DOCSLIB.ORG

Mississippi River and Tributaries Project Authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1928 and Amended by FCA ‘65

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project Authorized by the Flood Control Act of 1928 and Amended by FCA ‘65 Mississippi River & Tributaries Project Historic Flood of 2011 Mr. Donald R. Davenport Hydraulic Engineer/Silver Jacket Coordinator Memphis District US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Flooded 26,000 sq. miles 600,000 homeless Over 250 people killed Economic Damages ~$1B MR&T Project & 2011 Flood Facts • MR&T Project Authorized After the 1927 Flood-Flood Control Act of 1928 •Designed for a Project Design Flood (PDF) – Extreme Event w/Reasonable Chance of Occurrence •2011 Flood Exceeded 1927 and/or 1937 floods but was only about 80- 85% of PDF •MR&T Project contained the 2011 Flood despite being only 89% Complete while: •No MR&T Levees failed or were overtopped •Used 3 of 4 Floodways during the 2011 Flood (not Atchafalaya in New Orleans District) •Backwater Areas’ Flooding Limited to Interior Flooding Although Came Close to Using Yazoo BW Area in the Vicksburg Distrit US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Project Design Flood Rainfall 6 The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again. US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Memphis District Boundaries MRT Project in Memphis District .1,160 miles of Levees & Floodwalls .275 miles of Berms .1,300 Relief Wells .4 Corps Pumping Stations .1,300 miles of Channels .600 miles of Navigation Channel . 2 Harbors The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again. The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again. The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the file again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again. 8 BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® Memphis Flood Fight Areas & Activation Levels INDICATED STAGES FOR MOBILIZATION WITH SUSTAINED RISE IN SIGHT INDICATED FLOOD MOBILIZATION STAGE STAGE PHASE I PHASE II Little River Diversion Channel 32 ft 38 ft 43 ft (Cape Girardeau, MO, Gage) MISSISSIPPI RIVER: Cairo Gage 40 ft 49 ft 52 ft Memphis Gage 34 ft 37 ft 39 ft Helena Gage 44 ft 46 ft 48 ft ST. FRANCIS RIVER: St. Francistown Gage 18 ft 24 ft 25 ft Lake City Gage 6 ft 12 ft 13.5 ft WHITE RIVER: Georgetown Gage 21 ft 22 ft 29 ft Des Arc Gage 24 ft 25 ft 31 ft Clarendon Gage 26 ft 32 ft 35 ft 10 BUILDING STRONG® Total PDF Precipitation Observed Apr 19-May 4 2011 Precipitation Comparison between the Project Design Flood (PDF) Precipitation events and the observed 2011 precipitation event.: • The PDF occurred in 3 events. • The axis of maximum precipitation for the PDF was along and south of the Ohio River. • Maximum rainfall totals for PDF were 24-32” over KY and along the Ohio River • The 2011 precipitation event occurred during 2 events 4/19-4/28 and 5/1-5/4. • The axis of maximum precipitation for the 2011 event was along and just north of the Ohio River in unregulated areas. • Maximum rainfall totals for 2011 event were 12-24” along and just north of the Ohio River. •It should be noted that stages at Cairo were elevated (+10ft or 127% of normal) at the onset of the 2011 rainfall event due to heavy rains in late Feb/early Mar that produced a crest of 53.41’ on 3/18. 11 BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® Floodfight Time Line April 24 April 28 April 20 April 25 April 29 4/20 4/21 4/22 4/23 4/24 4/25 4/26 4/27 4/28 4/29 4/30 2011 Reelfoot Obion Cairo Missouri Upper St. Francis West Memphis Memphis Helena Clarksdale White River 13 BUILDING STRONG® May 18 May 24 May 10 May 16 May 21 May 26 May 17 May 22 May 2 May 6 May 11 May 28 5/1 5/5 5/9 5/13 5/17 5/21 5/25 5/29 2011 Lower St. Francis Upper St. Francis White River Reelfoot Obion Missouri Cairo West Memphis Memphis Clarksdale Helena 14 BUILDING STRONG® Top 10 Significant Events . High energy sandboils in Cairo, IL . Water Berm near Fulton, KY . Operation of Birds Point New Madrid Floodway . Overtopping of Wappapello Spillway in Missouri . Bank Failure at Merriweather – Cherokee in Tennessee . Tennemo Levee breach . Dyer County Little Levee breaches . Overtopping of White River