ThisreportreviewstheperformanceoftheexistingTotalFloodWarningSystem(TFWS)buildingblocksfor Federation Council with a focus on the villages of Boree Creek, Urana, Morundah and Rand. The report includesthefollowing:
Assessment of the current flood warning system components for Boree Creek, Urana, Morundah and Rand,inthelightofhistoriceventssuchasthe2012flood.
NeilDufty Principal neil.dufty@watertech.com.au WATERTECHNOLOGYPTYLTD
EXECUTIVESUMMARY
The Federation Council (Council) is a local government area located in the Riverina region of New South Wales, Australia. Council adopted the Federation Villages Floodplain Risk Management Plan and Study (FRMS&P)inApril2022andisnowprogressivelyimplementingtherecommendationsfromthePlan.Oneof thehighpriorityactionsrecommendedbytheFRMS&PisforImprovementtoFloodWarning(OptionRM-04). TheoptionisdescribedwithintheFRMS&Pasfollows:
Undertake a review of the existing flood warning system for the Federation Villages and identify improvements.
Review the current flood warning system in relation to trigger levels, maintenance requirements, messagingandrecipients.
Several gaps were identified in the existing flood warning systems andoptions for improvement/expansion identified.Someoftheseoptionsareapplicabletoallvillageswhilstsomeareonlyapplicabletooneormore villages.
Amulti-criteriaassessment(MCA)providesamethodbywhichoptionscanbeassessedagainstarangeof criteria. An MCA was used in this project as a tool to debate the relative merits of each flood warning improvement/expansionoption.
There were 5 options identified to enhance some of the local flood warning systems with additions to rain gauges and river gauges. These options would be considered in the process of reviewing if a local flood warningservicefromtheBureauifpossible.
InAustralia,floodearlywarningsystemsareanimportantpartofthefloodriskmanagementprocesspromoted bytheAustralianGovernment.GuidanceprovidedintheManagingthefloodplain:AGuidetoBestPracticein Flood Risk Management in Australia(AIDR, 2017 - p.61), shows that early warning systems are a flood responsemodificationoptionandareoneof‘arangeofmeasurestoreduceresidualfloodriskatacommunity scale’. In comparison with other flood risk management options, flood warning is assessed in this national guideashavinga‘medium’capacitytoaddresssafetyrisksanda‘low’capacitytoaddresspropertydamage risks,bothinexistingandfutureurbandevelopedareas(AIDR,2017-p.46).
TherehavebeenseveralrecentdevelopmentsinfloodwarningsystemsinAustraliaincludingtheAustralian Warning System (AIDR, 2021). The Australian Warning System (AWS) is a new national approach to informationandwarningsduringemergencieslikebushfire,flood,storm,extremeheatandsevereweather. UpuntilnowtherehavebeendifferentwarningsystemsfordifferenthazardtypesacrossAustralia.Thenew AustralianWarningSystemaimstoprovideconsistentwarningstoAustraliancommunitiessothatpeopleknow whattodowhentheyseeawarninglevel.
Actionstatements:Foreachwarningleveltherearearangeofactionstatementstoguideprotectiveaction bythecommunity.Thesestatementsevolveasthewarninglevelsincreaseinseverity.Statementsrange from‘stayinformed’attheAdvicelevel,to‘preparetoevacuate’attheWatchandActlevel,to‘evacuate now’ in the Emergency Warning level. As the situation changes and the threat is reduced, the level of warningwilldecreaseaccordingly.
The Australian Government has provided guidance to assess and design robust flood warning systems. It introducedtheconceptofthe‘totalfloodwarningsystem’(TFWS)todescribethefullrangeofelementsthat mustbedevelopediffloodwarningservicesaretobeprovidedeffectively.
TheNSWFloodRiskManagementGuide–SupportforEmergencyManagementPlanningrecommendsthat local councils consider in their strategic decision-making for emergency management planning that ‘any warning system needs to be supported by evidence that it meets the TFWS requirements including consultationwiththeBureauandtheNSWSES.’(DPE,2023–Table12,p.63)
Australian Componentsofthe TotalFloodWarningSystem(AIDR,2022)
Table2-1 Summary demographicfeatures (Australian Bureau ofStatistics,2021)*
* The number of dwellings and population foreachtown includes the surrounds as well as defined inthe statistical unit
ThedataprovidedinTable2-1showsthat:
The population of Morundah and Boree Creek rose between 2016 and 2021, whilst the population of UranaandRanddeclined.
There is a relatively even gender distribution in all four villages calling for an inclusive approach to emergencymanagementplanning.
WiththeexceptionofRand,themedianageforresidentsinthevillagesisabovetheNSWaverage.The medianageinUranastandsoutinparticularwithamedianage19yearsabovetheNSWaverage,and nearlyathirdofitspopulation(32.5%)atage65orabove.ThiswillhaveimplicationsforTFWSaspects such as warning communication methods and response including managing vulnerable people and evacuation routes/emergency relief centres. This observation is also supported by the relatively high percentageofpeoplethatneedassistanceincoreactivitiesinthisvillage(15.8%,2to3timeshigherthan theothervillages).
