|
6.9. Hydrology, Hydraulics, Sedimentation,
and Groundwater Investigations (Subaccount 09)
This section describes preparation
of hydrologic, hydraulic, sediment, and groundwater evaluations
of the existing and planned watershed features and facilities.
The goal is to identify adjustments to the system to reduce
sedimentation and improve water quality in San Diego Creek,
major tributaries to Newport Bay, and the Bay itself, while
providing opportunities for environmental restoration within
the watercourses. Because this task encompasses the majority
of the necessary technical studies, it is broken into four
major subtasks: (A) Hydrology, (B) Hydraulics, (C) Sedimentation,
and (D) Groundwater.
09.A Hydrology
Background
The Newport Bay watershed has been
extensively studied in the past 15-20 years. Detailed
hydrologic models have been developed in the following
studies:
Hydrologic
Analysis, Part II-Task IIA Technical Memorandum,
Newport Bay Watershed, San Diego Creek Comprehensive
Storm Water Sedimentation Control Plan, Boyle Engineering
Corporation, July 1981. (Section 208 Study)
Project
Report for San Diego Creek Facility F05 From Jamboree
Road to Jeffrey Road, Phase I: Hydrologic, Hydraulic,
and Sedimentation Study, Simons, Li and Associates,
October 1987.
Regional
Flood Control Master Plan for San Diego Creek,
Volume I, John Tettemer and Associates, April 1989.
The Section 208 study and
the Facility F05 study were based on existing conditions
in the 1980's, and estimates of ultimate development at
that time. The models are outdated since they do not include
the foothills retarding basins or any channelization projects
that have been recently constructed. There is a regional
Flood Control Master Plan that was prepared by The Irvine
Company, The City of Tustin, and the City of Irvine. It
includes the 100-year event on San Diego Creek and has
been updated within the last two years to reflect changes
due to construction of the Eastern Transportation Corridor
and the Foothills Transportation Corridor. However it
does not include the "as built" configuration
of the latest foothills retarding basins, some of which
are being retrofitted for additional sediment entrapment,
and it does not include the other tributaries to Newport
Bay. In summary, there is no single hydrologic model that
is completely up to date, with a full range of events,
needed for plan formulation. The hydrologic work effort
will thus include a current condition without-project
hydrologic model that incorporates all of the existing
facilities and features on the watershed, and a future
condition without-project model that includes the most
recent estimates for ultimate watershed development. The
models will be modified to provide with-project hydrology
for the proposed alternatives.
Overview
The basic tasks for hydrology include:
- Constructing an event based rainfall-runoff
model (HEC-1, or HECHMS) to compute peak discharges
and balanced hydrographs for a full range of events
at key concentration points within the watershed. The
models will be used as input to the overflow models
(see Hydraulics) and the basis for weighing the hydrologic
impacts of detention or restoration projects on the
watershed.
- Low flow analysis to determine
the quantity and seasonality of daily return flows.
Low flows are a significant vehicle for conveyance of
nutrients in the dry season, and can be treated by constructed
wetlands projects, while providing a portion of the
water requirements for those projects.
- Review and summarize the
operations of existing flood control and water storage
reservoirs. Identify potential ways to improve or optimize
flood control, sediment trapping, and storage for water
use and water reuse systems.
Detailed Tasks
09.A.1 Research,
collect, and review hydrologic information from Corps
of Engineers, Orange County Public Facilities and Resources
Department, other public agencies, and private consultants.
The aforementioned studies are suggested as a minimum
starting point. The goal is to avoid replicating previous
efforts.
09.A.2
Collect and review current rainfall-frequency analyzes
for Orange County watersheds. Coordinate with the County
and the Corps to determine if existing depth-duration-frequency
relations, or aerial reduction of point rainfall depths
need revision.
09.A.3
Collect available streamgage data and update existing
flood frequency analyses (computed probability, 5% and
95% confidence limits) for the following gage records.
San Diego Creek at Campus Drive
(San Joaquin Marsh, San Joaquin Golf Course)
San Diego Creek at Peters Canyon Wash San Diego Creek
at Culver Drive
Peters Canyon Wash at Barranca Parkway (Tustin MCAS)
Santa Ana Delhi Channel at Irvine Avenue
09A.4
Construct rainfall-runoff models for the Newport
Bay watershed using the Corps of Engineers HEC-1, or HECHMS
computer programs. Model results will be used to construct
without project discharge-frequency curves for the current
land use conditions and the expected future land use conditions.