Levee, Biscoe, AR . Sandboils at Ensley Levee, Memphis, TN . Sandboils at Rena Lara, MS Events in our discussion 15 BUILDING STRONG® Sand Boils LEVEE CENTERLINE LANDWARD SAND BOIL RIVERWARD IMPERVIOUS ZONE RANDOM ZONE NATURAL BLANKET FOUNDATION SAND BEDROCK BUILDING STRONG® Mother of all Sandboils (MOASB) – Cairo, IL 17 BUILDING STRONG® Sandboil in Cairo, IL BUILDING STRONG® Sandboil in Cairo, IL 19 BUILDING STRONG® Sandboil – approximately 12’ deep and 50’ across 20 BUILDING STRONG® High Energy Sandboil in Cairo, IL 21 BUILDING STRONG® Additional High Energy Sandboil in Cairo, IL 22 BUILDING STRONG® Additional High Energy Sandboil in Cairo, IL 23 BUILDING STRONG® Ensley Levee south of Memphis, TN 24 BUILDING STRONG® Ensley Levee south of Memphis, TN 25 BUILDING STRONG® Sandboils at toe of Ensley Levee Berm - 26 BUILDING STRONG® Fulton County KY Water Berm 27 BUILDING STRONG® Fulton County KY Water Berm 28 BUILDING STRONG® Fulton County KY Water Berm 29 BUILDING STRONG® Tennemo Levee Crevasse 30 BUILDING STRONG® Tennemo Levee Crevasse 31 BUILDING STRONG® Dyer County Little Levee Breaches 32 BUILDING STRONG® Dyer County Little Levee Breaches 33 BUILDING STRONG® 34 BUILDING STRONG® The Ultimate Action in Risk Management Memphis District blew up 9000’ of MS river main line levee ! 35 BUILDING STRONG® BPNM Floodway Performance Cairo Cairo Gage Information Wickliffe Prior to Activation of Inflow Crevasse: 61.7’ 5/2/2011 Expected Crest without Activation: 63.0’ 5/5/2011 Immediately Following Activation: 60.67’ 5/3/2011 Inflow Friday’s Stage: ~28.5’ 7/29/2011 Crevasse Provided 3.5’+ benefit compared to predicted stages Flow Rates Inflow/Outflow Crevasse #1 Inflow Crevasse = 404,000 cfs on 5/3/2011 Hickman Inflow/Outflow #1 = 87,000 cfs on 5/16/2011 Inflow/Outflow #2 = 383,000 cfs 5/6/2011 Reelfoot (Includes1500 ft Gap and Inflow/Outflow #2) Lake Inflow/Outflow Crevasse #2 Link to USGS for flow/velocity: http://water.usgs.gov/osw/floods/today/BPNM_measurement.html BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® Plan of Operations-Based on Cairo Gage Setback Levee (65.5') 66 Cairo Floodwall and 65 Commerce Birds Point Trigger Points and 63 Levee (65.3’) Operation Times PDF with Floodway (62.5') 62 Must Operate by 61’ Frontline Levee (62.5') 61 H + 12 Fuse plugs on 60 Frontline Levee (60.5’) Inflow crevasse ready for operation 59 H - 0 Comparative Heights Arrive at Floodway; Load embedded of Flood Control Works 58 pipes (forecast 60.5’ and rising) 57 H - 15 56 Depart Memphis Harbor (projected rise) H - 53 55 54 Load barges and MVK vessels depart from Vicksburg 53 H - 77 52 Personnel and equipment on “alert” H - 101 BUILDING STRONG® FLOODWAY ACTIVATION BUILDING STRONG® Birds Point New Madrid (BPNM) barges loaded at Ensley Engineer Yard (EEY) 40 BUILDING STRONG® BPNM barges loaded at EEY 41 BUILDING STRONG® BPNM tow heading north on 26 April 42 BUILDING STRONG® BPNM Access Wells Opened 43 BUILDING STRONG® BPNM Pumping Activities 44 BUILDING STRONG® 45 BUILDING STRONG® Inflow Performance . Stats: ► 24,875 of 27,210 LF detonated (91.5%) ► 404,000 cfs Max Inflow on 3 May 2011 BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® The Historic Flood of 2011 . The MR&T Project worked as designed – provided the authorized level of flood protection. The flood recorded historic levels throughout the basin. All 6 Districts conducted flood fights in their areas. Virtually all of the Memphis District was engaged with flood fighting or supporting the effort. The District was in flood fight mode for 47 straight days. This was the only known time that all 10 flood fight areas of the District were in flood fights at the same time. The only time in history that the 3 major floodways were used together for one flood: Birds Point New Madrid Floodway in Missouri, and Morganza Floodway and Bonnet Carre Spillway in Louisiana. 