The Environmental Role at VARIOUS STAGES OF THE CIVIL WORKS PROCESS

1. The Environmental Role at VARIOUS STAGES OF THE CIVIL WORKS PROCESS Highlights of your role as “the tree hugger”. Ch 8 Mod 3 Handout #s 22 & 23

2. OBJECTIVE • REVIEW MATERIAL PRESENTED • Review Environmental Role in the Planning and NEPA Process . • Focus on Role of the Environmental Planner in that process. • Review the Civil Works Administrative Process • Provide insight to schedule and budgeting for process

3. ENV Role • ENV is “Cradle to Grave”

4. Types of Civil Works Reports • Reconnaissance Study • Feasibility Scoping Meeting (FSM) package • Alternative Formulation Briefing (AFB) package • Draft Feasibility Report/EIS • Final Feasibility Report/EIS • Pre Con, Eng, Design Phase (PED) • Post-Authorization Change Reports • General Re-evaluation Reports • Limited Re-evaluation reports • Other Reports/Issue Papers/Mitigation Plans/O&M Documents • CAP projects are subject to MSC oversight, proceed in two phases, and have same issues

5. Environmental Components • NEPA: EA/EIS/FONSI/ROD • Environmental Sections of Reports • CWA: Section 404b/401 Analyses • CAA: Emission Analyses/SOC • CZMA: Consistency Determination • FWCA: D&FWCAR/PAL/PAR (prepared by FWS but significant coordination required especially for field activities) • ESA: BA (COE)/BO(FWS)Similar coordination • MSFCMA: EFH Assessment • SHPO-MOU • Others

6. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study Certify Reconnaissance Phase Initial Problem Identification Congressional Study Resolution/Authorization Initial Study Funding Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Negotiate PMP and FCSA Execute FCSA & Request Feasibility Funds Conduct Feasibility Study Complete Final RPT. for Coord. & Submission Step 10 Step 12 Step 11 Step 13 Step 14 Step 15 Division Engineer's Transmittal Letter Washington Level Policy Review (S&A) Civil Works Review Board Chief of Engineers Report Administration Review (OMB) Project Authorization Step 16 Step 17 Step 18 Execute PED Agreement Draft PPA Review/Approval Conduct PED Step 19 Step 20 Step 22 Step 21 Project Construction Congress Appropriates Construction Funds Execute PPA OMRR&R Remember the Civil WorksProject Delivery Process

7. “Generalized” Civil Works Process* *O&M Responsibilities based on project purpose

8. 40 Districts / 8 MSC Needs Loaded Rack & Stack OMB-ASA GUIDANCE ( FEB-MAR ) All Offices Develop Program Requirements ( Feb - May ) Funding To Field Offices ( Oct - Dec ) Budget Reviewed & Presented to Sec Army Rack & Stack (Jun - Aug ) BudgetCycle Budget Submitted to OMB ( Sep ) Cong. Hearings ( Mar - Apr ) OMB Passback ( Nov ) President Signs Approp. Bill ( Sep - Oct ) Appropriations Bills ( Jul - Sep ) President’s Budget to Congress ( Feb )

9. DFeasibility Report Process’s Key Reviews & Decision Meetings • FSM – Feasibility Scoping Meeting • AFB – Alternative Formulation Briefing • IRC – Issue Resolution Conference • IPR – In Progress Reviews • FRC – Feasibility Review Conference • CWRB-HQ Meeting- Cast of Thousands TO MAKE THEM WORTHWHILE, SUBMIT THE RIGHT INFORMATION AND LEAD DECISION MAKERS THROUGH THE PROBLEM

10. Feasibility Scoping Meeting Goals • Get concurrence on the without project conditions • Concurrence on Goals, Objectives, Constraints • Concurrence on the development and evaluation of alternatives ,i.e., types of models to be used. This is often the largest issue in the AFB, Draft Report Stage—start this process early • Opportunity to check with HQUSACE on Review procedures and policy • Get PCX involved. • Do not confuse with NEPA Scoping with FSM

11. Alternative Formulation Briefing Goals • Resolution of FSM issues • Without project conditions • Goals, objectives, constraints • Concurrence on the final array of alternatives, Evaluation Methodology, Plan Identification—NED, NER, Locally Preferred Plan, Etc… • APPROVAL FOR RELEASE and CONCURRENT HQ & PUBLIC REVIEW OF DRAFT Feasibility Report