The number of people per household is in line with the NSW average. This should be considered to estimate the number of people impacted by above-floor flooding of their residence as it has strong implications for emergency management planning including the extent of warning communication coverage,evacuationplanningandthepreparationofemergencyreliefcentres.
Thelevelofvolunteeringprovidesanindicationof‘socialcapital’(trust,norms,networks)inthevillages. Social capital has been found to be a major contributor to community disaster resilience and enables people to support each other during emergencies. All villages have significantly higher levels of volunteerismthantheNSWaverage.
Thepercentageofresidentsthatrequireassistanceincoreactivities(e.g.walking)isatorneartheNSW average for all but the Urana community, where it is nearly three times higher. This has significant implicationsforearlywarningforvulnerablepeopleandtherequirementforsupportservicesinaspects ofemergencymanagement.
2.3 Floodriskandhistory
According to the FRMS&P, the four villages are all impacted to varying degrees by riverine flooding. Both riverine and overland flooding were examined in the FRMS&P for Morundah. Some summary details are presentedinTable2-2.
Table2-2 Floodriskaspects(WMAwater, 2022 andJacobs,2017) Village Population Mainsourceofflooding
Thetownislocatedontheleftbank(east)ofColomboCreek,aneffluentofYancoCreek,asshowninFigure 2-2. Yanco Creek receives inflows from the Murrumbidgee River, regulated by the Yanco Weir, located approximately15kmdownstream(west)ofNarrandera.Furthersouth,theinteractionofColomboandYanco creeksisregulatedbytheTarabahWeir,locatedapproximately6kmnorthoftheMorundahVillage.Exchange ofwaterbetweentheColomboandYancoCreeksalsonaturallyoccursalongthefloodplain.
Anearthenleveeapproximately3.2kminlengthissituatedbetweentheMorundahvillageandColomboCreek. AsurveyoftheMorundahleveecrestwasundertakenbyNSWPublicWorks,completedinFebruary2015, capturingcrestlevelsfollowingsignificantraisingoftheleveefollowingthe2012floodevent.Followingmanual processing of the 2012 survey, a comparison of levels between the two levee alignments and crest levels foundthattheraisedlevee(2015)isapproximately0.8-1.0mhigherthantheleveesurveyedin2012.
Local runoff from the local catchment to the east and north of the town, in addition to breakouts from the Murrumbidgee River can also cause overland flooding in town. According to the FRMS&P, these flow mechanismscontributetoMorundah’sfloodrisk,particularlyiftheoverlandflowcannotdrainthroughexisting leveepipesinatimelymanner.IntheMarch2012event,forexample,heavyrainoverthelocalcatchment causedlocaloverlandflowsinitially,whileColomboCreekpeakedapproximatelyoneweeklater,reportedly overtoppingtheleveeatninelocationsandseepingintotheracecoursearea.
MorundahHotelhasseveralhistoricfloodphotosonitswallswhichshowfloodinginJune1931,‘circa1940s’, 1949, 1950 and 1952 (Yeo, 2013). Significant flooding has since occurred in 1956, 1960, 1970, 1974 and 2012.
The village of Boree Creek is located adjacent to Boree Creek (see Figure 2-3) at the boundary of the FederationLGA,approximately50kmsouthofNarranderaand82kmwestofWaggaWagga.
Boree Creek drains a catchment area of approximately 141 km² to the town and flows in a south westerly directionalongthesouthernedgeofthevillage.ThecreekcontinuessouthwesttoLakeCullivelandisjoined byBrookongCreekbeforeflowingintoUrangelineCreekwhichdischargesintoLakeUrana.Thecatchmentis predominantlyclearedrurallandandisusedforgrazingandagriculture.
The Rock – Oaklands railway runs east-west through Boree Creek, with the embankment roughly perpendiculartoBoreeCreek.Therailway embankmentformsamajorobstructiontoflowsandcontributes substantiallytofloodingonthenorthernsideoftherailwayline.
Mostofthedevelopedareas inBoreeCreek betweenEades StreetandNamoi Street (seeFigure2-2)are subjecttosignificantinundation(greaterthan1mdepths)inthe1%AEPeventandrarer.Intheseevents,all access roads to Boree Creek are subject to flooding, and the railway embankment is overtopped by approximately 1.4 m. The entire village is impacted by flooding in the PMF event with flood depths being greaterthan1mdeepandhencethetownisalowfloodislandinthePMFevent(Jacobs,2017).
The FRMS&P (WMAwater, 2022) concluded that structural mitigation measures were not feasible and / or economicatBoreeCreek. AscopingstudyforaVoluntaryPurchase/VoluntaryHouseRaisingschemeis beingundertakenatBoreeCreekaspartofaseparateproject.
