WIXLIB

Breaux Act Funding StatusCWPPRA Federal Funding 90,000,000 80,000,000 70,000,000 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000NOTE: The figures contained in this spreadsheet are NOT OFFICIAL ESTIMATES.FY92 - FY04 figures are actual Federal funds received. FY05 - FY15 are estimates obtained from DOI.FY16 - FY20 are projections based upon yearly increases using the average yearly increase from FY06-15.FY92FY93FY9FY 495FY96FY97FY98FY99FY0FY 3FY1FY 415FY16FY17FY18FY19FY20 30,000,000Total Funding Required(for projects for which construction has started) The overall funding limits of the program should beconsidered when approving projects for construction Once a project begins construction, the program shouldprovide OM&M over 20 year life of project- PPL1-8 projects have funding for 20 years already set aside- PPL9 projects set aside funds in increments: Ph I/ Phase II 3 yrsOM&M/ yearly OM&M thereafter Total funds into the total program (Fed/non-Fed) over lifeof program (FY92-20) 2,059.4M 20 years of funding required for projects which have beenapproved for construction 800.16M, “gap” betweentwo 1,259.2M The 20-year cost for the 22 projects scheduled to requestPhase II funding using FY06 funds currently totals 456.8M, reducing the “gap” to 802.4M7

Breaux Act Funding StatusTotal Funding Required (projects for which construction has started)constr 20 yrs OM&MTotal Funding intoProgram thru FY20: 2,059.4M 2,000 1,800Total Cost PPLs 1-14 1.73B 802.4M 1,600 1,259.2M 1,400 1,256.93 1,000 800 800.1622 projects( 456.8M)Millions 1,200 600 400 200 0To DateFY 2006 requests"Committed"UP FOR APPROVALCWPPRA Funding SummarySHORT-TERM The program has recently “picked up” itsobligation rate, and currently has lowestunobligated balance since 1995 (around 80M) The program is now “cash strapped” in theshort-term and has more projects requestingconstruction funds than funds available Even though “cash strapped”, we have anunobligated balance of approx 80MLONG-TERM 10-year extension provides breathing room andenables program to fund construction of allprojects currently in Phase I and II if it chooses8

Agenda Item No. 1: PPL16 ProcessPossible Discussion Areas for 8 Jun 05 Technical Committee Meeting1. Number of Nominees/Candidates Considered Current (PPL15) process:o Nominees: 1 project per basin, 2 from Barataria & Terrebonne (11 total)o Candidates: Technical Committee select 6o Phase I funding: Technical Committee recommend up to 4 to Task Force Possible scenario(s) to discuss:o Nominees: 2 projects per basin, 3 from Barataria & Terrebonne (20 total)o Candidates: Technical Committee select 8-10o Phase I funding: Technical Committee recommend up to 4 to Task Force(there is a need to revisit cash flow process to consider2. Technical Committee Selection of Candidates without Task Force ratificationIssue: The Task Force questioned the authority that they delegated to the TechnicalCommittee which enabled the Technical Committee to select 6 candidate projects fromthe 11 nominees without further ratification by the Task Force Current (PPL15) process: Technical Committee selects candidate projects,assigns Federal agencies, and begins Phase 0 evaluation (no ratification ofselection by Task Force) Possible scenario(s) to discuss: Technical Committee recommends candidateprojects to Task Force for their ratification prior to agency assignment and Phase0 evaluation3. Technical Committee Recommendation of Projects for Phase IIssue: The Task Force questioned being asked to approve a “slate” of projects for PhaseI funding versus approving projects “individually”. The Task Force also asked for abrief reason why projects were/were not selected for funding. Current (PPL15) process: The Technical Committee recommends “up to 4projects” for Phase I approval. All candidate projects are presented to the TaskForce, along with the Technical Committee’s recommendation. The Task Forcecan consider projects one-by-one or as a “block”. The Technical Committee doesnot provide reasons for selection. Possible scenario(s) to discuss: No change to recommendation procedure – theTask Force can decide to fund any project(s) it wishes to fund. The process canbe modified to require the Technical Committee to provide “reasons” for itsrecommendation for Phase I funding.4. Nomination/Regional Planning Team (RPT) Meetings.Issue: PPL nomination process may not allow agencies and parishes adequate time tounderstand benefits or problems with nominated projects. Current (PPL15) process: One RPT meeting is held in each hydrologic region,resulting in a list of 11 nominees coast-wide. Possible scenario(s) to discuss: Hold 2 RPT meetings per hydrologic region. Thefirst round of RPT meetings will be held to accept nominations and assign fact1