12. Other “IRC/IPR” Meetings • Involve HQUSACE (RIT) , Division, ASA(CW) in identifying, discussing, and resolving ongoing study or policy issues • Can be requested by any level (District, MSC, HQ) • Meetings can be broad or specific • Can be held at any time during the study • Can be Formal or Informal

13. FINAL (FR) REPORT PROCESS EIS considered a final at this time • Submit Draft ROD to HQUSACE • State and Agency 30 day Review of Chief’s Rpt Completes 90 days time clock • Chief’s Report Signature • Courtesy copy of Chief’s Report to Congress • ASA(CW) Review & approval • ROD is signed • Draft transmittal letter to OMB for clearance • Draft transmittal letter to Congress for authorization

14. Remember the NEPA Process Flow Chart Federal Action Issue NOI & Conduct Scoping Issue DEIS Issue FEIS 45 days 30 days yes Sign. Env Effects? yes Sign. Env Effects? no Issue ROD yes Need Env Review? unknown Issue FONSI Prepare EA 30 days no CATEX Implement Action

15. FR Processing at HQUSACE HQUSACE . • Washington Level Review. • CWRB CECW-Iapproves release of district report forState and Agency (S&A) 30 day concurrent Review. • HQUSACE provides directions to District for 30 Day S&A review and the filing of the FEIS with EPA for 30 day pubic review. • Submits report to Assistant Secretary for Civil Works.

16. Processing at the ASA’s Level • Assistant Secretary for Civil Works. • ASA(CW) circulates report to OMB for review for consistency with President’s Program. • Signs ROD for GI Studies. • Transmits Chief’s Rpt. to Congress following release by OMB. • Participates on vertical team for complex projects. • Project Advocate ! • Done at this point, wait for WRDA

17. Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Conduct Reconnaissance Study Certify Reconnaissance Phase Initial Problem Identification Congressional Study Resolution/Authorization Initial Study Funding Step 6 Step 7 Step 8 Step 9 Negotiate PMP and FCSA Execute FCSA & Request Feasibility Funds Conduct Feasibility Study Complete Final RPT. for Coord. & Submission Step 10 Step 12 Step 11 Step 13 Step 14 Step 15 Division Engineer's Transmittal Letter Washington Level Policy Review (S&A) Civil Works Review Board Chief of Engineers Report Administration Review (OMB) Project Authorization Step 16 Step 17 Step 18 Execute PED Agreement Draft PPA Review/Approval Conduct PED Step 19 Step 20 Step 22 Step 21 Project Construction Congress Appropriates Construction Funds Execute PPA OMRR&R Planning Stage is Complete?

18. Post Authorization Activities Post Authorization Reports. • Reports prepared following project authorization that address changes or reaffirmation of project justification. • General Reauthorization Report (GRR) • Major change • Review the NEPA documentation and permits. • Limited Revaluation Report • No changes, economic update only

19. Planning Engineering and Design Phase (PED) • Finalization of design after authorization. • ENV ensures ENV Statutory Compliance in preparation for Construction Phase (per PPA/PCA Checklist) • ROD/FONSI/SOC Commitments • May result in project changes. • Review NEPA documentation and permits. • Simply the design Phase in CAP (D&I). • CAP is all post authorization activity

20. Examples of ENV Role During PED • Supplemental Sampling/Monitoring per NEPA commitments/obligations: • CWA: aquatic, wetlands, wq, sediments sampling • CZMA: consistency determination • EFH: supplemental fishery data • ESA: supplemental wildlife data • SHPO: supplemental MOA data • Acquisition of State Permits/Certificates • CAA: potential SIP issues

21. Construction Phase • ENV ensures compliance with Federal and state issued ENFORCEMENT documents: • Certifications (404/401) • Permits (404/4011) • States CD (CZMA) • NOAA-F CR (EFH) • USFWS/NOAA-F BO (ESA) • CAA/SOC

22. Review Processes Supporting the Civil Works Program • District Quality Review (DQR) • Quality Assurance Review (QA ) • Agency Technical Review (ATR) • Independent External Peer Review( IEPR) • Policy Compliance Review (PCR) • Legal Compliance Review (LCR)

23. District Quality Control • In-house activity • Occurs through out the process • Focus is on: PMP • Recon and • Feasibility phase • PED • Construction