49 BUILDING STRONG® 50 BUILDING STRONG® …but not without damage CAIRO MISSOURI RF HELENA SF LOWER MEMPHIS SF UPPER WHITERIVER CLARKSDALE - OBION DEFICIENCY TOTAL Armoring 1 1 Backwater Flooding 8 2 1 1 3 3 18 Burrows 1 5 6 Depression 2 2 3 1 1 1 7 17 Deterioration 1 3 2 1 7 Erosion 1 1 2 Excavation 1 1 Failure (Undetermined) 1 3 4 Inoperable 1 1 Leaking 4 1 1 5 11 Obstructions 1 1 Other (Specifiy in remarks) 7 9 1 2 5 5 1 1 31 Overtopping 2 2 1 5 Rutting 2 1 3 Sand Boils 30 14 57 12 1 33 41 85 273 Scouring 1 5 8 14 Seepage 2 2 2 70 10 15 16 117 Sliding 3 6 2 3 1 2 17 Slope Stability 2 2 4 Total 62 38 69 100 18 68 61 5 112 533 51 BUILDING STRONG® Memphis District 2011 Flood Repairs Upper District 52 BUILDING STRONG® Memphis District 2011 Flood Repairs Lower District 53 BUILDING STRONG® 54 BUILDING STRONG® Relief Wells RIVERSIDE LANDSIDE Clay Sand Tertiary Formation 55 BUILDING STRONG® Slurry Trench RIVERSIDE LANDSIDE Clay Sand Tertiary Formation 56 BUILDING STRONG® BIRDS POINT-NEW MADRID FLOODWAY 1990 RECON STUDY ALTERNATIVES .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geotechnical Overview
    I-66 CORRIDOR STUDY WESTERN KENTUCKY TO MISSOURI BALLARD / MCCRACKEN COUNTY - ITEM # 1-23.00 APPENDIX 5 – GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW Prepared for Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) – Division of Planning Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) – District 1 Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. In Association With: Qk4 Third Rock Consultants, LLC Cultural Resource Analysts, Inc. Fuller, Mossbarger, Scott & May FEBRUARY 2005 Table of Contents Section Page No. 1. Project Description ................................................................ 1 2. Scope of Work ........................................................................ 2 3. Physiographic and Stratigraphic Setting............................. 3 3.1. Topography and Drainage............................................... 3 3.2. Stratigraphy..................................................................... 3 3.3. Soils and Unconsolidated Materials................................ 4 3.4. Groundwater................................................................... 4 3.5. Regional Seismicity ........................................................ 4 4. Existing Corridor Features ................................................... 6 4.1. General............................................................................ 6 4.2. Domestic and Public Areas............................................. 6 4.3. Other Features................................................................. 6 5. Geotechnical Concerns .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Mississippi River & Tributaries (Mr&T)
    1 OVERVIEW OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER & TRIBUTARIES (MR&T) - ATCHAFALAYA BASIN PROJECT 237 217 200 80 252 237 217 200 119 174 237 217 200 27 .59 255 0 163 131 239 110 112 62 102 130 Port255 Of0 Morgan163 City132 –65 Stakeholder135 92 Meeting102 56 120 255 0 163 122 53 120 56 130 48 111 Durund Elzey Assistance Deputy District Engineer (ADPM) US Army Corps of Engineers New Orleans District 11 February 2019 2 TOPICS OF DISCUSSION • Passing the MR&T Project Design Flood • The Jadwin Plan • The Morganza Floodway • The Old River Control Complex • MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Flood Control Project • Atchafalaya Basin Levee Construction • Atchafalaya Basin O&M • Atchafalaya River Dredging • The Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System (ABFS) Project • Sedimentation Issues • Path Forward 3 THE FLOOD OF 1927 Flood Control Act of 1928 4 and the Jadwin Plan The Morganza Floodway 5 6 Old River Control Structures Authorized 1973 Flood . The Low Sill Control Structure was undermined and the Wing Wall failed . The Old River Overbank Control Structure and the Morganza Control Structure were opened to relieve stress on the Low Sill Control Structure . Due to severe damage to the Low Sill Control Structure, USACE recommended construction of the Auxiliary Control Structure, which was completed in 1986 Morganza Control Structure Operated for First Time View of Old River Control Complex Old River Lock Auxiliary Control Structure Low Sill Control Structure Overbank Control Structure S.A. Murray Hydro 9 The Flood of 2011 10 Extent of 1927 Flood (in Blue) Versus 2011 Flood (in Green) Passing the Project Design Flood 11 The MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Project The MR&T Atchafalaya Basin Project Major Components • 451 Miles of Levees and Floodwalls • 4 Navigation Locks .
