Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades The First Biennial Review, 2006 (2007) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Program Planning, Financing, and Coordination
3 Program Planning, Financing, and Coordination
Pages 61-85
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 61... ...
specifies the sequence in which CERP projects are planned, designed, and constructed. A detailed schedule for the 68 CERP project components over more than 30 years was originally set out in the Yellow Book (USACE and SFWMD, 1999)
|
From page 62... ...
The 2005 Report to Congress includes sections devoted to outlining the bureaucratic structure of the restoration effort, project implementation, project co ordination, progress toward interim goals and interim targets, and a financial sum mary. It also summarizes the progress made on both CERP and non-CERP projects (see Appendix A of this report)
|
From page 63... ...
Program Planning, Financing, and Coordination 63 TABLE 3-1 Comparison of Construction Completion Dates from the Yellow Book and the Master Implementation Sequencing Plan, Version 1.0 for Band 1 NOTE: Gray shading reflects those projects being constructed by the South Florida Water Management District. Projects noted with an asterisk (*
|
From page 64... ...
64 Progress Toward Restoring the Everglades FIGURE 3-1 Locations of Band 1 CERP project components. © International Mapping Associates.
|
From page 65... ...
. The Yellow Book recommended a series of pilot projects and major restoration projects for initial authorization to "expedite ecological restoration of the south Florida ecosystems" (USACE and SFWMD, 1999; Tables 33 and 3-4)
|
From page 66... ...
Winsberg Farm Wetlands Habitat restoration Created wetlands in developed area of Restoration Palm Beach County will provide habitat for wildlife and native plants. L-30N Seepage Management Pilot Improved design and Minimal; construction will reduce reduction of uncertainty seepage loss to east and save some water for Everglades National Park.
|
From page 67... ...
Among the primary purposes, water storage could provide benefits to both the natural system and to the human environment, depending on the water reservations ultimately determined. Gray shading indicates those projects being constructed by the South Florida Water Management District.
|
From page 68... ...
All of the Yellow Book's initially recommended construction projects were also authorized in WRDA 2000 (Table 3-4) , contingent upon congres sional approval of the associated project implementation plans.
|
From page 69... ...
. Most of these initial projects are included in the Acceler8 program, and all Acceler8 projects are planned for completion within 2 years of the original Yellow Book schedule.
|
From page 70... ...
CERP implementation delays seem to result from a combination of factors: • budgetary and manpower restrictions, • delays in the completion of foundation (non-CERP) projects, • the extensive review and comment process involving partnering agencies and other stakeholders, • the need to negotiate resolutions to major concerns or agency dis agreements in the planning process, and • a project planning and authorization process that can be stalled by unresolved scientific uncertainties, especially for complex or contentious projects.
|
From page 71... ...
and other CERP planning efforts. The 68 project components in the Yellow Book constitute the FIGURE 3-2 CERP project development process.
|
From page 72... ...
As of April 2006, 24 CERP project components had final PMPs and two CERP projects -- Indian River Lagoon-South and Picayune Strand -- had final PIRs that were under technical and budgetary review (see Box 3-2 and Figure 3-1)
|
From page 73... ...
• Conduct Analyses for Savings Assessments • Develop Project Performance Clause Compliance • Conduct Economic Analyses Measures • Develop Implementation Plan • Compare Alternative Plans • Define Management Measures RECOVER RECOVER RECOVER • Assist in Development of Draft Operating • Provide Input to Existing and Conduct System Evaluation of Manual Without Project Conditions Alternative Plans • Assist in Identifying Quantity of Water Made • Review Consistency of Project Available, Water to be Reserved, and and System-Wide Performance Elimination or Transfers of Sources Measures • Coordinate Project Level Monitoring Plan with System -Wide Monitoring Plan Legend Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Activities Corps Final CAR 30 Day State / Sponsor DEP Sponsor DE State & Agency Review and Letter of Notice Review Approval Intent AFB = Alternative Formulation Briefing CAR = Coordination Act Report FSM = Feasibility Scoping Public and Prepare Washington Review by Transmit Meeting Release Agency Release Chief of Final PIR Level ASA (CW) ROD PIR Draft Review Final Engineers IPR = In-Progress Review w/NEPA Review and Signed to PIR of Draft PIR Report Document of PIR OMB Congress PIR PAL = Planning Aid Letter *
|
From page 74... ...