2.3.3 Urana
Urana is locatedapproximately 100 km northwest of Albury and 100 km southwest of WaggaWagga. The villageconsistsofasmall,urbanisedareasurroundedbyfarmingandgrazingland(seeFigure2-3).
Urangeline Creek runs adjacent to the westernside of the village, just before discharging into Lake Urana whichis approximately fourkilometres tothewestof thevillage. Urangeline Creek drains intoLake Urana, withacatchmentareaofapproximately2,370km².
TributariesofUrangelineCreekincludeBoreeCreekandBrookongCreekfromthenorthandWashpoolCreek, Sandhill Creek and a breakout from Billabong Creek via ‘the Tombstones’ from the south. The Urangeline Creekcatchmentispredominantlyclearedrurallandusedforgrazingandagriculture.
Despite its proximity to Billabong Creek, Rand is elevated above the deeply incised creek channel, and protectedbyaninformalleveealongtherightbankofthecreek(travellingupstreamtodownstream).Assuch, the flood risk to residential and non-residential properties is relatively limited, with out-of-bank flow only affectingdwellingsandotherbuildingsineventsequivalenttoandrarerthanthe0.2%AEPevent.However, breakoutsfromBillabongCreekawayfromtowncanovertoproads(particularlyUranaRoadtothesouth)and restrictaccessfordaysorevenweeksatatime.
AtUrana,duringtheMarch2012flood,thepeaktraveltimebetweenBoreeCreek/LockhartandUranawas estimated to be approximately 33 hours (Yeo, 2013). Floodwaters from Billabong Creek arrived at Urana approximately 3 days after the flood peaked at Rand. The flood warning lead time would be considerably shorterthanthatbutwouldbeatleast20hours.
At Rand, flood peak travel times between Walbundrie and Rand are approximately 6-9 hours (Yeo, 2013). Much longer warning lead time can beobtained by observing gauges furtherupstream on Billabong Creek (seeSection4.1.4).
The framework enables a more holistic understanding of the TFWS and the complexity of the interactions between its components. The framework has been successfully adapted to the review of TFWS in several flood-prone Australian communities. It has been described in research articles such ashttps://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-january-2021-the-total-flood-warning-system-a-review-ofthe-concept/
TheTFWSassessmentframeworkoutlinedinSection 3.1was used as abasisforthecommunity meeting discussions.Attendeeswerealsoaskedtoprovideideasforimprovementoftheexistingfloodwarningsystem.
The learnings from the community meetings are included in Section 4 along with a technical review of the existing and proposed TFWS for the four villages. Also included are the relevant findings from community engagementconductedfortheFRMS&P(WMAwater,2022)andbyYeo(2013)aftertheMarch2012floods.
3.3 Stakeholderengagement
Council’s Floodplain Risk Management Committee (FRMC) reviewed project progress throughout the developmentofthisreport.ThefollowingprojectvirtualmeetingswereheldwiththeFRMC:
NSWSESprovidedsomeminorcommentsonthedraftStage1reportincludingdetailsoftheAWSwhichare included in the report (Section 1.2). The Bureau provided minor comments on the draft Stage 1 report throughout and in addition provided details of the flood warning services in Section 4.6 and details of arrangementsforthedevelopmentoffloodforecastingoptionsinSection5.3.
NSW SES and the Bureau were also asked to review the final draft of the report prior to public exhibition. Virtual meetings with both agencies took place on 22 April 2024 and 23 April 2024 respectively, and the followingamendmentstothedraftreportweremade:
Finetuning of terminology, including Incident Control Centre (ICC) for Emergency Operations Centre (EOC); distinction between “local flood warnings” (Council responsibility) and “riverine flood warnings” (Bureauresponsibility);andclarificationoftypeofrivergauges(streamflowvslevel).
Rand.Hasnopeopledirectlyimpactedbyabovefloorflooding,exceptinthePMF.Ithasconsiderable warning lead time of at least 20 hours with rain and stream gauges across the extensive upstream catchment.TheissueatRandismorethatthetowniscutoffandisolatedinafloodevent,ratherthan propertiesareinundated.
TheimpactoffloodingontheclosureofroadsshouldalsobeconsideredinthedevelopmentoftheTFWS.All villagesarelocatedonflatcountrywithmostroadsclosedinsmallfloodsandpossibleisolationinthe1%AEP event. This has implications for possible evacuation and related warning messages (discussed in Section 4.1.2).
Community membersinUrana andMorundah believedthat the localemergency services had avery good understanding of flood risk and what to do in a flood. However, they believed that the regional emergency servicesoverexaggeratedtheirperceptionoffloodriskinthe2012flood,tryingtoevacuatepeople(including byhelicopter)whentheywerebetteroffstayinginthevillage.Ofconcernisthat forBoreeCreekresidents therewasnoNSWSESpresenceinthe2012flood,althoughtheyreceivedfooddropsbyair.
