DR9604-SY 960110il
U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers
Fort Worth District
Scope of Work
Sumps 14W & 15W
Fort Worth Floodway, Texas
Version: 10 January 1996
1.0
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Plan Formulation
Study Area Description
Hydrologic/Hydraulic Studies
Civil Design Studies
Cost Engineering
Geotechnical Studies
Hazardous, Toxic, and Radiological Waste Investigations
Surveys
Environmental Studies
Cultural Resources
Geographical Information Systems (GIS) Studies
Economic Studies
Real Estate Studies
Recreation Studies
Study Management
Programs and Project Management
Engineering Management
Report Preparation
Public Involvement
Supervision and Administration
Review Contingency
Schedule of Fiscal Year Funding
Funding by Phase and Subaccount
Funding by Subaccount
Page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
12
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
23
ii
1.0 PLAN FORMULATION.
a. General Criteria. Alternatives to be investigated include (1) improved/increased
sump storage and (2) installing pumping facilities. These measures, either alone or in
combination, shall be investigated in order to develop a plan which reasonably maximizes net
national economic development benefits. This plan shall be identified as the National Economic
Development (NED) plan. The NED plan shall be formulated in consideration of four criteria:
completeness, effectiveness, efficiency, and acceptability. Completeness is the extent to which a
given alternative plan provides and accounts for all necessary investments or other actions to
ensure the realization of the planned effects. Effectiveness is the extent to which an alternative
plan solves the specific problems and achieves the specified opportunities. Efficiency is the extent
to which an alternative plan is the most cost effective means of solving the flooding and drainage
problem, realizing opportunities consistent with protecting the nation's environment.
Acceptability is the extent that the alternative plan is approved of by State and local entities and
the public and compatibility with existing laws, regulations, and public policies. Each alternative
plan shall include justifiable measures to mitigate effects on fish and wildlife resources.
b. Specific Criteria. The feasibility study of Sumps 14W/15W will be conducted in
three phases. These phases are: Phase 1 - Technical Analysis of Alternatives; Phase 2 -
Economic, Real Estate, Environmental, and Engineering Analysis of Alternatives; and Phase 3 -
Final Determination of Recommended Plan. The division of the study into three phases has its
basis in the desire to produce a reasonable (constructable) solution in a timely manner. The
phases will allow for the review of the progress of the study at significant points during the study.
The work in each of the phases will be divided into the following areas: Phase 1 consists of
verifying the hydrologic and engineering existing conditions for the study area and preliminary
technical analysis of project alternatives. Phase 2 consists of verifying the economic, real estate,
and environmental existing conditions for the study area. Additionally, the economic, real estate,
and environmental analysis of project alternatives. All alternatives will be investigated for
feasibility by determining the costs and benefits associated with each alternative. Those
alternatives found to be infeasible will be screened from further consideration. Phase 3 will be
used to determine the National Economic Development (NED) plan and the locally preferred plan
(if different). In addition, this phase consists of performing the final work necessary to complete
the study of the NED and locally preferred plans and prepare an Engineering Appendix with
feature design level of detail.
The goal of this study is to provide a plan which can be implemented, has Federal and
non-Federal support, and will provide benefits at a reasonable and affordable cost. While limiting
the work in each phase to the minimum necessary to meet the needs of that phase in the most cost
effective manner, with continuous coordination between the Federal government and the sponsor.
The plans to be investigated during the feasibility study shall include the addition of more
sluice gates or pumps. The alternatives are to provide a minimum of 100-year protection.
Phase 1 - Technical Analysis of Alternatives, consists of verifying the hydrologic and
engineering existing conditions for the study area. The alternatives to be studied during this phase
include the addition of more sluice gates or pumps. The alternatives are to provide a minimum of
100-year protection. During this phase, site visits will be made by all appropriate team members
to develop their familiarity with the study area. The hydrology and hydraulics models will be
built/updated, review (by Hydrology and Hydraulics) of published sedimentation studies of the
area, design and computation quantities for all of the investigated plans, site reconnaissance of
study area by Geotechnical Branch, and Initial Site Assessment of study area. Additionally, this
phase shall consist of verifying land and property values, ownership of property, and construction
costs. Environmental inventory of proposed project areas and an assessment of impacts of plans,
land use studies of the study area, and compute expected average annual damages/benefits of the
plans. Those alternatives found to be infeasible will be screened from further consideration. A
joint meeting between the Corps, TCWCID#1, and city of Fort Worth will be held to discuss the
results of the phase and agree on which alternatives are to be carded into phase 2.
Phase 2 - Economic, Real Estate, Environmental, and Engineering Analysis of
Alternatives, consists of refining the preliminary design for each of the plans found feasible in
Phase 1. All alternatives will be investigated for feasibility by determining the costs and benefits
associated with each alternative. The hydrology and hydraulics models will be refined, detailed
design and computation quantities for all of the feasible plans, site specific investigations by
Geotechnical Branch, environmental data gathering for NEPA documentation and a final
assessment of impacts of plans, and update annual damages/benefits and finalize cost/benefit ratios
of the plans. All necessary land surveys will be conducted during this phase, these surveys shall
include finished floor elevations, street intersection elevations, and utility locations. This phase
will be used to determine the National Economic Development (NED) plan and the locally
preferred plan (if different). The NED plan will be bracketed to insure that the plan that
maximizes net benefits has been identified. This plan or plans will be carded into Phase 3 for
finalization. A joint meeting between the Corps, TCWCID#1, and city of Fort Worth will be held
to discuss the results of the phase and agree on which alternative(s) is fo be carded into phase 3.
Phase 3 - Final Determination of Recommended Plan, consists of performing the final
work necessary to complete the study of the NED and locally preferred plans and prepare an
Engineering Appendix with feature design level of detail. This phase will include the site
investigations (sub-surface and water) and the asbestos/lead surveys, appraisal of all property
within the project area, development of mitigation requirements (if necessary), cultural resources
field surveys, finalize recreation plans with topography, consideration of neighborhood continuity
for the project, and M-CACES cost estimates. The value of the structures in the study area will
be determined. In addition, an analysis of the financial capability of the potential sponsor to share
in the cost of the project construction will be performed. The report will be written and published
during this phase.