Develop 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year synthetic hydrographs
for the gage sites listed above, and at the tributaries
and potential restoration sites (see Subaccount 14 - Plan
Formulation, section D) listed below.
Tributary Sites
Big Canyon Wash at Newport Bay
Costa Mesa Channel at Newport Bay near Polaris Drive
Potential
Restoration Sites
Lower San Diego Creek and the San Joaquin Marsh
Lower San Diego Creek at the San Joaquin Golf Course
San Diego Creek Nr. Lion Country Safari
San Diego Creek at Barranca Parkway Extension (near Jeffrey
Road)
Peters Canyon Wash at Tustin Marine Corps Air Station
(MCAS)
Peters Canyon Wash at Tustin Ranch Golf Course
Borrego Canyon at El Toro MCAS Golf Course
Serrano Creek at Serrano Cr. Community Park
Sand Canyon Wash at William Mason Park
Lower reaches of the Santa Ana Delhi Channel
Lower Bonita Creek
Determine rainfall inputs, watershed
losses, unit hydrograph, and channel routing parameters
in coordination with the USACE and Orange County PFRD.
Peak discharges will be computed for the expected value
(50% confidence interval). The model will be calibrated
to adequately reproduce the n-year peak discharges for
the available gages in the area, and regional relationships,
if practical. In order to accommodate detailed sediment
yield analyses, the drainage area of the subwatersheds
should be on the order of one square mile. The models
can be extended to the 500-year (or greater) events, as
needed during spin-off feasibility analyses.
09.A.5 Because
detention may be part of the proposed flood control solutions,
develop balanced hydrographs at designated concentration
points.
09.A.6
Perform seasonal discharge frequency analyzes for
the selected stream gages to identi6, the dry season for
low flow analysis. Using average daily flows values, compute
the number of days per month that low flows exceed certain
thresholds (i.e., 1 cfs, 5 cfs, 10 cfs, etc.).
09.A.7
Perform reconnaissance-level hydrologic design of proposed
detention basin alternatives. Determine conceptual level
stage-storage, and stage-discharge relations for coding
into the hydrologic model.
09.A.8
Determine with-project discharge-frequency curves
for each of the alternatives at the same concentration
points for current and future land-use conditions.
09.A.9 Review
and summarize the operations of existing flood control
and water storage reservoirs. Coordinate with Subaccount
9.C - Sedimentation to evaluate potential for additional
sediment trapping, and the effects on storage for flood
control, water use, and water reuse systems.
09.A.10
Coordinate with other study team members to provide
hydrologic input to design alternatives. Attend meetings,
conferences, and coordinate as required and assist in
plan formulation. Prepare qualitative concept hydrologic
design data with sketches and narrative.
09.A.11
Prepare hydrologic documentation presenting discharge-frequency
results for without project conditions and for each of
the alternatives evaluated in the feasibility phase. Prepare
independent technical review comments and attend review
conferences, Address review comments and prepare final
appendix. File study material.
09.B Hydraulics
Background
Hydraulic models of the study area
will be used to evaluate the flood conveyance capacity
of the major channels within the watershed under both
existing and future-without-project watershed conditions.
Model simulation results in conjunction with the results
in design of improvements to the watershed drainage system.
Information regarding the hydraulic
performance of the existing system, primarily measured
flow, will aid in defining the problem areas and in calibration
of the hydraulic models. The available data will enable
evaluation of historical trends, while the developed hydraulic
models will allow extrapolation to future conditions and
assessment of the reaction of the system to proposed improvement
measures.
A wealth of information exists for
the Newport Bay watershed regarding the hydraulic and
sediment transport performance of the existing system.
These data, including long-term cross-sectional surveys
(from Dr. Stanley Trimble - UCLA), in-channel and in-Bay
sedimentation basin clean out quantities, results of numerical
modeling of Bay processes, and measured flow and sediment
transport rates at multiple locations within the watershed,
will aid in defining the problem areas and in calibration
of the hydraulic and sediment transport models. The available
data will enable evaluation of historical trends, while
the developed hydraulic and sediment transport models
will allow extrapolation to future conditions and assessment
of the reaction of the system to proposed improvement
measures.
Overview
The basic tasks in hydraulics
include:
- Flood Plain Mapping. Prepare overflow
maps for the 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year floods, for
existing and future-without-project conditions. Put maps
onto the GIS. The maps will help define areas of inundation
and frequency of occurrence. The information will be used
as a baseline to evaluate the effect of detention and
channel restoration alternatives on flooding and overflows.
