r/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool
Exercise with North Hudson Sewerage Authority and
New York-New Jersey Harbor Estuary Program
CLIMATE READY
WATER UTILITIES
CLIMATE READY
ESTUARIES
oEHV
Office of Water (4608T) EPA 817-K-12-002 April 2012 www.epa.gov/watersecurity
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Disclaimer
The Water Security Division, of the Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, has reviewed and approved this report summarizing the Climate
Ready Estuaries and Climate Ready Water Utilities Joint Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness
Tool (GREAT) Exercise. This document does not impose legally binding requirements on any party.
Neither the United States Government nor any of its employees, contractors, or their employees makes
any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's
use of or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this report,
or represents that its use by such party would not infringe on privately owned rights. Mention of trade
names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Executive Summary
Current watershed management practices may not be sufficient to cope with potential effects of climate
change on aquatic ecosystems, water supply reliability, water quality, and coastal flood risk. As a result,
there is a need to identify regional consequences from climate change and to develop adaptation strategies
that are integrated at a watershed scale. EPA's Climate Ready Water Utilities (CRWU) and Climate
Ready Estuaries (CRE) initiatives are working to coordinate their efforts and support climate change risk
assessment and adaptation planning. Both EPA initiatives have a focus on addressing climate change and
water resource issues with stakeholders that share common interests regarding watershed management.
This report details a recent exercise that provided an opportunity for these parties to collaborate on
assessment and planning with respect to potential climate change impacts on utility infrastructure and
natural resources.
The Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness Tool (GREAT) was used to support the collaborative
process of identifying climate change threats, assessing potential consequences, and evaluating adaptation
options for both a utility and for the overall watershed. GREAT guides users through an evaluation of
potential climate-related impacts, including impacts to source water, receiving waters, and other natural
resources that may be a priority concern to other stakeholders. Within the tool, users can assess adaptation
options to address these impacts using both traditional risk assessment and scenario-based decision
making. The entire process is designed to be iterative, with opportunities to revise assumptions, add new
information, and revisit analyses at a later date.
The New York/New Jersey (NY/NJ) Harbor Estuary Program was the lead National Estuary Program
(NEP) for this exercise and North Hudson Sewerage Authority (NHSA) was chosen as a local utility to
host this exercise. Both NHSA and the NEP quickly identified common interests with respect to current
challenges and how their efforts related to climate change may complement each other. The receiving
waters for the NHSA system are part of the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary ecosystem which provides critical
habitat and serves the surrounding communities by providing recreation and transportation services.
Participants were introduced to GREAT through a series of webinars that culminated at NHSA with an in-
person meeting. This final meeting provided a venue for participants to meet, discuss the results of the
analysis, and consider lessons learned and next steps.
The value of collaboration between the participants was noted during all stages of the GREAT process,
especially in the definition of consequence categories, the assessment of consequences to natural
resources, and the selection of adaptive measures requiring coordination as part of implementation. Both
the utility and its watershed partners gained perspectives on the value of information used in assessments
and the interpretation of results for their use in future planning efforts. Feedback on the exercise process
and on GREAT itself will be used in the design of future joint exercises as well as in development of the
second version of the tool. Participants recommended sharing results with a larger audience to solicit
additional input and continue the dialogue between NHSA and its watershed partners. For any subsequent
exercises, there may be a need to select a location with a different level of urbanization so that the
analysis will support a more thorough exploration of the overlap between NEP and utility planning efforts
related to climate change.
in
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Table of Contents
Disclaimer ii
Executive Summary iii
Purpose of Exercise 1
Project Background 1
Scoping Meeting 2
Site Description 2
GREAT Exercise Methodology 2
General Approach 2
Webinar 1-June 3, 2011 2
Scenario Planning 3
Time Periods 3
Consequence Weighting 3
Historical Climate Data 4
Assets 4
Webinar 2-June 24, 2011 4
Threats 4
Adaptive Measures 5
Webinar 3 - July 19, 2011 6
Revisit Assets and Threats 6
Asset/Threat Pair Assignment 7
Revisit Adaptive Measures 7
Preview Baseline and Resilience Analyses 7
In-person Meeting at NHSA - August 15, 2011 7
Baseline Analysis Discussion 8
Resilience Analysis Discussion 8
Implementation Packages 9
Results and Reports 10
GREAT Exercise Summary and Lessons 11
Conclusions & Next Steps 12
References 12
Appendix A: Adaptive Measure Inventory from Exercise A-l
Appendix B: Comments and Feedback from Participants B-l
IV
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Purpose of Exercise
EPA's Climate Ready Water Utilities (CRWU) and Climate Ready Estuaries (CRE) initiatives are
working to coordinate their efforts and support climate change risk assessment and adaptation planning.
The impacts of climate change can extend beyond the traditional assets of a utility (i.e., infrastructure).
Furthermore, current watershed management practices may not be sufficient to cope with potential effects
on aquatic ecosystems, water supply reliability, water quality, and coastal flood risk. As a result, there is a
need to identify regional consequences from climate change and to develop adaptation strategies that are
integrated at a watershed scale. During this exercise, the Climate Resilience Evaluation and Awareness
Tool (GREAT) was used as a framework to bring together a larger group of watershed or community
stakeholders to explore an expanded scope of risk management and planning activities at drinking water
and waste water utilities.
The objectives of this exercise were to:
• Bring together the North Hudson Sewerage Authority (NHSA) and the New York-New Jersey
(NY/NJ) Harbor Estuary Program for climate change risk assessment activities that foster
opportunities for collaborative adaptation planning;
• Assess the usefulness and applicability of GREAT software for identifying watershed-scale climate
change consequences and developing adaptation strategies;
• Identify ways to enhance the water resources and ecosystem sections of GREAT as part of
improvement for Version 2.0; and
• Identify gaps in the current GREAT approach and areas for further refinement.
The major steps used to develop and conduct this exercise were the following:
• Scoping meeting and report;
• Site selection;
• Webinars (three conducted);
• In-person exercise; and
• Post-exercise report.