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi River
    Mississippi River In 2011 the lower Mississippi River carried the greatest volume of floodwaters ever recorded, exceeding the his- toric flood of 1927. In that earlier flood, considered the most destructive river flood in the history of the United States, levees were breached or overtopped in 145 loca- tions, 70,000 km2 were inundated, and 700,000 people were displaced for weeks to months. Officially hundreds of people died but more likely thousands of rural resi- dents were killed (Barry 1997). The flood exposed two primary limitations to river and floodplain management of the time. First, flood manage- ment relied excessively on levees (the “levees-only” ap- proach) which presumed that nearly the entire floodplain could be disconnected from river floods. Second, flood- plain and river management was uncoordinated. In response to the flood, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers developed the Mississippi Rivers and Tributaries Project (MR&T). The MR&T coordinated levee placement and design, dam development and operations, floodplain management and navigation for the lower Mississippi Riv- er basin, including several major tributaries (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 2008). In addition to replacing a piecemeal approach to river management with a comprehensive system approach, the MR&T also moved floodplain management away from the “levees only” approach and included floodplain storage and conveyance as critical components of flood-risk man- Figure 1. The Mississippi River and Tributaries Project. Floodways agement. Four floodways were designated, portions of the are circled in red. (US Army Corps of Engineers) historic floodplain that would reconnect to the river and convey floodwaters during the highest floods (Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • 1973 Flood Again Justified the Federal Flood Control Projects in the Mississippi River Basin
    ~~\SSIPPI 11ft? ~~ AND -€4 TRIBUT ARIES DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENG INEERS LOWER MISS ISSIPPI VA LLEY DIVISION Vicksburg, Mississippi S\5SIPPI ~\-r:o AND TRIBUT ARIES POST-FLOOD REPORT 1l~13) Published by LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION AND MRC in cooperation with NORTH CENTRAL DIVISION, MISSOURI RIVER DIVISION, SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION, AND OHIO RIVER DIVISION SYLLABUS Throughout the autumn of 1972, above average rainfall began to fill fl ood control reservoirs along the tribu tary streams of the Miss issippi River. By December 1972, the basin had become saturated and very linle additional rainfall could be absorbed. Corps hydrologists noted an ominous pattern in hydrograph readings at Cairo, Illinois, the lOpOr the Lower Val ley, where the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers join. In ea rly i'vlarch 1973, morc storms developed over the Missouri River Basin, then moved into the nonheast over the Upper Mississippi and Illinois River Basins. Others blew lOW Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee, and Kentucky. On 9 March all indications we(e that a major flood had begun. Later storms in March and April added more fl oodwaters. It took until mid-June 1973 [or the flood to run its coursefrom the State of Iowa to the Gulf of Mexico. The magnitude of the nood varied greatly in the tributary basins,'buton an overall basis and particularly o n the lower Mis­ sissippi River the flood ranked as one of the great fl oods of Mississippi River history. Federal flood con trol works throughout the basin, although many projens were still under construction, were highly effenive for the purposes for which they were designed and constructed.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2011 Mississippi River Basin Flood: a Perspective on Forecasting, Water Management, and Flood Fight Chandra S
    The 2011 Mississippi River Basin Flood: A Perspective on Forecasting, Water Management, and Flood Fight Chandra S. Pathak, PhD, PE, D.WRE, F.ASCE HH&C Community of Practice Engineering and Construction US Army Corps of Engineers - HQ US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Acknowledgement Authors: Jeff Graschel (NOAA) Robert R. Holmes, PhD, P.E., D.WRE (USGS) Andrea G Veilleux, PhD (USGS) Charles E. Shadie, PE, D.WRE (USACE) Deborah H. Lee, PE, PH, D.WRE (USACE) Ron W. Bell, P.E. (USACE) Jody S. Farhat, PE, D.WRE (USACE) BUILDING STRONG® BUILDING STRONG® Mississippi River Watershed BUILDING STRONG® National Weather Service Role Provide weather, water and climate forecasts and