24. Agency Technical Review (ATR) • Formerly known as Independent Technical Review (ITR) also was historic role of MSC • A critical examination of technical aspects of decision document at the District level • Confirmation that work was done in accordance with: • Professional principles • Practices and Codes • Criteria • Laws and Regulations • Policy

25. ATR Basics • ATR performed by a virtual team of experts • Not involved with day to day project work and outside the home district • Senior-level competence • ATR lead from outside home MSC • Can include other agency personel

26. ATR Guidance • EC 1165-2-209 Water Resources Policies and Authorities CIVIL WORKS REVIEW POLICY • ER 1110-1-12 Quality Management (30 September 2006) • Technical Review Guides (being developed by PCXs) • Planning Guidance Notebook (ER 1105-2-100) Appendes G & H • PCX Sharepoint: Review Guides, Art of Review, etc.

27. Independent External Peer Review (IEPR) • Review of technical adequacy of large GI Projects • Focus on environmental, engineering and economic evaluations and assumptions. • 100% Federal cost • Conducted by outside eligible organization (OEO) • IEPR discussed at CWRB • Information posted on WEB Site

28. IEPR References • OMB Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review • WRDA 2007 Section 2034 • Engineer Circular 1165-2-209

29. PCX: A New Player in the Process • Planning Center of Expertise • Established by WRDA 2007 Section 2033 • Reviews and approves Review Plans ( RPs) • Oversees/manages ATR and IEPR • Reviews and Certifies Planning Models • Engineering Models approved within Engineering Process • Training and Development • Policy/Guidance Development and Interpretation

30. How do I engage the ECO-PCX? • First and foremost, through joint development of a Review Plan (RP) • Keep RP up to date • Maintain communication with the PCX(s) • Lead PCX will coordinate with other PCXs and the Cost Engineering Directory of Expertise (NWW) as appropriate • Visit PCX web/share point sites for latest information Ecosystem Restoration Gatewayhttp://cw-environment.usace.army.mil/restoation.cfm • ECO-PCX:http://el.erdc.usace.army.mil/ecocx

31. IEPR Cost • Contract ~$200-300k for 6-7 reviewers • Max in Statute is is $500K • PCX labor ~$10-15k • PDT labor • Assist in IEPR contract • Develop preliminary response • Final USACE Response

32. IEPR Contract

33. Document Processing Who does what? • District: • Preparation, • Technical certification/DQR • Document management. • PCX • Model Cert • ATR/IETR • MSC: • Quality Control Review • Approval of CAP Reports • Chair FSM/ATF/IPR etc

34. . Document Processing Who does what ?(cont). • HQUSACE: • Policy Compliance of GI Reports. • Approval of GI Reports. • Chairs CWRB Review • ASA(CW). • Final approval and transmittal to Congress. • Advocate for Civil Works Projects • OMB. • Consistency with President’s Program.

35. NEPA Points of Attention • Integrated reports/synchronization with Main Feasibility Report • Inconsistency between NEPA document and Feasibility Report is crucial. Inconsistency led to EC 1105-2-405 “Summary Report”. • Cooperating agencies can be helpful! • Time: • Allow adequate time for NEPA tasks-Not ONLY Environmental tasks- also be sure to consider seasonality of field requirements • EAs 120 days, EISs 6 months to a year • Built in time for QC, ATR, back check, etc • Costs: EAs $5-50K , EISs at least $100K

36. NEPA Points of Attention • Key steps to watch • NOA to mailing list for Draft NEPA Documents • Cross over of impact analysis in “Conditions chapter” • Coordination of Plan formulation within PDT • Draft & Final EIS QC/ATR/management/legal reviews • EIS trigger and significance of impacted resources • NOI in FR to prepare EIS • Agency, Public and NEPA Scoping Meetings • DEIS review by PDT/ QC/ATR/PM/Legal

37. NEPA Points of Attention • NOA in FR circulating DEIS-45 days • CWRB is a big milestone, be prepared • NOA in FR circulating FEIS-30 days • ROD execution-remember two page limit-it’s a description of the decision not a Summary Report. • Last but not least Issue coordination with RIT

38. The END • ENV role in the CW Phased Study/Project Program is HUGE • Need to start PLANNING AHEAD when developing PMP’s and budget documents • ENV role in CW Process-truly cradle to grave • Integrity of Federal commitment to application of EOP • DQR/ATR/IEPR/ RP milestones and costs are a reality of modern planning processes.