sheets. The second round of RPT meetings will be held to present more details onprojects and to vote on projects to move forward as nominees. A second scenarioallows for one coast-wide second meeting to present projects and vote fornominees.5. Demonstration Project NomineesIssue: The Workgroups are evaluating large numbers of demonstration project nominees,even though we only selected one demo under PPL13 and none under PPL14. Somedemonstration submissions may not meet the CWPPRA definition of “demonstration”. Current (PPL15) process: Any number of demonstration projects can besubmitted to the Engineering/Environmental Workgroup forconsideration/evaluation. Possible scenario(s) to discuss:o Limit demonstration submissions to 1 per agencyo Develop a process for the Workgroups to “screen” list of nominees for: (1)eligibility (meeting demonstration project criteria) and (2) limit to a setnumber of demos (like we specify a set number of nominees/candidates)o Select a category yearly for demos (shoreline protection, dredging, etc.)2

APPENDIX APRIORITY LIST 15 SELECTION PROCESSCoastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration ActGuidelines for Development of the 15th Priority Project ListFinal, 14 Jul 04I.Development of Supporting InformationA. COE staff prepares spreadsheets indicating status of all restoration projects(CWPPRA PL 1-14; Louisiana Coastal Area (LCA) Feasibility Study, Corpsof Engineers Continuing Authorities 1135, 204, 206; and State only projects).Also, indicate net acres at the end of 20 years for each CWPPRA project.B. DNR/USGS staff prepares basin maps indicating:1) Boundaries of the following projects types (PL 1-14; LCA FeasibilityStudy, COE 1135, 204, 206; and State only).2) Locations of completed projects,3) Projected land loss by 2050 with freshwater diversions at Caernarvon andDavis Pond plus PL 1-6) (Suhayda).4) Regional boundary maps with basin boundaries and parish boundariesincluded.II.Areas of Need and Project NominationsA. The four Regional Planning Teams meet, examine basin maps, discussareas of need and Coast 2050 strategies, and choose no more than one projectper basin, except that two projects may be selected from Terrebonne andBarataria basins because of the high loss rates in those basins. A total of up to11 projects could be nominated. Selection of the projects nominated per basinwill be by consensus, if possible. If voting is required, each officiallydesignated parish representative in the basin will have one vote and eachfederal agency and DNR will have one vote.B. The nominated projects will be indicated on a map and paired with Coast2050 strategies. A lead Federal agency will be designated to assist LDNR andlocal governments in preparing preliminary project support information (factsheet, maps, and potential designs and benefits). The Regional PlanningTeam Leaders transmit this information to the P&E subcommittee, TechnicalCommittee and members of the Regional Planning Teams.III.Preliminary Assessment of Nominated Projects1

A. Agencies, parishes, landowners, and other individuals informally confer tofurther develop projects. Nominated projects should be developed to supportone or more Coast 2050 strategies. The goals of each project should beconsistent with those of Coast 2050.B. Each sponsor of a nominated project will prepare a brief ProjectDescription (no more than one page plus a map) that discusses possiblefeatures.C. Engineering and Environmental Work Groups meet to review projectfeatures, discuss potential benefits, and estimate preliminary fully funded costranges for each project.D. P&E Subcommittee prepares matrix of cost estimates and other pertinentinformation and furnishes to Technical Committee and State WetlandsAuthority (SWA).IV.Selection of Phase 0 Candidate ProjectsA. Technical Committee meets to consider the project costs and potentialwetland benefits of the nominees. Technical Committee will select sixcandidate projects for detailed assessment by the Environmental, Engineering,and Economic work groups.B. Technical Committee assigns a Federal sponsor for each project to developpreliminary Wetland Value Assessment data and engineering cost estimatesfor Phase 0 as described below.V.Phase 0 Analysis of Candidate ProjectsA. Sponsoring agency coordinates site visits for each project. Visit is vital soeach agency can see the conditions in the area and estimate the project areaboundary. Field trip participation should be limited to two representativesfrom each agency.B. Environmental and Engineering Work Groups and the Academic AdvisoryGroup meet to refine project features and develop boundaries based on sitevisits.C. Sponsoring agency develops Project Information Sheets on assignedprojects, using formats developed by applicable work groups; preparespreliminary draft Wetland Value Assessment Project Information Sheet; and2