It also defines zones for potential establishment of floodplain
vegetation.
- Plan Formulation Assistance. Provide
hydraulic design assistance in the Plan Formulation process
to aid in the identification and evaluation of project
alternatives that help in achieving the study objectives.
Assist other study team disciplines in identifying and
prioritizing study subreaches. Assist in developing qualitative,
conceptual design data for various flood-control alternatives,
emphasizing environmentally compatible options over traditional
flood control alternatives where feasible. Improvement
options may be structural or non-structural, and may include
operational guidelines, channelization, channel maintenance,
riparian restoration, diversion structures, etc.
- Prepare Hydraulic Design Data.
Provide design parameters for sizing and layout of project
alternatives. Consider local drainage design standards.
Detailed Tasks
09.B.1
Coordinate with Corps of Engineers, Orange County Public
Facilities and Resources Department, other agencies and
consultants to identify and obtain all relevant hydraulic
engineering studies previously conducted. Review previous
studies and reports, catalogs, and prepare a very brief
abstract/summary. (In connection with HTRW issues, the
Corps is currently analyzing channel alternatives for
Peter's Canyon Wash through the Tustin Marine Corps Air
Station).
Collect and review as built plans
for structures, bridges, and utilities; topographic mapping;
and field survey to determine channel configuration. Prepare
a list of all plans and surveys available, with the dates
and a map locating all plans and surveys along the creek.
09.B.3
Perform a field reconnaissance of San Diego Creek and
prepare field notes, sketches, and photographs of bridges,
utility crossings, confluences, transitions, and other
areas as needed to verify channel geometry, stability,
roughness values, debris trapping problems, and river
morphology. Provide hydraulic parameters (reach length,
slope, geometry, and roughness) for use in the without-project
hydrologic models.
09.B.4
Prepare a detailed hydraulic analysis of San Diego Creek/Peters
Canyon Wash for existing and future without project conditions
using HEC-2 or HEC-RAS. Prepare overflow maps and flood
profiles for the 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year events.
Tabulate hydraulic parameters including water surface
elevation, depth, velocities, slope, and top width.
09.B.5
Perform reconnaissance-level hydraulic design for alternatives.
When possible, design should improve physical water quality
characteristics (dissolved oxygen, temperature, turbidity)
and minimize debris trapping on structures. Consider effects
of in-channel restoration projects on flood conveyance
capacity.
09.B.5.1
Detention basin alternatives for flood peak reduction
and sediment trapping. Research Corps guidance on stable
channel and sedimentation basin design. Lay out plan
and profile, including low drop structures, inlet and
outlet features, sediment-trapping features, overflow
structures, and erosion protection for side slopes.
Develop stage-storage and stage-discharge relations.
09.B.5.2
Channelization/channel restoration alternatives. Coordinate
with biologists, develop criteria for allowable vegetation,
consult Corps guidance, and determine "n"
values. Design incidental revetment structures and bank
protection where needed as part of the restoration projects.
09.B.6
Prepare a reconnaissance-level hydraulic analysis of San
Diego Creek/Peters Canyon Wash for with-project conditions
using HEC-2 or HEC-RAS. Describe changed conditions, including
trapping efficiency for sediment control features, and
estimates of contributions to erosion control.
09.B.7
Coordinate with other study team members to provide
hydraulic input to design alternatives. Attend meetings,
conferences, and coordinate as required and assist in
plan formulation. Prepare qualitative concept hydraulic
design data with sketches and narrative.
09.B.8
Prepare hydraulic documentation for without project conditions
and for each of the alternatives evaluated in the feasibility
phase. Prepare independent technical review comments and
attend review conferences. Address review comments and
prepare final appendix. File study material.
09.C Sedimentation
Background
Sediment
transport models of the study area will be used to estimate
the sediment loading and erosion/deposition rates within
reaches of interest, under both existing and future-without-project
watershed conditions. Model simulation results in conjunction
with the results of the hydrology study will produce parameters
for use in design of improvements to the watershed drainage
system.
Overview
The basic tasks in sedimentation
include:
- Erosion/Sedimentation Engineering.
Evaluate the existing, and future sediment regime for
without- and with-project conditions in San Diego Creek.
Evaluate sedimentation effects of existing facilities(foothill
retarding basins and in-channel basins) on the current
and future without project condition. Evaluate sedimentation
effects of proposed restoration alternatives as well
as proposals to enhance sediment-trapping abilities
at the foothills retarding basins.