1.1 STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION. The boundaries can generally be described as the SPF
flooding limits of the sumps (14W & 15W).
2
2.1 HYDROLOGIC/ItYDRAULIC STUDIES. A detailed hydrologic/hydraulic analysis of
existing (project base year) conditions shall be performed. Applicable Corps of Engineers
regulations, hydrologic analysis procedures, and policy guidance will be followed during this
study. For both hydrologic and hydraulic studies, a risk-based analysis framework will be
developed in accordance with EC 1105-2-205 that determines the reliability of variables such as:
discharge associated with exceedance intervals, conveyance and roughness, and cross-section
geometry. The sponsor will be involved in the review of the calibration of the models to insure
that structures which were flooded in recent events are included in the results of the modeling.
The study shall consist of a detailed design and analysis of flood control, which will include the
following:
· A flow duration analysis will be developed for the West Fork.
· A comprehensive hydrologic and hydraulic model of the project area will be developed. The
models will utilize the most recent detailed topography of the area and storm drainage plans from
the city of Fort Worth. Baseline Conditions 25-year, 50-year, 100-year, 500-year, and standard
project flood events inflow into the sump and flood event elevations will be computed. The
analysis will include computation of sump elevation-area-volume data. Baseline Conditions sump
routings will be performed.
· With-Project alternatives: Sump routings will be developed for each alternative, additional
sluice(s) and pump(s).
· With-Project alternative - sluice(s). The addition of sluices to supplement the existing drainage
sluices will be investigated. Several sizes and number of sluice(s) will be investigated. The
optimum number and size of the sluice(s) will be determined.
· With-Project alternative - pump(s). Detailed hydrologic and hydraulic design of several pump
sizes will be developed. The optimum number and size of pump(s) will be determined.
· Flood event delineations will be developed for Baseline Conditions and With-Project
Conditions.
· Extensive site visits will be necessary for on-site observations and measurements.
· Technical review of hydrologic and hydraulic analysis. The hydrologic and hydraulic analysis
will be reviewed and evaluated for technical adequacy. Modifications to the original design may
be made due to the result of this comment phase.
· Preparation of report (includes text and plates). The hydrologic and hydraulic section of the
report will include pertinent description of the hydrologic and hydraulic analysis, design rating
curves and plates, and flood delineations.
2.2 CIVIL DESIGN STUD1]gS.
a. General.
Projects
(1) The design studies portion of the Feasibility Report for Sump 14W & 15W,
will consist of an Engineering Appendix, preparation of design plates, a written
description of the selected plan, and a cost estimate of the improvements. All
components of the project shall be accomplished in a professional manner using
accepted engineering practices and in accordance with Corps of Engineers'
regulations applicable to a civil works project.
(2) The Engineering Appendix shall consist of all design data analyses, a writeup of
the design features for the improved areas, information plates, and cost estimates
pertaining to civil and relocation design of the selected plan.
(3) All design plates (drawings) provided shall be original tracings and shall be
prepared by such methods and quality of workmanship to permit satisfactory clear
and legible reproduction, including reproduction at one-half scale. Likewise,
adequate engineering scales to properly present the design data development,
including detailed features, shall be used on all drawings to be included as design
plates. All drawings are to be prepared on Corps of Engineers standard size sheet
22" x 40" (trim to trim), including the standard title block.
(4) Cost estimates for this project will be prepared based on quantity take-offs for
all design items included in this scope of work. All estimates shall be in
accordance with the engineering manual, EM 1110-2-1301, Cost Estimate -
Planning and Design Stages. All estimates will be in the work breakdown
structure format and the costs for the recommended plan and NED plan, if
different, will be prepared using the M-CACES software.
b. Civil Design Criteria.
(1) All channel design and agronomy criteria used shall be in accordance with the
following Engineering Manuals (EM):
EM 1110-2-3 8 Environmental Quality in Design of Civil Works
EM 1110-2-1601 Hydraulic Design of Flood Control Channels
(2) The design plates for the selected plan in the Feasibility Report shall consist of a
project location and vicinity map, and miscellaneous details. Topographical maps will
be modified with more detailed information on finished floor elevations in order to
establish the design criteria. All plates shall include alignment criteria in plan view,
right-of-way and construction limits, turfing areas, and construction dimensions and
legends.
4
(3) The written description required for the Feasibility Report shall include a plan
description of the design features, impact of existing bridges, utilities, establishment
of turf along the levee, and the environment including turfing of disturbed areas,
waste disposal sites for excess excavation and construction debris, and a cost table.
c. Relocations.
(1) Utilities that are to be relocated shall be identified in accordance with the
following criteria letter: SWFED-HH, 10 August 1973 - Relocation Criteria for
Improved Channel Projects.
(2) All utilities to be relocated shall be shown in their existing locations on the civil
design plates. Each item shall be noted with relocation limits and an applicable design
solution.
(3) The written description required for the Feasibility Report shall include all
affected utility lines which include sanitary sewer and water lines. The reasons for the
above work required shall be stated in this written report.
d. Plan Formulation.
(1) Proposed alternatives will be considered initially with a minimum of detail. As
the formulation progresses, the number of alternatives will decrease until a
recommended plan is selected and a detailed design presented.
(2) A more detailed design (which includes alignments, cross-sections, and
configurations) and plan and profiles will be developed for the most feasible plan(s).
Cost estimates at this level of detail will be generated as needed.
(3) A recommended plan will be selected and a detailed design will be prepared for
presentation in the report. A re-analysis of the developed plan and profile will be
performed. A project description will be developed for the selected plan and neat line
quantities developed for use in a detailed construction cost estimate.
2.3 COST ENGINEERING.
a. General.
(1) Cost estimates for this project will be prepared based on quantity take-offs for all
design items included in this scope of work. Ail estimates shall be in accordance with
the engineering manual, EM 1110-2-1301, Cost Estimate - Planning and Design
Stages. All estimates will be in the work breakdown structure format and the costs
for the recommended plan and NED plan, if different, will be prepared using the M-
CACES sof~ware.
5
(2) A project description and detailed estimate of cost (M-CACES) will be
developed for the selected plan.
