Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Program Overview

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Program Overview"— Presentation transcript:

1 Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Program Overview
US Army Corps of Engineers Presented by: Andy Borden, Don Johantges, and Misty Jones Cincinnati, Ohio 15 April 2014

2 LRD Value to the Nation FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT:
$39.2B in cumulative Flood Damages Prevented thru 2012 11 to 1 ROI REGULATORY: 14,000+ permits processed annually MILITARY PROGRAMS: $800M placement amount on average per year, dropping to ~$600M for FY15 and beyond (KY, IL, MI, OH, IN) INTERAGENCY SUPPORT: $98M placement for 20 Federal agencies EMERGENCY OPERATIONS: USACE Lead Division for Temp Emergency Power Kentucky Ice Storm ’09 Lower Ohio Flood ‘11 Tornado Recovery ‘11 Super Storm Sandy ’12 Winter Storms ‘13 NAVIGATION: 3400 miles of commercial waterways 10% of US inland waterways Ohio River System: 86 lock chambers, 245M tons Great Lakes System: 6 lock chambers, 129M tons 66 deep draft harbors 80 shallow draft harbors RECREATION: 83 M visits/year 37K jobs supported $1.8B value added 933K Land Acres 400K Water Acres 785 Rec Areas HYDROPOWER: 10 Plants 3.3 MWHr OVERSEAS CONTINGENCY SUPPORT: 465 positions filled since 2008 Flood Risk Mgt: Cumulative damages prevented through 2012: $39.2B includes impact from LRD operations along the Mississippi River Last year was 10:1 Return on Investment (ROI), this year 11:1 (Debbie Lee x-3070/ Frank Monfelli x-3011) Recreation : 83M visitors FY 12 data (FY13 not available yet) 37K jobs (source is ERDC 2010 info, last available) $1.8B value (includes wages, benefits, profits, rent and tax) (Jeff DeFosse – x3192)

3 Civil Works Transformation
TARGET AREAS Modernize planning process Enhance the budget development process through a systems-oriented watershed approach, collaboration and innovative funding Evaluate the current and required portfolio of water resources projects through a smart infrastructure strategy to deliver solutions to water resources problems Improve methods of delivery Olmsted - 18 FEB 2014 Aerial View

4 Influences on Future Civil Works Program Funding
Delay in Passing the Budget (Continuing Resolution): Limits new study and new construction starts No Earmarks: Limits Congressional Adds and plus-up to Pres Bud Sequestration / Budget Cuts: Tied to reducing National Debt Inland Waterways Trust Fund: Construction funds limited to revenues National/Regional Priorities: Infrastructure investments that strengthen the national economy, security & quality of life Environmental Conditions: Drought, natural disasters, flooding, = Supplement Funds Budget Transformation: Project-centric to a prioritized systems-based, watershed approach OMB and ASA(CW) Policy: Budget ceilings, Investments must support of national economic and environmental goals Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2013 (WRRDA 2013): Pending authorization Local Sponsor/Stakeholder Partnerships: Cost Sharing Requirements Pending Authorization (WRDA): (H.R and S. 601) Reflects momentum in both houses to codify internal initiatives to streamline the CW process. SMART Planning, 3x3x3 initiative, expanding economic benefits categories Offers new opportunities to expand the "credited, contributed and voluntary funds" methods for project development & implementation, reflects an understanding that future EWA budgets will be further constrained, explores alternative sources. Makes USACE develop a list of 15 (+/-) projects in a Pilot Program that would be ceded over to the local interests (including the associated Federal funds GI, CG) for implementation Olmsted L&D: both houses indicate a desire to change the cost sharing equation with the IWTF Identifies the Great Lakes as a separate entity & establish new priorities for the HMTF Requires USACE to produce additional reports on Olmsted cost overruns Sets a annual National funding limit on DS program (Approx $9.2 million) Requires USACE to study & revise current levee vegetation requirements Re-establishes an automatic De-authorization process, designed to reduce the National backlog of authorized projects, resulting in possibility of LRD authorized projects at Greenup, SOO and JT Myers be de-Authorized

