CHACON CREEK LAREDO, TEXAS Project Review Plan Independent Technical Review

Similar documents
Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay, Texas

PEER REVIEW PLAN SANTA CRUZ RIVER FEASIBILITY STUDY (TRES RIOS DEL NORTE) LOS ANGELES DISTRICT

REVIEW PLAN MALIBU CREEK ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION FEASIBILITY STUDY MALIBU, CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES DISTRICT

REVIEW OF DECISION DOCUMENTS

REVIEW PLAN SAIPAN LAGOON AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION STUDY SAIPAN, COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS (CNMI)

CITY OF LAREDO Environmental Services Department

REVIEW PLAN. San Clemente Storm Damage and Shoreline Protection Feasibility Study

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DIVISION, GREAT LAKES AND OHIO RIVER CORPS OF ENGINEERS 550 MAIN STREET CINCINNATI, OH

REVIEW PLAN ORESTIMBA CREEK, CALIFORNIA FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY SACRAMENTO DISTRICT

SUBJECT: South Atlantic Division Regional Programmatic Review Plan for the Continuing Authorities Program

Appendix G Peer Review Plan

REVIEW PLAN. Dade County Florida Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane Protection (BEC&HP) Project Limited Reevaluation Report. Jacksonville District

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EC U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CECW Washington, D.C Circular No December 2012

Regulation 20 November 2007 ER APPENDIX H POLICY COMPLIANCE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF DECISION DOCUMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS

f. Methodology for Updating Benefit-to-Cost Ratios (BCR) for Budget Development (CWPM ) (draft);

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION 60 FORSYTH STREET SW, ROOM 10M15 ATLANTA, GA

REVIEW PLAN. Savannah Harbor DMCA 12A Dike Raising

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION 60 FORSYTH STREET SW, ROOM 10M15 ATLANTA, GA

US Army Corps of Engineers. Section 408 Overview. Regulatory Workshop July 22, Kim Leonard/Kevin Lee BUILDING STRONG

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ER U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CECW-P Washington, DC Regulation No February 2016

Deep Draft Navigation Planning Center of Expertise

Planning Bulletin : SMART Planning in the Reconnaissance Phase

New Draft Section 408 Policy Document EC

Civil Works Process Overview

1. Introduction..3 a. Purpose of This Procedural Review Plan...3 b. Description and Information...3 c. References...3

Department of the Army U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC

GAO ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. Peer Review Process for Civil Works Project Studies Can Be Improved

Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of Section Vertical Integration and Acceleration of Studies. Interim Report to Congress

Public Notice U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, GALVESTON DISTRICT AND TEXAS COMMISSION ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 441 G STREET NW WASHINGTON, D.C

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Washington, DC

Update on USACE Civil Works Program Authorities, Policies, and Guidance

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY EC US Army Corps of Engineers CECW-ZB Washington, DC Circular No September 2018

ACTION ITEMS PERSON RESPONSIBLE DEADLINE

AGENCY TECHNICAL REVIEW DOCUMENT TEMPLATES PCOP WEBINAR SERIES. Miki Fujitsubo, NTS FRM-PCX 15 February

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa District

TEXOMA Same Conference

Digitally signed by BIGELOW.BENJAMIN.JAMES ou=pki, ou=usa, cn=bigelow.benjamin.james Date:

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, (ATTN: CESPL-ED-DB, Mr.

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR THE PROVISION OF DAM BREAK ANALYSES AND INUNDATION MAPPING SERVICES FOR SOUTH FEATHER WATER AND POWER AGENCY S

CHESAPEAKE BAY COMPREHENSIVE WATER RESOURCES AND RESTORATION PLAN

US Army Corps of Engineers Periodic Inspection Report 9 Update. Dallas City Council June 3, 2009

Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle, Los Altos, CA Issued: Friday, January 27, 2017

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Disaster Response Missions, Roles & Readiness

WHOLE WATERSHED RESTORATION INITIATIVE

US Army Corps of Engineers Los Angeles District Overview

Standard Peer Review Process for Minimum Flows and Levels and Water Reservations within the Central Florida Water Initiative Area

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS 441 G STREET, NW WASHINGTON, DC

Planning Modernization & WRRDA Implementation

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING COOPERATIVE ECOSYSTEM STUDIES UNITS NETWORK

TRCA Administrative Fee Schedule for ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT and INFRASTRUCTURE PERMITTING SERVICES February 1, 2018

PHOENIX LAKE IRWM PROJECT UPDATE Ross Town Council Meeting

Distribution Restriction Statement Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

Project Management Plan (PMP) Park Ranger Community of Practice

S.A.M.E. Future Work & Small Business Symposium

PUBLIC NOTICE REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO ALTER A U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PROJECT PURSUANT TO 33 U.S.C. SECTION 408

