home > Noise > Pearl River

Corps Finally Reveals $2.8 Million Flood Study


by Adam Lynch
August 20, 2009

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has finally released its 2007 Pearl River Watershed Feasibility Report to the public. The flood-prevention study has been long under wraps by the corps under the argument that it was in a "deliberative process."

Essentially, the study consists of the corps' comparison between a levees-only plan and a project devised by Jackson oilman John McGowan and Waggoner Engineering to flood the Pearl River between Hinds and Rankin counties and create two lakes. The Two Lakes plan has evolved under McGowan into its more recent incarnation proposing a 4,133-acre lake containing 36 islands ranging in size from 1.6 acres to 40 acres.

Douglas Kamien, chief of the Project Management Division of the Corps' Vicksburg District, said in an Aug. 11, 2009, letter to the Rankin-Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District that "because the study has not been acted upon" by the Levee Board in more than two years, it has "lost the merits of protection sought by the deliberative process privilege." Kamien wrote that, under these circumstances, the Corps could do no foreseeable harm through releasing the study to the public.

The study, which cost $2.8 million, appeared on the Corps' web site this month. On Aug. 10, the Rankin-Hinds Pearl River Flood and Drainage Control District submitted a resolution requesting the Corps provide modifications of project schedules and costs of various flood-control propositions, including the McGowan plan. The board also requested the corps consider "all reasonable alternatives" to the McGowan plan and the Corps' own preferred levees-only plan.

On the same day, the board agreed to pull its selection of a locally preferred plan involving a smaller and less ambitious lake plan than the one featured in the corps' study, with board Chairman Billy Orr explaining that the Corps should move forward with its deliberations free of the local board's bias toward any particular plan.

The board also agreed to share the costs of upcoming modifications of the 2007 study with the Corps, not to exceed $50,000.

Levee Board attorney Trudy Allen would not release a copy of the board's resolution to the Jackson Free Press on the day of the board's decision, even though the board issued their decision in a public vote. The JFP instead received a copy of the resolution from Jackson Mayor Harvey Johnson Jr., who is a board member.

In its 2007 study, the Corps included every estimated cost requirement for the Two Lakes Project advocated by McGowan and Waggoner Engineering, including flood and environmental mitigation. Total costs amounted to a staggering $1.5 billion, much of which would have to be financed on a local level--likely derived through property taxes. Interest on the financing, as well as annual operation and maintenance, amounted to almost $9 million by corps' estimates.

McGowan, who criticized the Corps for not releasing the study, says the federal agency inflated costs, and says he can build a project containing two lakes for $336 million to $400 million. Engineer Robert Muller, who works with McGowan, told the JFP in May that the price fluctuates because the plan has yet to be submitted through the Environmental Protection Agency's vetting process--the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, which considers all potential costs.

The report also makes clear that the Corps seriously considered a lake plan strictly at the behest of political forces, stating that former U.S. Rep. Chip Pickering, R-Miss., pressed the issue of the local lake plan with then-Mississippi Economic Development Authority Director Leland Speed--a lake advocate--and representatives of the local Levee Board in 2006. The Corps report points out that even Pickering recognized at the time that the lakes plan, then referred to as the Lower Lakes Plan, "would probably not be justified economically" by the federal government, and that local funding would be needed to finance the brunt of the endeavor.

 
posted by Todd Stauffer on 08/20/09 at 03:59 PM. [printer version]    Share |

COMMENTS

Where can I access the study online?

posted by annyimiss on 08/20/09 at 05:22 PM

Here it is; linking it above now.

This is BIG news that they finally released it. Long overdue.

posted by DonnaLadd on 08/20/09 at 05:25 PM

How much ya wanna bet that neither the CL nor Big TV will pick up on the Pickering angle?

posted by blogtw4 on 08/21/09 at 05:45 AM

What interests me is Speed's involvement. And I trust the Corps estimate of costs much more than a land developer. Do you want a glorified realtor building your lake?

posted by Ironghost on 08/21/09 at 07:35 AM

Thanks for updating the link, I began reading it last night. For a report about too much water, it is pretty dry. Is there any local group looking at these flood mitigation ideas objectively? What are the positions of the local and national conservation and environmental groups?

posted by annyimiss on 08/21/09 at 07:48 AM

Does anyone care about what another dam system will do to the Pearl Wildlife Management area down south? Artificial lakes do nothing but line the pockets of politicians and developers, at the expense of the environment. It's time to stop abritarily messing with mother nature.