2.4 GEOTECltNICAL STUDIES. Feasibility level geotechnical engineering design and
geological investigations and analyses will be performed in support of the project alternatives as
outlined in Section 1.1 of this Initial Project Management Plan. An investigation will be
performed and the resulting analysis and design recommendations will be documented in a
geotechnical appendix to be attached to the subject report.
a. Preliminary. Investigations. - Preliminary investigations will include site reconnaissance
and research of available information such as Soil Conservation Service publications, geological
publications, and foundation reports for any existing bridges, buildings, or other structures. The
purpose of the preliminary investigation is to identify factors which could possibly reduce the
scope of the required field investigations. The information obtained in the preliminary
investigation will be utilized in the design of the boring\surveying program to be performed in the
detailed phase of the geotechnical study. Any existing drilling and testing information will be used
as applicable for analysis and design of project alternatives.
b. Field and Laboratory Investigations. - Additional field investigations (drilling and
testing and/or surveying) may be required to assess the feasibility of the proposed project
alternatives. Borings would be of sufficient depth to adequately characterize the foundation
conditions for preliminary design. Laboratory tests (visual classification, Atterberg limits and
strength) would be performed on selected samples. The purpose of the field investigation
program would be to characterize the foundation conditions of the sites. Information obtained
from the field investigation program will be used in the development of the design of the project
features.
c. Analyses. - Sufficient engineering analyses will be performed to provide support for
evaluation of the design and construction of the project. Geological features which affect the
project design, construction, or operation will be evaluated and documented. Design parameters
will be developed for use in design of the project features. Analyses of areal and site geology will
be made. Results of investigations and analyses will be documented within the geotechnical
appendix.
d. Report. - Investigations and analyses performed will be documented in a formal
geotechnical appendix as part of the Feasibility Study document. The report will contain the
following information:
1. A brief description of the project.
2. References to applicable publications, site visits and foundation reports.
3. A description of areal and site geological conditions.
6
4. A description of all investigations and testing conducted. Testing methods will be
referenced.
5. A description of the project site including relevant surface features and subsurface
conditions.
6. A description of groundwater conditions, as obtained from the aforementioned
sources.
7. Geotechnical recommendations regarding borrow and/or disposal areas as needed.
8. Geotechnical engineering design recommendations for design of the project
features. Designs will be provided for proposed embankments and/or channels. All
analyses performed will be documented in the text.
8. Plates as necessary to support the investigations, analyses, and design
recommendations contained within the report.
2.5 HAZARDOUS, TOXIC, AND RADIOLOGICAL WASTE INVESTIGATIONS.
General. The project area (project construction area and/or floodplain buy out area) is to be
investigated to determine ifHTRW materials are present in the project vicinity. When completed,
the Initial Assessment should satisfy HTRW data requirements for a reconnaissance-level planning
study as outlined in ER 1165-2-132. As appropriate, investigations, analyses, and documentation
will generally be conducted as follows:
(1) Site Reconnaissance. The project site and the general vicinity will be investigated for
the presence or suspected presence of HTW materials. The investigation will be limited to surface
reconnaissance; i.e., drilling and/or lab testing will not be required. The site reconnaissance will
be documented with appropriate maps, photographs, and text.
(2) Municipal Records Review. Review of information and records applicable to the site
of the Recommended Plan including contacting the local fire department, environmental health
department, electric company, and water department will be performed. The purpose of this
review is to determine if violation of municipal codes have occurred on-site.
(3) State Records Review. Review Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission
data bases for underground storage tank facilities and leaking underground storage tank facilities
which may be present at the site or within a one-half mile radius from the site.
(4) Federal Records Review. A review of the Environmental Protection Agency,
Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Information System,
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Emergency Notification System listings. The
purpose of this review will be to identify the present use of HTW materials being stored,
7
generated, or transported in the area, or any State liens related to violations of the above acts. In
addition to past use, disposal, treatment, storage, emissions, or hazardous materials in the area
will be reviewed. This information will be reviewed and summarized up to a one-half mile radius
from the referenced site location.
(5) Review of Historical Land Use. A limited historical study of the site will be
performed. Records of original tracts, if available, will be reviewed as well as other available
maps. A review of past aerial photographs as pertains to land usage will be performed.
(6) Review of Relevant Geological Information. Evaluation and review of available
geological and hydrological information (United States Department of Agriculture, Soil
Conservation Service, and United States Geological Service) will be performed.
(7) Documentation. All findings will be detailed in a formal report including
recommendations for further action, if required. Lists of source materials and copies of relevant
reports which have been reviewed will be attached. List of agencies visited and personnel
interviewed for this investigation will be provided.
3. SITE INVESTIGATION
General. The primary objective of the SI is to determine the presence and character of
contamination identified in the Initial Assessment, estimate the volume and level of contamination
and to a limited extent, assess possible remedial action alternatives with respect to the available
data. When completed the SI should satisfy HTRW data requirements for a feasibility-level
planning study as outlined in ER 1165-2-132. The SI will include the following tasks:
(1) Investigations. Sampling of surface soil, sediments and surface water will be
performed. If necessary, subsurface drilling and soil/groundwater HTRW sampling operations
will be performed using a truck-mounted rotary drill, accessory equipment and necessary
materials. Sampling locations will be selected based on the Initial Assessment conducted at the
site. Conduct QA/QC sampling and analysis to assure proper sampling and laboratory
procedures.
(2) Testing. Submit samples to laboratory for analytical testing of priority pollutants.
Sampling and testing will be done in accordance with ER 1110-1-263.
(3) Prepare a Site Investigation Report. This report will summarize the sampling and
testing efforts; identify the location, extent and degree of contamination; and provide
recommendations on avoiding or remediating the contamination, as appropriate.
2.6 SURVEYS. Horizontal and vertical control surveys will be needed for soil boring locations
consistent with the engineering scale base maps. Finished floor elevations for the structures within
the study are will be required.