Project Background
During this exercise, representatives from the NHSA and the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program worked
together to use GREAT software to conduct a risk assessment analysis of climate impacts on shared
assets. The NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program is one of 28 National Estuary Programs (NEPs) established
under the Clean Water Act and is managed under a Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan.
EPA's Climate Ready Estuaries (CRE) initiative works with the NEPs and other coastal managers to:
• Assess climate change vulnerabilities;
• Develop and implement adaptation strategies;
• Engage and educate stakeholders; and
• Share lessons learned about climate change adaptation.
The EPA CRWU initiative plays a similar role for utilities in the water sector. More specifically, CRWU
provides resources for the water sector to adapt to climate change by promoting a clear understanding of
climate science and adaptation options and by promoting consideration of integrated water resources
management (IWRM) planning in the water sector. Both the CRWU and CRE initiatives have a focus on
addressing climate change and water resource issues and this exercise provided a first opportunity to
collaborate.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Throughout this exercise, GREAT provided a platform for discussion of climate change impacts on
shared water resources. GREAT is designed to assist drinking water and wastewater utilities in
understanding potential climate change threats and in assessing the related risks. Using the most current
scientific understanding of climate change, GREAT allows users to evaluate potential impacts of climate
change on their utilities and to assess adaptation options to address these impacts using both traditional
risk assessment and scenario-based decision making. GREAT also has the capability to consider impacts
on source water, receiving waters, and other natural resources that may be a priority concern to other
stakeholders (e.g., NEPs).
Scoping Meeting
The scoping meeting for this exercise produced a vision for the collaborative process: participants
conduct climate change risk evaluations using GREAT to determine the resilience of the local
water/wastewater utilities and their surrounding watershed. Participants used known information about
their utility and the watershed to identify climate change threats, assess potential consequences, and
evaluate adaptation options in GREAT. During scoping discussions, the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program
was identified as the lead NEP for this exercise. Based on location and interest, NHSA was chosen as a
local utility to host this exercise. Both NHSA and the NEP quickly identified common interests with
respect to current challenges and how their efforts related to climate change could impact each other.
Site Description
The NHSA system includes approximately 107 miles of combined sewers, 17 combined sewer overflow
(CSO) regulators, 11 CSO outfalls, and 6 pump stations. This system serves the New Jersey communities
of Hoboken, Union City, Weehawken, and West New York. The receiving waters for the NHSA system
are part of the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary ecosystem. The estuary is fed by a system of rivers draining from
five states, mainly off the Catskill Mountains, and flowing through several major metropolitan areas. An
important natural resource in the region, the estuary provides habitat for over 300 species of migratory
birds, spawning ground for several species offish, and also serves the surrounding communities by
providing recreation and transportation services.
GREAT Exercise Methodology
General Approach
Prior to the in-person meeting at the NHSA facilities, participants engaged in three webinars. These
webinars served several functions including introducing participants and providing a familiarity with
GREAT. Originally, EPA planned to use webinars as working sessions with all parties. However,
following the first webinar, the process was refined. Instead, utility representatives worked with
contractors and EPA to enter their data prior to the webinar session. NHSA staff called to discuss any
questions about the data entry and then provided their data file in advance of each webinar. The data file
was edited in preparation for the webinar. Between webinars, participants communicated with regard to
individual priorities and goals as well as data-related questions.
Webinar 1 - June 3, 2011
The objective of this webinar was to review the Setup and Assets portions of GREAT and begin preparing
for the j oint exercise. Using an initial set of information prepared by NHSA and entered into GREAT, the
group reviewed the Setup portion of the tool.
GREAT captures a variety of information about the utility being assessed, including aspects such as size
and ownership structure. This information is important, but is neither fundamental nor a prerequisite to
establishing an inventory or assessing resilience. Some of the data specified are used when generating the
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
final results and reports. These reports provide documentation of the analyses and may facilitate feedback
from report recipients. For example, wastewater utilities may use the Wastewater tab to specify the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or State Permit Number, Design Capacity,
and other flow and system details.
Scenario Planning
GREAT provides two options for assessing the likelihood for specific climate events. One approach is to
assume that threats will occur in the time periods considered, allowing users to explore a range of
potential conditions as future climate scenarios for risk assessment. If a user is not comfortable assessing
likelihood for threats due to uncertainty in climate projections or anticipation of future conditions, this
approach is preferable. With this approach, the threat likelihood will indicate that the threat simply occurs
instead of having a likelihood of occurrence on a qualitative scale.
If a user elects to assess the likelihood of threats, a second approach allows users to qualitatively assess
the likelihood of occurrence as low, moderate, high, and very high based on best professional judgment,
past experience and observations of historical conditions, and research using resources linked from
GREAT. Definitions for these are as follows:
• Very High - Occurrence within the time frame is probable: not certain, but far more likely to occur
than not. Recurrence is also likely within the time frame.
• High - Occurrence within the time frame is likely. Recurrence within the time frame is also possible.
• Medium - Occurrence within the time frame is less likely. Recurrence within the time frame is
unlikely.
• Low - Occurrence is possible, but unlikely within the time frame.
Following a discussion of the merits of each method, NHSA chose to use the second method and assess
the likelihood of threats during the exercise. The specific assessments were deferred until a later webinar,
but participants anticipated that the assessment of likelihood would be a valuable component of the
overall risk assessment and could foster discussion on how to plan for uncertain threats.
Time Periods
GREAT allows the user to select up to a total of five time periods in an analysis. Selection of time periods
can be based on budget or planning cycles, infrastructure needs, or anticipated timing of climate change
impacts. These time periods are then applied directly to threats being considered in assessments.
NHSA expressed interest in time periods that overlap with planned infrastructure upgrades (2015, 2020,
2030, 2040 and 2050). However, the current harbor restoration plan has target goals going out as far as
2050 and 2100. Further discussion of time periods was deferred until assets and threats could be
considered.
Consequence Weighting
Next, the group moved on to the consequence weighting portion of setup. Within GREAT, the user can
assess consequences across five selected categories. These attributes are provided to ensure that
assessments consider a range of potential losses due to climate change impacts:
• Business Impacts
• Equipment / Facility Impacts
• Water Resource Impacts
• Environmental Impacts
• Community Impacts
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Users can choose one of two methods for combining the consequence assessments across attributes:
• Select the HIGHEST LEVEL method if the user would prefer to use the highest level of consequence
for any attribute to be the overall consequence value.
