Minutes of the
Navigation Environmental Coordination
Committee
August 6, 2009
Quarterly Meeting
Hotel Père
Ken Barr of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers called the meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. on August 6, 2009. A complete list of attendees follows these minutes.
Minutes from the May 20, 2009 Meeting
Janet Sternburg moved and Jim Fischer seconded a motion to approve the draft minutes of the May 20, 2009 meeting as written. The motion carried unanimously.
Status Reports
Chuck Spitzack reported that, on July 31, 2009, MVR forwarded the Implementation Report to Congress (IRTC) to MVD for review. The IRTC is posted on the Corps’ FTP site for partner access, and is also available in hardcopy upon request. Elizabeth Ivy said MVD has already provided the report electronically to Corps Headquarters (HQ), with formal hardcopy submission to follow shortly. She said it is not yet known whether the Administration will submit the IRTC to Congress.
Spitzack said FY 09 has been a challenging year due to budget uncertainties and staff reassignments. However, he said carry-over funds from this year will enhance program continuity into FY 10. Among NESP’s FY 09 accomplishments, Spitzack cited enhanced coordination with EMP.
Spitzack said the Corps staff is drafting a briefing memo to General Walsh on behalf of the three district commanders regarding the UMRS public outreach efforts. Corps staff will share the memo with NECC and EMP-CC members and stakeholders when finalized. Spitzack clarified that, although the public outreach effort will focus primarily on the UMR and IWW, it will be implemented with awareness of basin and downstream connections. The outreach will be specific to the Corps’ UMRS programs, but from a partnership perspective. The Corps’ outreach effort will also compliment other ongoing efforts, including the McKnight Collaborative’s Mississippi Campaign and General Walsh’s effort to establish a 200-year vision for the basin.
Bill Wittland reported that VoxStrategic, a contractor for the Corps’ public outreach effort, and Corps staff are in the process of gathering surveys from participants in the August 5, 2009 EMP-CC/NECC joint session and collecting information from other related activities. Wittland outlined next steps, including collecting further input from the Corps’ Outreach Team, partners, and stakeholders and presenting a proposed approach to the EMP-CC and NECC at the November 18, 2009 joint session. He offered the following clarifications from the August 5 joint session discussion:
Scott Whitney observed that the outreach effort is broader than NESP, but noted that General Walsh still wants NESP renamed.
Ken Barr reported that MVD’s February 11, 2009 Advisory Panel (AP) proposal remains at HQ. Brad Walker expressed concern that the AP has not yet been established, noting that important planning work is underway in its absence. Spitzack said that he and Elizabeth Ivy are continuing to communicate with HQ regarding the importance of standing up the AP.
Floodplain Restoration System Team
Todd Strole reviewed NESP’s floodplain restoration component as proposed in the Feasibility Study, authorized in WRDA 09, and interpreted in the NESP Implementation Guidance. He said that a Floodplain Restoration System Team (FRST) is being established for the purposes of 1) advancing the systemic restoration and management of floodplains for natural resources, flood damage reduction, and economic benefits across the UMR; 2) coordinating with other program interests; and 3) integrating into reach planning efforts via the Regional Support Team. Strole said potential team members include representatives from USACE, USEPA, USFWS, USFS, USDA, state resource agencies, NGOs, and academia. Among key coordination points for the FRST, Stole cited the river resource teams, NESP Science Panel, NESP Regional Support Team, Reach Planning Teams, Midwest Natural Resources Group, NESP Forestry Team “Project M,” and USACE/NRCS National Partnering Team.
In response to a question from Joyce Collins, Scott Whitney said the Forestry Team’s draft report has undergone partner review and should be finalized shortly. Spitzack and Barr clarified that NECC will have an opportunity to review the report before it is finalized.
Strole said one of the FRST’s initial tasks will be to identify issues and opportunities it wishes to address. He suggested those may include recent hydrologic events, flood damages, data needs, economic opportunities, floodplain restoration options, and impediments to floodplain restoration. Strole asked NECC members and stakeholders to suggest any additional potential FRST members, as well as any other issues and opportunities. Strole announced that the first FRST conference call is scheduled for August 19, 2009.