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa District NACA th Annual Business to Business Conference & Expo

USACE 2012: The Objective Organization Draft Report

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX80 VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI

Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Kula Commanding General Aug. 14, US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG

Mount St. Helens Long-Term Sediment Management Plan

Chicago District Industry Day

WHOLE WATERSHED RESTORATION INITIATIVE Request for Proposals for Community-based Habitat Restoration Projects in Oregon and Washington

Panel Decision & Report. SRP MAPC Plymouth County, MA

Addendum No. 1 WEBB CREEK BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT (DESIGN)

Quality Assurance/Quality Control Procedures for Environmental Documents

Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of Section Consolidation of Studies. Report to Congress

APPENDIX J FUNDING SOURCES

The CESU Network Strategic Plan FY

Distribution Restriction Statement Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

South Atlantic Division. US Army Corps of Engineers

Omaha District Corps of Engineers Environmental Remediation Programs Associated General Contractors

In-Step, In Line, On Time. Robert F. Tally Jr. FHWA Indiana Division Administrator Monday, November 16, 2009

New Orleans Hurricane and Storm Damage Risk Reduction System Update

Public Information Meeting Rahway River Basin, New Jersey Flood Risk Management Feasibility Study

Technical Considerations for Alamo Lake Operation

The major Army command (MACOM) USACE consists of

MISSISSIPPI RIVER MUSEUM &AQUARIUM

Distribution Restriction Statement Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

CONTEXT FOR ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS: WHY DO WE HAVE TO DO VE? WHO HAS AUTHORITY OVER VE? THE CUSTOMER WON T PAY FOR VE!

DOING RESEARCH IN THE GRAND CANYON 1 MONITORING AND GRAND CANYON MONITORING AND RESEARCH CENTER US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FLAGSTAFF, AZ

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Tulsa District. SAME DE Panel Briefing

From: Scott Thomas Sent: Friday, June 13, :28 PM To: [MULTIPLE RECIEPIENTS] Subject: RE: PSE, Additional Flood Storage and Corps GI Process

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ER U. S. Army Corps of Engineers CERM-B Washington, DC Regulation No November 2001

Fort Worth District. COL Richard J. Muraski Jr. SAME Tulsa/Little Rock Small Business Conference. Tuesday, April 10, 2012 April 12, 2012

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ER U.S. Army Corps of Engineers CEMP-CE Washington, DC Regulation No November 2014

Project Priority Scoring System Texas Recreation & Parks Account Non-Urban Indoor Recreation Grant Program (Effective May 1, 2014)

FOREST SERVICE MANUAL NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS (WO) WASHINGTON, DC

SAME INDUSTRY DAY MOBILE DISTRICT PROGRAM

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION PROGRAM (DERP) FOR FORMERLY USED DEFENSE SITES (FUDS)

BMP Program Management Services

Engineer Circular Requests to Alter USACE Projects

1 San Diego, CA One Corps Serving The Army and The Nation

JOINT PUBLIC NOTICE. October 1, 2018

VALUE ENGINEERING PROGRAM

TOWN OF GREENWICH Annual Department Operational Plan (FY )

Infrastructure Month Tool Kit Talking Points

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SOUTH BAY SALT POND RESTORATION PROJECT

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Navigation Program Update

University of North Texas Libraries

Transcription:

CHACON CREEK LAREDO, TEXAS Project Review Plan Independent Technical Review 1. PURPOSE Pursuant to Engineering Circular (EC) 1105-2-408, Peer Review of Decision Documents, Office of Management and Budget s Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, and the May 30, 2007 memorandum from Major General Don Riley, USACE Director of Civil Works, a Project Review Plan (PRP) is being developed. This Project Review Plan presents analysis of the process for independent technical review (ITR) that will be implemented as part of the Chacon Creek feasibility study. These processes are essential to improving the quality of the products that we produce. 2. APPLICABILITY The document provides the PRP for the Chacon Creek Feasibility Study. It identifies the ITR process for all work conducted as part of the study, including in-house, non-federal sponsor, and contract work efforts. 3. REFERENCES EC 1105-2-408 Peer Review of Decision Documents dated May 31, 2005 ER 1105-2-100 Planning Guidance Notebook, dated April 2000 Major General Riley Memorandum on Peer Review Process, dated May 30, 2007 4. GENERAL The study area is located in Laredo, Webb County, Texas, lying on the northern border of the Rio Grande River. Located in the eastern half of the city, Chacon Creek originates north of Lake Casa Blanca and flows about 5 miles to the south and west emptying into the Rio Grande. The stream provides some flood control, but it is also a local natural resource with recreational, educational, and economic potential. The objective of the feasibility study is to develop a project that will address ecosystem restoration, flood damage reduction, and recreation relating to Chacon Creek. 5. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS (Independent Technical Review) As part of the Quality Control Plan for the Chacon Creek Project, an ITR team will be formed to perform periodic reviews of the feasibility study efforts, including the project assumptions, analyses, and calculations, as needed throughout the planning study process. The ITR is best conducted by experienced peers within the same discipline who are not directly involved with the development of the study or project being reviewed. Pursuant to EC 1105-2-408, the District will coordinate with the Ecosystem Planning Center of Expertise (Mississippi Valley Division) to organize a team to perform the ITR at various stages throughout the study. The technical point-of-contact is the Mississippi