• Select the WEIGHTED SUM method if the user would prefer to aggregate the attributes based on
relative weights. This second method would be appropriate if the user's utility would prefer to weigh
some attributes more heavily than others in order to reflect overall priorities.
NHSA had initially selected the default (Weighted Sum) method and assigned equal weights to all five
consequence categories. However, following discussion on the webinar, the group agreed that NHSA and
NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program would consult further with colleagues regarding organizational priorities
and any potential modifications to the category definitions.
Historical Climate Data
Historical Climate Data should reflect the conditions already being experienced for comparison with
projections of future climate conditions. Within GREAT, the data are organized with respect to highest
and lowest observations for average temperature and precipitation at a specified location.
After a brief demonstration of how to load and display the historical temperature and precipitation data
for New York City, NHSA was encouraged to explore other potential datasets for its location. As part of
this discussion, NHSA indicated that the potential threats of greatest interest for the analysis were storm
surge (and associated coastal flooding), volume and temperature changes (e.g., earlier spring runoff), and
high flow events (e.g., increased heavy precipitation).
Assets
The final process step reviewed during this webinar was how to select and edit assets within the tool.
GREAT provides two asset categories that are analyzed and maintained separately: Infrastructure and
Natural Resources. Each category contains a distinct structure and levels of assets. After developing the
initial My Assets list, a user may employ the Edit Assets tab to customize the assets to match the user's
facility. The user can specify asset properties, such as the description and other physical details (e.g.,
longitude, latitude, and elevation). Additionally, the user can add custom assets not provided in the asset
template.
NHSA suggested that the exercise should focus on the Adams wastewater treatment plant and associated
critical infrastructure. This facility, located in Hoboken, New Jersey, includes four pump stations, several
CSO facilities, and discharge locations at the Hudson River.
Webinar 2 - June 24, 2011
The objective of the second webinar was to review the Threats and Adaptive Measures portions of
GREAT in preparation for the in-person meeting at NHSA.
Threats
GREAT provides users with the ability to review regional climate projections, links to quantitative
information on global sea level rise, and qualitative information organized by threat type. This
information is predominantly drawn from the Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States report
published by the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP 2009) and peer-reviewed literature
cited therein. GREAT also provides a list of threat types associated with widely recognized climate
change drivers.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
To begin their selection of threats, the group reviewed the qualitative climate change information for the
Northeast region, including the description of how sea-level rise could change. For threats, NHSA had
initially identified the following:
• Coastal storm surge - Gradual sea-level rise will be exacerbated by more sudden coastal storm surges
during severe storms. In New York City, the 1-in-100 year coastal flood event is expected to occur
once in every 15 to 35 years by the end of the century (Horton et al. 2010). Increased coastal storm
surge may damage facilities and critical infrastructure.
• High flow events - Climate model projections, particularly for the Northeast, show that precipitation
will occur in more concentrated extreme events (e.g., intense precipitation events). NHSA, like many
wastewater facilities, is located at low elevation in the watershed, leaving its infrastructure at risk to
flooding related to extreme events and increasing the chance of combined sewer overflows.
• Altered surface water quality - Climate models project increases in average temperatures and the
number of extreme hot days in the United States. Algal blooms resulting from higher temperatures
may impact receiving water quality, possibly leading to more stringent discharge requirements and
the need for more advanced treatment by wastewater facilities. For NHSA, the threat would be related
to changes in the receiving water quality and the subsequent need to adjust to ensure standards are
met.
• Volume and temperature challenges - Climate models project that in the future, many areas are likely
to receive less annual precipitation, and when precipitation does fall, it will be in fewer, more extreme
rainfall events. These storm events wash sediment downstream and degrade water quality.
Diminished receiving water quality from increased sediment and/or algal blooms may lead to more
stringent requirements for wastewater discharges, higher treatment costs, and needs for capital
improvements.
• Loss of coastal landforms - Climate models project increases in the frequency and intensity of storm
systems. Damaging storms can lead to loss of coastal and stream ecosystems. The loss of coastal
wetlands can reduce the buffer for critical infrastructure against coastal storms, leading to damage of
treatments plants and potential disruption of services.
The group briefly reviewed how to select and customize threats within the tool by editing the coastal
storm surge threat screen. Customization includes specifying individual threat properties (e.g., name,
description) and defining any time-dependent characteristics (e.g., magnitude, frequency) of the threat.
Users can also input threshold values for specific threats which can be helpful in assessing consequences
to assets during the baseline and resilience analysis steps.
Participants discussed each of these threats and agreed that the last threat (loss of coastal landforms) may
not be relevant for NHSA given the lack of significant natural habitat in the highly urban area
surrounding the utility. The group decided to maintain the first four threats for use during the analysis and
planning portions of the tool.
Adaptive Measures
During this webinar, participants also reviewed how to select and edit adaptive measures. GREAT
provides an inventory of adaptive measures that can be classified as:
• Existing - part of an organization's current capabilities
• Potential - part of any plans or capabilities being considered
• Not Used - included in the Adaptive Measure Library but not applied to an analysis
The current template of available adaptive measures is based upon previous discussions with utilities and
literature review. A measure is designated by the user as Existing or Potential based on their intended use.
If an adaptive measure is used in the Baseline Analysis it becomes Existing; if a measure is used in
Resilience Analysis it becomes Potential.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
NHSA provided a spreadsheet indicating existing and potential adaptive measures that could be used for
the baseline and resilience analyses. One of these measures, Sewer/collection models, was designated as
both an existing and potential measure. This designation can be made in GREAT using one of two
approaches:
• The measure is defined as existing for the Baseline Analysis and then revisited during the Resilience
Analysis by choosing to Improve an Existing Measure.
• Alternatively, the measure can be defined twice prior to any analyses, where the potential
Sewer/collection model measure has an updated description explaining how it differs from the similar
existing measure.
NHSA agreed to continue entering adaptive measure information into GREAT and revisit this topic
during the next webinar.
