California Geotechnical Levee Evaluation Program SAME/ASCE Midwest Levee Conference, June Mike Inamine California Department of Water Resources GEOTECHNICAL LEVEE EVALUATIONS PROGRAM Central Valley Flood Protection Board February 26, 2009

22  Reduce chance of flooding  Reduce consequences of flooding  Sustain economic growth  Protect and enhance ecosystems  Promote sustainability 4 FloodSAFE Goals

33 Statewide Program 4 Major Activities Primarily funded by Propositions 1E and 84 Emphasis on State- federal system in Central Valley and Delta ~10 year effort A multi-faceted program to improve public safety through integrated flood management.

44 FloodSAFE Strategic Plan FloodSAFE Strategic Plan FloodSAFE Implementation Plan FloodSAFE Implementation Plan California Water Plan Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Integrated Regional Water Management Plans Integrated Regional Water Management Plans Statewide Flood Management Planning What to accomplish… How to accomplish… Statewide strategic policy document… System-wide plan for improving integrated flood management in Central Valley … Regional plans with State assistance… Planning Activities Project Feasibility Studies Detailed project studies … Improve Flood Management Systems

Systemwide Analysis

66 Geographical Breakdown of Systemwide Analysis “State Flood System in the Central Valley”

Overview of Levee Evaluations Program  Geotechnical Program  Supports Central Valley Flood Protection Plan and Local Efforts  Urban Levee Evaluations (ULE)  Population of 10,000 or more  350 miles of State/federal project urban levees  Approximately 120 miles of non-project urban levees  Intensive evaluation  Governor’s 2006 Emergency Declaration  Non-Urban Levee Evaluations (NULE)  Populations less than 10,000  1250 miles of State/federal project non-urban levees  400 miles of non-project non-urban levees  Strategic evaluation  Technical Policy  Seismic policy  Interim Levee Design Criteria

ULE / NULE Purpose In support of the Central Valley Flood Protection Plan (CVFPP) and other flood management related programs, evaluate non-urban and urban State/Federal project levees, including appurtenant non-project levees, to determine if they meet defined geotechnical criteria and, if appropriate, identify remedial measure(s) to meet those criteria.

Goal #1 – Support the CVFPP and CVFED projects, federal and local flood management projects, local FEMA certification efforts and the legislative mandate of urban, 200-year flood protection by Goal #2 – Support federal & local flood management programs by providing geotechnical data, analysis and remedial alternatives to local, State and federal stakeholders. Goal #3 – Improve geotechnical information exchange methods between state, local and Federal flood management agencies. Goal #4 - Identify critical levee repairs NULE/ULE Goals

Objectives Revisiting timelines, objectives due to budget impasse Strategic and tactical distinctions between ULE and NULE  Financial limits  Stakeholder process  200-year urban mandate  Differing phased approaches

Levee Evaluations Non-urban Levee Evaluations Technical Policy Urban Levee Evaluations Seismic Policy Interim Levee Design Criteria North South Central North Levee Evaluations Portfolio Breakdown

Seismic Policy Develop a statewide seismic policy for urban levee performance, emergency levee remediation, and long- term levee remediation  Interim seismic design guidelines for urban levees  Long-term seismic policy and design criteria for urban levees Interim Levee Design Criteria Provide interim design guidance that enables local and State agencies to construct levees to meet developing 200-year criteria with reasonable certainty and conservatism Technical Policy

Levees under study

2  Literature and background research (Locals, USACE, DWR, Consultants)  Outreach  Geomorphology  Surveying  Geophysics  Exploration  Testing  Analysis  Problem Identification  Remedial alternatives and costs General Technical Approach

ULE Process

NULE Process

NULE Process (cont’d)

Geomorphology Marysville, CA Geophysical Surveys Helicopter Electromagnetic (HEM)

2 Surveys  Traditional land survey  LiDar – Light Detection and Ranging  Bathymetry – Multibeam echosounder Datum: NAVD88 and NAD83

2 Methods Mud-rotary with punch- core sampling CPT Sonic Advantages Nearly continuous soil profile Method optimized for encountered materials Economical for large project Disadvantages Large volume of sample generation Correlation of drilling methods Subsurface Exploration Program

2 Hydrology and Hydraulics  Design profile (1957 in the north/central and 1955 in the south)  100-year WSE  200-year WSE  Top of levee

Seepage Stability Settlement Erosion Seismic vulnerability Geotechnical Analyses

2  Stakeholder briefings  Literature search (Locals, USACE, DWR, Consultants)  Interviews  Inspections  Points-of-Interest  CVFPP Workshops  LiDAR and other surveys  Water surface elevations  Geomorphology  Assessment process  Geotechnical Assessment Report NULE First Year Work

2 Charge: Provide independent, expert review of geotechnical policies and procedures with regard to safety, performance, state-of-practice and economy Independent Consulting Board Board Members:  Chris Groves (Shannon-Wilson)  Ray Seed (UC Berkeley)  George Sills (formerly USACE-ERDC)  Skip Hendron  Bill Marcuson

Technical Design Review Four charges for Levee Evaluations:  Central Valley Flood Protection Plan  Support for local projects  Design review of EIP and other design and construction projects  Design and construction support for CVFPB Scope expansion Multiple Boards

Time  ULE targeted for completion September 2010  NULE targeted for completion August 2011 Money  ULE $110M  NULE $111M Contract Support  Urban  Non-Urban  QA/QC  Independent Consulting Board  Seismic research  USACE

2 Concluding Remarks  Urban evaluation 50 percent complete  Initiating non-urban evaluation  Collaboration of DWR, USACE, local stakeholders and consultants, coordinated through Central Valley Flood Protection Plan process  Evolving, stakeholder-driven process  Unprecedented scope  Expanded design review work

