Module 22Module 22

STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14 Washington Level and Washington Level and

Administration Administration Review Processes Review Processes

Module 22Module 22

STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14STEPS 11, 12, 13 & 14 Washington Level and Washington Level and

Administration Administration Review Processes Review Processes

Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11

Objective:Objective:

Understand what should happen to the Final Feasibility report when it comes to Washington!

What reports are reviewed?What reports are reviewed?

at the Washington level…

Decision Documents that support Congressional authorization

FOCUS - Final feasibility reports

(incl. NEPA documents)

Decision Document Any report prepared for the purpose of :

obtaining project authorization, modification, or Washington level approval;

obtaining commitment of Federal funds for project implementation; or

obtaining approval to spend and receive money as a result of entering into an agreement.

Decision Documents Obtaining project authorization, modification, or verification:

Reconnaissance Report* Feasibility Report Limited Reevaluation Reports** General Reevaluation Reports (GRR)** Post Authorization Change (Section 902) Report Detailed Project Report* Major Rehabilitation Report

* Approval at MSC** Approval at MSC if no additional Congressional action required

REFERENCE: EC 1165-2-203, dated 15 October 1996 “Technical and Policy Compliance Review”

Policy Review:Policy Review:

Analysis of decision factors and assumptions used to determine the extent and nature of Federal interest, project cost sharing and cooperation, and related issues.

Ensures uniform application of established policy and procedures nationwide.

Ensures that proposed action is consistent with overall goals and objectives of the program.

Review Process - “GOAL”Review Process - “GOAL”

Resolve issues and policy concerns as they arise during the study rather than identifying and resolving issues after decisions are made and the report prepared.

HQ ReviewHQ Review

MISSION - Consider whether proposed project conforms with laws & policies

MISSION - Consider whether proposed project conforms with laws & policies

APPENDIX B - ER 1165-2-203

“Policy Compliance Review Considerations”

economics (benefits & costs) engineering environmental local cooperation plan formulation & selection cost sharing

HQ ReviewHQ Review

“The review prospective”- Value added comments and significant concerns on decision making process.

All review comments shall contain: A clear statement of the concern The basis of the concern The significance of the concern Specific actions to resolve the concern

HQ ReviewHQ Review

Division submits 15 copies of Final feasibility report to Regional Integration Team (RIT) with Division Engineer’s Transmittal Letter

PGM Compliance Memorandum Documentation and certification of agency technical and

legal review Division Engineer’s Transmittal Letter Report mailing/distribution list Proposed Draft Chief of Engineer’s Report M-CACES cost estimate (one copy only) Report Summary, project maps, and PowerPoint presentation

Final Review Process Final Review Process

Five Required Members:

PERMANENT MEMBERSDeputy Chief of Engineers (Chair)

Deputy for Civil Works and Emergency Operations

CW Community of Practice Leader for Planning

Chief Counsel (advisory role only)

PROJECT SPECIFIC MEMBERSOne RIT leader not from the presenting MSC

One COP leader from Engineering, Operations, Real Estate or other appropriate COP

Civil Works Review Board Civil Works Review Board

See EC 1105-2-406 (31 Mar 2005) “District Engineers Presentation”

Required Attendees:CWRB members

Appropriate MSC & District staff

Appropriate HQ OWPR, HQ RIT members, HQ staff

Requested AttendeesSponsor Rep to provide sponsor’s views

ASA(CW) Office of Project Planning & Review

Office of Management & Budget

District Commander’s Briefing District Commander’s Briefing

See EC 1105-2-406 (31 Mar 2005) “District Engineers Presentation”

Briefing Contents Report overview including NED and/or NER plans PGM compliance actions OWPR comments and their resolution ATR and IEPR highlights and results Public involvement process and results Public/agency comments/responses on NEPA

documents How Environmental Operating Principles and P&G

accounts were addressed including climate change Project delivery process

District Commander’s Briefing District Commander’s Briefing

See EC 1105-2-406 (31 Mar 2005) “District Engineers Presentation”

After CWRB approval, RIT provides

coordination package to district to initiate 30-

day State & Agency review.

District mails reports; EIS filed with EPA

Policy review completed by OWPR

IEPR completed and posted

Final Review Process Final Review Process

Review concentrates on the adequacy of the district’s compliance with the PGM.

Review considers new information in the final report not previously available and impact on critical issues.

Report addenda/revised pages may be necessary Meeting may be necessary to resolve issues.