Webinar3-Julyl9,2011
The objective of this webinar was to discuss logistics for the in-person exercise at NHSA in Hoboken,
New Jersey, review all information previously entered into GREAT, and demonstrate the baseline and
resilience analysis portions of GREAT in preparation for the exercise. During the logistics discussion, the
group agreed that participation at the exercise would include the core working group and representatives
from the New Jersey Dischargers Group. Other key details were also finalized such as start and end times,
roles and responsibilities and final steps prior to the in-person exercise.
Revisit Assets and Threats
To evaluate the data for analysis during the in-person meeting, the group reviewed the assets, threats, and
adaptive measures as entered into GREAT. The asset list for NHSA remained unchanged following
review and included the Hudson River as a natural resource (the receiving water) and several elements
under infrastructure (Adams Street treatment plant, Hoboken mains, Hoboken storm water sewers and
four separate pump stations). Participants also discussed the idea of further grouping the existing assets so
as to reduce the complexity of the baseline and resilience analyses.
A key lesson learned from this webinar was that many utilities and stakeholders would prefer to conduct
an assessment on just a few priority assets or threats before conducting a more complete assessment for
the watershed or system. This priority assessment would provide a way for utilities to assess conditions
they are most concerned about in relation to climate change and related impacts. The main reason for
conducting a priority assessment first is that utility representatives may not have time to do a
comprehensive assessment of all assets and threats over each time period selected. But if initial
assessments of assets or threats prove to be valuable, users may be encouraged to spend additional time
on more thorough assessments.
In GREAT, threats are assigned to specific time periods by selecting whether or not they are applicable to
each period and the likelihood of occurrence is assessed for each threat-time period combination. The
group assigned threats to the defined time periods with likelihood of occurrence ranging from low to very
high. Likelihood assessments (Table 1) were made based on NHSA's best professional judgment and
interest in providing diverse conditions for the exercise.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries
GREAT Exercise Report
Table 1. NHSA priority threats and their assessed likelihood of occurrence in identified time
periods (2015, 2020, 2030, 2040 and 2050).
Threat
High flow events
Coastal storm surges
Altered surface water
Likelihood of Occurrence by Time Period
2015
Low
Medium
n/a
2020
Low
Medium
n/a
2030
Medium
Medium
Low
2040
High
High
Medium
2050
Very High
Very High
Low
Asset/Threat Pair Assignment
Identified threats need to be associated with assets for use in the analysis steps in GREAT: the asset/threat
pair is the starting point for each detailed analysis. Threats can be paired to either single assets or groups
of assets. When paired to groups, the assessment needs to consider all assets within the group together
with respect to the consequences of a threat occurring.
NHSA proposed using the higher level of PUMP Stations to consider all stations together with respect to
both flood threats (high flow events and coastal storm surges). With respect to the Hudson River as the
receiving water, both flood and water quality threats were assigned to this natural resource asset.
Revisit Adaptive Measures
NHSA reviewed its initial list of existing and potential adaptive measures. Participants agreed that the list
should be revised to reduce the number of adaptive measures. NHSA, EPA, and the contractor team
planned to discuss this issue further and make a decision prior to the in-person exercise. The list of
adaptive measures used in this exercise can be found in Appendix A.
Preview Baseline and Resilience Analyses
Finally, the group reviewed the baseline and resilience analysis steps within GREAT. The results from
this Baseline Analysis establish a benchmark for the level of risk that threats associated with climate
change may pose to utility assets. Comparison of these results to assessments following implementation
of new adaptive measures (Resilience Analysis) provides a measure of the risk reduction possible through
adaptation. GREAT guides the assessment of any asset/threat pair on any time period where the threat is
applicable. An analysis considering all time periods can also be pursued where the consequences of threat
occurrence may not change over time.
EPA recommended that NHSA prepare initial baseline and resilience analyses as part of a priority
assessment in preparation for the in-person meeting.
In-person Meeting at NHSA - August 15, 2011
This meeting was the culmination of the exercise and brought together a diverse group of stakeholders,
including representatives from the EPA, local and regional water and wastewater utilities, and
consultants. During the in-person exercise, participants worked collaboratively to:
• Review the Asset, Threat, and Adaptive Measures information entered by NHSA;
• Demonstrate the baseline and resilience analyses;
• Develop implementation packages;
• Review example summary reports;
• Discuss analysis results and overall user-interface experience; and
• Provide constructive criticism on the process and lessons learned.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
NHSA and the contractor team prepared example baseline and resilience analyses steps in advance of the
meeting to demonstrate the process and promote discussion during the meeting. These examples included
assessments of flood threats to the pump stations and degraded water quality in the Hudson River.
Baseline Analysis Discussion
Within GREAT, the Baseline Analysis is the starting point for performing assessments. The Baseline
Analysis involves a specific series of steps including: 1) defining adaptive measures for this asset-threat
pair; 2) assessing consequences of the threat on the asset; and 3) reviewing results of the analysis. The
results of the Baseline Analysis describe the current risks to assets due to the occurrence of future,
climate-related threats. More importantly, the results of the baseline analysis also serve as a frame of
reference for the results from the next step in the GREAT process, the Resilience Analysis.
For the NHSA exercise, the presentation of the example analysis file started with examples of flood
consequences for the pump stations. With respect to both types of floods, High flow events and Coastal
storm surges, the consequences of these events in all time periods were assessed as Very High. These
examples were illustrative of how utilities could consider Baseline analyses.
For the second step of baseline analysis, NHSA had assessed the consequences of defined threats on
select assets given existing protective measures. A majority of the discussion during the demonstration of
Baseline Analysis focused on the consequences of Altered surface water quality (threat) on the Hudson
River (asset). Participants noted that this was an area for collaboration between the utility and other
stakeholders, such as the NY/NJ Harbor Estuary Program. At a minimum, watershed stakeholders could
provide information and resources to support assessment of threat-related consequences on natural
resources.
From the perspective of a utility, climate change impacts (e.g., changes in the amount and timing of water
runoff) will have multiple, interrelated effects on plant operations. Both direct loss of assets from flooding
and the potential for degrading receiving water quality during storm events were central to discussions.