makes Phase 1 engineering and design cost estimates and Phase 2 constructioncost estimates.D. Environmental and Engineering Work Groups evaluate all projects usingthe WVA and reviews design and cost estimates.E. Engineering Work Group reviews and approves Phase 1 and 2 costestimates.F. Economics Work Group reviews cost estimates and develops annualized(fully funded) costs.G. Environmental and Engineering Work Groups apply the PrioritizationCriteria and develop prioritization scores for each candidate project.H. Corps of Engineers staff prepares information package for TechnicalCommittee and State Wetlands Authority. Packages consist of:1) updated Project Information Sheets;2) a matrix for each region that lists projects, fully funded cost, averageannual cost, Wetland Value Assessment results in net acres andAverage Annual Habitat Units (AAHUs), cost effectiveness (averageannual cost/AAHU), and the prioritization score.3) qualitative discussion of supporting partnerships and public support;and4) oyster lease impact areas delineated for the State’s Restricted AreaMap (this map should also be provided to DNR).I. Technical Committee hosts two public hearings to present information fromH above and allows public comment.VI.Selection of 15th Priority Project ListA. Technical Committee meets and considers matrix, Project InformationSheets, and pubic comments. The Technical Committee will recommend upto four projects for selection to the 15th PPL.B. The CWPPRA Task Force will review the TC recommendations anddetermine which projects will receive Phase 1 funding for the 15th PPL.C. State Wetlands Authority reviews projects on the 15th Priority List andconsider for Phase I approval and inclusion in the upcoming Coastal WetlandsConservation and Restoration Plan.3

15th Priority List Project Development ScheduleOctober 2004Distribute public announcement of PPL15 process and scheduleFebruary 1, 2005February 2, 2005February 3, 2005Region IV Planning Team Meeting (Rockefeller Refuge)Region III Planning Team Meeting (Morgan City)Regions II and I Planning Team Meetings (New Orleans)February 8, 2005Mardi GrasFebruary 17, 2005(rescheduled date)Task Force Meeting (PPL 14 selected)February 4 – February 25Agencies prepare fact sheets for RPT nominated projectsFebruary 21, 2005President’s Day HolidayMarch 7 - 8, 2005Engineering/ Environmental work groups review project features,benefits & prepare preliminary cost estimates for nominatedprojects (Baton Rouge)March 10, 2005P&E Subcommittee prepares matrix of nominated projectsshowing initial cost estimatesMarch 16, 2005Technical Committee meets to select PPL15 candidate projects(New Orleans)May 4, 2005Spring Task Force meeting (Lafayette)April/MayCandidate project site visitsMay/June/July/AugustEnv/Eng/Econ work group project evaluationsJune 1, 2005Demonstration project submissions dueJune 15, 2005Technical Committee meeting (Baton Rouge)July 13, 2005Task Force meeting (New Orleans) – announce public meetingsAugust 30, 2005PPL 15 Public Meeting (Abbeville)August 31, 2005PPL 15 Public Meeting (New Orleans)September 14, 2005 Technical Committee meeting - recommend PPL15 (New Orleans)October 19, 2005Task Force meeting to select PPL 15 (New Orleans)December 7, 2005Technical Committee meeting (Baton Rouge)January 25, 2006Task Force meeting (Baton Rouge)February 2006RPT meetings for PPL 164

Decision: FY06 Planning Budget Development

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act13-Oct-04Fiscal Year 2006 Planning Schedule and BudgetP&E Committee Recommendation,Tech Committee Recommendation,Approved by Task Force,CWPPRA COSTSNOTE: Number shown in parentheses in line item tasks represents the number ofmeetings for that task.TaskCategoryTask No.TaskStart DateEnd DateDept. of InteriorUSACEUSFWSNWRCState of LouisianaUSGS BRDNRDWFGov. Ofc.EPAUSDAUSDCOtherTotalPPL 15 TASKSPL15600TF Selection and Funding of the 15thPPL (1)10/26/0510/26/050PL15700PPL 15 Report Development10/26/055/31/060PL15800Upward Submittal of the PPL 15Report6/1/066/1/060PL15900Submission of the PPL 15 Report toCongress8/1/068/1/0600FY06 Subtotal PL 15 TasksPlanning FY06\FY06 Budget Pkg (4) Initial to Tech Comm 8 June 2005.xlsFY06 Detail Budget00006/2/20053:59 PM00000000Page 1 of 6