5 FY15 President’s Budget includes $38.8M
For Great Lakes Harbor Maintenance Dredging Duluth-Superior Saginaw River St. Mary’s River Detroit River Green Bay Monroe Marquette Harbor Toledo St. Clair River Sandusky Indiana Harbor Ashtabula Burns Harbor Cleveland Grand Haven Fairport Chippewa Harbor Grand Marais Lake Superior Beaver Bay Two Harbors Eagle Harbor Lac La Belle Knife River Grand Traverse Bay Cornucopia Duluth-Superior La Pointe Keweenaw Waterway Bayfield Big Bay Port Wing Ontonagon Little Lake Whitefish Point Harbor Black River Presque Isle Grand Marais Soo Locks Ashland Saxon Marquette St. Marys River MI Channels in Straits of Mackinac Manistique Detour Les Cheneaux Island Gladstone Grays Reef Mackinac Island Little Bay de noc St. James Mackinac City Cheboygan Cross Village Petoskey Hammond Bay Cedar River Washington Island Inland Route WI Menominee Oconto Leland Charlevoix Alpena Lake Huron CANADA Ogdensburg Pensaukee Sturgeon Bay Morristown Black River Harbor Big Suamico Algoma Greilickville Frankfort Harrisville Green Bay Kewaunee Arcadia Cape Vincent Au Sable Harbor Portage Lake Two Rivers Tawas Bay Sackets Harbor Manitowoc Manistee Point Lookout Port Austin Ontario Lake Port Ontario Ludington Harbor Beach Sheboygan Pentwater Saginaw Bay Port FY13 President’s Budget: $31.0M, 2.4M cu yards, 15 projects Oswego White Lake Caseville Port Sanilac Commercial Recreational President’s Budget Port Washington Sebewaing Lake Michigan Muskegon MI Lexington Little Sodus Bay Grand River Olcott Oak Orchard Rochester Irondequoit Bay Great Sodus Bay Black River Little River Wilson Milwaukee Grand Haven St. Clair River Pine River Holland Buffalo Kenosha Clinton River Belle River Black Rock Lock/Tonawanda NY Saugatuck Lake St. Clair Sturgeon Point South Haven Lake Erie Cattaraugus Waukegan Rouge River IL St. Joseph Detroit River Dunkirk St. Joseph River Barcelona Monroe Chicago Harbor New Buffalo Erie Bolles Harbor Put-In-Bay Chicago River Michigan City Conneaut PA Toledo Fairport Ashtabula Calumet Burns Small Boat Harbor OH Cooley Canal Toussaint River Port Clinton Rocky River Burns Waterway Harbor West Harbor Vermilion Cleveland Indiana Harbor IN Lorain Sandusky Huron 60 Federal commercial projects 80 Federal shallow draft/recreational projects

6 Current Dredged Material Management Conditions
DREDGED MATERIAL MANAGEMENT STATUS Critical – Dredged Material Management issues could severely restrict channel availability within 5 years MINNESOTA Lake Superior Pressing – Dredged Material Management issues could severely restrict channel availability within 10 years. Two Harbors Duluth Superior Keweenaw Waterway No pressing issues within next 10 years; continue to work on long range planning such as DMMPs. Presque Isle Ashland Ontonagon Marquette Grand Marias Channel in Straits of Mackinac St. Marys River Little Bay de Noc Grays Reef Cheboygan WISCONSIN Menominee Charlevoix Alpena Lake Huron Ogdensburg Frankfort ANNUAL DREDGING REQUIREMENT (CY) Green Bay Kewaunee MICHIGAN Ontario Manitowoc Manistee Lake Lake Michigan Ludington 800K Sheboygan Saginaw Harbor Beach CANADA Oswego Port Washington Muskegon Harbor Rochester Harbor NEW YORK 100K – 250K Milwaukee Grand Haven St. Clair River Buffalo Harbor Kenosha Rouge River Holland Channels in Lake St. Clair Lake Erie Dunkirk 50K – 95K Waukegan St. Joseph Harbor Detroit River <50K Chicago River & Harbor Erie PENNSYLVANIA Monroe Conneaut Calumet Ashtabula INDIANA Fairport ILLINOIS Burns Waterway Harbor Toledo Huron Lorain Cleveland Sandusky Harbor Indiana Harbor OHIO