Janet Sternburg asked whether
the FRST would identify specific locations for floodplain restoration projects,
or would be more science- and policy-focused, noting that this would determine
the type of people who should participate.
Strole said the Team could potentially do so, but observed that project
identification is really the purview of the river management teams. Sternburg expressed concern that on-the-land
managers are most knowledgeable about floodplain restoration opportunities, but
are not well represented on the river management teams. Bob Clevenstine suggested that
representatives from the Upper Mississippi,
In response to a question from
Brad Walker, Strole said cost sharing and land acquisition issues
(e.g., states’ participation as cost share partners and coordination with
the Wetlands Reserve Program) are possible topics for the FRST to investigate. Bernie Hoyer urged coordination with staff
implementing the states’ Wildlife Action Plans, noting that
Draft FY 10 NESP Work Plans
Ken Barr reported that the Senate has approved $9 million in FY 10 preconstruction engineering and design (PED) funding for NESP. However, the House-passed bill does not include any funding for NESP, and thus prospects for conference committee funding are uncertain.
Scott Whitney said NESP will not likely receive an actual budget for several months. Whitney said he anticipates that the funding situation in FY 10 will be similar to that in FY 09, which began with considerable uncertainty under a continuing resolution authority (CRA). The funding uncertainties and staff needs of other USACE projects combined to result in several staff reassignments away from NESP, constraining the program’s execution capability. When NESP’s funding outlook stabilized in March, it was difficult to get these staff back on NESP projects. Carry-over money from FY 09 may serve to lessen disruptions should FY 10 start with similar uncertainty.
Whitney presented an initial draft of the FY 10 NESP work plan, reflecting $9 million, $11 million, and $13 million funding scenarios, based on the Senate’s funding level. Whitney reported that new team leaders have been assigned to several of the project delivery teams (PDTs). He also noted that design work on Locks 22 and 25 is being coordinated as much as possible to maximize efficiencies. Janet Sternburg expressed concern that turnover in PDTs, both within the Corps and among partners, will erode institutional memory regarding key decisions and agreements over time (e.g., L&D 22 issues related to mussel impacts). Ken Barr said these types of decisions and understandings should be captured in each project’s NEPA documentation.
Elizabeth Ivy questioned the decision to plan for NESP at the $9 million, $11 million, and $13 million funding levels, when the current Congressional range is $0 to $9 million. Whitney explained that the $11 million and $13 million planning scenarios reflect carry-over from FY 09, and, in the case of the $13 million level, also possible FY 09 stimulus funding. Whitney said NESP could potentially receive general investigation stimulus funds that currently are being reallocated within the Corps. Although NESP did not receive stimulus funds in the first round of allocations, it was a high priority in the Corps’ initial list of candidate projects. [Subsequent to the meeting, Corps staff reported that no FY 09 stimulus funds were provided for NESP.]
Whitney said that, under funding in the $9-$13 million range, NESP will complete planning on seven of its ecosystem restoration projects, and will thus need to select new projects for planning in order to fully execute its restoration program for the year. Whitney said how soon NESP would need new projects in FY 10 is dependent on the funding level and any restrictions on activity if FY 10 starts under a continuing authority. Jeff DeZellar urged Corps staff to use the projects selected in the reach planning process.
Bernie Hoyer asked how soon after receiving construction general funds could NESP initiate project construction. Barr said some ecosystem restoration projects and small-scale navigation projects (e.g., mooring cells and switchboats) could be ready for construction in FY 10, with more robust construction capability in FY 11. Jeff Stamper said Locks 22 and 25 are about 20 percent through the design phase. He said small elements of the lock construction could be let for contract by the end of 2010. But, Spitzack cautioned that constructing locks in a piecemeal fashion is risky. In response to a question from Hoyer, Stamper estimated that lock design work could be completed in two years, if the project is allocated at least $35 million. Stamper also noted that, in addition to the restoration projects and small scale navigation measures Barr cited, some mitigation projects would be ready for construction in FY 10.