Community members feltthatthose peoplethatexperiencedthe2012floodgenerally understandtheflood riskinmorerecentsmallerfloodevents.However,therewasaconcernaboutthefloodriskawarenessofthe significant number of newcomers that had moved the villages since 2012. A suggested improvement (in Morundah)wastoprovideaFloodInformationSheettoallresidentswhichwouldprovidedetailsfordifferent gaugeheights,whataretheexpectedimpactsandresponseactionsforresidentstofollow.
The purpose of this Urana Local Flood Plan is to cover preparedness measures, the conduct of response operationsandthecoordinationofimmediaterecoverymeasuresfromfloodingwithintheformerUranaShire Councilarea(nowthenorthernpartofFederationLGA).Itcoversoperationsforalllevelsoffloodingwithinthe councilarea.
NSW State Emergency Service(NSWSES)isthecombatagency responsibleinNSWforflooding.Thisis identifiedintheFederationCouncilLocalEmergencyManagementPlan(page15).
ThereisaNSWSESUnitlocatedatUrana.TheNSWSESUranaUnitCommanderisresponsiblefordealing with floods as detailed in the NSW State Flood Plan. The Urana Local Flood Plan outlines other local responsibilitiesinflooding.
For Urana, Yeo (2013) describes the concerns that were still voiced by some in the recent community meetings.
‘TheAlburyLocalAreaCommandandtheNSWSESMurrayRegionissuedfirstanEvacuationWarningthen anEvacuationOrderforUrana,ontheunderstandingthatcriticalutilitiescouldfailandthatfoodsuppliescould runoutwithroadscut.However,theformalEvacuationOrderspecifiedthebasisforthisdecisiononly‘asa resultoffloodingexpectedforUranabeginningMonday5thMarch’.Bythetimeofitsissuanceat7p.m.,the flood had peaked and was beginning to fall, infrastructure was still functioning, the community had made alternativearrangementsforaccommodationwithinUrana,andpeoplewereturningtheirmindstothecleanupprocess.TheordertoevacuatethetownontheTuesdaywasnotacceptedbythemajorityofthecommunity.
‘TheEvacuationOrderhasbeenviewedinUranaasanexampleofnon-consultativebureaucracyandhasled tolingeringresentment.Thisalsocreatedaclimatewhereitwasdifficulttowinthesupportofcouncillorsand thelocalcommunityforthisfloodintelligencecollectionandreviewstudy.Apost-floodpublicmeetingmaybe required to begin the process of restoring confidence in the Region SES, which will be important for the coordinatedmanagementoffuturefloodoperations.ItseemsthattheLocalSESarebestplacedtounderstand the situation of their local communities, and so need to have major input into future decisions concerning evacuation.’
At Morundah, the FRMS&P (WMAwater, 2022) investigated and located two possible nearby evacuation sheltersoutsidethePMF(notingtheParadisePalladiumTheatreiswithinthePMF).Itnotesthat‘thefloodplain isquitecomplexintheareasurroundingMorundah,withanumberofmeanderingtributariesandisolatedareas ofhigh ground. As such, a singleevacuation point may not be suitable forthe safe evacuation of the local residents.’Twooptions wereidentifiedand‘theseoptions shouldbediscussedwiththelocalcommunity to determinethemostappropriatelocationforanevacuationshelter’(WMAwater,2022).
TheFRMS&P identifieda possible location forevacuationshelterlocation on theoutskirts of Boree Creek. However,thisevacuationsitestartedtobeimpactedbyfloodwaterinthe10%AEPflood.
Community flood engagement and education helps people learn how to prepare for and respond to floods (includingtofloodwarnings).Theprimeoutcomeispublicsafety,withasecondaryoutcomebeingprotection ofproperty.
AsnotedinSection4.2,therewasasuggestiontoprovideaFloodInformationSheettoallresidentswhich would provide details for different gauge heights, what are the expected impacts and response actions for residentstofollow.
Morundah. ‘Educational initiatives to maintain the heightened awareness and readiness for flooding naturallygeneratedbytheMarch2012floodshouldbepromoted,especiallyduringdecades-longperiods whenfloodsarenotexperienced.ThedisplayofhistoricalfloodphotosatMorundahPubcontributesto thisend.’
Boree Creek. ‘Educational initiatives to maintain the heightened awareness and readiness for flooding naturallygeneratedbytheMarch2012floodshouldbepromoted,especiallyduringdecades-longperiods whenfloodsarenotexperienced.Itisunderstoodthatalocalresidentisintendingtopublishalocalhistory onBoreeCreekfloods,whichwillbeagoodmeansforpreservingknowledgeofthese,ofteninfrequent, eventsforfuturegenerations.’
