slide1 l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
May 1, 2006 PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
May 1, 2006

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 45

May 1, 2006 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 149 Views
  • Uploaded on

Liaison Council Meeting. May 1, 2006. Meeting purpose:. Welcome. Present Draft Biennial Budget Project load projections Discuss Tri-Party MOA amendments Obtain Liaison Council input/thoughts on draft MOA amendments. Meeting process:. Biennial Budget Presentation Questions

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'May 1, 2006' - ingo


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
meeting purpose
Meeting purpose:

Welcome

  • Present Draft Biennial Budget
    • Project load projections
  • Discuss Tri-Party MOA amendments
  • Obtain Liaison Council input/thoughts on draft MOA amendments
meeting process
Meeting process:
  • Biennial Budget Presentation
    • Questions
  • MOA Amendments Presentation
    • Questions
  • Liaison Council Input/Thoughts
    • Captured
december 14 2005 liaison council meeting
December 14, 2005 Liaison Council Meeting

EEP Planning Cycle:

Dec 05/Jan06 Coastal RFPs

Feb-Mar 06 Operational Strategic Plan

Mar 06 Second wave FDP RFPs

Apr 06-Jun 06 Award of Oct 05 RFPs

Mar-Apr 06 Biennial Budget

Jul 06- Aug 06 First wave SFY 07 RFPs

Aug-Sep 06 Annual Report

business model continuous improvement

Assemble requests for mitigation

Evaluate existing assets

Make adjustments

Calculate the net remaining need

Design strategies to satisfy need

Evaluate progress/ quality

Contract work

Business Model: Continuous Improvement
impact projections time frames

1

2

4

5

6

7

3

Impact Projections (Time Frames)

7 Years

7 -Year NCDOT TIP

2006 7-Year NCDOT TIP Impact Projections

6 Years 3 months

July 2005

Feb 2006

Oct 2011

EEP Receipt of Impacts

2006 7-Year NCDOT TIP Mitigation Permit Projections

April 2011

Feb 2006

5 Years 3 months

Effective Mitigation Projection

Projected date that last TIP project may be permitted

sfy 07 08 biennial budget breakdown
SFY 07/08 Biennial Budget Breakdown
  • Admin= $11.2 M
  • Restoration= $115.7 M
  • HQP= $29.8 M
  • Proj. Dev.= $3.5 M
  • Total $160.2

* Based on MOA schedules

implementation
Implementation
  • Programmed (two years)
    • $115.6 M
  • Breakdown
    • $ 73.6 M FDP (64%)
    • $ 42.0 M DBB (36%)
slide9
HQP
  • $29.7 M budget
  • $25.1 M land
  • Projected to be compete QTR1 SFY 07/08
  • Completes land transactions on options
    • Titles
    • Surveys
    • Legal fees
    • HB 933
project development
Project Development
  • $3.5 M
  • Includes
    • Cost to complete 13 active WS plans
    • Initiate 4 new WS plans
    • Initiate 6 abbreviated WS plans
historical projected
Historical & Projected

2005 2006 2007

slide13
“We have had a productive transition and are still learning how to make EEP work better”

Secretary Bill Ross

Address to the Liaison Council

December 14, 2005

tri party moa
Tri-party MOA:
  • Core principles and goals remain the same
  • Necessity for amendments
  • Section adjustments
tri party moa what is not changing
Tri-party MOA- What is not changing
  • Advance mitigation based on impact prediction
  • 1:1 restoration to replace lost functions

(preservation will not be used as sole method of mitigation)

  • Concerted effort to effectively restore and replace lost aquatic functions
  • Clean Water Act standards for no net loss
necessity for moa amendments
Necessity for MOA amendments
  • Technical adjustments to original assumptions
  • Impact projections not far enough in advance
  • Clarification of responsibilities
  • Complexity of metrics and reporting
  • To align processes and timing
moa adjustment themes
MOA adjustment themes
  • Challenging CUs and alternative mitigation
  • Accountability
  • Flexibility
  • Sequencing and communication between EEP-DOT-USACE
  • Compliance metrics
amendment sections
Amendment Sections:
  • IV.F
  • VI. B. 4
  • VI. B. 6
  • X
section iv f
Section IV.F

Why: Build some level of flexibility

What: NCDOT ability to propose to use alternatives- in-lieu fee program, other

Discussion: Means and methods for DOT to propose alternative mitigation when/if NCDENR is unable to provide

section vi b 4
Section VI.B.4

Why: to clarify responsibilities

What: A clear definition of who USACE holds accountable for mitigation at what points in time

Discussion: To clearly define that EEP is responsible party at time of permit decision,

section vi b 6
Section VI.B.6

Why: To align processes and timing

What: A clear definition of sequencing DOT requests and EEP acceptance for mitigation to ensure that mitigation delivery is in the correct timing with permit requirements and a protocol to address unanticipated impacts.