Barr suggested including a more detailed discussion of the First Increment Plan at the November 18, 2009 NECC meeting, to review the proposed implementation scenarios under different funding levels. Barr said the Corps is inclined to continue its roughly even allocation of funds between ecosystem restoration and navigation projects, if funding levels continue to be low. Stamper concurred, emphasizing that lock construction will not be feasible unless NESP receives significantly increased funding. Spitzack stressed the need to complete lock design and receive consistent, adequate funding from Congress in order to achieve efficient implementation of lock construction. Spitzack and Stamper explained that, funding permitting, constructing the new locks at 22 and 25 simultaneously would yield significant construction and operational efficiencies.
Barr noted that the reach planning teams (RPTs) will be refocusing on identifying mitigation projects. He suggested that these projects be a topic of discussion at the November 18 NECC meeting. Stamper mentioned that design on moorings is nearing completion, and will likely be ready for construction shortly. Barr reported that supplemental NEPA documents will be finalized soon on Locks 22 and 25, as well as a number of small scale navigation projects.
Barr explained that, at this time, no further design work is needed on the water level management project in Pool 5 as it will likely not be implemented in the near future. Barr reported that design work on the Pool 2 Wingdam/Dike Alteration project is completed. Thus, the FY 10 scenarios do not include funding for either project.
Barr said funds have been set aside for the Root River and
Pierce County floodplain restoration projects, but that further work is
required on agreements with Minnesota and Wisconsin, respectively, for these
projects. Jim Fischer said
DeZellar reported that MVP will advance the
Barr highlighted NESP’s efforts to resolve various policy and implementation issues, creating a foundation for efficient implementation of the program once it receives construction general funds. DeZellar announced that MVP has approved the Pool 2 Wingdam/Dike Alteration project design. He said the authority to approve such projects at the district-level will significantly enhance NESP’s efficiency. DeZellar noted that the L&D 8 embankment lowering project has been challenging, but has received substantial partner participation.
Barr reported that an external peer review contract for the fish passage design project at L&D 22 was awarded last week. He said an Independent Technical Review (ITR) has been completed, and the Project Implementation Report (PIR) is currently underway. In response to a request by Joyce Collins, Barr said he will provide a list of the peer reviewers to partners, when those names are known. In response to questions from Collins and Barry Johnson, Barr said the peer review will be done on the entire PIR, including the monitoring plan. Barr and Brian Johnson said they anticipate that the L&D 26 fish passage will be ready for construction by late 2011. Collins asked if an external peer review would also be done on the L&D 26 fish passage design. Barr said it is not yet known whether an external review will be needed at 26, but explained that there are a number of factors that could trigger one, including project costs, controversy, or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) findings. In response to a question from Rick Frietsche, Brian Johnson said value engineering is a separate process from external peer review.
Brian Johnson reported that the Scheniman Chute side channel
restoration project is ready for internal review. With estimated costs just below $5 million,
Scheniman Chute is eligible for district-level approval. Johnson said the
Barr explained that the Corps has been working on planning and design for a large number of restoration projects to ensure NESP’s ability to ramp up quickly should it receive a construction new start. Sternburg asked at what funding level the Corps would be confident that NESP has stability. Barr said the Corps has explored a range of scenarios and strategies to ensure NESP ability to adjust to different circumstances. The lowest funding scenario under which any lock construction is contemplated is $35 million annually. Spitzack added that the restoration component could operate very efficiently with $100 million per year. Spitzack said NESP as a whole will not be successful if total funding levels off at or below $100 million.