2 Questions?

Levee Critical Levee Repairs  55 critical erosion sites repaired  47 critical PL sites rehabilitated  $290 million State funds spent  Continuing work - 20 critical sites - 17 non-critical erosion sites non-critical PL sites Levee Evaluations  350 miles urban federal levees ($85 M)  150 miles urban nonfederal levees ($45 M)  About 15 holes per mile  Helicopter Electromagnetic Surveys  LiDAR  Bathymetry  1,250 miles of non-urban levees

Levee State – Local Early Implementation Projects No regrets 2 setback levee projects 2 slurry wall projects $212 million State contribution in FY $99 million local contribution in FY $400 million State budget for FY Segment 3 Fix-in-place Segment 2 Setback levee Existing Levee Setback Levee

State – Local Early Implementation Projects No regrets 2 setback levee projects 2 slurry wall projects $212 million State contribution in FY $99 million local contribution in FY $400 million State budget for FY Segment 3 Fix-in-place Segment 2 Setback levee Existing Levee Setback Levee

Federal Projects  Many State – Local – Federal Studies and Projects  Active construction on: - Folsom Dam Joint Federal Project - American River Common Features Project - South Sacramento County Streams Project - Sacramento River Bank Protection Project  Federal construction to follow State-Local EIPs

California Leads the Way: Taking Steps to Manage Flood Risk in the Central Valley Time / Investment Flood Risk Critical Levee Repairs Levee Evaluations State-Local Early Implementation Projects Federal Projects Central Valley Flood Protection Plan Mitigation Banking Flood Corridor Easements Designated Floodways Reservoir Reoperation and Forecast Based Operation Climate Change Adjustments to Flood Hydrology Floodplain Mapping Annual Flood Risk Notifications New Building Standards Emergency Response Plans Emergency Supplies and Stockpiles Improved Maintenance and Inspection Procedures Local Agency Reports on Maintenance Local Agency Risk Acknowledgement Shared Liability between State and Local Agencies 200-year Minimum Protection for Urban Areas General Plan Amendments and Zoning Ordinances RESIDUAL RISK New Ongoing INITIAL RISK

NULE Goals and Objectives Goals & Objectives Goal #1 – Support the CVFPP and Central Valley Floodplain Evaluation and Delineation (CVFED) projects.  Define the levees surrounding non-urban basins utilizing available information by October 1,  By January 1, 2009, vet the defined locations of non-urban levees with local stakeholders.  Define and vet non-urban geotechnical levee criteria by January 1,  By March 1, 2009 (June 1, 2009), perform the initial phase of geotechnical evaluation based on available, historical information to determine whether levees: a) are deficient b) possess no obvious deficiencies, or c) sufficient data is lacking to make a determination as to levee performance. Levees shall be evaluated with respect to current geotechnical state-of-practice at the design WSE and top of levee WSE.  Prepare preliminary, remedial alternatives (and associated cost estimates) necessary for acceptable levee performance at the design WSE by June 1, 2009 (July 1, 2009).  Develop the initial geotechnical exploration plan by June 1, 2009 (July 1, 2009).  Deliver the final documentation of geotechnical analysis and remedial alternatives by August 1, Goal #2 – Support Federal & local flood management programs by providing geotechnical data, analysis and remedial alternatives to local, State and federal stakeholders.  Publish a list of available data and analysis products for use by local, State and federal stakeholders on the FloodSAFE website by June 1,  Provide available data and analysis products within 30 days of a request. Goal #3 – Improve geotechnical information exchange methods between state, local and Federal flood management agencies.  By October 1, 2008, develop an interim non-urban GIS database that will be compatible with a future FloodSAFE-wide database.  By November 1, 2008, develop a GINT database for exploration products. Goal #4 - Identify critical levee repairs  Identify critical geotechnical deficiencies that may result in levee failure in the next high water event. Recommend further analysis to the Critical Repairs program as deficiencies are identified.

Goal #1 – Support the CVFPP, federal and local flood management projects, local FEMA certification efforts and the legislative mandate of urban, 200-year flood protection by  Define the levees surrounding urban basins utilizing available information by September 30,  By January 1, 2009, vet the defined locations of urban levees with local stakeholders.  Define and vet urban geotechnical levee evaluation criteria by October 1,  By April 1, 2010, perform geotechnical exploration, testing and analyses required to evaluate the safety of urban levees. Levees shall be evaluated with respect to current geotechnical state-of-practice at the design WSE and top of levee WSE.  Prepare preliminary, remedial alternatives and associated cost estimates necessary for acceptable levee performance at the estimated 200-year WSE by July 1,  Deliver the final documentation of geotechnical analysis and remedial alternatives by September 1, Goal #2 – Support Federal & local flood management programs by providing geotechnical data, analysis and remedial alternatives to local, State and federal stakeholders.  Publish a list of available data and analysis products for use by local, State and federal stakeholders on the FloodSAFE website by January 15,  Provide available data and analysis products within 30 days of a request. Goal #3 – Improve geotechnical information exchange methods between state, local and Federal flood management agencies.  By April 1, 2008, develop an interim GIS database for levee evaluation products.  By January 1, 2007, develop an interim GINT database for exploration products.  By September 1, 2010, provide input and support development of a Floodsafe-wide GIS database available to State, local and federal stakeholders. Goal #4 - Identify critical levee repairs  Identify critical geotechnical deficiencies that may result in levee failure in the next high water event. Recommend further analysis to the Critical Repairs program as deficiencies are identified. ULE Goals and Objectives: