identify a non-Federal sponsor and to define the scope, objective of the watershed study, prepare a Watershed Assessment Management Plan and negotiate a cost sharing agreement - $100, Assessment is cost shared 75%/25% and sponsors may contribute their share in kind. - Must have a Review Plan - A non-profit may be a non-Federal sponsor - Interim 729 Assessment Agreement available - Review and approval at HQUSACE - Potential Corps projects must compete as feasibility new start 15

BUILDING STRONG ® 16 NOTE!!  Watershed study – a study to plan a better way to manage water (and other) resources in a watershed (a watershed plan)  Watershed approach or – system approach are applicable to all projects, programs and activities – ► Integrative, collaborative, multi-objective, interdependencies considered

BUILDING STRONG ® FY 12 BUDGET EC March 2010 Watershed studies – key attributes:  Identify a combination of recommended actions (a Watershed Management Plan) to be undertaken by various partners and stakeholders in order to achieve local, tribal, regional, and national water resources management goals identified in the study and may or may not identify further budgetable Corps studies or implementation projects.  Require team thinking about water resources development and management in the context of multiple purposes rather than single purposes, and, thus, facilitates the search for comprehensive and integrated solutions.  Improve opportunities for public and private groups to identify and achieve common goals by unifying on-going and future efforts and leveraging resources.  Leverage resources, including cost shared collaboration, and integrates programs and activities within and among Civil Works programs, and with other Federal, tribal state and nongovernmental organizations, to improve consistency and cost effectiveness;

BUILDING STRONG ® FY 12 BUDGET EC March 2010 Watershed studies are planning initiatives that have a multi-purpose and multi-objective scope and accommodate flexibility and collaboration in the planning process. As a minimum, the study area must encompass the region of an 8 digit HUC. Following the reconnaissance study, a study may proceed as a watershed assessment (75/25) under Section 729 of WRDA 86, as amended, or as a feasibility study accomplished in a watershed context in accordance with the standard feasibility study process (50/50).

BUILDING STRONG ® 19 Section 729 of WRDA 86, as amended by Sec 202 WRDA 2000 and Section 2010 of WRDA 07  Examine needs relating to: ► Ecosystem protection & restoration; flood damage reduction, navigation & ports; watershed protection; water supply; drought preparedness  Cooperate w/ Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, EPA  Consult w/ tribal, state & local govt entities  Cost Sharing 75/25; in-kind credit allowed  Original Guidance Memo 29 May 2001 …( continued)

BUILDING STRONG ® 20 Section 729 of WRDA 86, as amended by Sec 202 WRDA 2000 and Section 2010 of WRDA 07  Products can be: ► Plans or management documents that identify actions to be taken by partners and stakeholders to meet the objectives of the plan, ► Not just projects recommended for Corps implementation. ► New Guidance in EC

BUILDING STRONG ® Watershed Planning NGO’s State Agencies Stakeholders collaborate by sharing their: in order to develop a multi-purpose Strategic Watershed Plan All Corps Vision Think problem solving, not projects. Tribes Federal Agencies Leveraged Resources (Federal, State, and Local) Experience Resources Data Tools Skills

BUILDING STRONG ® 22 Watershed Planning Corps Planning Pathways Corps as the Lead Stakeholder Traditional Feasibility Study Corps Project for Design & Construction Report with Recommendations Corps as Participating Stakeholder Participate as Needed  Skills  Experience  Tools  Data  Authorities No Additional Corps Involvement (Participate in Updates) Watershed Process Watershed Plan Initial Watershed Assessment (Reconnaissance-like) Final Watershed Assessment (Feasibility-like) Report for Information to Congress Traditional Reconnaissance Study (Watershed Approach Using EC-409) Watershed PathTechnical Support Path Project Path Watershed Management Plan Potential Project Spin-offs Potential Project Spin-offs Corps Involvement Level

BUILDING STRONG ® Why Watershed Plans Fail to Achieve Desired Goals  Planning activities conducted at too great of a scale  Plan was a one-time study rather than long-term management process  Lack of stakeholder involvement and ownership  Skirting of real land use/management issues  Plan was too long or complex  Recommendations were too general  Failure to identify and address conflicts  Source: Center for Watershed Protection