Ivy said the Inland Waterway Trust Fund (IWTF) is currently
the biggest hurdle to NESP receiving construction funds. In response to a question from Bernie
Schonhoff, Spitzack explained that two major issues must be resolved: 1) a national capital investment plan for
navigation is needed and 2) a mechanism to ensure adequate revenue into the
IWTF to support the capital investment plan must be agreed upon. Jeff Stamper said there are about $17 billion
worth of navigation projects in the Corps’ project pipeline, but there is
currently only $170 million available annually in federal and IWTF money to
construct those projects. He observed
that Olmsted and Emsworth on the
Barr said he will be asking the PDTs to develop a list of milestones and products. Sternburg reiterated her request for updated PDT membership lists. She noted that anticipated staff reductions in MO DoC may result in changes in the agency’s representation on the PDTs. Whitney said that PDTs’ milestones and products will need to be completed before the end of September, so that they can be integrated into NESP’s FY 10 work plan.
Project Highlights
LaGrange Lock
Jeff Stamper showcased the hydraulic model for the LaGrange Lock. So far, the Corps has spent approximately $350,000 for hydraulic modeling. He explained that this type of model can serve as important communication tool for designers, partners and stakeholders, Congressional officials, and the public. Stamper said pilots provided valuable information in the model’s development. Stamper described the model’s abilities to explore real world scenarios, such as using time lapse cameras to analyze lock approaches.
The Corps is modeling baseline conditions for LaGrange this year. Stamper emphasized the importance of having a precise baseline, in order to ensure that the model accurately responds to subsequent modifications of the structure.
Backwater Restoration:
Marshall Plumley described the Corps’ efforts to restore
natural floodplain habitat in the middle Peoria Pool, which includes Meadow,
Wightman, and
The Corps has identified the following ecosystem goals for the middle Peoria Pool:
Plumley said the potential restoration techniques include enhancing topographic diversity and constructing islands in order to enhance water quality and decrease wind fetch and turbidity. Plumley said the Corps has been working on project modeling for the past 18 months, exploring whether the proposed measures will be sustainable and yield the desired benefits. He anticipates that the PIR will be completed in about a year. Plumley noted that the project area was originally confined to the backwaters, but has expanded slightly. While some project features will be 100 percent federally funded, some features will require cost-share with partners.
Ken Barr asked if the PDT is considering experimental
designs and learning opportunities.
Plumley said the PDT has defined immediate and secondary measures. Implementation of secondary measures will
depend on how the first round measures function. Jon Duyvejonck asked whether the Corps has
identified any potential for self-sustaining channels, noting the significant
costs associated with maintenance dredging.
Plumley said the models are being used to identify areas with the most
potential for self-sustaining features.
The project will also integrate any lessons learned from the EMP’s
Peoria Lake HREP. Barr said the project
will likely need maintenance dredging throughout its 50-year design life,
especially with the significant sediment loads and the low gradient on the
Barr said design on
Rick Mollahan reported that the Illinois River Team (IRT)
and the Executive Committee for the Section 519 Illinois River Basin
Restoration Committee held a joint meeting on July 22, 2009. Mollahan said Hank DeHaan summarized two of
the Section 519 projects,
Mollahan reported that the IRT will recommend to the
Illinois River Coordinating Council (IRCC) that it reestablish the Illinois SAC
for one year to evaluate the future organization, function, and composition
needed to provide scientific and technical support. The IRT further recommended the SAC be configured
to support not only the IRCC, but also the recently authorized councils for the
Mississippi River and the Ohio/Wabash Rivers within
Mollahan said the full meeting summary and other IRT-related documents are available at: ftp://163.191.72.109/. The user name is ‘dnr’ and the password is ‘idnr.’ Enter the ‘Public’ folder and ‘Illinois River Team’ subfolders.
Mollahan reported that, under
Section 519, there was sufficient funding to initiate, but not complete, a
dredging and island construction project located near the
Science Advisory Panel Activities
Barry Johnson reported that the Science Advisory Panel met with the side channel PDTs during the June RRAT boat tour, and will continue to consult directly with various PDTs as needed. The Science Panel conveyed its thoughts to the Corps regarding a draft charter for the Panel, and is now waiting for the Corps’ response. Johnson reported that the Science Panel is completing its report on applying adaptive management to water level management (WLM) efforts. He said the Panel will share its draft report with the water level management teams for feedback at the September 1-3 Science Panel meeting, a portion of which will be devoted to meeting with representatives of the WLM teams. The report will address what is known about WLM conceptual models, important uncertainties, and the Panel’s recommendations.