The project scope changes (e.g., additional road removal, larger pumps to provide ad ditional flood protection) , inflationary increases, and the failure to account for land acquisition costs in the original project cost estimates have led to an increase in costs from $15.5 million in the original Yellow Book to $349 million (DOI and US ACE, 2005; USACE and SFWMD, 2005b)
|
From page 75... ...
The regulations offer no specific instruction on how to measure such benefits, except to say that benefit measures should be able to be assessed and predicted and should be consistent with performance measures used to develop CERP interim goals and interim targets. A systematic approach to analyze the costs and benefits across multiple projects in support of plan formulation is notably lacking in the project planning process.
|
From page 76... ...
In addition, estimated project costs have increased from $7.8 billion to $9.9 billion, reflecting $1.5 billion in inflationary increases and $571 million in project scope changes for the two projects with approved PIRs (see Box 3-2 TABLE 3-5 CERP Cost Estimate Update Summary Updated Cost Estimate Summary (in millions, rounded) Oct 1999 Price Level Oct 2004 Price Level Projectsa $ 7,820 $ 9,881 Adaptive Assessment and Monitoringb $ 387 $ 496 Program Coordinationc $ 0 $ 500 TOTALd $ 8,207 $ 10,876 aOctober 1999 price level information from the Central and Southern Florida Project Compre hensive Review Study, Final Integrated Feasibility Report and Programmatic Environmental Im pact Statement (Yellow Book)
|
From page 77... ...
The 2005 Report to Congress reported CERP land acquisition expenditures of $800 million, $259 million, and $32 million from the state of Florida, federal agencies, and local funds, respectively. As Florida's Acceler8 program moves forward over the next 4-5 years, the state will spend a significantly greater proportion than the federal government on CERP projects.
|
From page 78... ...
have already increased CERP cost estimates by $571 million. However, it is unclear whether these scope changes could reduce the costs of other CERP projects, because there does not seem to be a formal process in place to evaluate increased investment costs against the systemwide benefits, assuming that funding is not unlimited.
|
From page 79... ...
As a result, the totals for CERP spending differ significantly from those in Table 3-6. SOURCE: Data collected from the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program FY 2000, 2001, and 2006 Cross-Cut Budgets (SFERTF, 2000b, 2001, 2006)
|
From page 80... ...
. Even without scope changes in the CERP, a major increase in federal expenditures will be needed to accomplish timely completion of CERP project commitments.
|
From page 81... ...
Despite these factors that are working against the partnership of the CERP, the coalition has held together and slow progress is being made to restore the South Florida ecosystem. Aside from all the technical and scientific issues, the paramount challenge CERP faces, as expressed in the 2005 Report to Congress (DOI and USACE, 2005)
|
From page 82... ...
. Other stakeholders argue that decompartmentalization projects are at the heart of the restoration effort and are being unduly delayed because of a lack of leadership and a capitulation to the demands of special interest groups (Estenoz, 2002)
|
From page 83... ...
If the political and financial support for the CERP wanes, it is likely that the trust among the signatories will also wane and with it hope for restoration of the South Florida ecosystem. With the CERP only in its fifth year and no projects actually completed, it is highly likely that the partnership will see more rather then fewer tests of its cohesiveness.
|
From page 84... ...
The original project implementation schedule from the Yellow Book was recently revised in the MISP. The new 5-year banding approach is a planning mechanism that offers adaptability in the project development process and accommodates uncertainty in achieving project milestone dates.
|
From page 85... ...
Despite these cost increases, current planned federal expenditures for FY 2005 to FY 2009 fall far short of even those envisioned in the original CERP implementation plan. Although the CERP is intended to be a 50/50 cost-sharing arrangement between the federal and nonfederal (state and local)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.