Some additional questions NHSA and similar utilities should consider include:
• How does climate change affect our ability to treat to the level required to meet regulations? For
example, do we need to adapt to changes in influent volumes and quality?
• How does climate change affect our ability to meet NPDES permit requirements? Do projected
changes require responses in treatment, collection capacity, additional storage, or all of the above?
Resilience Analysis Discussion
After performing a Baseline Analysis, users define and select Potential Adaptive Measures to lower the
risk posed to assets. Similar to the Baseline Analysis, the Resilience Analysis involves a specific series of
steps including: 1) select adaptive measures; 2) re-assess consequences; 3) assign contribution from
different adaptive measures; and 4) review analysis results.
The example Resilience Analysis demonstrated the risk reduction due to implementing adaptive
measures. Resilience analyses were conducted for the first three time periods (2015, 2020, and 2030) for
both flood and water quality threats. For each of these threats, potential adaptive measures were selected
and applied within the analysis. In general, the overall risk reduction through adaptation was gauged to be
greater as more time passed. In other words, even though threats and their related impacts or
consequences were assessed to be more severe in later time periods, the capacity and time to implement
additional adaptive measures was also anticipated to improve response and further reduce the
consequences of these threats.
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries
GREAT Exercise Report
A key feature of GREAT is to provide a way to compare current and future risk levels as related to threats
posed by a changing climate. Building resilience to climate-related threats by considering and deciding to
implement adaptive measures facilitates the decision making process. In GREAT, the reduction of risk
can be visualized in a risk matrix, where each analysis falls into a specific combination of likelihood of
threat occurrence and level of consequence to the asset. Viewing the set of risk matrices from the exercise
(Figure 1), it is evident that for each successive time period, the shift of numbers towards lower
consequences in Resilience (bottom row of matrices) relative to Baseline (top row of matrices) is more
pronounced in 2030 than in 2015. In effect, this shows that adaptive measures selected for the 2030 time
period are more effective than those selected for the 2015 time period.
2015
(5 years)
2020
(10 years)
2030
(20 years)
Baseline
Resilience
Figure 1. Example of risk matrices as displayed in GREAT for three identified time periods (2015, 2020,
and 2030). Risk is assessed based on the likelihood of occurrence and the overall consequences. Risk
matrices show the number of asset-threat pairs for each likelihood-consequence combination for all
Baseline (top row) and Resilience (bottom row) assessments. For example, within the Baseline Analysis
for the 2030 time period, two asset-threat pairs (circled number) have a medium likelihood of occurrence
and a very high consequence.
More detailed discussions among participants centered on how adaptive measure contributions are
calculated in the third step of Resilience Analysis. Specifically, the group recognized the difficulty in
assessing these contributions and tracking the contributions made in other assessments for the same
adaptive measures.
Implementation Packages
During the meeting, the group reviewed three examples of implementation packages: Phase I, Phase II
and Phase I+II. These packages were designed to illustrate different priorities (e.g., timing of
implementation, resources needed) that would result in different combinations of measures within
packages. Each package included measures to address consequences from the water quality degradation
and flood threats considered in the example analyses. Phase I provided a group of measures that could be
pursued before 2020 that would provide benefits beyond mitigating consequences associated with climate
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries
GREAT Exercise Report
change. In contrast, implementing Phase II would require more significant investment. The combined
package (i.e., Phase I+II) includes all measures as the most comprehensive package.
Throughout the discussion related to implementation of adaptation packages, participants recognized the
need for more guidance, specifically, on how to build these packages. The measure of risk reduction
within GREAT (risk reduction units or RRUs) provides a metric for users to compare packages
(Figure 2). Comparison of the different packages in terms of risk reduction units reveals that the
implementation of more comprehensive packages results in greater risk reduction (Table 2). Each
package that the group reviewed provided additional risk reduction with the consideration of more
significant or comprehensive efforts. Consideration of the costs of the adaptive measures used in this
exercise was deferred until additional staff at NHSA could be consulted. Optimally, GREAT users would
use the ratio of cost to risk reduction (i.e., $/RRU) to look for cost effective options and optimize benefits
from adaptation.
Medium
Low
(37) (40) (45) (60
1
4D 3D 2D
(35) (37) (40)
Low Medium High Very
High
Consequences
Figure 2. Matrix used in GREAT to compute risk reduction units (RRUs). Numbers within this matrix are
the RRU values associated with each combination of likelihood and consequence. The difference between
the Baseline and Resilience assessments is used to calculate RRUs for each asset-threat-time period
combination. For example, if the consequences for an asset paired with a high likelihood threat changes
from high (Baseline) to Low (Resilience), then the RRUs are calculated as 55 - 40 = 15 RRUs (circled
locations).
Results and Reports
GREAT was recognized by the group as being a tool that supports awareness of climate change
implications for water utilities, helps utilities to catalog actions, and promotes adaptation planning. The
discussion of analysis results focused on the report generating aspects of the tool. Discussion led to
several suggestions to improve and expand the reports currently available in the tool (see Appendix B).
Several participants expressed interest in additional reports targeting other goals for applying GREAT
data and results. For example, the climate information provided for a specific location would be helpful
for some users in communicating how climate change may generate particular threats. Another example
described by NHSA staff was the need to support communication with management or customers that
focuses on three questions: (1) What is the utility doing to respond to climate change? (2) Why are these
actions being pursued? and (3) How much does this plan cost?