warnings to: • Protect life and property • Enhance the national economy River Flood Forecasting is a collaborative effort between many agencies BUILDING STRONG® NWS River Forecast Centers 13 River Forecast Centers issue river guidance BUILDING STRONG® Pre-Event Conditions • Winter Outlook predicted wetter than average for Ohio & TN Valleys • Historic snow water equivalents occurred over Upper Miss Valley • Above normal rainfall in Feb caused elevated streamflow in the Ohio Valley BUILDING STRONG® Pre-Event Conditions • Spring flood Outlook indicated Above Average to High Flood Risk for Mississippi, Ohio, & Tennessee Valleys • Briefings provided to partners to convey flood risk • Then it started to “Rain” BUILDING STRONG® Rainfall Overview BUILDING STRONG® Communication/Collaboration • Continuous forecast coordination between NWS forecasters and USACE decision
    [Show full text]
  • Possible Capture of the Mississippi by the Atchafalaya River by John D
    Possible Capture of the Mississippi by the Atchafalaya River by John D. Higby, Jr., P.E. Information Series No. 50 POSSIBLE CAPTURE OF THE MISSISSIPPI BY THE ATCHAFALAYA RIVER by John D. Higby, Jr., P.E. Submitted to The Water Resources Planning Fellowship Steering Committee Colorado State University in fulfillment of requirements for AE 695V Special Study August 1983 Colorado Water Resources Research Institute Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Norman A. Evans, Director POSSIBLE CAPTURE OF THE MISSISSIPPI BY THE ATCHAFALAYA RIVER by John D. Higby, Jr., P.E. --Submitted to The Water Resources Planning Fellowship Steering Committee Colorado State University in fulfillment of requirements for AE 695V Special Study . August 1983 Colorado Water Resources Research Institute Colorado State University Fort Collins, Colorado 80523 Norman A. Evans, Director ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge the support of my supervisors in the Mobile District Office of the Corps of Engineers and the Office of the Chief of Engineers for making my year of study possible through the Planning Fellowship Training Program. The guidance of Dr. Norman A. Evans, Director of the Colorado Water Resources Research Institute, is acknowledged. Also acknowledged is assistance received from Dr. Chester C. Watson in obtaining many of the references used in this report. The guidance and contribution of my graduate committee is also acknowledged. Besides Dr. Evans, the committee members are Drs. H. P. Caulfield, R. B. Held, K. C. Nobe, and E. V. Richardson. Most importantly, the love and support of my best friend and wife, Kay, is acknowledged. ; i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i i L1ST OF FIGURES v ABSTRACT vi INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mississippi River Commission History of the Management of The
    The Mississippi River Commission History of the Management of the Mississippi River US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® US Army Corps of Engineers BUILDING STRONG® Presentation Outline . Overview of Mississippi River . History of Mississippi River Commission (MRC) . Mississippi River flood of 1927 . Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) project . Lower MR&T project ► Flood risk reduction system ► Deep water navigation ► Ecosystem restoration 3 BUILDING STRONG® Mississippi River 4 BUILDING STRONG® History of the Mississippi River and the creation of the Mississippi River Commission (MRC) • 1717 First levee built by Europeans along the Mississippi River (3 ft high, 5400 ft long, and 18 ft wide at the top) • 1743 French hasten development of levee system • 1802 Congress created the modern Army Corps of Engineers • 1803 Louisiana Purchase • 1811 Arrival of the Steamboat • 1876-1879 Jetty system completed • 1879 Creation of Mississippi River Commission 5 BUILDING STRONG® Act of Congress on June 28, 1879 Charge of the Mississippi River Commission 6 BUILDING STRONG® Mississippi River Commission (MRC) 1879 Mississippi River Commission Act, Forty-Sixth Congress, Sess. I. Ch. 43. Jurisdiction on the Mississippi River from its headwaters at Lake Itasca, Minnesota, to the Head of Passes near the Gulf of Mexico Three officers from the U.S. Corps of Engineers One member from the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey (now the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)) Three civilians (Two Civilian Engineers) All nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate 7 BUILDING STRONG® Current Mississippi River Commission (MRC) • Maj. Gen. John W. Peabody* President Designee Corps of Engineers, Vicksburg, MS • COL.
