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 The models are outdated since they do not include the foothills retarding basins or any channelization projects that have been recently constructed.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.

Back to Top

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.

Back to Top

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.

Back to Top

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.