Urana.‘Educationalinitiativestomaintaintheheightenedawarenessandreadinessforfloodingnaturally generated by the March2012floodshouldbepromoted,especiallyduring decades-longperiods when floodsarenotexperienced.Thiscouldinvolvedisplaysofhistoricfloodphotosatmeetingplaces.’
4.5 Datacollection
Manual 21 – Flood Warning (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009, page 15) provides guidance regarding data collection from rain and river level gauges. According to Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009),effectiveroutinemonitoringofthepotentialforfloodingrequires‘sufficientrainfallandriverflowdatato provide a representative picture of what is happening over the river basin’ and ‘close liaison between meteorologicalandhydrologicalforecastinggroups’.
4.5.1
Rainfalldata
Bothpluviographanddailyrainfallrecordsarerequiredforhydrologicalanalysisandfloodforecastingaspart of the TFWSfor the four villages. Pluviographs record rainfall data at short time increments, indicating the temporaldistributionpatternwhilethemorecommondailyrainfalldataprovidesthespatialvariationoverthe catchments. The pluviographs are used for flood warning, whilst the daily rainfall gauges provide data for climateanalysis.
No sub-daily rainfall data exists within the Morundah local catchment. The Bureau holds the closest pluviographstationatYancoAgriculturalInstitute(Gauge#074037).
BoreeCreek
TheBureaumaintainsanetworkofdailyrainfallgaugesandtherearetwogaugeslocatedwithintheBoree Creek catchment. Only one of these gauges has data for recent years: Gauge # 074014 Boree Creek (RichmondStreet)(commencedin1924).Thisgaugewasclosedin2014.Yeo(2013)locatedthreeunofficial raingaugesintheBoreeCreekdistrict.
The Bureau maintains a network of daily rainfall gauges and there are a number of them located in and adjacent to the Urangeline Creek catchment including Urana Post Office Gauge # 74110 (commenced in 1871).
No sub-daily rainfall data exists within the Urangeline Creek catchment. The closest pluviographs to the UrangelineCreekcatchmentarelocatedatNerranderaAirport(Gauge#074148)andWaggaWagga(Gauge #072150).
Rand
The Bureau maintains a network of daily rainfall gauges and there are a number of them located in and adjacenttotheBillabongCreekcatchment.TheclosestrainfallstationisatWalbundrie(17kmsfromRand) Gauge#074115.
Riverlevelandstreamflowdataisalsorequiredforthehydrologicalanalysisandfloodforecasting.Riverlevel and flow gauges in NSW are operated by several organisations including WaterNSW, Manly Hydraulics Laboratory, and in some areas, local councils. A coverage of river data sources for each of the villages is providedbelow.
A WaterNSW operated gauge (GS 41000279) is located in the Brookong Creek catchment (upstream of Lockhart)whichisatributaryofUrangelineCreek.
Rand
Data exists for a number of sites along Billabong Creek. For Rand, the gauge on the Billabong Creek at Walbundrie (Bureau Nr 574015, station number 410091) is the closest recording station. It is located approximately30kmupstreamofRand.
Localresidentscantagimpactstolocalrivergauges. Pastexperiences–height3.2m–norealimpacts,3.8 m–gettingmarginal,4.0m–thevillageisintrouble.Do not think new gauges are required.
Observed heights at Rand / Walbundrie are not particularly useful for providing a reliable indicator for the impendingpeakheightatUrana.AnewstreamgaugewouldbebeneficialontheUrangelineCreekupstream ofUrana.
The services that the Bureau provides NSW and ACT is outlined in ‘Service Level Specification for Flood Forecasting and Warning Services for New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory’ (Bureau of Meteorology,2013).
Severe Weather Warnings and Severe Thunderstorm Warnings give a warning of potential heavy rain leading to possible localised flash flooding. These may also be issued during the rainfall phase, independentlyofthefloodwatchorfloodwarnings.
FloodWarningsforadjacentcatchmentsincludingtheMurrumbidgeeRiverandMurrayRivercatchments. FloodWarningsareissuedbytheBureautoadvisethatfloodingmayoccuratspecificwaterlevelgauges (knownasforecastlocations),basedondefinedwaterlevelthresholds.FloodWarningsmayincludeeither qualitative or quantitative predictions or may include a statement about future flooding that is more generalised. The typeof prediction provideddepends on the quality of realtime rainfalland river level data,thecapabilityofrainfallandhydrologicalforecastmodelsandthelevelofservicerequired.
AquantitativeorqualitativefloodwarningofMinor,ModerateorMajorfloodingisprovidedatforecastlocations. The Bureau provides forecasts when flooding is likely. The forecast may include the likely classification of floodingandwhenitislikelytooccur,predictionsofexpectedwaterlevelsandthetimingoffloodpeaks.
According to Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009) (page 21), ‘operational coordination and communication areessential between the prediction agency and the lead responseagency involved in the receptionandinterpretationofpredictions.Onsitereportsprovidevaluablefeedbacktothepredictionagency ontheimpactsofflooding andontheaccuracyofthepredictions.Informationonforecastaccuracycanbe usedtoadjusthydrologicalpredictionmodelssofutureforecastscanbemademoreaccurate’.