Johnson said the Science Panel would like to meet with the Illinois River Science Advisory Committee to discuss coordination, how best to avoid duplication, and opportunities for future collaboration. In response to a question from Ken Barr, Rick Mollahan said he does not know whether the SAC will be ready to meet with the Science Panel this fall, as the SAC is still in the process of confirming members. In the interim, Mollahan encouraged the Science Panel to work directly with the SAC’s Chair.
In response to a question from Tim Schlagenhaft, Johnson said invitations to the September 1-3 Science Panel meeting will be sent out shortly. He added that even though all participants on the Water Level Management Task Force (WLMTF) may not be able to attend the meeting, they will have an opportunity to comment on the Science Panel’s report. Barr welcomed suggestions for invitees to the Science Panel meeting in September. He said the Regional Support Team (RST) will also be attending the meeting. Schlagenhaft urged the Science Panel to give the WLMTF adequate time to review its draft. Barr said the report will also be presented to the NECC for review prior to being finalized. In response to a question from Brian Johnson, Barry Johnson said the Science Panel has referenced a Southern Illinois University study related to water level management. Jeff DeZellar and Schlagenhaft suggested that the Science Panel consult with Mary Stefanski, Chair of the WLMTF. Jim Fischer encouraged the Science Panel to ensure that all relevant stakeholders are given an opportunity to review the draft report.
In response to a question from Fischer, Barr said he anticipates that, by September, the Corps will distribute a draft charter for the Science Panel to NECC members and stakeholders.
Partner Reports
Rick Nelson announced that Sam Hamilton is the new USFWS
Director.
Joyce Collins said the Open Reach is witnessing an increase in hydropower proposals, especially hydrokinetic projects. She reported that the USFWS has developed a study plan to ensure that the effects from hydropower on fish and wildlife are dealt with adequately in the project review process. Collins said the study review plan will be available on Region 3’s website shortly.
Janet Sternburg reported that the MO DoC is reducing staff. Impacts on the river team will not be known until September.
Vince Shay reported that TNC is undergoing significant
organizational changes, including to its river programs. The Upper and Lower Mississippi River and
Gretchen Benjamin said that TNC and the Corps hold a
biennial meeting as part of their national-level MOU. She said that the next conference is
scheduled for October 26-29, 2009 in
Tim Schlagenhaft said MN DNR will be hosting the UMRCC Fish and Wildlife Tech Sections’ meetings this fall. In conjunction, there will be a retirement party for Gary Wege.
Max Starbuck said the National Corn Growers Association
(NCGA) is going through an organizational restructuring. The Association is becoming more active in climate
change, sustainability, and water quality issues, and is developing a web page
specifically related to water quality.
Starbuck announced that, on August 25-26, NCGA will host a conference in
Rick Mollahan reported that
Doug Blodgett encouraged partners to visit Emiquon while they are in the area and see the tremendous biological response to the management changes that have been made.
Jon Duyvejonck said that an
Upper Mississippi River Conference is scheduled for September 23-25 in
Jim Fischer reported that WI DNR is facing a 10 percent budget cut, and employees will be required to take 8 days of furlough. There will likely be no hires in the next 2 to 4 years. As a result, the department is going through a workload reduction effort, reexamining all of its activities. Fischer said that WI DNR is prioritizing permit approvals for stimulus-funded projects, and working hard to maintain a relatively fast turnaround. He also reported that WI DNR has been working with MVP for several years on L&D 3 safety and embankment issues. While agreement has been reached on the safety and upper embankment elements, issues still remain between the two agencies regarding the lower embankment and fish passage. Fischer also noted that WI DNR’s Secretary, Matt Frank, recently visited with the UMR Team, and expressed his interest in elevating the UMR’s visibility, particularly in terms of ecological restoration projects. Secretary Frank also expressed interest in participating on the proposed NESP Advisory Panel.