    [Show full text]
  • H Water Resources in Development Mississippi 1993
    H WATER RESOURCES US Army Corps IN DEVELOPMENT Vicksburg District MISSISSIPPI 1993 Arkabutla Lake, the northern-most Corps flood control lake in Mississippi, celebrated its 50th anniversary in 1993. The lake, known for sailing and crappie, is 30 minutes from Memphis, Tennes­ see. (Photo by Brad Emerson) This publication is authorized by the Secretary of the Army as required by Public Law 99-662 7^7 775 , h ^ WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS IN MISSISSIPPI U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS LOWER MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI May 1993 Mississippi Water Resources Basins This publication is compiled and edited by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Vicksburg District. For additional copies Water Resources Development in Mississippi 1993 Contents FOREWORD................................................. 4-5 PASCAGOULA RIVER BASIN.................41 INTRODUCTION..........................................7 Introduction....................................... 42 Civil Works Overview........................7 Projects...............................................42 Mississippi River Commission........12 Studies................................................ 46 Flood Plain Management................. 48 MISSISSIPPI RIVER....................................13 PEARL RIVER BASIN............................... 49 Introduction.........................................15 Projects................................................ 15 Introduction....................................... 51 Studies................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Scanned Document
    MISSISSIPPI RIVER COMMISSION The Mississippi River Commission (MRC) was improvements to include levees, headwater reservoirs, created by an act of Congress on June 28, 1879. The and pumping stations that maximize the benefits Flood Control Act of May 15, 1928, authorized the realized on the main stem by expanding flood Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries protection coverage and improving drainage into (MR&T) Project. The Commission consists of three adjacent areas within the alluvial valley. officers of the Corps of Engineers, one from the former Coast and Geodetic Survey (presently the National Since its initiation, the MR&T project has brought Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), and three an unprecedented degree of flood protection to the civilians, two of whom must be civil engineers. All approximate 4 million people living in the members are appointed by the President with the advice 35,000-square-mile project area within the lower and consent of the Senate. Mississippi Valley. The Nation has contributed more than $13 billion toward the planning, construction, The MRC has a proud heritage that dates back to operation, and maintenance of the project. To date, the June 28, 1879. Congress established the seven-member Nation has received a 27 to 1 return on that investment, presidential Commission with the mission to transform including $360 billion in flood damages prevented. the Mississippi River into a reliable commercial artery, while protecting adjacent towns and fertile agricultural The MRC continued its 130-year process of lands from destructive floods. The 1879 legislation that listening to the concerns of partners and stakeholders in created MRC granted the body extensive planning the Mississippi valley, inspecting the challenges posed authority and jurisdiction on the Mississippi River by the river, and partnering to find sustainable stretching from its headwaters at Lake Itasca to the engineering solutions to those challenges through the Head of Passes, near its mouth at the Gulf of Mexico.