- Estimate past, present, and future
delivery of sediment to the existing sedimentation basins
and to Newport Bay on a per-event and average annual
basis. Determine what level of event results in the
largest contributor of sediment on an annual basis.
- Plan Formulation Assistance.
Provide hydraulic/erosion/sedimentation design assistance
the Plan Formulation process to aid in the identification
and evaluation of project alternatives that help in
achieving the study objectives. Assist other study team
disciplines in identifying and prioritizing study subreaches.
Detailed Tasks
09.C.1
Review previous sedimentation studies conducted in portions
of the Newport Bay watershed to assess the watershed's
hydraulic conditions, hydrology, methods used, data, and
results pertinent to the present conditions and proposed
project conditions. Collect and review the data available
from the sediment control and maintenance-monitoring program
ongoing in the watershed. Include in the review an identification
of major sediment sources within the watershed. What are
the effects of flow diversions, sediment retention facilities,
and agricultural irrigation activities on sediment production.
Compile information that may be used to characterize watershed
soil loss and sediment yield. Summarize the data available
and identify gaps. To avoid duplication of previous efforts,
the sedimentation studies should build on previous information
whenever practical.
09.C.2
Prepare a geomorphic analysis that characterizes the general
stability or erosional characteristics of the study reach.
Use available information, particularly historic aerial
photographs, development history, flood/erosion history,
maintenance records, surveyed cross-sectional data (by
Dr. Stanley Trimble, UCLA), and field reconnaissance.
Special attention should be given to Serrano Creek between
Serrano Creek Community Park and Portola Parkway.
09.C.3
Sediment sampling to determine particle size distributions
at source areas (channels) and sink areas (basins, channels,
and the Bay).
09.C.3.1
Visit study reaches and areas of active erosion and
collect bed material samples sufficient to describe
the variation in bed material characteristics throughout
the drainage system. At a minimum, collect approximately
24 low flow samples and 12 bank samples throughout San
Diego Creek, Peters Canyon Wash, Bonita Creek, Serrano
Creek, and the Santa Ana Delhi Channel. Samples should
also include one each (bank and low flow) for each of
the m-stream sediment basins. Perform sieve analyzes
to determine particle size distributions.
09.C.3.2
Visit each of the foothill retarding basins (Bee Canyon,
Round Canyon, Hicks Canyon, East Hicks Canyon, Agua
Chinon, Orchard Estates, and Eastfoot) and collect a
minimum of two samples of the trapped sediments at each.
Perform sieve and hydrometer analysis to determine particle
size distributions.
09.C.4
Prepare sedimentation analysis for existing and future
without-project conditions.
09.C.4.1
Evaluate the sediment Yield or production rates for
recurrence intervals of 5-, 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year
events and for the average annual inflow. Source areas
will be identified in terms of land use (i.e. urban,
open space, agriculture, etc.) for each subwatershed
broken out in the hydrologic model. Use Modified Universal
Soil Loss Equation (MUSLE) and the COE-LAD Debris Method.
09.C.4.2
Evaluate the most recent suspended sediment data existing
gage locations. Break down the suspended load information
into size class, and develop updated bed material load
versus discharge relations to use for calibration. Evaluate
the reliability of the existing sediment gage data in
terms of the detailed sediment budget developed within
this study.
09.C.4.3
Select a bed material transport analysis procedure within
the Sediment Analysis Module (SAM) with the available
measured data. Apply SAM program to HEC-2 hydraulic
data and balanced hydrographs for five floods and determine
bed material inflow and outflow by reach. Prepare sediment
budget analysis and determine average annual aggradation
and/or degradation by subreach.
09.C.4.4
Estimate non-damaging flood frequency for failure
by scour at bridges and bank protection.
09.C.4.5
Evaluate the effects of sediment trapping by existing
reservoirs, retarding basins (including retrofits),
and other sediment retention structures that will impact
downstream sediment delivery estimates.
09.C.5
Estimate sediment delivery to the existing sedimentation
basins and the Upper Newport Bay.
09.C.5.1
Estimate historic delivery using the results of previous
historical assessments, such as Trimble's A Sediment
Budget for San Diego Creek 1986-1993, in conjunction
with size distribution analysis of basin and Bay deposition.
09.C.5.2
Contrast with estimated sediment delivery from sedimentation
analysis of existing and future-without-project conditions.
Put recent sedimentation rates in historical perspective
by contrasting the recent hydrology to the long-term
trend.