AccordingtoManual21(Attorney-General’sDepartment,2009)(page36),‘whenafloodpredictionisreceived, a primary task of the response agency (usually the local council, local SES or catchment management authority)shouldbetolink thepredictedconditions to potentialimpacts withinthe localarea.Thiswillthen determineanddirectresponseandrecoveryoperationsandthemessagescommunicatedtothecommunity.
For the four villages, the Bureau only provides a Flood Watch, and Severe Weather Warnings and Severe ThunderstormWarnings,andthustheregionalIncidentControlCentre(ICC,mayoftenalsobereferredtoas Emergency Operations Centre (EOC)) and local emergency managers have to interpret the flood situation basedonthefloodstudy,localknowledge(e.g.March2012flood)anddatafromarangeofsourcese.g.local floodreferencepointssuchasthemanualreadstaffgaugeonBillabongCreekadjacenttoFourCornersRoad. ItshouldbenotedthatanICC/EOCmeansa‘centreestablishedatState,RegionorLocallevelasacentreof communication and as acentreforthecoordinationofoperations andsupportduring anemergency (NSW StateEmergencyPlan,2018).
4.8 Warningmessageconstruction
According to Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009), ‘the warning message is the critical link betweenfloodpredictionandinterpretationontheonehand,andthetakingofprotectiveactionontheother. Itmustbe‘userfriendly’,itshouldexplainwhatishappeningandwhatwillhappen,whereandhowtheflood willaffecttherecipientofthemessageandwhatheorshecandoaboutit.Themessagemustcomefroma crediblesource,beinformativeandpersuasiveandbeclearlyunderstoodbythosereceivingit.Themessage maybeeitherinwrittenformorcommunicatedverbally’.
stated, thefloodwarning and advice fromtheNSW SES was viewed as beingtoo generalandsometimes locallyinaccurate.
4.9 Warningmessagecommunication
According to Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009) (page 50), ‘the best predictions, the best interpretivematerialandthebestwarningmessagesareoflittlevalueiftheyhavenoimpactondamagesor safety.Failureisguaranteedifwarningmessagesbasedonfloodpredictionsandinterpretationsofthemare not conveyed effectively to those expected to respond. In essence, a warning which is not communicated effectivelyisnowarningatallifitisnotheardorheeded’.
Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009) (page 51) identifies two different types of message communicationbasedonthetargetaudience:
2. Specific warnings are intended for individuals or parts of communities and reflect the need for ‘narrowcasting’tospecificaudienceswhomayhavespecificcharacteristicsorbeatdifferentkindsofrisk.
NSW SES delivers flood warning information directly to the public in addition to utilising the media. A combinationofthefollowingwarningmethodsmaybeutilised:
Emergency Alert is a national telephony-based alert system used by emergency service agencies to send voice messages and short message service (SMS) to landline/mobile telephones in times of emergency. Whereappropriateandusuallyinconjunctionwithotherwarningmessages,EmergencyAlertisusedtosend SMS/voicealertstolandlineandmobiletelephonesinaspecifiedgeographicarea.Theshortwarningtimes associated with flash flooding precludes the use of emergency alert in that instance. The emergency alert systemshouldbeusedinconjunctionwiththethreelevelsoffloodwarning(AustralianWarningSystem)now usedbyNSWSES(seeFigure1-1).
AttheUranacommunitymeeting,therewasacommentthatcommunicationsforthe2022floodeventswere much improved compared to 2012. Residents tended to largely rely on the ‘bush telegraph’ for warning messages with the local NSW SES and RFS brigade working together to disseminate messages.
Doorknocking is a useful method of local warning communication. Local phone messaging is also useful; however,therearesomephone‘blackspots’inthearea.
ThereisalowlevelofpropertiesrentedcomparedtotheNSWaverageinallfourvillages,whichimpliesalow transience of the population. The population of all four villages is relatively stable indicating that a large proportionofallfourcommunitieswouldhavesomeexperiencewithfloodinginthearea,includinginMarch 2012.
AllvillageshavesignificantlyhigherlevelsofvolunteerismthantheNSWaverageindicatingthestrongsocial capital (networks, bonds) in all villages which has been found to be a major inherent resilience asset for communities.
According to Manual 21 (Attorney-General’s Department, 2009) (page 67), ‘flood warning systems need regularattentiontoensuretheywillfunctionasintendedandtocontinuetoimprovetheirperformance’.Itadds thatreviewshouldbeconductedbothatthestrategicandoperationallevel.
Review of the TFWS should result in the Local Flood Plan and NSW SES Flood Intelligence Cards being updatedbasedonlearningsfromtherecentfloodeventandanynewdataobtainedorchangestofloodrisk (e.g.newmitigationworks)betweenfloodevents.