2.7 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES. Environmental studies and report preparation. This
work is to be performed by the government or contracting agents.
a. An environmental inventory of the proposed project area, an assessment of the
without-project future, and an assessment of the impacts of the structural and
nonstructural measures for the urban and rural flood control shall be made a part of the
Feasibility Report. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation and
appendices will be prepared in compliance with the requirements of ER 1105-2-100,
"Planning Reports," and ER 200-2-2. The report shall be based on all studies and
investigations conducted and from published reports applicable to the study area. The
main report shall be direct, concise, and written in an easy-to-understand style using ample
graphics, illustrations, and photographs. The main report shall also include the study
findings and recommendations.
b. Office and field work necessary to inventory, describe and evaluate environmental
elements in the area of project influence shall be accomplished, and an assessment of the
beneficial and adverse environmental impacts of each alternative considered in detail shall
be prepared. This assessment will be quantitative whenever possible. The assessment
shall discuss project alternatives and impacts of project alternatives including impacts on
water quality, vegetation, wildlife, fisheries, recreation, and other significant
considerations.
c. A literature and data gathering search shall be performed and necessary field studies
conducted to acquire information on the following environmental parameters for inclusion
in the NEPA document.
1. A general description or statement of the existing air quality and noise level
conditions in the immediate project area shall be prepared. Any significant problems
associated with existing air quality or noise level sources in the project area shall be
provided.
2. The existing water and sediment quality shall be described for the project area and
downstream areas which may be affected by the project based on all available data
and previous research. Available data and results of analysis shall be interpreted and
a discussion prepared on principle sources of municipal, or industrial pollution in the
project area to be affected. The discussion shall include the results of any previous
analyses of the physical, chemical and biological parameters, including nutrients,
metals, and pesticides and the source and concentrations of each.
3. If specific data is unavailable, water quality will be discussed in general terms
based on stream and watershed conditions.
4. The existing conditions of biological resources of the project area shall be
described for use in the environmental assessment. The biological elements to be
addressed shall consist of the following: vegetational habitat, vegetation of
significance, fish and wildlife resources, habitat of significance.
a) Major habitat types (e.g. brushlands, rangelands, woodlands, wetlands, etc.)
within the project area shall be included. Cover or habitat types shall be listed
for future analysis. A generalized discussion of habitat types shall be provided
and a discussion of the important habitats shall be incorporated.
b) Based on aerial photography, literature search, field verifications, or other
means, a discussion of any rare, remnant or unique species, specimens, stands,
or communities; threatened or endangered species; virgin stands; climax
communities; vegetation types unusual to the region; and habitats of important
native plants shall be provided. Any floral resources that should be preserved,
enhanced, protected or approached with care shall be indicated. A listing of
plants officially recognized or proposed by the Department of Interior (DOI),
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Texas Parks and Wildlife
Department (TPWD), and Texas Organization of Endangered Species, as
threatened and endangered plants reported for the area shall be provided.
Additionally, a detailed discussion shall be made of the relative value of habitat
types identified as feeding, breeding, nesting, nursery areas, cover, resting, and
as sources of nutrients for fish and wildlife.
c) The major mammal, bird, reptile and amphibian species groups which
characterize each habitat type shall be described. This information shall be
obtained primarily from the literature and other available sources and
supplemented with onsite field investigations. Species of commercial and
recreational importance shall be described, and their economic value shall be
quantified utilizing TPWD and USFWS data and other available information.
d) Wildlife resources identified that should be preserved, enhanced, protected,
or approached with care shall be discussed. Threatened and endangered
species of actual or potential occurrence in the study area shall be discussed.
The Endangered Species Act of 1973 will be strictly adhered to if any
threatened or endangered species, or their habitat, are found to exist in the
project area.
e) Aquatic resources that will be affected by the project shall be described.
Fisheries and vegetational resources shall be discussed, and proposed measures
for preserving and improving the quality of these areas as aquatic habitat shall
be provided. Fish and macro-invertebrate species shall be discussed and
available data from existing literature and TPWD and USFWS survey reports
on fisheries shall be presented.
f) Habitat evaluation procedures shall be performed in cooperation with the
USFWS to develop an appropriate, justifiable impact mitigation plan which will
10
be supported by an incremental analysis. The benefits and costs of the
measures shall be determined.
d. The USFWS will review previously described projects and provide an impact
assessment of the various alternatives to the Study Team. The USFWS will also review
the project to determine if any changes are required to the USFWS report provided for the
Reconnaissance Report due to new information, including the listing of threatened or
endangered species, policy changes, or planning requirements. The USFWS will also
review the quality of existing environmental baseline information, including terrestrial and
aquatic habitat mapping for the study area.
e. The USFWS will conduct the majority of their efforts with in-house resources,
including the development of an interagency team for evaluation of existing habitat quality
in project area and conduct impact assessment (Habitat Evaluation Procedures) for the
feasible projects, and develop a habitat mitigation plan for fish and wildlife resources. The
USFWS will prepare draft Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report during this phase
documenting results of their studies, including habitat descriptions, species present,
threatened and/or endangered species, wetlands present, etc.
f. A discussion of potential measures to mitigate losses to fish and wildlife resources
resulting from implementation of viable alternatives, shall be included in the assessment.
Predicted impacts to environmental resources in the area shall be investigated and included
in the assessment. This information shall be obtained from available documents, economic
data, and consultation with local and regional sources, and supplemented by field
verification and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Report.
g. Based on this report, an appropriate mitigation plan will be developed. Information for
the report shall be obtained by review of published and unpublished sources, and
consultation with universities, State and Federal agencies, private organizations,
individual, and other sources. The literature search shall be restricted primarily to
published sources, and secondarily to unpublished literature such as university theses and
dissertations, private organization reports, and other sources. Field studies to acquire
information for development of the environmental inventory and assessment shall be
performed as necessary.
h. The USFWS will finalize their Coordination Act Report, considering comments from
the Corps and TPWD, including refinement based upon development of final plans. The
USFWS will also provide a letter of concurrence from the state game and fish agency
(TPWD).
This agreement is intended to cover only the first phase of the NEPA process, that of
developing an Environmental Assessment for Pecan Bayou. Modification of this agreement, to
address preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), will be made, if necessary, after
the EA has been prepared.