09.C.5.3
Estimate the size and frequency of the flow events that
are the dominant contributors to the sedimentation problems
in the Upper Newport Bay.
09.C.6
Hydraulic/Sediment Design Data for Potential Solutions.
Research Corps guidance and provide input for stable channel
and sedimentation basin design. Evaluate potential for
additional sediment trapping for proposed detention basin
modifications. Consider use of polymer additives that
promote flocculation of the colloids and increase the
rate of settling of fines.
09.C.7
Prepare sedimentation analysis for with-project conditions.
Apply SAM program and refine design for stability of sediment
transport.
09.C.7.1 Develop
estimates of bed material trapping efficiency and downstream
scour impacts associated with any proposed detention
basins, or re-operation of existing basins and reservoirs.
09.C.7.2
Repeat bed material transport analyzes with hydraulic
information revised to reflect proposed channelization,
revegetation, or diversion of existing watercourses.
09.C.8
Assist in Developing Maintenance Plan. Review and evaluate
existing maintenance activities in terms of frequency,
volumes of sediment and vegetation removed, limits of
removal, disposal sites, and environmental restrictions.
In light of the monitoring plan (see below) discuss potential
to improve, augment, or optimize maintenance practices.
The goal is to improve efficiencies by replacing individual
piecemeal efforts with regional efforts. Summarize the
impacts of any ecosystem restoration as they affect maintenance
practices and the conveyance capacity of the channels.
09.C.9
Prepare documentation for without project conditions and
for each of the alternatives evaluated in the feasibility
phase. Compile individual draft report texts and prepare
draft sedimentation appendix Prepare independent technical
review comments and attend review conferences. Address
review comments and prepare final appendix. File study
material.
09.D Groundwater
Groundwater provides a significant
contribution to the daily return flows (low flows) in
San Diego Creek, and the tributaries to the Bay during
the dry season. In terms of quantity, it is a potential
source of water for use in maintaining restoration projects.
In terms of quality, it is a potential contributor of
nutrients to the Bay.
09.D.1
Collect and summarize the available groundwater quantity
data. Evaluate the contribution of groundwater to the
low flows and coordinate information with that in Task
09A.6.
09.D.2
Collect and summarize groundwater quality data. Coordinate
with Environmental efforts under Subaccount-05 to evaluate
the groundwater effects on water quality in the stream
channels and the Bay.
6.10. Geotechnical Investigations (Subaccount 10)
The geotechnical work for this study
will consist of research, analysis and summary of existing
data and archives to determine general geologic conditions
and hazards for the watershed and provide geotechnical guidance
and materials assessment for proposed restoration alternatives.
The results of the geologic studies will be presented in
an appendix to the report. Detailed site-specific investigations,
sampling and laboratory testing will not be performed unless
directed and funded for "spin-off" feasibility
studies.
10.A.
Site Specific Investigations: This involves up to eleven
sites as further described under the Plan Formulation
section (Subaccount 14).
10.A.1
Support will include site visits, general assistance
and input to the plan formulation process to enhance
long term watershed stability and to reverse negative
trends that impact watershed stability. Most of the
site-specific projects have common elements that include
detention, sediment trapping, and constructed wetlands
for nutrient removal.
10.A.2
Research, collect and summarize the existing geologic
information related to geologic conditions, constraints,
groundwater and bank stability.
10.A.3
Collect existing soils information, address foundation
requirements for hydraulic structures; constructability
(in terms of excavatability) analysis, special processing
and handling requirements, specification requirements,
and construction considerations in support of the cost
analysis; and a plan of exploration to develop the design
parameters for geotechnical analyses of selected alternatives.
10.A.4
At the Tustin MCAS site, address construction considerations
in support of the cost analysis specifically for boring
and Jacking of culverts through the Eastern Transportation
Corridor (ETC) embankment.
6.11. Design and Cost Estimates (Subaccount 11)
In order to perform economic
and trade-off analyses, a conceptual level of design is
required to evaluate the project performance and cost for
each restoration alternative. Cost evaluations are necessary
for up to eleven alternatives described under Plan Formulation
(Subaccount 14, Section D).
11.A.
Plan Formulation Assistance. Assist in plan formulation,
in-house review, response to all comments, and support
to the study manager and other study team members; assistance
in developing design features and cost estimates for the
potential restoration sites.
11.B.