10
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries
GREAT Exercise Report
Table 2. Adaptation packages for different phases show the list of adaptive measures included in each
package and the risk reduction units obtained from each (* indicate those measures used in all three
packages). See Appendix A for details regarding definitions for these adaptive measures
Adaptation
Packages
Phase I
Phase II
Phase I+II
Risk
Reduction
Units
50RRUs
56.5 RRUs
74.5 RRUs
Adaptive
Measures
Included
Climate training for
personnel
Flood models*
Community outreach
Flood risk management*
Communicate plans with
public
Infrastructure inspection*
Optimized pumping*
Emergency response plan
- flooding
Facility safety plan
Alternate wastewater / storm
water capabilities
Flood models*
Grey water system
On-site treatment / re-use
Flood risk management*
Effluent re-use studies
Increased capacity -
wastewater / storm water
Infrastructure inspection*
Optimized pumping*
Green infrastructure at
facility
Alternate wastewater / storm water
capabilities
Climate training for personnel
Flood models*
Grey water system
Community outreach
On-site treatment / re-use
Flood risk management*
Effluent re-use studies
Communicate plans with public
Increased capacity - wastewater /
storm water
Infrastructure inspection*
Optimized pumping*
Green infrastructure at facility
Emergency response plan - flooding
Facility safety plan
GREAT Exercise Summary and Lessons
The GREAT Exercise fostered an important dialogue between stakeholders that share an interest in the
present and future conditions of natural and water resources, in this case, the Hudson River Harbor and
Estuary. Several key lessons were learned both during and at the conclusion of the exercise. In particular,
there is a need to support a process within GREAT for prioritized assets, allowing users to run
preliminary analyses on these select assets prior to conducting a comprehensive risk assessment. For
subsequent exercises, there may be a need to select a location with a different level of urbanization so that
the analysis will support a more thorough exploration of the overlap between NEP and utility assessment
and planning efforts related to climate change. However, the overall exercise process proved to be
valuable for the parties involved, and both the watershed stakeholder and utility communities were
receptive to further collaboration.
More specific feedback was received in response to several questions posed to participants at the
conclusion of the in-person exercise. The first question asked about the usefulness and applicability of
GREAT software for identifying watershed-scale climate change consequences and developing adaptation
strategies for joint planning efforts. In general, participants commented that the process was helpful and
recommended sharing the results with a broader, Harbor-wide audience to solicit additional input.
Participants also suggested conducting additional exercises in areas affected by drought. There was some
concern among participants that a balance be achieved in planning for both high flow events and
droughts, even in areas that historically have experienced only one or the other but not both of these
challenges. GREAT could support consideration of both of these potential climate change impacts.
A second question solicited feedback on any observed gaps or needed refinements to the current GREAT
approach. Exercise participants had several recommendations that would make the tool process more
user-friendly and results more applicable to real-world decisions. First, they recommended that the tool
generate a map of results within the final report to help visualize impacts and adaptation options.
11
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Participants also requested an explicit link to asset management software from within GREAT, so that
existing files and work might be leveraged to support the GREAT process. Another key recommendation
was the ability to generate a report containing climate information to help communicate with decision
makers. Within this report, participants cited several features that would be helpful to include (e.g., the
ability to add images, link to a map and export latitude and longitude information for use in the future).
The final question posed to participants during the in-person exercise targeted potential enhancements to
the water resources and ecosystem sections of GREAT. While it was clear that participants valued the
exercise process, EPA wanted feedback on how to make the tool itself more applicable to a broader
audience of stakeholders that held a common interest in protecting shared water resources. An important
area of the tool identified by participants for potential revision was the consequence section, in particular,
the language used for source/receiving water impacts. Participants discussed this topic at several points
during the exercise process, and it was clear that, depending on one's perspective, the language could be
interpreted differently. In addition, participants suggested that the total maximum daily load process
should be informed by reports. Another recommendation to enhance the water resource and ecosystem
sections within GREAT was to use reports to document climate resiliency benefits of projects as part of
participation in the State Revolving Fund programs. A final recommendation was the need to
acknowledge the challenge of comparing spending on climate change adaptation to other budgetary and
infrastructure needs. A complete list of comments provided by participants regarding potential changes to
GREAT is presented in Appendix C.
Conclusions & Next Steps
The CRWU-CRE Joint GREAT Exercise at NHSA was an important step in ensuring that GREAT
provides the awareness building, risk assessment framework, and planning support needed by the water
sector and their watershed partners. The value of collaboration between the participants was noted during
all stages of the GREAT process, especially in the definition of consequence categories, the assessment of
consequences to natural resources, and the selection of adaptive measures requiring coordination as part
of implementation. Both the utility and its watershed partners gained perspectives on the value of
information used in assessments and the interpretation of results for their use in future planning efforts.
Feedback on the exercise process and on GREAT itself will be used in the design of future joint exercises
as well as in development of the second version of the tool. The locations and priorities for these
exercises should differ from those explored with NHSA to ensure a diverse set of utilities, regions, and
threats are discussed. The scope and duration of follow-up activities related to NHSA's climate change
assessment and planning are still being determined.
References
Horton, R., Gornitz, V., Bowman, M., Blake, R. Climate observations and projections. Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences, 2010. 1196, 41-62.
U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP). Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States.
Karl, T.R, Melillo. J.M., Peterson, T.C. (eds.). Cambridge University Press. 2009.
12
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Appendix A: Adaptive Measure Inventory from Exercise
These Existing Adaptive Measures were selected from the library within GREAT as those measures
currently in place at NHSA. Participants cataloged important remarks related to some of these measures
in the tool for reference in reports and in current and future analyses.
| Effluent re-use
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Sustainable Strategies
Description: Implement sewage effluent re-use at your utility. This action should be conducted following
assessment and modeling of the impacts of re-use on operations. Potential costs include the need for infrastructure
and the ability to generate and meet demand for the effluent.
Remarks: Effluent is used for on-site non-potable use. More potential is available with investigation.
| Back-up power
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Construct
Description: Establish alternate or on-site backup power supply or electrical switching equipment.
| CSO strategies
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Repair / Retrofit
Description: Implement combined sewer overflow storage and design standards. For systems going through repairs
and upgrades, some designs are suited to being retrofit for CSO prevention at the same time. In addition to storage
options, flow diversions and isolation of storm water in areas vulnerable to high peak runoff volumes can be
deployed to limit influent volumes to treatment plant.
| Infiltration reduction
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Repair / Retrofit
Description: Reduce infiltration into collection system to reduce excess influent volumes during times where soil is
saturated from storms or floods. Effective strategies include replacing laterals, inspection, and monitoring.
| Wet repair
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Repair / Retrofit
Description: Develop procedures and policies for post-flood repairs when inundation persists and repairs are needed
to assets in flooded areas.