posted by Gorilla33 on 08/21/09 at 08:13 AM

annyimiss, see see the JFP's Pearl River archive; tons of substantive reading there:

posted by DonnaLadd on 08/21/09 at 08:29 AM

Just read the conclusion only and it is not a big surprise. Estimated costs for the Lower Lakes Plan is 1.4 billion dollars with a flood reduction benefit/cost ratio of .2 (20 cents flood protection benefit for every dollar spent). Report mentions that economic development benefits are not factored into flood protection cost/benefit calculations. Also mentions that the levies only plan does not have big support but is not hampered by strong opposition either, whereas there is strong opposition to the lakes plan. There are environmental downsides with both plans but the lakes plan has a much bigger environmental downside.

posted by gwilly on 08/21/09 at 10:41 AM

To me it looks like the Corps studied the Lower Lakes plan rather than the Two Lakes plan. Or are they one and the same?

posted by QB on 08/21/09 at 12:21 PM

No need to play dumb, QB. ;-)

posted by DonnaLadd on 08/21/09 at 12:39 PM

Page 1 of 1 pages

You are not logged in. To post a comment, you must be a registered user and logged in. Click here to register or click here to log in.

Log in to JFP using Facebook

:: recentcomments

Feb 10, 2012 | 02:12 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
DonnaLadd: Thanks, Maddow, for the credit and the link love for this post: on.msnbc.com/yflZ4j
Feb 09, 2012 | 09:50 PM
Biz Roundup: Welcoming New Businesses to Town
redlion: Interesting story. I actually patronized one of Scott's stores during a recent six week stay in the DC area. Still have a re-useable shopping bag from there. Had ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 04:55 PM
[Outlaw] A More Perfect Union
thabian: Loved this column not only for the very important subject matter, but because it contained a truly entertaining voice. I wanted to read more!!!!
Feb 09, 2012 | 04:35 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
DonnaLadd: Let's not forget when Rep. Holland tried to ban abortion back in 2006. Many of us weren't laughing about that stunt. Here's a 2010 report on him and a ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 04:15 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
Jason Meeks: brief mention of it in video :) by Colbert (via Twitter trending) http://tpmmuckraker. talkingpointsmemo.com/201 2/02/mississippi_rep_want ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 04:01 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
DonnaLadd: Oh, and I love it when Mississippi punks the nation.
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:57 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
DonnaLadd: I'm surprised anyone took it seriously. We heard about it earlier the week, and it seemed obvious before it was Holland. But we all deal with him. I'll ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:40 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
Lori G: I thought it was genius when I saw it. Of course, I knew the Colbert joke. I think that is the problem. In this state, there just aren't enough people that ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:20 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
DonnaLadd: I can totally see Holland on Colbert, both pretending to be conservatives! Ha!
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:16 PM
Fight the Power
rlnave: Attorney General Jim Hood was worried for nothing. Even though he was at the Supreme Court making arguments in the ongoing pardon case this morning, I'm hearing that Jackson Democratic Rep. ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:16 PM
Holland's Gulf of America Bill Sweeping the Nation
Lori G: This is an old Colbert joke! I wish someone would send this to Colbert. I swear, I think he'd cover it.
Feb 09, 2012 | 03:02 PM
[Editor's Note] Aloha, Jackson
DonnaLadd: By the way, I looked up an image of the patch our captain friend gave us. Apparently, he is with the 25th Infantry Division; read more here.
Feb 09, 2012 | 01:23 PM
Biz Roundup: Welcoming New Businesses to Town
DonnaLadd: Case in point from the Christian Science Monitor: Whole Foods Killing off Small Natural Food Stores: After years of delivering organic produce to health-food ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 01:19 PM
Biz Roundup: Welcoming New Businesses to Town
DonnaLadd: This is a mixed blessing. They sell cool stuff, but they could shut McDade's and Rainbow down if we're not all careful about where we spend all our food money. ...
Feb 09, 2012 | 01:08 PM
[Outlaw] A More Perfect Union
DonnaLadd: Amazing column.

100 recent comments »

 


click to view "flip" version of this week's print issue

 

Guests online: 186
Logged-in members: 1
Anonymous members: 0
Elapsed time: 0.6813
The most number of visitors ever was 1661 at once on 02/10/2012
currently online: davidmayes

 

© Jackson Free Press, Inc. - portions of code by CC with EE. User agreement and privacy statement.
phone: 601-362-6121 (ext 11 sales, ext 16 editorial, ext 17 publisher)
fax: 601-510-9019 * P.O. Box 5067 * Jackson, MS * 39296