Site Design. Provide input, review and revise H
& H plan and profile layouts for reconnaissance-level
alternative designs, described in 09.B.5 and assist in
preparation of conceptual design sheets. Prepare 8½
"x 11" and/or 11" x 17" sheets of
cross sections and miscellaneous details. Compute material,
equipment, and labor quantities, and perform a reconnaissance-level
design of major structural features. Provide text and
sketches for input to the study manager for a draft design
appendix for the F3 milestone and a final appendix for
the F4 milestone.
11.C. Cost Estimates.
Review drawings and conduct site visits (up to 11 sites
and 11 sets of drawings), verify quantities and prepare
reconnaissance-level construction cost estimates using
the MCACES. Prepare a draft cost engineering appendix
for the alternative sites for the F3 milestone, and final
cost estimates for the F4 milestone.
6.12. Real Estate Studies (Subaccount
12)
Real Estate Studies are required
to determine the value of land affected by flood inundation
and erosion, and the cost of land necessary to construct
any proposed projects. The studies will include the following
tasks:
12.A.
Rights of Entry. Gain
rights of entry to portions of watershed for mapping and
field investigations for Corps and contract employees.
Investigate access at restoration sites and El Toro and
Tustin MCAS.
12.B.
Site Specific Parcel Mapping.
Parcel maps of the restoration sites for the spin-off
studies must be extracted from Orange County GIS for use
in the overflow mapping, inundation and erosion damage
analysis, and formulation of alternatives.
12.C. Acquisition Plans
and Cost Estimates.
A preliminary, reconnaissance-level, real estate acquisition
plan shall be prepared for the proposed alternatives.
The plan shall include a gross appraisal of all project
area properties for the market value of lands at their
highest and best use and preparation of a baseline cost
estimate for real-estate acquisition associated with the
proposed alternatives.
6.22. Regulatory (Subaccount 22)
22.A. Habitat and
Species Ground Surveys. Regulatory Branch will work with
USFWS to conduct field spot surveys of habitat mapping
within portions of the watershed. Regulatory Branch will
use aerial photos and GIS maps developed from the aerial
surveys to verify the habitat types. Field surveys may
include up to 32 kilometers of channels. Some of the habitat
areas are within the NCCP/HCP lands and may be studied
under the amended NCCP/HCP process (see below). Regulatory
Branch will assist in historical research, data collection,
species identification, habitat modeling, and ecosystem
mapping to arrive at the baseline conditions.
22.B. Study Team and
Resource Agency Coordination. Regulatory Branch will be
involved early in the planning process, as a necessary
component in preparing an integrated watershed management
plan and restoration projects. In order to provide proper
guidance in planning and design process, the Regulatory
Branch will attend interagency meetings and public hearings,
and review a variety of documents generated by the Environmental
Branch, as described within this PSP.
6.15. Report Preparation (Subaccount
15)
The work will be in accordance with
ER 1105-2-100, Chapter 2, EC 1105-2-206, EC 1105-2-208 and
ER 110-2-1150, paragraph 10c. Report preparation includes
the compilation of all study team products into an initial
draft report and a final report. The work will include collection
and assembly of pertinent data, writing, editing, typing,
drafting, reviewing, revising, reproducing, and distributing
the draft and final Feasibility Reports, Environmental Impact
Statement/Report, and related technical documents and appendices.
Planning will be responsible for reproduction
and dissemination to facilitate review and revision. All
study team members will be involved the formulation and
review of the reports. A Feasibility Review Conference and
two comment periods will be held to assure that all comments
and views are incorporated.
This task also includes any
possible requirements for additional rewriting, unforeseen
technical modifications, reformulation, or documentation
as a result of the Washington-level review process which
take place outside of the end of the feasibility phase (i.e.,
submittal of the report to the OMB by the ASA). Time and
cost estimates are based on time the study manager spends
on report preparation, and reproduction costs for the reports.
15A.
F3 Report. The report content includes a discussion of
current and likely future baseline conditions, and a discussion
of preliminary restoration alternatives and spin-off feasibility
studies.
15.B F4 Report. Spin-off
feasibility studies will be determined by this milestone
and described in this report. This draft of the watershed
feasibility study will also include a joint programmatic
EIS/EIR
15.C F5 Public Draft.
The public draft feasibility report will include report
revisions based on comments received during review of
the F4 report. This report will be released to the public
and resource agencies for comments. A formal public meeting
will be held during the public review period.
15.D Final Report.