Remarks: Repairs are done routinely following any damage from major events.
| Performance models
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Model
Description: Build flow and treatment models that accommodate climate change impacts. These models could
predict changes in performance or service interruptions and assess responses to damage or changing water quality.
Remarks: Most likely to be used. Model will soon be incorporated in operations management plan and updated
every 5 years.
| Sewer / collection models
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Model
Description: Build and use models for sewage flow, quality, and combined sewer overflow frequency. These
models could be directed at the assessment of current capabilities of your utility to handle influent scenarios or as a
means to evaluate infrastructure improvements and climate-related changes. These models, linked to hydrologic
models, can provide information on storage needs and the potential for flood events.
Remarks: These will be used more often. GIS maps exist now that will help to monitor and plan for the future once
asset management system is up and condition assessments completed.
| Monitor structures
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Monitor / Inspect
Description: Deploy monitoring on structures to complement inspections and inform assessments. Additional data
from monitoring should improve analyses of climate change impacts on asset life and performance.
A-l
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
| Monitor treatment
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Monitor / Inspect
Description: Monitor treatment efficiency including sludge characteristics to inform treatment models and assess
the impacts of changes in temperature and influent quality on performance. Monitoring in addition to that required
for regulatory compliance may benefit diagnosis of new or improved treatment needs.
| Monitor weather
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Monitor / Inspect
Description: Integrate weather forecast monitoring into operations. Experience with responding to current weather
conditions and extreme events can be applicable to plans for projected climate conditions. Discerning the limits of
your system resiliency will reveal areas to address when preparing for climate change.
Remarks: Level of sophistication can be improved to enhance our ability to manage events-can tie into more
sophisticated climate change information.
| Emergency response plan - community
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Plan
Description: Develop emergency response and recovery plans in coordination with local hospitals and first
responders. These plans should focus on events that may become more frequent under projected future climate
conditions, especially those that the community has limited experience dealing with. Plans should be coupled with
other measures to limit consequences when possible.
Remarks: Need to update ERPs to address this.
| Regulatory flexibility
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Plan
Description: Consider regulatory options for compliance in areas where meeting current regulations will be difficult
in responding to climate change. Plans should document the projected challenges to meeting regulations due to
changing ambient conditions, water quality and availability, and other impacts on the ability of the utility to meet its
mission goals. Regulatory compliance being met while enacting adaptive measures should also be considered in any
plans.
A-2
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
These Potential Adaptive Measures were selected from the library within GREAT as those measures that
may help reduce the risks of threats (e.g., floods, etc.) to assets. Participants cataloged important remarks
(e.g., assumptions, potential barriers to implementation) related to some of these measures for reference in
reports and in current and future analyses.
Building code changes
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Green Infrastructure
Description: Partner with government to alter building codes to manage waste and storm water flows and water
demand. These partnerships are an opportunity for sharing knowledge and demonstrating community leadership
through pilot projects.
Green infrastructure at facility
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Green Infrastructure
Description: Employ green infrastructure at facilities. Green infrastructure is a sustainable approach to wet weather
management. Green Infrastructure approaches maintain or restore natural hydrologies by improving storm water
infiltration or capturing water for reuse. Partner with community to employ green infrastructure to manage storm
water flows and water demand. Green Infrastructure approaches maintain or restore natural hydrologies by
improving storm water infiltration or capturing water for reuse.
Remarks: Combined description from second "green infrastructure" description into this first one for efficiency in
analysis.
Grey water system
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Sustainable Strategies
Description: Implement domestic and commercial grey-water or sewage recycling system. Scale of system
deployed can vary from isolated portions of service array (e.g., identify large irrigation arrays for consumers) or
gradually be deployed system-wide. This type of program should be coupled with models to assess the impact of
reduced demand to ensure system performance is not detrimentally impacted by program.
Remarks: May be counter to NHSA ability to generate revenue to support other programs.
On-site treatment / re-use
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Sustainable Strategies
Description: Implement on-site treatment and re-use for the utility. For any and all facilities, where appropriate,
identify opportunities to treat and re-use effluent. Practices developed could have efficiency gains and serve as a
model for other large facilities in the region to pursue similar practices.
Class: Alternative Strategies Type: Sustainable Strategies
Description: Implement local rainwater harvesting program. Program scale can vary from domestic incentives for
homes to community-scale programs. This type of program should be coupled with models to assess the impact of
reduced influent volumes from different precipitation events to ensure performance is not detrimentally impacted by
program.
Alternate wastewater / storm water capabilities
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Construct
Description: Develop redundant capabilities and options for storm and wastewater: treatment, discharge, collection,
distribution, and receiving water (total, partial, critical portions).
Increased capacity - wastewater / storm water
Class: Expanded Capacity Type: Construct
Description: Increase system capacity for increased influent volumes, particularly for combined sewer systems.
Constructing storage for diversion of peaks flows is one strategy to increase effective capacity by decreasing peak
loads during storms.
Effluent re-use studies
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Efficiency
Description: Study the ability to employ and resulting benefits of effluent re-use at your utility. Studies could
include research on methods and state-of-the-art practices, regulatory implications of re-use, operational capabilities,
user acceptance, simulations of supply and demand changes, and projections of benefits.
Remarks: Potential as time goes on to reduce water usage and impact on sewers/system and treatment plant
process.
A-3
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Optimized pumping
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Efficiency
Description: Review facilities to optimize power requirements for pumping. As an overall energy efficiency goal,
the optimization of power use for pumping requires careful consideration of current practices, simulation of impacts
of changes in practices, and assessment of capability to refine networks to reduce power needs.
Flood models
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Model
Description: Build integrated flood models for catchments, shorelines (with sea level rise), and urban drainage.
Beyond many current hydrologic and flood models, these new models should ensure that perturbations due to
climate change can be accommodated in models and that these models include topographic information (GIS) and
risk assessment components.
Nutrient / contaminant models
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Model
Description: Build and use catchment-based models for nutrients, sediment, and pesticides to predict changes
attributable to projected climate conditions and design schemes for mitigation of impacts. Beyond many current
hydrologic and sediment-transport models, these models should ensure that perturbations in transport and nutrient
transformations associated with climate change are accommodated in models.
