Flood Control in the Upper Mississippi

1
Flood Controlin the Upper Mississippi
ISPE Bootcamp October 6, 2009
By Michael D. Klingner, P.E.
2
2008 FLOOD
3
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
4
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
5
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
6
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
7

• Burlington forecasted crest at 9am on June 13th
  was 23.8 for June 19th. Actually reached 23.8 on
  the 15th Crest forecast off 4 days
• The crest forecast for the 17th was 26.01 feet.
  Actual crest was 25.8 feet on June 18th.

8
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
9
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
10
Hunt-Lima Lake Flood Damage Estimate of Costs

• USACE-RI / FEMA repairs to levees, 30,460,056
• pump houses and Canton Dam
• Road Repairs (County Twp. Commissioners) 2,763,
  648
• Private property losses (DD land
  owners) 4,228,312
• Crop Loss (39,893 acres) 33,931,783
• URSA Farmers Coop bin and grain loss 5,400,000
• plus Meyer cleanup
• Other Expenses 3,449,185
• TOTAL 80,000,000

11
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
12
2008 FLOOD (cont.)
13
Education Goals

• Levee History
• Levee Performance 1993 - 2008
• Comprehensive Plan
• Design Criteria / Standards
• Levee Safety/Liability
• Levee Certification
• Engineering and Environmental Opportunities

14
Flood Control as a Federal Issue

• 1743 French Colonial Government Requiring Levee
  Protection or Forfeit Land to the French Crown
• 1850 Congress Passed a Swamp Act for Public
  Health
• 1871 Illinois Statutes for Drainage Districts
• 1880-1910 Levees Built in our Area
• 1928 MRT- Project Flood (500 Year) for Lower
  Mississippi
• 1954- Flood Control Act- 50 Year Level
• 1999- Comprehensive Plan to Address Systemic
  Flood Control for the Upper Mississippi

15

• WHATS WRONG?
• Inadequate existing System
• Piecemeal vs. a systemic system
• Flood Frequency (Outdated Regulation,
  100-YR vs. 500-YR)
• Discrepancy between Lower Valley and Upper
  Valley
• Difficult to obtain State permits for
  improvements

16
Flood Control
17
(No Transcript)
18
1993 Summary

• 15 20 Billion in Economic Damages
• 70,000 Homes Damaged or Destroyed
• 74,000 Persons Evacuated
• Levees that did not overtop prevented an
  estimated 19 billion in potential additional
  damages
• Floods of equal or greater magnitude will likely
  occur in the future

19
UPPER MISSISSIPPI, ILLINOIS MISSOURI R I V E R
S A S S O C I A T I O N

• UMIMRAs Actions Post 93
• Worked with Corps of Engineers, State Federal
  officials to rebuild as built
• Initiated updating Flow Frequency Flood Profiles
• Retained Delft Hydraulics Outsiders View
  January 1997 Navigation Flood Control -
  Environmental
• Initiated authorization of Comprehensive Plan in
  WRDA 99
• 2000 Today Worked for appropriations
• February 2008 Comprehensive Final Report
• August 2008 Mississippi River Commission
  Recommends Plan H

20
UPPER MISSISSIPPI, ILLINOIS MISSOURI R I V E R
S A S S O C I A T I O N

• Draft Comprehensive Plan Highlights
• A flood damage reduction plan for the Upper
  Mississippi Illinois can be developed
• Strong regional benefits exist 5 to 1
• Most of the Levee Districts above St. Louis can
  be improved without increasing water levels
• Critical infrastructure Transportation (e.g.
  bridge, highways, railroads, etc.) need to
  function during significant flood events
• National oversight recommended (e.g. the
  Mississippi River Commission)

21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
St. Louis
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
Lower Valley and Upper Valley SPF Flows
Flow at Hannibal, Missouri 600,000 CFS
Flow at Greenville, Mississippi 2,890,000 CFS
27
Lower Valley and Upper Valley Flood Reduction
Funding
Upper Mississippi 10.5 million
Lower Mississippi 320 million
28
TROUBLE ON THE IL?
29
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
Illinois River Events (Beardstown)
30
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
Upper Mississippi River Events
31
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)

• The public living and working along the Illinois
  river have never seen a significant flood event
  and do not recognize the risk.
• Level of protection is inadequate most Districts
  are at 50 year design or less.
• Drainage District officials are not familiar with
  PL 84-99 and FEMA policies and not in
  communication with state and federal officials.
• Public does not recognize magnitude of SPF or
  major flood impacts.

32
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)

• Illinois EPA only require 100 year levels of
  protection for water intake and wastewater
  facilities and will not participate in greater
  protection.
• State of Illinois has numerous bridges and
  highways that will be impacted.
• Little ability to fight a flood, as most
  districts are earthen levees (not sand like upper
  Mississippi) and little available man power.
• Current State of Illinois Illinois Department
  of Natural Resources (IDNR) regulations make
  permits for improvements cost prohibitive.

33
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
34
(No Transcript)
35
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
36
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
37
TROUBLE ON THE IL? (cont.)
Beardstown
38
Iowa Draft Water Policies (Water Resources
Coordinating Council)

• The 0.2 flood should be the regulated flood
  plain instead of the 1 flood.
• The State should prohibit development in the
  regulated flood plain.
• Structures in the regulated flood plain should be
  constructed in a manner that will reduce damage
  caused by the 0.2 flood.
• Supports Plan H Comprehensive Plan.