Valley Division. Since the project is anticipated to have a significant flood damage reduction component, additional coordination with the Flood Damage Reduction Planning Center of Expertise (South Pacific Division) will be required to ensure that the appropriate expertise is assembled on the review team. The technical point-of-contact for the FDR PCX is the South Pacific Division. The ITR will focus on the following: Review of the planning study process, Review of the methods of analysis and design of the alternatives and recommended plan, Compliance with program and NEPA requirements, and Completeness of study and support documentation More detailed ITR information is found in the Plan Formulation and Evaluation Section of the Project Management Plan (PMP). It is anticipated that an external peer review (EPR) will not be required since this project involves neither of the special cases where risk and magnitude of the proposed project necessitate the critical examination by a qualified person or team outside the Corps. With an estimated cost of $2.05 million, the project will not exceed the threshold necessary for an EPR; currently set at $50 million. Additionally, the anticipated risk associated with this project is considered minimal. The SWD vertical team will determine the appropriate level of review prior to request for approval by the appropriate PCX. 6. REVIEW PROCESS The ITR process will be conducted throughout the study process. ITR involvement is anticipated between major project milestones (i.e. FSM and AFB). Once the ITR team has been identified, models and appropriate documentation will be provided. Coordination with the ITR team and the PDT will be arranged appropriately. All decision documents relating to the ITR will be conducted utilizing DrChecks. 7. REVIEW SCHEDULE Task Proposed Date Develop Project Review Plan August 14, 2007 ITR review of FSM documents August 6-10, 2007 ITR review of draft documents (before AFB) TBD Participation in AFB meeting TBD 8. PROJECT RISK Anticipate minimal risk involved with the project. 9. PROJECT REVIEW PLAN

The components of the PRP were developed pursuant to the requirements of EC 1105-2- 408. A. General Information The decision documents that will undergo peer review are the Feasibility Report (including Economic Appendix), Environmental Impact Statement, and Engineering Appendix. The District PDT is listed below: 1. District Project Delivery Team Disciplines Hydrology and hydraulics Civil Design Structural Design Geotechnical Cost Estimating Economics Cultural Resources Environmental Real Estate HTRW Recreation 2. ITR Team TBD. It is recommended that the ITR team lead be from outside the major subordinate commend (MSC). B. Scientific Information The final feasibility report (and supporting documentation) is anticipated to contain standard engineering, environmental and economic analyses and information; therefore no influential scientific information is likely to be contained in any of the documentation. C. Timing The peer review process is projected to begin by the end of FY08 with the initiation of the ITR team and assessment of key models (e.g. HEC-RAS, HEC-FDA, and HSI) during this initial plan formulation phase of the study. D. Public Comment A Public Involvement Plan will be formulated to ensure the participation of all interested parties throughout the feasibility study process. Public Scoping Meetings will also be scheduled and conducted as appropriate. Additionally, an Interagency Coordination Team (ICT) consisting of District, non-federal sponsor, State and

Federal resource agency, and other stakeholder representatives will be formed to address common issues associated with Chacon Creek. TASK START DATE FINISH DATE Public Involvement Plan TBD TBD Public Scoping Meeting TBD TBD ICT Meetings TBD TBD E. Dissemination of Public Comments Proceedings from all public meetings, minutes from ICT meetings or any other public involvement meetings will be posted on the Chacon Creek Project website. F. Reviewers Since the feasibility study is a flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration study, anticipated disciplines of ITR reviewers are: 1. Engineering (hydrology and hydraulics) 2. Economics 3. Environmental 4. Real Estate 5. Planning G. Review Disciplines A brief description of the disciplines required for the ITR team are identified below: 1. Hydrology and hydraulics the reviewer(s) should have extensive knowledge of hydrology and hydraulics models or studies relating to flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration. 2. Economics the reviewer should have a strong understanding of economic models or studies relating to flood damage reduction. 3. Environmental the reviewer(s) should have strong background in inland ecosystems (e.g. riverine) and Texas environmental laws and regulations. 4. Real Estate The reviewer should have knowledge in reviewing RE Plans for feasibility studies relating to flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration. 5. Planning The reviewer(s) should have a strong knowledge in current planning policies and guidance related to feasibility studies.