11
2.8 CULTURAL RESOURCES. The legal responsibilities of any Federal undertaking
requires Cultural Resources work conducted for any study or project in partial fulfillment of the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers obligation under numerous Public Laws. Some of the Public Laws
that apply to the projects described herein, include: Historic Sites Act of 1935 (P.L. 74-292; 16
U.S.C. 461-467; Stat. 666 et seq.), the Archeological Recovery Act of 1960 (P.L. 86-523; Stat.
2201; 16 U.S.C. 469) as amended 1974, to the Archeological And Historic Preservation Act of
1974 (P.L. 93-291), the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (P.L. 89-665; 16
U.S.C 470 et seq.; 80 Stat. 915 et seq.), amended by P.L. 91-243, P.L. 93-54, P.L. 94-442, P.L.
94-458, P.L. 96-224, P.L. 96-515, P.L. 98-483, P.L. 99-514, P.L. 100-123, and P.L. 102-575;
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (P.L. 91-190; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), amended by P.L. 94-52, P.L. 94-83, P.L. 99-160, P.L. 100-202, P.L. 100-404, P.L. 101-
144, and P.L. 102-389; Executive Order No. 11593, 1971, Protection and Enhancement of the
Cultural Environment, the Archeological Resources Protection act of 1979 (P.L. 96-95; 16
U.S.C. 470 aa-mm; 93 Stat. 721 et seq), amended by P.L. 100-555 and P.L. 100-588; Executive
Order No. 12372, 1982, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs. The guidelines for
these undertakings are provided in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 36 CFR Part 800:
Protection Of Historic Properties, Section 106 process. All the ramifications of the undertaking
require attention under the above laws including: borrow areas, other excavation areas (drainage
outlets, channels), disposal areas, roads, pipelines, any other utility easements (telephone or cable
lines, etc.), subsurface testing for other Federally required activities, any wildlife mitigation areas
resulting from environmental mitigation, demolition, building (levees, right-of-ways [ROW],
construction), and sumps.
All Cultural Resources work shall be completed as much as possible before the project
begins in order to facilitate timely testing and/or mitigation prior to the project. For small
excavation and construction projects such as the sumps, all of the background work can be
accomplished prior to the undertaking and other work can be accomplished in concert with
project implementation. The existing conditions around these two sumps are highly developed
and will require a brief report to the Texas State Historic Preservation Office (TXSHPO)
describing the project, impact and the developed area around the sumps. In the event, expanded
subsurface excavations are required to accomodate the larger sump capacity and any new
easements, the excavations would require monitoring for deeply buried (4m) cultural resources
during the excavation phase prior to construction. The above work does not include testing or
mitigation of historic properties.
2.9 GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS STUDIES. This work will be
performed by the Government. The GIS efforts include support of Economics Studies and
Environmental Resource Studies undertaken by the Government. Support of Economics analysis
will be accomplished through integration of hydrologic (HEC-2) flood models and economic
structural data using the GIS methodology designed and tested in the 1991 Upper Trinity
Prototype Methodology Study. Support of the Environmental Resource studies will include use
of digital GIS landuse/landcover datalayers to report existing and proposed effects on resource
base of structural and nonstructural flood mitigation alternatives. Work to be completed is as
follows:
12
-!
A. GIS Support of Economics Studies
(1) GIS database of economic residential and commercial structure appraised values will
be queried to provide a report of absolute values within the study area effected by flood damage
and potential structural and nonstructural alternatives (Phase 1).
(2) Coordinate with Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch to obtain the water surface
profiles from HEC-2 models for all existing conditions and improvement alternatives, generate
water depth and flood delineation maps, calculate annual flood damage reports for Economics
Section, and support results with reports and maps as necessary (Phase 2).
(3) Rerun HEC-2 models produced by Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch for final project
structural-nonstructural improvement, generate water depth and flood delineation maps, calculate
annual flood damage reports for Economics Section, and support results with reports and maps as
necessary (Phase 3).
(4) A narrative report will be included documenting methods used to model floods and
calculate economic damages. Economic Damage Summary Reports and flood delineation maps
will be included in final report (Phase 3).
B. GIS Support of Environmental Resources Studies
(1) GIS Database of Satellite imagery based landuse-landcover will be queried to provide
tabular summary reports of environmental resources under existing conditions (Phase 1).
(2) Largescale maps delineating project area will be produced, as necessary, to guide field
investigations undertaken by USACE and USFWS in the study area. The maps will be generated
from existing maplayers including satellite imagery based landuse-landcover and the Trinity River
Corridor engineering scale digital basemaps of 2-foot contours, buildings, and roads (Phase 2).
(3) A narrative report will be included documenting methods employed to support
Environmental Resources Study efforts. Tabular reports of landuse-landcover resource acreages
effected under existing and improved conditions will be included in final report (Phase 3).
2.10 ECONOMIC STUDIES. This work is to be performed primarily by the Government with
assistance from the Sponsor, as indicated. Studies included under this category include analyses
of existing and proposed land use, expected annual flood damages (i.e, existing vs. with-project
conditions), as well as cost/benefit analysis of proposed measures (i.e., structural, non-structural)
to reduce flood damages within Sump 14W & 15W. A risk-based analysis framework will be
developed in accordance with draft EC 1105-2-205 that determines the reliability of variables
such as structure first floor elevations and content and structural values.
For structural plans, contents values will be estimated at 50% of structure value. Then a
sensitivity analysis will be conducted to determine whether or not the formulation is sensitive to
13
content values as a parameter. If the formulation is found to be sensitive to contents values within
the range of 44% to 73%, content surveys will be attempted.
The depth-damage curves that will be used in the study were originally based on data
collected by the Flood Insurance Administration. These curves have been extensively modified
over the years by the District as a result of field surveys and interviews with both property owners
and insurance adjusters. Distinct curves for over two hundred different structure types are
included in the data set.
Sump size/storage will be addressed, and economic optimization efforts will include
determination of the net benefits curve through analysis of three levels of protection.
a. Land use studies will be used to distinguish among single family residential, multifamily
residential, commercial, public, industrial, and vacant land within the study watershed.