39

• Levee Politics Authorization
• Levee Permits Induced Head Analysis
  Significant Requirements in Illinois
• Levee Financing Local Assessments
• Levee Design - Engineering

40
Drainage District Consulting

• Drainage District Organization Political
  Subdivisions of the State
• Board Members
• Drainage Assessments
• Types of Work
• a. Pump Station Design
• Levee Design / Rehabilitation
• HH / Drainage Studies
• Hydraulic Structures
• General Consulting

41
Drainage District Assessments

• Process
• Inventory all parcels in the district or
  properties that could potentially benefit from
  district flood protection and drainage.
• Evaluate assessed valuation and land use for each
  parcel.
• Develop a defensible methodology to determine the
  benefit each parcel receives.
• Develop a fee structure based on benefits.
  Communities may be assessed as a whole rather
  than by individual parcels.
• File petitions, have court hearings, respond to
  objections, set assessment roll, collect
  assessment fees.

42
FEMA PAL PROCESS

• PAL PROVISIONALLY ACCREDITED LEVEE
• Why National Floodplain Remapping Initiative
• Process 65.10 Certification Procedures
• Utilization of Existing Data USACE, NLD Survey
  Data, Field Inspections, etc.
• Each Section (CFR 65.10) Certified
• Liability concern for most companies
• (costs range from 50,000 to over
  1,000,000)
• FEMA Review Progress Reports
• Costello Bill HR 3415 (7 year extension)

43
FEMA Levee Certification

• Map Modernization Program (100 year Design)
• 65.10 of 44 CFR
• Freeboard 3 to 4 feet / Risk Uncertainty
• Closures
• Embankment Protection
• Foundation/Settlement
• Interior Drainage
• Operation Plans and Criteria
• Certification / Liability

44
Levee Certification Liability

• Certification / Accreditation / Compliance
• 44 CFR 65.2 b) For the purpose of this part, a
  certification by a registered professional
  engineer or other party does not constitute a
  warranty or guarantee of performance, expressed
  or implied. Certification of data is a statement
  that the data is accurate to the best of the
  certifiers knowledge. Certification of analyses
  is a statement that the analyses have been
  performed correctly and in accordance with sound
  engineering practices. Certification of
  structural works is a statement that the works
  are designed in accordance with sound engineering
  practices to provide protection from the base
  flood. Certification of as-built conditions is
  a statement that the structure(s) has been built
  according to the plans being certified, is in
  place, and is fully functioning. (c) For the
  purposes of this part, reasonably safe from
  flooding means base flood waters will not
  inundate the land or damage structures to be
  removed from the SFHA and that any subsurface
  waters related to the base flood will not damage
  existing or proposed buildings.

45
Design Criteria

• 50-YR (2)
• 100-YR (1)
• 500-YR (0.2)
• SPF Standard Project Flood (EM 1110-2-1411)
• Standard Project Flood Estimates
  representing flood discharges that may be
  expected from the most severe combination of
  meteorological hydrologic conditions that are
  considered reasonably characteristic of the
  geographical region involved, excluding extremely
  rare combinations.
• PMF Probable Maximum Flood (NWS, 1978) HEC,
  1984 Probable Maximum Flood Estimation
• Protection of Critical Infrastructure?

46
Design Standards

• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers EM 1110-2-1913
  April 30, 2000
• Geological Study Subsurface exploration
• Establish soil profiles, borrow locations and
  embankment sections
• Initiate final exploration and borrow areas
• Preliminary design and rough quantities
• Assign a typical trial section to each reach

47
Design Standards (cont.)

• Analyze each section
• Under-seepage and through seepage
• Slope stability
• Settlement
• Traffic ability
• Design special treatments as needed (berms for
  seepage, roadway crossings, closures)
• Final design for each reach
• Final Quantities and borrow areas
• Design embankment slope protection

48
Pump Station Design - Overview

• Standards Hydraulic Institute, EM 1110-2-3105,
  EM 1110-2-3104, EM 1110-2-3102
• Discharge Velocity / Priming Conditions
• Size 0.25 to 1 of Water off of Watershed in 24
  hours
• Other Sump Design, Pump Type, Vacuum System,
  Outlet, etc.

49
Engineering and Environmental Opportunities

• Protecting Critical Infrastructure
• Urban levees and flood ways to 500 year
  protection or standard project flood design
• Conservation areas and agricultural flood
  easements
• 100 year levee certifications (PAL)
• Comprehensive Plan major systemic improvements
  on both Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers
• Be involved and keep informed
• Join UMIMRA www.UMIMRA.org
• Illinois Association for Floodplain and
  Stormwater
• Management (IAFSM) www.illinoisfloods.org

50
Thank you! Michael D. Klingner, P.E. President,
Klingner Associates P.C. Vice Chairman, UMIMRA
51
Contact Information

• Michael D. Klingner, P.E.
• Klingner Associates, P.C.
• Offices Quincy, Illinois
• Galesburg, Illinois
• Hannibal, Missouri
• Burlington, Iowa
• www.klingner.com
• [phone]
• mdk_at_mail.klingner.com