The George Washington University 
Crisis and Emergnecy Management Newsletter
Back to main page
           November 2002
Volume 3 - Number 4
 
Links

»
Archives
    October 01
     November 01
     December 01
     Feburary 02
     March 02
     April 02
     Summer 02
     October 02
»
Institute for Crisis,
Disaster and Risk Management








Oregon Study...

GAO Report on OREGON INLET JETTY PROJECT.
By Thom Carr

On October 7, 2002, the Government Accounting Office (GAO) posted on it’s web site (www.gao.gov) a recently released GAO study of the Corps of Engineers cost-benefit analysis of putting jetties in Oregon Inlet in North Carolina.  The 87 page report is titled “OREGON INLET JETTY PROJECT - Environmental and Economic Concerns Still Need to Be Resolved (GAO-02-803)” dated September 30, 2002. The report findings were that “the Corps’ analysis has limitations that undermine its usefulness for assessing the economic tradeoffs between the current 14-foot dredging program and the Corps’ preferred alternative of a jetty system with a 20-foot navigation channel.”  At first glance, one would think that this was just an other GAO report on an other lack luster failed government project that did not get finished.  It is even worst then that.  This project did not get started!

The GAO report noted six (6) major failings of the Corps’ current analysis:
(1)    failed to consider intermediate channel depths between 14 feet and 20 feet,
(2)    used outdated data to estimate the benefits to trawlers and did not account for the effects of the proposed jetty project on smaller commercial fishing vessels,
(3)    used some incorrect and outdated data to estimate vessel losses and damages,
(4)    used questionable survey and sampling techniques to estimate recreational benefits,
(5)    did not value land protected from erosion according to federal guidelines, and
(6)    did not fully account for risk and uncertainty in key variables used in the analysis.

In a parting shot then GAO noted “the fact that the Corps did not account for the economic value of the lives that might be saved by the jetty project; in addition, its estimate of project cost does not include more recent expenditures and is based on an overly optimistic assumption.”  GAO’s review found that only least six deaths were attributable to conditions in Oregon Inlet over the 25-year period from 1977 through 2001, which is slightly less than the Corps estimate of 14 over a comparable period.  GAO noted that whether these accidental deaths would have been prevented by the jetty project is uncertain. This uncertainty is from the fact that under some weather conditions the inlet would still be hazardous even with the recommended 20-foot channel and dual jetties in place.

On 05/17/50, P.L. 81-516, The River and Harbor Act of 1950 authorized the Corps to dredge the ocean bar navigation channel to a depth of 14 feet.  After a number of years of study by the Committee on Public Works of the U.S. Senate, the Committee on Public Works of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Corps.  The River and Harbor Act of 1970, Public Law 91-611, Section 101, authorized the Oregon Inlet Jetty Project on 12/31/70.  For over 3 decades (30 years) the Government has been unable get beyond a cost-benefit analysis.  Could those lives have been saved by quicker Government action? That is also uncertain.