7 Ohio River Infrastructure Overview
Challenges Deteriorating NAV Dams (gates & structure) Miter Gates Deteriorating lock chambers Aging operating machinery EMSWORTH L&D Allegheny 6 Dam Undermining 2008 MARKLAND L&D Belleville Barge Accident/Pool Loss 2005 OLMSTED L&D This slide is an overview of the Ohio River Infrastructure with its current condition assessment. As you can see, there is quite a bit of “orange” and “red” indicated due to a whole host of issues 53 Montgomery Dam Gates 2012 52 LEGEND Improvements Condition Existing A/B Greenup Unscheduled Closure 2003 C Markland Gate Failure 2009 Under Construction D Construction Authorized F

8 LRD CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM Omnibus Bill / Work Plan
COMPARISON FY 2010 – FY 2013 ($ MILLIONS) FY 10 PRES BUD APPN. FY 11 WORK PLAN FY 12 FY 13 CR FY 14 Omnibus Bill / Work Plan FY 15 I 1.8 11.0 2.4 8.6 5.1 8.8 5.0 7.5 3.1 5.4 2.3 C 397.5 407.4 429.2 331.3 403.2 402.3 340.3 388.7 272.5 366.0 318.3 IWTF 85.0 79.4 87.3 73.0 78.5 75.9 90.3 83.0 82.5 78.1 84.5 C + IWTF 482.5 486.8 516.5 404.3 481.7 478.2 430.6 471.7 355.0 444.1 402.8 O&M 457.6 443.1 437.7 447.2 437.1 469.9 431.7 456.4 497.3 474.8 TOTAL 941.9 940.9 956.6 860.1 923.9 956.9 866.2 910.9 811.4 946.8 879.9 Total PRES BUD: $900M average over past 6 years Flat to declining trends across all appropriations Does not include Emergency Supplemental funds Year-long CR in FY13 Currently under CR until 15 Jan 2014 No Congressional Earmarks Legend: I – Investigations C – Construction IWTF – Inland Waterway Trust Fund O&M – Operations & Maintenance PRES BUD – President’s Budget APPN – Congressional Appropriation HoR – House of Representatives SEN – Senate

9 LRD Flood Risk Management/Dam Safety Construction Projects
Lake Superior Lake Michigan Lake Huron Lake Erie Lake Ontario Ohio River Cumberland River Tennessee River Chicago Detroit Buffalo Pittsburgh Huntington Louisville Nashville Cincinnati Dover Dam: Muskingum River, OH $60M Estimated Federal Cost Dam Safety Assurance McCook & Thornton Reservoir: Cook County, IL $677M Estimated Federal Cost Construction of 2 reservoirs Floodwater storage > 14B gal. Impacts 341 Sq. Miles East Branch Clarion River Lake, PA: $280M Estimated Federal Cost Dam Safety Assurance Construction of a full length, full depth cut-off wall preceded by a phase of site development Rough River Lake, KY $149M Estimated Federal Cost Major Rehabilitation Bluestone Dam: Bluestone Lake, WV $475M Estimated Federal Cost Dam Safety Assurance CINCINNATI (DIV HQ) BUFFALO (LRB) CHICAGO (LRC) DETROIT (LRE) HUNTINGTON (LRH) LOUISVILLE (LRL) NASHVILLE (LRN) PITTSBURGH (LRP) Center Hill Dam: Caney Fork River, DeKalb Co, TN $295M Estimated Federal Cost Dam Safety Assurance

