1. Regional Flood Plain Management Council April 15, 2015 H-GAC December 2nd

2. Purpose To investigate the feasibility of reducing the vulnerability of the upper Texas coast to hurricane surge and flood damages through the study of an integrated flood protection system that relies on natural or nature-based features, non-structural and structural interventions.

3. Study Area

4. Methodology To define flood risk management and surge suppression requirements within the region through a technical analysis of potential alternatives. What is the threat? What needs to be protected? How will we protect? How do we finance the final project?

5. What’s the threat? Defined the threat by modeling the physics and hydraulic loads of potential storms. Models: ADCIRC, SLOSH, HEC-RAS

6. What needs to be protected? Define the level of safety for people, the economy and the environment through extensive modeling of storms, economic data, and assessment of environmental impacts. Study area facts: Population of over 5 million people and growing America’s largest concentration of energy, petrochemical and refining industries A commercial Navigation System of channels and ports linked to the world economy Home to NASA Booming fisheries and tourism industry A coastal estuary system of national significance A regional economy linked to all of Texas, the national economy and to national security

7. How will we protect? Develop an integrated storm surge and flood defense system through the evaluation of technical structural and non-structural alternatives – Compare cost of technical solutions to economic losses prevented to determine the Benefit-to-Cost Ratio (BCR) for the alternatives

8. Financing Federal Funds: – Traditional path to project authorization and appropriation (costs share 65-35) – Seek special legislation…….New Orleans State Funds: - General revenue - Special taxing districts - Revenue bonds - Private investment - Public-Private Partnership

9. Three Phases Phase 1: Data Collection – Complete Phase 2: Mitigation Technical Study- February 2016 Phase 3: Final Report and Recommendation- June 2016

10. Phase 1 Critical Activities Completed Defined the Threat and the Need for the surge protection Reviewed of existing data and technical alternatives Assembled the Data library……ready to pass to GLO Executed round 1 of public scoping meetings Reviewed similar International projects and structures Developed alternative screening criteria – Alternatives must reduce risk and impacts associate with surge and coastal flooding to: People Infrastructure Environment Regional or National Economy – Alternatives must be in compliance with local, state and federal regulations

11. Phase 1 Critical Activities Completed Developed alternative evaluation criteria – Technically feasibility – Economically feasibility – Environmentally feasibility – Social Feasible Developed decision criteria – Public acceptance – Flexibility, adaptability, and resilience – Extended Economic benefits GIS Portal Develop a list of potential alternatives by study region Phase 1 Report is available at http://www.gccprd.com

13. Phase 2 Critical Tasks Underway AD-CIRC modeling – Establish baseline surge elevations for the region HEC-FDA Economic model – Establish baseline regional economic conditions Refine HEC-RAS drainage models Alternatives development Stakeholder engagement

14. Potential Alternatives

15. End State A defined suite of alternatives based on sound technical and economic analysis that creates an integrated protection system that reduces risk to the public, the economy and the environment within the six county study region.

16. Questions?