Discussions: Centering around USACE developing protocol

section x
Section X

Why: Complexity

What: To develop a clear and concise definition and metrics for evaluating compliance, reporting, and directing the program

Discussion: USACE proposes metrics that are compatible with proposed CFRs and simplifies the reporting system.

moa timeline technical issues
MOA Timeline Technical Issues

Years Allowed to Complete Construction From Moment Impact Data Delivered

1

2

4

5

3

Transition Period

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9

Year 10

Year 11

Year 12

Year 13

Year 14

Year 15

Date Impact

Projections

Received

5 months to complete Watershed Planning, Site Identification, Acquisition, Design, and Construction

slide24

MOA Timeline Technical Issues

Years To Complete Acquisition in MOA From Moment Impact Data Delivered

-3

-2

-1

1

2

3

-4

Transition Period

Year 3

Year 4

Year 5

Year 6

Year 7

Year 8

Year 9

Year 10

Year 11

Year 12

Year 13

Year 14

Year 15

-3 Years 7 months

Date Impact

Projections

Received

usace amendment process
USACE Amendment Process:

Continue discussions between USACE, DOT and EEP

Develop proposed draft amendment document

Public comment

progress report
Progress Report
  • End of Transition Compliance
  • Other ILF programs
    • Buffer
    • Nutrient offset
  • Fund Reports
data sources
Data Sources
  • End of Transition Report
  • Annual Report for FY 2004-2005

www.nceep.net – follow links to Publications page

end of transition compliance overall
End of Transition Compliance - Overall
  • Streams = 98.70%
  • Wetlands = 95.04%
  • Highest level of compliance ever for NC’s ILF Programs
  • Includes 5:1 return of HQ Preservation
  • Permits for which 1:1 restoration has not been provided remain covered by 10:1 preservation
project delivery mechanisms current contracts
Project Delivery Mechanisms – current contracts
  • Full Delivery
    • Contract value = $87,082,559
  • Design-Bid-Build
    • Contract value = $39,612,933
on the horizon
On the horizon:
  • MOA adjustments
  • Expansion of nutrient offset
  • Cost study – possible fee revisions
  • GARVEE bonds
  • Building Information Management System
  • More training of construction contractors
reports
Reports
  • Quarterly Reports
  • Annual Report
  • End of Transition Report

www.nceep.net

biennial budget steps
Biennial Budget Steps
  • Determine need based on new impact projections
  • Cash flow projections on active contracts
  • Assemble document on two-year schedule (cash flow)
  • Submit to DOT
phase 1 determine new program requirements
Phase 1- Determine New Program Requirements
  • Receive and analyze DOT impact forecasts
  • Compare impact forecasts with assets produced
  • Calculate net-remaining need consistent with MOA timelines
  • Design strategies to implement projects
phase 2 determine cost to complete active work
Phase 2- Determine cost to complete active work
  • Compile active contracts and agreements
  • Determine remaining contract value
  • Determine anticipated cash flow
  • Place projections into biennial/quarterly projection
phase 3 combine active and new starts
Phase 3- Combine active and new starts

Assemble data in format as required under the two-party

  • Administration
  • Implementation
    • DBB
    • FDP
    • HQP
  • Project Development (Watershed plans)
key points about eep
Key points about EEP

Major administrative duties:

  • manage funds
  • contract administration (Q/A)
  • strategic planning
  • programming work
  • reporting
  • leverage resources
  • addressing compliance/new rules and regulations
  • proposing strategies based on new science emerging technology
key points about eep45
Key points about EEP
  • Outsource majority of work, rely heavily on the private sector for production
    • Design, Bid, Build
    • Full Delivery
    • Land Owner Contacts
    • Watershed planning
    • Monitoring
  • Coordination and Guidance
    • Program Assessment and Consistency Group
    • Partnerships