10 LRD Navigation / Other Construction Projects
Lake Superior Lake Michigan Lake Huron Lake Erie Lake Ontario Ohio River Cumberland River Tennessee River Chicago Detroit Buffalo Pittsburgh Huntington Louisville Nashville Cincinnati Green Bay Harbor, Wisconsin: Dredged Material Disposal Facility $21M Estimated Federal Cost The project will provide sufficient capacity for 20 years of maintenance dredging Chicago Ship & Sanitary Cannel: Romeoville, IL in Cook County aka – Asian Carp Barrier $212M Estimated Federal Cost Dispersal barrier system developed to prevent the spread of invasive fish species Locks & Dams 2, 3, 4: Monongahela River, PA $845M Estimated Federal Cost New gated dam & rehabilitated auxiliary chamber floodway bulkhead structure; new twin 84 X 720 foot locks & below-dam scour protection at Charleroi Olmsted Locks & Dam: Ohio River, Olmsted, IL $3B Estimated Federal Cost 2 – 110’ by 1200’ locks & a dam comprised of tainter gates, navigable pass, and a fixed weir

11 What is Changing in Military Programs?
FY13 – Project Funding reduced iaw Sequester. Still recovering from its impacts. FY14 & Beyond – Whole Projects Delayed/Eliminated within Service Priorities BRAC 17 ? – DOD Consolidating using Existing Space to Reduce Support Costs Reduction in MILCON program and number of projects Increased potential requirements for Restoration and Modernization of existing facilities Emphasis on design and material requirements for reduced energy demand and sustainability due to Executive Orders and 13514 Executive Order of January 24, 2007 Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management “…to strengthen the environmental, energy, and transportation management of Federal agencies…” “…improve energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions of the agency, through reduction of energy intensity by 30 percent by the end of fiscal year 2015, relative to the baseline of the agency’s energy use in fiscal year 2003…” “…ensure that at least half of the statutorily required renewable energy consumed by the agency in a fiscal year comes from new renewable sources, and to the extent feasible, the agency implements renewable energy generation projects on agency property for agency use…” Executive Order of October 5, 2009 Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance “… to establish an integrated strategy towards sustainability in the Federal Government and to make reduction of greenhouse gas emissions a priority for Federal agencies…” “…to create a clean energy economy that will increase our Nation’s prosperity, promote energy security, protect the interests of taxpayers, and safeguard the health of our environment, the Federal Government must lead by example. It is therefore the policy of the United States that Federal agencies shall increase energy efficiency…” -26% reduction in potable water use by 2020 versus 2008 Baseline. -50% reduction in solid waste (to include construction and demolition) by 2015 versus 2008 Baseline. -All buildings from 2020 and thereafter are designed to achieve zero-net-energy by 2030. Joliet ARC

12 What does that mean to us?
Installations will need support to develop project proposals that show Life-Cycle Costs that meet or beat new construction Retrofit facilities to support functional changes – Flexible Use Reduce reliance on national grid utilities Reduce Demand Use on-site renewable energy source NET ZERO by 2020 What does that mean to us? Be prepared to respond to: 1) Installations will need support to develop project proposals showing life-cycle-costs that will meet or beat the cost of new construction. 2) Successful projects will support the leadership's priorities for retrofitting facilities to support functional changes that are estimated to be required well into the future (flexible use) and … 3) that reduce the reliance on utilities taken from the national grid (reduce demand and/or use on-site renewable energy power source). + The Army is striving to manage our natural resources with a net zero strategy by: 1. Producing as much energy as we use 2. Capturing or reusing water equal to use 3. Eliminating solid waste disposal NET ZERO can only be achieved by 2020 through the use of various Thir Party financing options, which will be employed by the military installations.