Future land use will be determined by interviewing local officials and based upon current
growth trends. The Sponsor will provide the existing city master plan to assist in the
determination of future land use.
b. The STDMA Flood Damage model will be utilized to assess flood damages under
existing and improved (structural) conditions within the study area.
c. Expected annual damages will be computed, based on updated hydrologic and
hydraulic findings for existing and improved conditions. These findings will be segregated
by flood zone (1-, 2-, 5-year, for example), structure type (residential, commercial,
public, etc.) and by study reach.
d. Residual damages will be calculated for both existing and future conditions under the
recommended plan of improvement. Several alternatives will be analyzed during the
economic optimization evaluation.
e. A cost/benefit analysis will be prepared, with the benefits being derived for structural
plans by the difference between the existing conditions expected annual damages from the
improved conditions residual expected damages.
f. Finalization of the economic feasibility for the NED and locally preferred plans will be
made during this phase. Additionally, the flood warning system will be finalized.
g. A narrative economic report will be included as an appendix in the Feasibility Report.
This report will display the study findings in an objective, logical manner. All line items
addressed will be supported by the methodology, documentation, and display of the
proper analysis tools utilized. A financial analyses in support of the construction
recommendation will be presented and shall include the following: a statement of financial
capability; a financial capability assessment; and a financing plan.
14
h. The Government will prepare and include in the main body of the Feasibility Report,
the District Commander's Assessment of the Sponsor's Ability to Pay non-Federal shares
of the Recommended Project costs as specified in Engineering Regulation 1105-2-100.
2.11 REAL ESTATE STUDIES.
A. Schedule for Real Estate Studies. This study is to be conducted in three phases. The
majority of the real estate effort including the gross appraisal and writing of the real estate plan
will be accomplished in Phase 3, once the plan of improvements is defined. These major work
items, in Phase 3, can be completed within 90 days from receipt of conceptual design for the
proposed engineering solutions and appurtenant features.
B. Scope of Work'for Real Estate Studies. Real estate work effort in Phase 1 will involve
collection of map and/or legal description data on the local sponsor's existing property interests in
the vicinity of the sumps. The work in phases two and three will be dependent upon the findings,
recommendations, plans and decisions established during the preceding phases of the overall
study. If it is concluded that the plan of improvements can be accomplished without acquisition
of additional property interests, real estate efforts will be concluded by writing a brief summary.
No further analysis or appraisals will be required because the lands involved were items of local
cooperation on the existing Fort Worth Floodway project. If the plan of improvements does
involve acquisition of interests in real property, Phase 2 efforts will involve additional data
collection and coordination with designers. Finally, in Phase 3 the Government will prepare a
Real Estate Plan with detail appropriate to the scope and complexity of the acquisition. This plan
will describe the minimum real estate requirements for the proposed project, including estates,
costs, schedules and special considerations. The property values in the plan will be based on a
formal gross appraisal with appropriate review and approval. The work to be accomplished is
detailed as follows.
1. Gross Appraisal: The appraisal will estimate the value of property rights to be
acquired. The appraisal reports will include:
a. Maps of the subject area with sufficient detail to identify the types of lands and
improvements that will be impacted by the proposed project
b. Data on which of the improvements are business related, which are residences,
and the number and value within the project limits.
c. County tax office ownership and valuation data will be collected on affected
properties. The total number of ownerships within the project area will be verified based
detailed project plans used in conjunction with the latest ownership maps available.
on
d. Data, from local real estate markets, on recent land sales and offers for sale of
improved and unimproved properties comparable to the right-of-way required for the
project. This market information will be the basis for values of the various types of
15
properties within the proposed project. Severance damages which may be caused by loss of
access, distortion of tracts, or uneconomical remnants, will be estimated as a lump sum.
2. Real Estate Plan: The plans will address all aspects of the proposed real estate acquisition
including the following:
a. The total acreage to be acquired and the local sponsors exiSting interests in the
subject property. The acreage will be broken down into the various minimum estates required
or recommended and the rationale for using them.
b. The estimated number of residential and commercial properties to be displaced;
information regarding the availability of replacement housing; and estimated relocation costs
applying the requirements of the Uniform Act (The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real
Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, Public Law 91-646). This will include an
analysis of any special considerations which are anticipated in order to comply with the Uniform
Act
c. An assessment of the Sponsor's land acquisition experience and ability to acquire
in accordance with Title III of the Uniform Act, including capability to condemn. An
assessment of the Sponsor's experience and ability with benefits under Title II of the
Uniform Act.
d. A Baseline Cost Estimate for Real Estate.
e. A map showing the project area including minimum estates, property lines, utilities
and facilities to be relocated, and any known or potential Hazardous and Toxic Waste (HTW)
lands.
f. A discussion of the attitude of the landowners.
g. Any other relevant real estate information appropriate for the project.
3. Rights of Entry: All rights-of-entry permits for activities that require entry to private
property will be obtained.
2.12
RECREATION STUDIES. This work is to be performed by the Government.
General. This work item includes tasks necessary to evaluate the impact of each
alternative plan on recreation and related activities in the study area and to investigate
opportunities for enhancement of recreation opportunities associated with the
recommended project.
16
Visual Resources. As a requirement of NEPA, the existing visual and aesthetic
resources will be identified within the study area, and impacts of proposed project
alternatives on aesthetic resources will be evaluated. Tasks performed under this work
are governed by ER 1105-2-100. The scope of work for these activities includes the
following:
1. Identification of Significant Visual Resources. Significant visual resources and other
planning issues related to aesthetics that may impact plan formulation, design and engineering,
and potential recreational opportunities will be identified. Also, significant resources within
the study area will be investigated. Significant public perceptions related to local and regional
aesthetics will be identified, while strategies for avoiding or minimizing potential impacts will
be formulated.
2. Identification of Appropriate Mitigation. Appropriate measures to mitigate for
unavoidable adverse effects on significant aesthetic resources will be identified. Potential
mitigation measures, features, and actions will be evaluated according to their ability to
compensate for adverse effects or to mitigate damage to aesthetic resources associated with
various project alternatives.