4.12 Communityparticipation
Manual21(Attorney-General’sDepartment,2009)(page68)stresses,‘akeypointaboutthereviewprocess is that all relevant agencies should be involved to ensure organisational changes can be implemented. Similarly,theprocessmustbeopentoinputfromtheflood-affectedcommunity,membersofwhicharelikely tohaveideasabouthowwarningsystemsandservicescanbemoreeffectivelyimplemented.Theviewsof communitymembersareessentialtoimprovingwarningsystems,andpeopleshouldbeactivelyencouraged toputforwardtheiropinionsonsystemperformanceandwaystoimproveit’.
Animportantwayofattainingsharedresponsibilityisthroughcommunityparticipationindisastermanagement. There is a growing body of evidence to show that community participation is critical in the development of effectiveearlywarningsystems.Forexample,theUnitedNationsInternationalStrategyforDisasterReduction
In the other villages, emergency management including flood warning response is strongly driven by local residents in practice, although official planning and response decisions are being made by emergency agenciesonaregionalbasis.
4.13 IntegrationoftheTFWScomponents
Manual21(Attorney-General’sDepartment,2009)stressestheneedforintegrationofthecomponentsofthe TFWS.‘Forafloodwarningsystemtoworkeffectively,thesecomponentsmustallbepresent,andtheymust be integrated rather than operating in isolation from each other. The view that any one component of the systemrepresentsallofit,orisanendinitself,impairsthesystem’seffectiveness’.
5.1 Identificationofimprovement/expansionoptionsfortheexistingfloodwarning systems
As a result of the review results, all 12 components of the TFWS were examined to identify possible improvementstotheexistingfloodwarningsystemsforthefourvillages.
Provide a Flood Information Sheet to all residents in the four villages which would provide details for differentgaugeheights,whataretheexpectedimpactsandresponseactionsforresidentstofollow.
Prediction
Boree Creek shouldbeassessedby NSW SESinterms ofrequiring aflashfloodalertingservice.If a flashfloodwarningsystemisrecommended,thenCouncilwouldleadthedevelopmentofthis,andcould seekgrantfundingthroughthefloodplainmanagementprocess.NSWSESandtheBureauwouldprovide bestpracticeadvice.ThenationalFlashFloodAdvisoryResource(FLARE)isanauthoritativeresource created to assist agencies with flash flood warning responsibilities, such as councils and emergency services,todesign,implementandmanagefit-for-purposeflashfloodwarningsystems.Moredetailsat http://www.Bureau.gov.au/australia/flood/flashfloodadvisoryresource/
The MCA framework was developed to test the main attributes of the potential flood warning improvement/expansionoptionsidentifiedinSection5.3.ThedevelopmentoftheMCAframeworkwasbased onguidancefromtheAustralianGovernmentforMCAsininfrastructureprojects(IAUS,2021).
ThefollowingattributeswereincludedintheMCA:
ImprovementPotential(“SocietalImpact”inIAUS,2021)
Thisrates howmuchimprovementanoptioncouldbeexpectedtodelivertoaparticularcommunity.Inthe case of the flood warning system review for Federation Council, this criterion is split into two separate components,asfollows:
a. >WarningLeadTime =increasewarningleadtime
b. >WarningAccuracy =increasedaccuracyoftheavailablewarning
Based on the analysis in this report including community and stakeholder consultation, a draft MCA was developedbyWaterTechnologyandpresentedtotheFRMCatthemeetingon5December2023. FRMCmemberswerethenprovidedwiththedraftMCAspreadsheetforeachmembertoaddtheirinputusing theLikertscalesoutlinedinSection6.2.Responseswereincludedinassessmentrelatedtothefindingsbelow (Section6.4).
6.4 MCAresults
Table 6-1 summarises the MCA spreadsheet analysis of all flood warning improvement/expansion options identifiedinSection5.3.
As shown in Table 7-1, the highest average MCA scores were for options that better coordinated the relationships andcommunications betweentheNSWSESandlocalemergency services andcommunities. ThisrankingstronglyreflectedtheviewsoflocalcommunitiesconsultedaspartofthisprojectinAugust2023 (Section3.2)whichcalledforlocalcommunitiestoworkwithlocalandregionalemergencyservicesandutilise strong local social networks, local knowledge and local communications. In this respect, the three highest rankingMCAscoreswere:
As suggested in Section 7.2, the proposed options can fit into broader categories which can simplify the selectionofapossibleTFWSconfigurationforthefourvillages.Theoptionstendedtoscorecloselywithother optionsineachcategory.
Table7-2rationalises the options inTables 7-1into actioncategories.Theactioncategories areprioritised basedontheMCAscoring.