13 LRD MILCON Programs 15 Installations Lima ATP Selfridge ANG (BRAC05)
Superior Lake 15 Installations Anchor Installations Michigan Other Installations Lake Army Air Force Huron Other DoD Michigan Lima ATP Michigan Selfridge ANG (BRAC05) Grissom ARB Lake Erie Detroit Arsenal Lake Rock Island Arsenal Youngstown ARB Ohio Newport AAP DSCC Our regional coverage for the Active Services and DOD with significant installations highlighted. Illinois Indiana Crane Naval AD Wright-Patterson AFB River Scott AFB Fort Knox C.M. Price Center Ohio Bluegrass Fort Campbell Kentucky

14 LRD FUSRAP Program Ashland1/Seaway D/ RS Creek & Ashland 2 PA/SI RI/FS
RD/RA COMPLETE Niagara Falls Guterl Seaway Lake Ontario Linde NY Harshaw Lake Erie Bliss & Laughlin Bliss & Laughlin IN The Corps and DOE have an MOU which lays out the process for referral and designation, and returning sites to DOE for long-term stewardship once remediation is completed. Notes that the current projection is that this LRD Program will continue beyond 2020 at current funding levels. PA Joslyn Painesville Luckey OH Shallow Land Disposal Area (Located in Parks Township) Superior Steel

15 LRD Military Outlook: Total Military Program (as of 14 Apr 2014)
BRAC Workload peaked in FY 09, and complete by Sep 2011 by statute. MILCON workload peaked in 2012 at a high of $878.1M and has shown a steady decline through FY16 before steadying out. MILCON This is a $76M reduction versus last year Installation Support O&M Support to DPWs is staying even to this point Environmental This is a $10M reduction versus last year International and Interagency Services This is a minor reduction versus last year Biggest clients EPA, VA, DOE and DHS.

16 Military Architect and Design to be Advertised in Next 12 Months
SDVOB - DBB task orders Small Business - D/B or DBB task orders HubZone (HZ) - D/B or DBB task orders Remarks:  Contracts are 5 year (3 year base + 2 year option).  Small Business MATOC – LRD Mission Boundaries including Reserves.

17 LRD FY15 & Prior Construction to be Advertised in Next 12 Months
PROGID St Location Description Army KY Fort Campbell Unmanned Aerial Vehicle MNT Hangar Multifunction Aviation BDE Blue Grass Army Depot Consolidated Shipping/Receiving Center SOF Group Special Troops BN System Integration Maintenance facility Army Reserve NJ Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst Record Fire Range Machine Gun Range CO Fort Carson Training Building Addition CA Fresno Army Reserve Center NY Mattydale Tustin Miramar VA Fort Lee TASS Training Center Fort Hunter Liggett MD Aberdeen Proving Ground MA Attleboro Ft. Story NC Ft. Bragg Mare Island Bowie Army Family Housing IL Rock Island Arsenal Family Housing Air Force OH Wright Patterson AFB Add/Alter Materiel Lab Air Force Reserve March ARB Regional Deployment facility FL Homestead AFB Entry Control Complex Defense Logistics MI Selfridge ARB Replace Fuel Distribution Facility DOD Educ Act. Ft Campbell Elementary School High School Addition to Elementary School FUSRAP PA Armstrong County Radiological Site Remediation Tonawanda Dept of Energy TN Oak Ridge Facility Site Prep – Excavation, Sediment Basin

18 Key Contracting Contacts
Regional Chief of Contracting Vincent Marsh Regional Procurement Analyst Misty Jones District Chiefs of Contracting Louisville District – Denise Bush Great Lakes District - Jeffery Ernest River District – Cynthia Smith Branch Contracting Contacts Buffalo – Tony Abate Chicago – Regina Blair Detroit – Sandra Kenzie Huntington – Cheryl Fitzwater Nashville – Valerie Carlton Pittsburgh – Cynthia Smith Louisville Military Branch – Rita Burns Louisville Civil Branch – Lisa Bisig Louisville Business Oversight Branch – Crystal May Reorganization to focus on quality. BOB eliminating stovepipe oversight. Small Business Deputies

19 Essential Links Contractor Performance Assessment Rating System: Electronic Subcontracting Reporting System: Small Business Administration: Solicitation Website: https://www.FBO.gov System for Award Management: https://www.sam.gov Division Website: CPARS – New merged system and why eSRS – Subcontracting system and why SBA – Excellent contact

20 For more information visit the US Army Corps of Engineers Web Site at:
Questions? For more information visit the US Army Corps of Engineers Web Site at:


Download ppt "Great Lakes and Ohio River Division Program Overview"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google