3.0 OTHER REQUIREMENTS
3.1 STUDY MANAGEMENT. This work is to be accomplished by both the Government and
Sponsor. Overall management will insure that the study accomplishes the goals established,
proceeds at the anticipated rate, and all items in the scope of work are followed. Study
management to be performed by the Government will include scheduling and organizing of all
studies; regular periodic meetings with technical elements to review progress; preparing budget
documentation and monitoring and managing all funds being spent; preparation of project related
correspondence; coordinating with all Federal, State, and local agencies to insure that all have
been informed of the proposed plans of improvement, as well as the progress of the study;
Government participation in all Study Management Team meetings and Executive Committee
meetings; and providing guidance and support as required to insure that all questions have been
answered and all problems have been solved from the start of the study to the review and
approval of the final report by the Chief of Engineers.
Study management to be performed by the Sponsor will include scheduling and organizing of
required studies; regular periodic meetings with technical elements (both Fort Worth District and
contractors) to review progress; monitoring and managing funds being spent; preparation of
project related correspondence; coordinating with Federal, State, and local agencies to insure that
all have been informed of the proposed plans of improvement, as well as the progress of the study.
a. Regular monthly meetings will be held with participation of study management
(Government and Sponsor) and technical specialists working on study items. Progress and
problems will be discussed to facilitate actions by management to allot resources, coordinate
issues, or seek additional advice or expertise so as to maintain study progress and to address
all relevant issues.
17
b. Project related correspondence will be prepared by the Government and the Sponsor. This
shall include responses to all public, government, special interest groups, Congressional, or
other inquiries directly or indirectly relating to study activities or the study area.
c. Coordination with other agencies will require on-site visits and correspondence with
Federal, State, and local government agencies, institutions, businesses, or groups with
expertise, responsibilities, or resources related to flood control, environmental resources, or
other areas of interest in this study.
d. Automatic data processing capability will be provided by the Government using both micro
and mainframe computers to manage various data and accounting requirements generated by
the study.
3.2 PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT. This work is to be
performed by the Government and Sponsor.
The Project Manager (PM) and Sponsor will attend meetings and keep up-to-date on progress
and issues. The PM will be responsible for Quarterly status reports, fact sheets, and budgetary
efforts, with assistance from the Program Management team member.
Study budgeting and accounting will require monitoring of study expenditures by the
Government. Budget documentation will consist of the project cost estimates, benefit estimates,
and study cost estimates and related project information sheets needed to support budget
requests. Monitoring and managing of study funds will require preparation of monthly obligations
and expenditures schedules and monthly fund obligation projections; regular continuing review of
progress relative to expenditures; monthly review and reconciliation of CEFMS Finance and
Accounting System status reports with actual and planned charges against the study; coordination
of progress on funds obligations and expenditures with reviewing headquarters; and negotiations,
transfer of funds, and monitoring expenditures for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service studies. At the
end of the study year, an accounting of the funds expended in each study activity will be prepared
and submitted to the Study Management Team for review.
Study budgeting and accounting will also require preparation of annual budget
documentation. Budget documents will be updated periodically during the study in support of
budget reviews and to reflect changing interest rates or cost estimates.
The PM will develop the Project Management Plan to be submitted to Southwestern Division
(SWD) along with draft feasibility report. The PM and Sponsor will assist in the development of
the draft Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) to be submitted to SWD with the final feasibility
report if this becomes a Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) project. Otherwise, development
of the draft PCA will be accomplished with Pre-construction Engineering and Design (PED) funds
and submitted with the Design Memorandum (DM) report (if no DM, then during early stages of
Plans & Specifications).
18
3.3 ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT. This work is to be accomplished by the Government.
General Engineering will act as the project manager for Engineering Division (ED). As such, it
will monitor the execution of ED work in accordance with the IPMP as outlined in the FCSA. It
will also monitor the expenditure of funds per the FCSA. General Engineering will maintain that
all work performed is within the specified scopes and that any deviation is coordinated with
PPMD and the local sponsor for appropriate action.
General Engineering is responsible for the technical adequacy for the Feasibility Engineering
Appendi(x). As such, General Engineering will coordinate reviews in compliance with ER 415-1-
11, and with the District's Design Quality Management Plan (DQMP).
General Engineering also provides drafting support to the civil/structural section and will
assist in the preparation of plates and drawings.
Finally, General Engineering will be the primary point of contact for Engineering Division for
any concerns originating outside ED. General Engineering will attempt to resolve any concerns as
quickly as possible with minimal impact to the study team.
3.4 REPORT PREPARATION. This work is to be pgrformed by the Government. The
Feasibility Report for Sump 14W & 15W will consist of the main report, Environmental
Assessment, Finding of No Significant Impact (or an Environmental Impact Statement, if
warranted),U. S. Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act report, Archeological Assessment, Public
Notice, exhibits, and appendixes, and will be prepared in compliance with the requirements of ER
1105-2-100, "Guidance For Conducting Civil Works Planning Studies." The report will be a
complete decision making document and as such will include a complete presentation of plan
formulation. Once the draft report has been prepared it will be forwarded to higher Corps
authority for review prior to the required feasibility review conference (FRC). Upon completion
of the FRC the report will be revised as necessary and the released for public review and
comment. The public review period is typically 30 days in length. After the public review period
is completed, the report will be revised as necessary, and the final report will be signed by the
District Engineer and forwarded to Southwestern Division and HQUSACE for concurrent policy
review. Upon receipt, the Division will issue the Division Engineer's public notice. After
approval of the report by HQUSACE, the Chief of Engineers will forward the report to the
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. The ASA(CW) will coordinate the report
findings with the Office of Management and Budget. The ultimate goal is Congressional
authorization of the recommended plan for construction. The report will be based on all studies
and investigations conducted and from published reports applicable to the study area. The main
report shall be direct, concise, and written in an easy to understand style using ample graphics,
illustrations, and photographs. The main report will also include the study findings and
recommendations.
a. The length and detail of the NEPA document will conform to the regulations contained in
ER 200-2-2, "Procedures for the Implementation ofNEPA," dated 4 March 1988.
b. The appendices will be technical reports written for technical reviewers. The length and
detail of the appendices will be sufficient to cover all aspects of the subject. Graphics and
19
other illustrations will be used to facilitate the presentation. As a minimum, appendixes for
the following subjects will be included:
(1) Engineering Appendix (prepared in accordance with EC 1110-2-268, Engineering
and Design for Civil Works Projects, 1 July 1991), which will consist of:
Hydrology
Hydraulics
Civil Design
Cost Estimating
Geotechnical Data
Hazardous and Toxic Wastes
(2) Economics
(3) Real Estate
(4) Environmental Resources
(5) Cultural Resources
(6) USFWS Coordination Act Report
c. All report originals will be prepared on 8.5" x 11" plain white bond paper one side only.