Table7-2helpsintheselectionprocessofpossiblefloodwarningimprovement/expansionoptionsforthefour villages. Those options in the same action category should link together. For example, in the ‘Develop, implement and evaluate flood warning education activities’, a flood information sheet could provide flood warninginformationappropriatefornewcomersandlong-timeresidents.Similarly,inthecategoryof‘Conduct regularreviewsoftheTFWS’,‘10.1Conductannualreviewofthefloodwarningsystems’and‘12.1Monitor andevaluatetheintegrationoftheTFWScomponents’couldbecarriedoutinconjunction.
The high-ranking options in relation to ‘improve linkages between regional emergency services, local emergency services and communities’ reflect the need for better integration of the considerable local knowledgewithinboththelocalemergencyservicesandthebroaderlocalcommunityintotheNSWSESflood responseplanningandmessaging. Thiswouldappeartohavebeenlessthanoptimalinpastfloods.
The costing of alloptions in the High and Medium categories is relatively low being less than $20K and/or requiringin-kindsupportfromemergencyagenciesandCouncil.
Toprogressthedevelopmentofriverinefloodwarningservices,CouncilwithsupportfromNSWSESwould leadthisprojectandcouldgetfundingtoimplement.TherequesttoimplementwouldgothroughtheNSW Flood Warning ConsultativeCommittee(FWCC)andwouldbe assessedagainst otherrequests across the countryintermsofriskmanagement.Toprogressthedevelopmentofabespokeflashfloodalertingservice for Boree Creek, Council would lead the development of this, and could seek grant funding through the floodplainmanagementprocess.NSWSESandtheBureauwouldprovidebestpracticeadvice.
WaterTechnologyhasdevelopedsimilarbespokefloodwarningsystemsinotherpartsofAustraliaincluding forfloodimpactedvillagesnearTamworth.Thesite-specificfloodwarningsystemscanprovidemoretimely and accurate flood warnings than the existing services and provide specific communication (e.g. text messages,siren)thattriggersearlyevacuation.
* Indicative cost only as of 2024. Funding can be sought for the establishment of flood warning systems through NSW Government’s Floodplain ManagementProgramGrantshttps://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/water/floodplains/floodplain-management-grants.
** Indicative cost in 2024 to install telemetered combined river level gauge and pluviography is $40K- $60K with yearly maintenance cost of approximately $10K per year. Funding can be sought for the establishment of flood warning systems through NSW Government’s Floodplain ManagementProgramGrantshttps://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/water/floodplains/floodplain-management-grants.
ABS(2021). 2021 Census Statistics for Federation (LGA12870).Availableat:https://abs.gov.au/census/findcensus-data/quickstats/2021/LGA12870.AustralianBureauofStatistics.
AIDR(2017). A Guide to Best Practice in Flood Risk Management in Australia. AustralianInstituteforDisaster Resilience.
AIDR(2021). The Australian Warning System – Companion Document to Public Information and Warnings. AustralianInstituteforDisasterResilience.
AIDR(2022). Application of the Total Warning System to Flood. AustralianInstituteforDisasterResilience
Bureau of Meteorology (2013). Service Level Specification for Flood Forecasting and Warning Services for New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory
BureauofMeteorology(2024). Climate Data Online.http://www.Bureau.gov.au/climate/data/
DPE (2023). Flood Risk Management Guide – Support for Emergency Management Planning. NSW DepartmentofPlanningandEnvironment.
DPE(2023). Flood Risk Management Manual. NSWDepartmentofPlanningandEnvironment. FederationCouncil(2022). Community Strategic Plan 2022-2023 to 2031-2032.
FederationCouncil(2023). Federation Council Intramaps interactive online mapping portal. https://www.federationcouncil.nsw.gov.au/Building-Planning/Intramaps
FederationCouncil(2023). Federation Council Community Profile.IDCommunityDemographicResources. https://profile.id.com.au/federation
GHD(2014). Jerilderie Flood Study - Final Report - August 2014. prepared by GHD for Jerilderie Shire Council.
IAUS(2021). Guide to multi-criteria analysis.InfrastructureAustralia,AustralianGovernment.
Jacobs,2017. Flood Study for the Towns of Urana, Morundah, Boree Creek, Oaklands and Rand.
Mileti, D.S., & J.H. Sorensen. (1990) Communication of Emergency Public Warnings: A Social Science Perspective and State-of-the-Art Assessment.Washington,DC:FederalEmergencyManagementAgency.
Molino,S.,Dufty,N.,Crapper,G.&Karwaj,A.(2011) Are warnings working? Achievements and challenges in getting communities to respond,paperpresentedtotheFloodplainManagementAssociationConference, TamworthNSW,February2011.
NSWGovernment(2005). Floodplain Development Management Manual.
NSWGovernment(2018). NSW State Emergency Management Plan.
NSWSES(2019). The Provision and Requirements for Flood Warning in New South Wales - Supplementary Document to the State Flood Plan
UnitedNations(2015) Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015-2030).UnitedNations.
WMAwater(2022). Federation Villages Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan.WMAwater.