The final report includes revisions based on comments
received during the public review time period. The report
will include information entered into GIS; results of
the hydrologic, hydraulic, and sediment transport investigations;
restoration site investigations and a description of the
"spin-off" feasibility studies; other technical
appendices; and, a joint programmatic EIS/EIR for the
watershed.
6.16. Programs and Project
Management (Subaccount 16)
16.A.
Programs Management. This subaccount includes budget preparation
for current year and out years, monitoring cost and accounting
allocations.
16.B.
Project Management
This subaccount includes point of
contact responsibilities, and development and negotiation
of the Project Cooperation Agreements (PCA's), Memorandum
of Agreements (MOA's) and other customer agreements. Periodic
meetings will be held between the Corps and the Sponsor
to report on the status of the study and responsible in-kind
services and credits.
Monthly status reports covering
selected financial and performance measurements will be
provided by the Corps. Responsibilities include the finalizing
of the study network based on resource availability, and
the maintenance and management of the network during the
course of the study.
Budgetary management responsibilities
include tracking and documenting the funds and budget
(accounting) of the study, documenting appropriations,
including interpretation of current and future budgetary
guidance submitting project data sheets, justification
sheets and other testimonial fact sheets as required;
monitoring and reprogramming study funds, executing current
year and future funds; processing schedules of obligations
and expenditures; monitoring project financial performance
and coordinating with study and project managers on project
financial performance; assessing District manpower allocations
versus available funds, assuming district operating budget
includes appropriate hired labor and contract amounts;
coordinating future funds allocations and manpower requirements
with other District elements; setting up and documenting
all cost key accounts, and reviewing pre-and post-labor
reports.
The Project Manager will coordinate
with the sponsor for the management of negotiated in-kind
services and coordination with Corps review, coordination
of cost-sharing procedures, and management of budgets
and schedules for the feasibility study. Negotiation of
tasks and costs, review of reports, and participation
in meetings on study results and issues are included in
this task.
The Project Manager will establish,
manage and maintain a study network to facilitate cost
accounting and schedule purposes.
6.17. Quality Control and Review (Subaccount 17)
All planning, NEPA and CEQA documents
will be extensively reviewed prior to being finalized. The
quality control process will include technical team meetings,
meetings with the local sponsors, and Corps in-house technical
review. The quality control process will be on-going throughout
the study (seamless peer review), but at particular milestones,
specific efforts will be made to assess the quality and
progress of the study (independent technical/policy review).
Corps CESPL-PDOM 1105-1-1, Independent Technical Review
Guidelines, will be followed
17.A.
COE Internal Seamless Peer Review.
Seamless peer review is an
in-progress, single discipline peer review conducted at
the work station of the project/study/design team member.
It will not substitute for normal internal review of products
which is the responsibility of each study/design team
member's first line supervisor. Upon completion of each
assigned study or design task, and prior to release of
task products, study/design team members will request
on-board peer reviews by their Review Team counterparts.
It is envisioned that most study/design team members will
receive a series of reviews during the preparation of
a major project document. The review will be planned,
conducted and documented. Underlying policy and design
assumptions will be identified. Each review will include
an evaluation of the adequacy of data, assumptions, acceptability
of techniques and procedures used, level of detail, compliance
with policy and guidelines, consistency of results, accuracy
and comprehensiveness. A formal comment/response/decision
process will be used in this stage of review. A memorandum
for the record prepared by the Review Team member will
be the basis for establishing accountability for the product
and review process. Peer reviews will be conducted much
less formally than final document reviews. Countersigned
checklists must be submitted to maintain accountability.
The reviews will be completed prior to major decision
points so that technical results can be verified prior
to setting the future course of design/study activities.
If any technical issues are unresolved prior to submission
of the milestone reports to the South Pacific Division
(SPD), SPD can be requested to aid in resolution or forward
the issues to HQUSACE if needed. Costs associated with
these reviews are incorporated into the other subaccounts.
17.B. Corps
Internal Independent Technical Policy Review.
This process begins with a Review
Strategy Session to establish the Quality Control Plan,
prepare plan of review to include checklists, and identify
participants. Study design and review teams will be assigned
at this meeting. Completion of specific documents will
be identified by specific milestone dates, i.e. F3, F4,
F5 etc. The Review Team will perform their review at the
specific milestones and document each review. An SPD representative
will participate in the initial Review Strategy meeting
as part of the Division's quality assurance partnership
with the District. Division representatives will, throughout
the course of the study, aid in resolving technical issues
that cannot be resolved within the District level teams.