Mike Jawson said that President Obama has nominated Marcia
McNutt to be the next USGS Director.
Jawson also announced that UMESC will be celebrating its 50th
anniversary with an open house, which is scheduled for September 12 at the
Center. Jawson explained that UMESC is
anticipating three major research projects under the Great Lakes Initiative
funding pending in Congress. Much of
this research, particularly in the areas of invasive species, food chains, and
contaminants, should have applicability to the
Marshall Plumley announced that
the Illinois River Conference in
Other Business
Rick Nelson expressed concern that program updates are dominating NECC and EMP-CC agendas, and often covered more than once during the quarterly meeting series. He suggested that providing updates via conference call/webinar prior to the regularly scheduled quarterly meetings could increase efficiency of the quarterly meetings; decrease information overlap between the NECC, EMP-CC/NECC, and EMP-CC meetings; and allow for more time for issue-focused topics at the quarterly meetings. Jim Fischer added that this approach would also allow partners to coordinate internally prior to the quarterly meetings. Ken Barr recalled Bernie Schonhoff’s previous suggestion that some special topics might also be well-suited to addressing via webinar, in part to allow for broader participation.
In response to a question from Jon Duyvejonck, Barr said any decision regarding the possible integration of the NECC and EMP-CC will be deferred until after the NESP Advisory Panel is established. He noted that the AP will decide what, if any, working groups it wants to establish. Then the Corps and its EMP partners will need to consider whether the EMP-CC can and should integrate with any group the AP has established. In the interim, Barr said NECC and EMP-CC will continue to meet jointly to address issues of mutual interest. He stressed that, at present, NESP and EMP are at different points in their development and thus there is clear value to maintaining separate identities for NECC and EMP-CC. Elizabeth Ivy concurred.
Janet Sternburg asked if there would be any limitations on the number of connections available on the webinars. Barr said the technology is available to support large webinars, though cost may be a factor. Joyce Collins encouraged Corps staff to provide read ahead materials in advance of the conference calls/webinars, as is typically done for the quarterly meetings.
The following conference calls/webinars were scheduled:
The upcoming quarterly meetings are as follows:
With no further business, the meeting adjourned at 11:40 p.m.
NECC Attendance List
August 6, 2009
NECC Members
|
Elizabeth Ivy |
|
|
Ken Barr |
|
|
Rick Nelson |
|
|
Rick Mollahan |
Illinois Department of Natural Resources |
|
Iowa Department of Natural Resources |
|
|
Tim Schlagenhaft |
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources |
|
Janet Sternburg |
Missouri Department of Conservation |
|
Jim Fischer |
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources |
|
Bill Franz |
|
Others in
Attendance
|
Kevin Bluhm |
|
|
Jeff DeZellar |
|
|
Chuck Spitzack |
|
|
T. Leo Keller |
|
|
Jim Homann |
|
|
Marshall Plumley |
|
|
Scott Whitney |
|
|
Brian Johnson |
|
|
Jeff Stamper |
|
|
Bob Clevenstine |
|
|
Joyce Collins |
|
|
Jon Duyvejonck |
|
|
Rick Frietsche |
|
|
Jason Wilson |
|
|
Mike Jawson |
|
|
Barry Johnson |
|
|
Bernie Hoyer |
Iowa Department of Natural Resources |
|
Brad Walker |
Izaak Walton League |
|
Anngie Richter |
JFNew |
|
Max Starbuck |
National Corn Growers Association |
|
Vince Shay |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Gretchen Benjamin |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Doug Blodgett |
The Nature Conservancy |
|
Todd Strole |
The Nature Conservancy/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers |
|
Kim Schneider |
Schneider Communications |
|
Bill Wittland |
VoxStrategic |
|
Tom Boland |
MACTEC |
|
Barb Naramore |
|
|
Dave Hokanson |
|
|
Kirsten Mickelsen |
|