Infrastructure inspection
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Monitor / Inspect
Description: Conduct inspections of structures throughout your system that may be compromised due to climate-
related changes in event frequency, duration, or magnitude. Inspections should be part of any assessment of failure
risk under projected climate conditions.
Monitor temperature
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Monitor / Inspect
Description: Monitor temperature trends in water and region and incorporate results into overall performance
monitoring and assessment. This information may be applicable to performance projections under projected climate
conditions.
Remarks: Not sure this will be applicable or help mitigation.
Emergency response plan - flooding
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Plan
Description: Develop emergency response and recovery plans as part of overall flooding strategy. These plans
should focus on flood frequencies and magnitudes that may become more frequent under projected future climate
conditions, especially those that the community has limited experience dealing with. Plans should be coupled with
other measures to limit consequences when possible.
Facility safety plan
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Plan
Description: Revisit health and safety plans in the light of climate-related impacts on operations and possible new
hazards. Updates to plans may also encompass new environmental and personnel monitoring, performance models,
and projections of changing hazard conditions (e.g., floods occurring at site with historical experience dealing with
frequent floods).
Flood risk management
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Plan
Description: Develop phased, adaptive risk management plan for urban flood risks and treatment requirements.
These plans should prioritize the ability to limit or prevent damage to facilities and water resources during floods.
Integrating observations, process models, and decision frameworks provides a powerful suite of tools to anticipate
potential flood scenarios and deal with flood damage.
Climate training for personnel
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: R&D / Training
Description: Conduct climate-related training (e.g., tabletop exercises, knowledge building) for utility personnel
and emergency response community. Draw from resources provided by associations and government agencies to
provide information regarding the potential impacts of climate change and effectiveness of response actions.
A-4
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries GREAT Exercise Report
Treatment alternatives
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: R&D / Training
Description: Research alternative treatment technologies for projected climate conditions. These technologies
should be tested for the ability to integrate into current operations and their suitability for performance under current
conditions. Possible future conditions for these processes to address include higher ambient temperatures, changing
influent flows or particulate loading, and higher dissolved solids.
Communicate plans with public
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Users / Demand
Description: Raise public awareness of what your utility is planning and the potential for changes in levels of
service during events. These notifications should balance information on hazards with details of prepared response
strategies, including opportunities for the public to assist in preparing and responding to contamination, or other
events related to climate change. Develop stakeholder dialogues, relationships, trust and shared decision-making
tools to improve responses to events. Stakeholders should include other water-dependent sectors, communities, and
government agencies. Develop stakeholder dialogues, relationships, trust and shared decision-making tools to
improve responses to events. Stakeholders should include other water-dependent sectors, communities, and
government agencies. Establish public advisory communication system to alert consumers of events when they
occur. This system can also disseminate information during periods of normal information. Media outlets, mobile
devices, internet services, and social media can all be utilized to reach the broadest audience.
Remarks: Combined descriptions in the "User/demand" adaptive measures and then applied "not used".
Community outreach
Class: Expanded Operating Flexibility Type: Users / Demand
Description: Use outreach (e.g., town halls, sponsored events) to engage customers in decision making and build
dialog regarding collaborations necessary to adjust demand for service in response to other priorities. Raise public
awareness of what your utility is planning and the potential for changes in levels of service during events. These
notifications should balance information on hazards with details of prepared response strategies, including
opportunities for the public to assist in preparing and responding to water shortages, contamination, or other events
related to climate change. Script public relations documents for potential service changes associated with climate
change. Proactive actions to prepare for climate change are opportunities to engage the public in climate change
awareness and education regarding their water resources. Material should emphasize benefits of actions beyond
climate resilience.
A-5
-------
Climate Ready Water Utilities - Climate Ready Estuaries
GREAT Exercise Report
Appendix B: Comments and Feedback from Participants
The following comments were provided during the exercise as suggestions for improving the GREAT
interface, process, or content to support the collaboration between utilities and other watershed
stakeholders.
Timelines - may be helpful to provide default timelines that are every 10 years (or 15
years)
Historical data should be easier to load Historical Data
Add guidance specific to dischargers to the source/receiving water impacts category, Consequence
including recommendation to partner with other organizations
Language is mostly drinking water focused and should be made more applicable to Consequence
wastewater
Comment
There is only one permit field in Setup, some utilities may have multiple permits
Step/Screen
Setup
Time Periods
Distinguish Natural Resources from consequences (loss value) to other assets where
they could overlap
Assets & Consequence
Use/mark priority assets for initial assessment
Tool should provide explicit link to asset management software
May be helpful to set up as more of a spreadsheet format
Threats interface is complex and could be simplified
Need to define competing use
Assets
Assets
Assets
Revise layout for editing measure descriptions to enable better user review
Items needing clarification: ID #, Year in service, user defined, definition (refine
based on CRWU report, EPA Office of Policy work orEPAOWM efforts
Build cost model for inclusion in GREAT or cost guidelines
Threats
Threats
Adaptive Measures
Adaptive Measures
Simplify the tool: provide output after Baseline directed at cost and prioritization of
potential planning steps
Improve indicators of progress in analysis steps
Adaptive Measures &
Implementation Planning
Baseline
Baseline & Resilience
Reduce complexity of Resilience analysis (graphics are confusing)
Resilience
Improve interface for entering adaptive measure contributions
Provide guidance on structuring adaptation packages (e.g., act now or later, minimize
cost or $/RRU, phased approach, or green approach)
Resilience
Implementation Planning
Remove Time Period Drill Down from the Summary Report; add as Attachment
option
Reports
Provide graphics and data in PowerPoint Report Reports
Provide additional reports (e.g., scoping report, planning report, implementation Reports
report, summary report versus detailed report)
Revise footer on Summary Report - make level of confidentiality custom
Add map of the results to report(s)
Report containing climate information should also be provided (e.g., user can add
images, link to map, or export lat/long information)
Include a spreadsheet or worksheet to use
Reports
Reports
Reports
General
B-l
------- |