    [Show full text]
  • Mississippi River Commission
    September 2016 Maj. Gen. Michael C. Wehr President Hon. Sam E. Angel Senior Member Mississippi Hon. R. D. James Member, Civil Engineer River Commission Hon. Norma Jean Mattei, Ph.D. Member, Civil Engineer 2016 Rear Adm. Gerd F. Glang Member Executive Summary 395th & 396th Sessions Brig. Gen. Richard G. Kaiser Member Brig. Gen. David C. Hill Member Listening, Inspecting, Partnering & Engineering since 1879 Table of Contents Mississippi River Commission 3 Inspection Trip Objectives 4 Strategic Messages 5 395th Session of the MRC, High-Water Trip 11 Public Meetings and Partnering Sessions 13 Top Regional Issues 15 Inspection Sites 22 396th Session of the MRC, High-Water Trip 26 Public Meetings and Partnering Sessions 28 Top Regional Issues 31 Inspection Sites 40 MR&T Project Economic Value 46 MR&T Authorized Work Remaining (Necessary to convey project design flood) 47 MR&T Authorized Work Remaining (by state) 48 MR&T 2016 Mississippi River Winter Flood Event 55 MR&T 2016 Winter Flood Damages 56 MRC Values 57 MRC Priorities 58 MR&T Project Fact Sheet 59 200-Year Working Vision 60 Partners Engaged 61 To view full testimonies and other linked documents in this publication, visit: http://www.mvd.usace.army.mil/About/MississippiRiverCommission(MRC).aspx 2 Mississippi River Commission www.mvd.usace.army.mil/mrc/ The Mississippi River Commission has a exerting unprecedented pressure on the proud heritage that dates back to June 28, backbone of the protection system, but the 1879, when Congress established the seven- levees withstood the record stages and pressure member presidential commission with the due in large part to the operation of three mission to transform the Mississippi River into a floodways and the storage capacity provided reliable commercial artery, while protecting by non-MR&T reservoirs in the Ohio and adjacent towns and fertile agricultural lands Arkansas-White basins.
    [Show full text]
  • Morgan City 2011
    DOCUMENTING THE 2011 FLOODS FOR THE MORGAN CITY ARCHIVES As the 2011 flood waters slowly made their way down the Mis- sissippi River, the state of Louisiana was assessing the potential impact to the river’s immediate neighbors. Based on projected water quantities, officials decided to open the Morganza floodway for the second time in its existence, diverting vast amounts of the river over- flow from Baton Rouge and New Orleans into the Atchafalaya Basin and inevitably the surrounding communities. Morgan City entered the national spotlight as the last stop on this diversion into the Basin. As the waters rose, Morgan City prepared to be flooded and eventu- ally was so. In a series of interviews, Tulane School of Architecture second year students documented the businesses hardest hit by the flooding. They then compiled their material into this volume presented to the Mor- gan City Archives, which does not have the excess labor to gather the information on their own accord, but thrives on the personal stories of its citizens. This project would not have been possible without the support of Morgan City’s Mayor Tim Matte and the Chief Administrative Officer Lorrie Braus. Special thanks also go to the interviewees below: Ellis Braus Mike Breaux Keith Daigle Greg Dillon Jerry Gauthier Jerry Hoffpauir Wayne Lancon George Lange Calvin Leleaux Brandon Leonard Chris Lipari Bill New Mike Patterson Dale Rentrop, Jr. Charlie Solar Darby Washburn Frankie Yates CONTENTS Morgan City and the 2011 Floods. [01] The Morgan City Floodwall. [02] Historic Floods of Morgan City. [03] Tracking the Flood . [04] Baker Hughes .
    [Show full text]
  • The Mississippi River & Tributaries Project:Controlling the Flow
    The Mississippi River & Tributaries Project Controlling the Project Design Flood Following the Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927, the nation galvanized in its support for a comprehensive and unified system of public works within the lower Mississippi Valley that would provide enhanced protection from floods, while maintaining a mutually compatible and efficient Mississippi River channel for navigation. Administered by the Mississippi River Commission under the supervision of the Office of the Chief of Engineers, the resultant Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR&T) project employs a variety of intensely managed engineering techniques, including an extensive levee system to prevent disastrous overflows on developed alluvial lands; floodways to safely divert excess flows past critical reaches so that the levee system will not be unduly stressed; channel improvements and stabilization features to protect the integrity of flood control measures and to ensure proper alignment and depth of the navigation channel; and tributary basin improvements, to include levees, reservoirs, and pumping stations, that maximize the benefits realized on the main stem by expanding flood protection coverage and improving drainage into adjacent areas within the alluvial valley. Since its initiation, the MR&T project has brought an unprecedented degree of flood protection to over 4.5 million people living in the 35,000 square-mile project area within the lower Mississippi Valley. The nation has contributed $13 billion toward the planning, construction, operation, and maintenance of the project and, to date, the nation has received a 27 to 1 return on that investment, including $350 billion in flood damages prevented. Such astounding figures place the MR&T project among the most successful and cost-effective public works projects in the history of the United States.
    [Show full text]