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act13-Oct-04Fiscal Year 2006 Planning Schedule and BudgetP&E Committee Recommendation,Tech Committee Recommendation,Approved by Task Force,CWPPRA COSTSNOTE: Number shown in parentheses in line item tasks represents the number ofmeetings for that task.TaskCategoryTask No.TaskStart DateEnd DateDept. of InteriorUSACEUSFWSNWRCState of LouisianaUSGS BRDNRDWFGov. Ofc.EPAUSDAUSDCOtherTotalPPL 16 TASKSPL16200 Development and Nomination of ProjectsPL16210DNR/USGS prepares base maps ofproject areas, location of completedprojects and projected loss by 2050.Develop a comprehensive coastal LA 0/13/2005map showing all water resource andrestoration projects (CWPPRA, state,WRDA projects, etc.)PL16220Sponsoring agencies prepare factsheets and maps prior to andfollowing RPT nomination meetings.10/13/051/31/06016230RPT's meet to formulate andcombine projects. Each basinnominates no more than 1 project,with exception of 2 in Barataria andTerrebonne (3 meetings)[11 nominees]2/1/062/3/060PLPL1/31/05016300 Ranking of Nominated ProjectsPL16310Envir and Engr WG's to revise thePrioritization Criteria, WVA Models,etc (1 or 2 meetings).10/1/059/30/060PL16320Engr Work Group preparespreliminary fully funded cost rangesfor nominees.3/8/063/9/060PL16330Environ/Engr Work Groups reviewnominees3/8/063/9/060PL16340P&E develops and distributes projectmatrix3/10/063/10/060Planning FY06\FY06 Budget Pkg (4) Initial to Tech Comm 8 June 2005.xlsFY06 Detail Budget6/2/20053:59 PMPage 2 of 6

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act13-Oct-04Fiscal Year 2006 Planning Schedule and BudgetP&E Committee Recommendation,Tech Committee Recommendation,Approved by Task Force,CWPPRA COSTSNOTE: Number shown in parentheses in line item tasks represents the number ofmeetings for that task.TaskCategoryPLTask No.TaskStart DateEnd DateDept. of InteriorUSACEUSFWSNWRCState of LouisianaUSGS BRDNRDWFGov. Ofc.EPAUSDAUSDCOtherTotal16400 Analysis of CandidatesPL16410Sponsoring agencies coordinate sitevisits for all projects4/1/065/31/060PL16420Engr/Environ Work Group refineproject features and determineboundaries5/1/068/30/060PL16430Sponsoring agencies develop projectinformation for WVA; developdesigns and cost estimates5/1/068/30/060PL16440Environ/Engr Work Groups projectwetland benefits (with WVA)5/1/068/30/060PL16450Engr Work Group reviews/approvesPh 1 and Ph 2 cost estimates fromsponsoring agencies5/1/068/30/060PL16460Economic Work Group reviews costestimates, adds monitoring, O&M,etc., and develops annualized costs5/1/068/30/060PL16475Envr and Eng WG's prioritization ofPPL 16 projects5/1/068/30/060PL16480Prepare project informationpackages for P&E.5/1/068/30/060PL16485P&E holds 2 Public Meetings8/30/068/31/060PL16490TC Recommendation for ProjectSelection and Funding9/14/069/14/060FY06 Subtotal PPL 16 TasksPlanning FY06\FY06 Budget Pkg (4) Initial to Tech Comm 8 June 2005.xlsFY06 Detail Budget00006/2/20053:59 PM00000000Page 3 of 6

Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act13-Oct-04Fiscal Year 2006 Planning Schedule and BudgetP&E Committee Recommendation,Tech Committee Recommendation,Approved by Task Force,CWPPRA COSTSNOTE: Number shown in parentheses in line item tasks represents the number ofmeetings for that task.TaskCategoryTask No.TaskStart DateEnd DateDept. of InteriorUSACEUSFWSNWRCState of LouisianaUSGS BRDNRDWFGov. Ofc.EPAUSDAUSDCOtherTotalProject and Program Management TasksPM16100Program ram g Mgmt--Budget Developmentand Oversight10/1/059/30/060PM16130Program and Project Management-Financial Management of Non-CashFlow Projects10/1/059/30/060PM16200P&E Meetings (3 meetingspreparation and attendance)10/1/059/30/060PM16210Tech Com Mtngs (6 mtngs; prep andattend)10/1/059/30/060PM16220Task Force mtngs (4 mtngs; prepand attend)10/1/059/30/060PM16300Prepare Evaluation Report(Report to Congress)NOTE: next update in FY06 budget10/1/059/30/060PM16400Agency Participation, Review 30%and 95% Design for Phase 1 Projects10/1/059/30/060PM16410Engineering & Environmental WorkGroups review Phase II funding ofapproved Phase I projects (Neededfor adequate review of Phase I.)[Assume projects requesting PhII funding in FY06 (present scheduleindicates projects). Assumewill require Eng or Env WG review; 2labor days for each.]10/1/059/30/060PM16500Helicopter Support:Helicopter usage for the PPLprocess.10/1/059/30/060PM16600Miscellaneous Technical Support10/1/059/30/060FY06 Subtotal Project Management Tasks000000000000FY06 Tota

Breaux Act Funding Status 2 CWPPRA Construction Program Total Federal funds received into program (FY92 to FY05) 585M Total obligations 515.9M Total expenditures 247M 130 active projects: 64 projects completed construction 13 currently under construction 53 not yet started construction CWPPRA Construction Program Currently 22 projects scheduled to request