Final Review ProcessFinal Review Process

RIT prepares recommendation package for submission to ASA(CW) which includes:

Materials previously submitted by District Feasibility Report & appendices and/or supporting

documentation (addendums, ATR, etc.) Policy Compliance Review Documentation Summary of agency, public, and IEPR comments Correspondence received from state & agency Review Draft Report of the Chief of Engineers

Final Review Process Final Review Process

The Chief of Engineer’s Report provides the Secretary of the Army with the views, findings and recommendations on project authorization.

The Chief of Engineer’s Report provides the Secretary of the Army with the views, findings and recommendations on project authorization.

Processing the COE Rpt: Processing the COE Rpt: Recommendation package & Draft Chief’s Report received from RIT following completion of policy review (i.e. STEP 11) Assess whether responses are required to letters received during state & agency review Prepare response to report of IEPR

Final Chief’s Report and transmittal letters to Congress are prepared.

Report signed by the Chief of Engineers. Transmittal letters signed by Chief of Staff Example attached

Chief of Engineers Report - EXAMPLE

OASA(CW) - Office of the Assistant Secretary of the

Army for Civil Works (OASA(CW))

ASA(CW) – Honorable Jo-Ellen Darcy

OMB - Office of Management and Budget

Executive Office of the President of the United States

ASA(CW) Responsibilities: ASA(CW) Responsibilities:

Develops Administration Policy Goals.

Assures that authorization, implementation, and budgeting of project is consistent with applicable laws and policies.

Monitor policy review compliance.

Resolve policy issues.

120 day maximum review time frame – mandated by WRDA

2007

ASA(CW) Report Processing: ASA(CW) Report Processing:

Is the feasibility report complete? If so, send the report to OMB. Transmittal memorandum signed by ASA(CW).

(see example) Draft letters to Congress for submittal

of the Chief’s Report provided. (see example)

ASA(CW) Transmittal Letter to OMB - EXAMPLE

Draft Transmittal Letter to Congress - EXAMPLE

(Draft Act and Report Language not shown)

“… before any agency submits to Congress for approval, appropriation, or legislation action any report, proposal or plan relating to a Federal or Federally assisted water or related land resources project or program, such report, proposal or plan should be submitted to the OMB.”

(Executive Order 12322, 17 September 1981)

Coordinate Executive Branch reports and proposed legislation.

Review proposed projects to determine relationship to the budget priorities of the President

Review Executive Orders

Formulates the President’s fiscal program

Assists in preparation of the President’s annual budget

Supervises and controls the administration of the budget.

Issue policies for the Executive Branch.

Reviewed by: Associate Director of Natural Resources, Energy

and Science, Water and Energy Branch What they are reviewing:

ASA(CW) transmittal letter Draft letters to Congress Copies of Final Feasibility Report & Appendices PGM, Policy Review Assessment, ITR and Independent

Peer Review documentation & other documents

District gives briefing

OMB will ask anything (and everything)

OMB Clearance Letter signed by

Associate Director (see example)

OMB Clearance Letter - EXAMPLE

AFTER OMB Clearance:AFTER OMB Clearance:

ASA(CW) sends Chief of Engineers Report to Congress for project authorization. (see

example)

Congressional authorization ??

Transmittal Letter to Congress - EXAMPLE

NOTE: Act and Report Language Not Shown

Authorization Process:Authorization Process:

ASA(CW) submits Chief of Engineers’ Report to Congress.

Congress refers report to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure and Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works for consideration.

WRDA Fact Sheets are important sources

(see example)

Authorization Fact Sheet - EXAMPLE

Committee Hearings:Committee Hearings:

Report recommendation presented by Director of Civil Works and/or ASA(CW).

Testimony by: Members of Congress Other Federal Agencies States/Local Agencies Stakeholders Public Interests

Committee Hearings: (cont.’d)Committee Hearings: (cont.’d)

In theory passed every two years!

WRDA ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 2007WRDA ’02 ’03 ’04 ’05 ’06 2007

Water Resources Development Act - EXAMPLE

Project Deauthorization:Project Deauthorization:

Section 1001 - Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorized project deauthorization review program.

Submission of list every two years of authorized but unfunded projects for last 10 years

Congress has 30 months after submittal of list to fund projects or deauthorization is automatic.

5 years (WRDA 2007)

every year (WRDA 2007)

until the end of the next fiscal year (WRDA 2007)