Plates will be 11" high and folded to' conform with 8.5" width of the main document.
3.5 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. This work is to be performed by the Government and the
Sponsor during all phases of the study. The Government and the Sponsor shall arrange, conduct,
monitor, and evaluate each workshop/public meeting for the purpose of incorporating public input
into this feasibility phase study. The "public" shall include any affected or interested non-Corps of
Engineers entities. This includes other Federal, regional, State, and local government entity and
officials; public and private organizations; and individuals.
The Sponsor shall be responsible for providing the meeting facility, visual aids, and
developing/distributing public notices for all public meetings and workshops. The Government
shall assist the Sponsor in the development of the appropriate mailing list and distribute public
notices for the public meeting. The Sponsor shall provide pertinent information for the mailing
list The Government shall be responsible for conducting the meeting.
The public involvement during the study shall consist of approximately one (1) public
meeting and two (2) public workshops. The public meeting will be conducted at~er the
publication of the draft report, to inform the public of the findings and solicit comments from the
public. The announcement for the first public workshop will be given as part of the FCSA
signing. The notice for the public meeting will be sent out approximately 30 days prior to the date.
The second public workshop will be held after the initial findings, and used to solicit comments,
and build support for potential report recommendations.
3.6 SUPERVISION AND ADMINISTRATION. This work is to be performed by the
Government and the Sponsor during all phases of the study. The work will include all tasks
performed by the Executive Committee during the course of the Feasibility study and all
20
coordination efforts by the study managers and their supervisors with higher authorities and the
usual local and government chains of command. All tasks completed in this effort, including
phone conversations, preparation of letters, maintaining documentation, etc., will be accomplished
under this cost item. This work will be performed during all of the phases of the study. During
the study period, supervisors will attend the monthly meetings to review and follow the study
progress and problems. Supervisors will attend the work conferences with the sponsor.
Additionally, four monthly team meetings will be specifically identified for the Chiefs of Planning,
Engineering, and Real Estate will be requested to participate. Generally, these meetings will be
(1) Study Initiation, (2) Selection of Alternatives, (3)Plan Formulation and (4)Draft Report
Review. The Sponsor is expected to fully participate in these meetings.
In addition, a Planning Branch Chiefs review, along with a "peer" review will be conducted
prior to submittal of the draf~ report to the Southwestern Division.
3.7 REVllEW CONTINGENCY. This work is to be performed by the Government and the
Sponsor as required. The Feasibility Report is submitted concurrently to the Division and
HQUSACE. Comments may be received from either office, which must be addressed by the Fort
Worth District. The amount of work required from the District and the Sponsor during review is
determined by the number and nature of the review comments and cannot be predetermined;
therefore, this work item is considered a contingency.
3.8 SCHEDULE OF FISCAL YEAR FUNDING. The study period is scheduled to start in
Government fiscal year (FY) 1996 and finish in FY 1997. The amount of funds required in
Government FY 1996 and FY 1997 by the Government and the Sponsor are estimated as follows:
FY96 FY97
Government $100,000 $105,000
Sponsor 100,000 105,000
(Cash Contribution) (?) (?)
(In-Kind Services) (?) (?)
Total $200,000 $210,000
21
3.9 FUNDING BY PHASE AND SUBACCOUNT. The estimated total study cost has been
broken down into various subaccounts by phase.
PHASE COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
Hydrologic/Hydraulic Studies
Civil/Structural Design
Cost Engineering
Geotechnical Studies
Hazardous and Toxic Wastes
Surveys
Environmental Studies
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Cultural Resource Studies
Geographical Information System
Economic Studies
Recreation Studies
Real Estate Studies
Study Management
Plan Formulation
Programs and Project Management
General Engineering
Report Preparation
Public Involvement
Supervision and Administration
Review Contingency
47,000 15,000 8,000
25,000 17,000 12,000
5,000 5,000 10,000
5,000 7,000 5,000
5,000 10,000 5,000
0 10,000 0
1,000 2,000 5,000
0 2,000 3,000
0 2,000 3,000
0 6,000 5,000
0 13,000 9,000
0 2,000 3,000
1,000 2,000 7,000
10,000 10,000 10,000
2,000 3,000 0
14,000 12,000 14,000
9,000 9,000 9,000
0 0 10,000
1,000 1,000 3,000
3,000 2,000 3,000
0 0 25,000
SUBTOTAL
$ 126,000 $127,000 $157,000
22
3.10 FUNDING BY SUBACCOUNT. The estimated total study cost has been broken down
into various subaccounts, as defined in EC 1110-2-538, Civil Works Project Cost Esti-
mating - Code of Accounts. The costs are also broken down by Federal Costs and Non-Federal
Work-in-Kind Services, as shown in the following table.
DRAFT STUDY COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY
Federal Non-Federal Total
Hydrologic/Hydraulic Studies
Civil/Structural Design
Cost Engineering
Geotechnical Studies
Hazardous and Toxic Wastes
Surveys
Environmental Studies
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Cultural Resource Studies
Geographical Information System
Economic Studies
Recreation Studies
Real Estate Studies
Study Management
Plan Formulation
Programs and Project Management
General Engineering
Report Preparation
Public Involvement
Supervision and Administration
Review Contingency
70,000 0
57,000 0
20,000 0
17,000 0
20,000 0
10,000 0
8,000 0
5,000 0
5,000 0
1 !,000 0
22,000 0
5,000 0
10,000 0
30,000 0
5,000 0
40,000 0
27,000 0
10,000 0
5,000 0
8,000 0
20,000 0
70,000
57 000
20 000
17 000
20 000
10 000
8 000
5 000
5 000
11,000
22,000
5,000
10,000
30,000
5,000
40,000
27,000
10,000
5,000
8,000
20,000
SUBTOTAL
CASH CONTRIBUTION
TOTAL STUDY COST
$ ? $?
(?) ?
$ 410,000 $ 205,000
$ 410,000
$ 410,000
23