Review costs are presented in Section VIII for the F3
report milestone, the F4 report milestone, and the F5
public draft, as 17.B.1, 17.B.2, and 17.B.3, respectively.
The Quality Control Plan that
will be adopted at the Review Strategy Session will need
to include the following items:
Objective.
The objective of this Subaccount will be the successful
completion and delivery of quality documents to customers,
within budget and on time. The goals of the QC process
are:
- Provide enhanced quality through
timely review of decision and implementation documents.
- Reduce personnel requirements
at the District to the maximum extent possible by reducing
the amount of document revision required during the
review process.
- Provide a mechanism for continuous
in-progress (seamless) review of documents as they are
prepared to improve quality and minimize revision of
completed documents.
- Integrate policy review
into technical review of decision documents.
Guidelines. The
guidelines to be followed when completing this Subaccount
will provide Review Team Members the tools to meet QCP
objectives. The guidelines to be followed will include:
- CESPL OM Independent Technical
Review Guidelines for Planning, Engineering, Construction,
Operations, and Real Estate.
- CESPL OM Standard Operating Procedure
for Independent Technical Review:
- CESPL OM Checklist for Single Discipline Peer
Review.
- CESPL OM Guidelines for Independent Technical
Review of Pre-Authorization Decision Documents.
- CESPL OM Review Checklist for Reconnaissance,
Feasibility and Reevaluation Reports.
- CESPL OM Index to Minimum Report Content.
- CESPL OM Independent Technical Review Management
Checkpoint System for Reconnaissance, Feasibility,
and Reevaluation Reports.
Study
Team Roster. As mentioned above, individuals to
be appointed to the study team will be accomplished at
a Review Strategy Session. However, its members will have
technical expertise in each area of each Subaccount previously
mentioned.
Review
Team Roster. At the Review Strategy Session, a
review team will be assembled that will mirror the study
management team. The Review Team members will also have
technical expertise in each area of each Subaccount previously
mentioned.
List
of Documents to be Reviewed. A list of completed
documents to be reviewed by the Technical Review Team
will be developed.
Review
Schedule. A schedule for review activities will
be developed and included as a part of the QC plan. This
will include a schedule for periodic review and update
of the QC plan.
Other.
Other items to be included in the QC plan are a discussion
of known policy questions needing clarification, a list
of major technical issues that may require Headquarters'
technical guidance, a statement of manpower and financial
resources to be committed to the review, and views of
the local sponsor on the QC process.
6.18. Contingencies (Subaccount 18)
A ten (10%) percent contingency has
been placed on the feasibility study cost. The contingency
amount applies to both Corps in-house efforts as well as
in-kind service efforts. This contingency would be assessed
based upon the recommendations from the feasibility study
team and approved by the feasibility Executive Committee.
6.23. "Spin-Off" PSP Costs
An additional $100,000 is included
in this watershed study effort for the preparation of PSP's
for the "spin-off" feasibility studies. This funding
will be 100% Federal, and not included in the cost-sharing
requirements for the rest of the watershed feasibility study.
Additional monies may be required in the future, depending
on the amount of "spin-off" feasibility studies.
For accounting and administrative
purposes, all tasks are categorized by cost subaccount as
described in the Scope of Activities. Acceptance of the
product of in-kind services will be at the purview of the
Corps. Any applicable guidance for specific work items will
be specified at the appropriate locations of the detailed
task descriptions (Scope of Activities), and will be provided
at the beginning of work, or earlier. The general guidelines
and criteria embodied in the Planning Guidance Notebook
(ER 1105-2-100), EC 1105-2-206 and EC 1105-2-208 will provide
overall direction for the Government and the Sponsors in
problem identification, plan formulation, impact assessment,
evaluation, and report preparation during the feasibility
phase.
To insure timely and responsive completion
of the in-kind services, the Sponsors and the Government
will all designate a study manager whose responsibility
is to conduct the feasibility study. The study managers
will establish a coordination procedure that will permit
daily contact. The Sponsors' study manager will be responsible
for directing the conduct of all in-kind services and for
transmitting the information to the Government at the required
times. The Government's study manager will be responsible
for providing overall policy and general direction for the
in-kind services, incorporation of the Sponsors' work into
other study elements, and coordination of the in-house review
of the Sponsors' work. Together, the respective study managers
will resolve any comments produced by the in-house review
and will agree on the procedure for completing the in-kind
work to the satisfaction of both parties.
|
Upper
Newport Bay / San Diego Creek Watershed Planning Initiative