Upload
raphael-sharick
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Need For Updating Alluvial Need For Updating Alluvial Fan Floodplain Delineation Fan Floodplain Delineation
Guidelines: Guidelines:
An ASFPM Discussion PaperAn ASFPM Discussion Paper
ASFPM National ConferenceASFPM National ConferenceLouisville, KentuckyLouisville, Kentucky
May 19, 2011May 19, 2011
Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview
• ASFPM Discussion Paper Process
• Background: The Status Quo
• Discussion Paper Overview
• Facilitated Discussion
What is a Discussion Paper?What is a Discussion Paper?• It is:
– (The Paper Formerly Known as White)– A Policy Document– An Overview– A Summary– A First Step
• It is NOT:– A Research Project– A Technical Paper– A Detailed Methodology– A Fully Implemented Plan
ASFPM Discussion Paper ProcessASFPM Discussion Paper Process
• ASFPM Arid Regions Committee – Initiate & Write Draft Paper
• ASFPM Committee Group • State Chapters • ASFPM Board
– Approval?– Implementation as Policy– Recommended Actions
• Action by FEMA?• Implementation by Communities?
You are here
Background: Status QuoBackground: Status Quo
• FEMA Appendix G: (Guidelines)– Three Stage Methodology
• Stage 1: Landform• Stage 2: Active v. Inactive• Stage 3: Floodplain Delineation
– Table G1: Delineation Tools• “Not all methods are appropriate for all situations”
• 44 CFR Part 65.13 (Regulations)– Rules for LOMRs
p. G-12
FAN: - Fluvial Fans (not Debris Flow)
Hydraulic Models: - Uncertainty can be set aside - Urbanized areas, stable channel
Geomorphic Methods: - Little Urbanization - Approximate Method
Composite Methods: - Integrate results
NFIP Part 65.13NFIP Part 65.13• Major Structural
• Engineering Analyses– Hydrology– Debris Flow– Sediment– Erosion– Avulsion– Local Runoff– O&M Plan
Paper OverviewPaper Overview
• Alluvial Fan Flooding is Important– Large Percentage of Undeveloped Land– Unique Flood Hazards– Fans Delineation is Unique
• Goal: Improve Tools for Delineating & Managing Alluvial Fan Floodplains
Paper OverviewPaper Overview
• A History of Successes– 1970’s: Alluvial Fan Floods in So. California
• FEMA FAN Model
– 1980’s: Fan Delineation Studies in Southwest– 1990’s: NRC Alluvial Fan Committee
• Evaluation of Methodology• Recommended Improvements (1996)• Appendix G Revision (2002)
– 1996-2010: Fan Delineation Studies
Paper OverviewPaper Overview• Methodology Update Needed
– Lessons Learned from 15 Years of Application• Trial & Error• Identify Shortcomings & Opportunities
– New Tools & Technologies Available• Software• Hardware• Understanding of Physical Systems
– NFIP Reauthorization – RiskMAP Priorities
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#1: Recognize Fundamental Principles
– Account for Flow Path Uncertainty– Account for Changing Conditions on Fans
• Aggradation, Avulsion, Etc.• Engineering Time Scales
– Account for Differences Between Fans • One Size Does Not Fit All
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#2: Recognize That There Are DifferentTypes of Active Alluvial Fans
– Debris Flow Fans vs. Fluvial Fans• Well-Documented in Literature• Different Processes & Hazards
– Channelized Flow vs. Sheet Flooding• Different Degree of Hazard• May Occur on Same Landform
Lesson: One Size Does Not Fit All
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#3: The Methodology Should Distinguish High & Low Hazard Portions of Active Fans– Flow Path Uncertainty– Debris Flow Risk– Avulsion Risk– High Flow Depths & Velocities– Shallow Sheet Flooding Areas– Deposition & Scour– (Inactive Areas)
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#4: Clarify Appendix G Terminology
– Active Alluvial Fan…Active Alluvial Fan Flooding• Ultrahazardous … Sheet Flooding?• Uncertainty Cannot Be Set Aside?• Active = Flooded During 10,000 years? 1,000 yrs?• Active = Deposition, Erosion & Unstable Flow Paths• Active = Ultrahazardous
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#5: Improve Technical Guidance
– Better Documentation of Method Needed• Compare to Riverine Guidance• Fans are More Complicated, Need More Help
– Better Description of Composite Method– Better Description of Geomorphic Data– More Detailed Examples
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#6: Recognize Key Processes on Active Fans
– Flow Path Uncertainty• Mechanisms of Avulsion & Movement• Quantify Risk of Avulsion in Engineering Time Scale
– Infiltration• Recharge
– Peak Flow Attenuation • Apex to Toe• Impact of Development on Storage & Losses
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#6: Recognize Key Processes on Active Fans
– Avulsion• Definition• Analysis Techniques
– Sheet Flooding• Dominant Flow Type in Central Arizona• Shallow, Low Velocity, Broad Distribution
– Sediment Transport– Debris Flow
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#7: Conduct Training– Recognizing Active Alluvial Fans– Identifying Debris Flow Risk– Application of Analytical Tools
#8: Improve Review Process– Assure Fans are Identified– Areas Downstream of Active Fans – Active Fans Have Been Missed in Delineations
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#9: Investigate Avulsion Frequency– Identify Methods to Quantify Frequency– Update Methodologies to Reflect Actual Risk
#10: Investigate Other Methods to Quantify Flow Path Uncertainty– USACE Risk Analysis– Monte Carlo Simulations– Other….
Paper Overview: RecommendationsPaper Overview: Recommendations
#11: Collect Better Documentation of Fan Floods– Photographs & Accounts– Central Repository
#12: Explore Linkages Between ImprovedDelineation & Management Tools
– Link Hazards to Management (RiskMAP)– Link Hazards to Insurance Rates
Where Do We Go From Here?Where Do We Go From Here?
• ASFPM Board Approval….Done
• Consideration by IPT….Scheduled– FEMA, ASFPM, NAFSMA, USACE
• Action….Future– Study & Analysis?– Committee?– Recommendations?
QuestionsQuestions
• Jon Fuller [email protected]– Linkedin : Alluvial Fan Floods Group– Twitter: @alluvialfans – Future: www.alluvialfanflooding.com