RETURN TO PLANNING GUIDANCE PAGE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

• References 
• Scope
• Electronic Submissions 

Reconnaissance Phase Products:

• Section 905(b) Analysis.
• Reconnaissance Review Conference.
• Signed Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement and Project Study Plan.

Feasibility Phase Reports:

• Feasibility Scoping Meeting. 
• Alternative Review Conference. 
• Alternative Formulation Briefing. 
• Draft Report and Feasibility Review Conference. 
• Final Report and Division Commander’s Public Notice.
• Departmental Agency Coordination and Headquarters Review Assessment.

Chief’s Report. Post-Authorization Decision Documents:

• Approval Authorities.
• Electronic Submissions. 

Milestone Descriptions

CESPD-ET-P 30 March 2000

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, Albuquerque District

Commander, Los Angeles District

Commander, Sacramento District

Commander, San Francisco District

SUBJECT: Processing of Planning Reports in the South Pacific Division

1. This memorandum provides implementation procedures for the coordination and processing of planning reports for Congressionally authorized projects. These planning reports are developed during reconnaissance studies, feasibility studies and studies leading to post-authorization decision documents. Guidance for the coordination and processing of reports developed in support of the Continuing Authorities Program will be provided in a separate memorandum.

2. A summary of the internal actions that are taken within the South Pacific Division for the processing of planning reports, from an internal Division perspective, are described in Enclosed Table 2.

3. Questions regarding the processes described in this memorandum can be addressed to Robin Mooney at (415) 977-8167.

FOR THE COMMANDER

/s/

CARL R. POSTLEWATE

Director, Engineering and Technical Services

CESPD-ET-P

SUBJECT: Processing of Planning Reports in the South Pacific Division

IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE

PROCESSING OF PLANNING REPORTS

1. References.

a. ER 1105-2-100 – Policy and Planning, Planning guidance, dated 28 December 1990.

b. ER 5-1-11 - Program and Project Management, dated 27 February 1998.

c. EC 1165-2-203 – Technical and Policy compliance Review, dated 15 October 1996.

d. CESPD R 1110-1-8 – Quality Management Plan, dated 14 December 1998.

e. CESPD-ET-P Memorandum, dated 19 March 1999, subject: Expedited Reconnaissance Phase Studies

f. CESPD-ET-P Memorandum, dated 30 April 1999, Guidance for Post-Authorization Decision Documents.

g. CECW-PE/CECW-A/CECW-E Memorandum, dated 14 March 2000, subject: Engineering Appendix to Decision Documents

2. Scope.

This memorandum provides guidance for coordination and processing of planning reports for Congressionally authorized projects that are developed during reconnaissance studies, feasibility studies and studies leading to post-authorization decision documents.

3. Organizational Changes.

This memorandum presents the organization symbols that are to be used as of the date of this memorandum in addressing correspondence to the Headquarter and the South

Pacific Division. It is recognized that these symbols may change in future restructuring initiatives. Separate notification of these changes will be provided when they occur.

4. Electronic Submissions.

As indicated below, some of the reports and documentation may, at the option of the district, be submitted electronically, rather than in a printed format. Reports and documents in support of the reconnaissance phase may be submitted electronically. Pre-conference documentation for South Pacific Division milestone conferences may also be submitted electronically. Reports and documents that are to undergo a HQUSACE policy compliance review must, however, be submitted as printed copies.

5. Reconnaissance Phase Products.

a. Section 905(b) Analysis.

1) The district will forward 2 printed copies of the Section 905(b) Analysis and Letter of Intent (LOI) to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P). Alternately, the district may submit the Section 905(b) Analysis and Letter of Intent electronically. The assigned planning program manager will endorse 1 copy of the documents to Headquarters, Planning Division (CECW-PE) for review and approval. Copies will also be provided to the members of the South Pacific Division’s district support team for information.

2) Upon receipt of the Headquarters memorandum approving the Section 905(b) Analysis, the assigned planning program manager will endorse the approval memorandum to the district and inform other members of the district support team of the approval. Once the Section 905(b) Analysis is approved by Headquarters, negotiations may proceed for preparation of the final Project Study Plan (PSP) and Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement (FCSA).

b. Reconnaissance Review Conference.

1) A Reconnaissance Review Conference will usually not be held during the expedited reconnaissance phase, but in unusual circumstances, the district, Division, or Headquarters may call for a conference. When the district requests a conference, the request will be directed to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P). The South Pacific Division’s planning program manager will coordinate the request with the Headquarters Planning Division and also inform other members of the district support team. The Reconnaissance Review Conference may be held as a meeting in the field or as a teleconference. District support team members will be invited to attend.

2) A draft memorandum documenting the results of the conference will be prepared by district, Division and Headquarters representatives during, or immediately following the conference. The final memorandum will be signed at Headquarters approximately 10 days after the conference. Upon receipt of the memorandum from Headquarters, the planning program manager will endorse the

memorandum to the district and provide copies to other members of the district support team for information.

c. Changes to the Model Feasibility Cost-Sharing Agreement. Requested changes to the model Feasibility Cost-Sharing Agreement will be sent by the district to

the South Pacific Division, Programs Management Directorate (CESPD-PM). The assigned program manager will coordinate the action with the other members of the district support team and endorse the request to the Headquarters Planning Division (CECW-P). The Headquarters approval of the changes will be endorsed to the district by

the assigned program manager, who will inform other members of the district support team of the action.

d. Signed Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement and Project Study Plan. When the Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement is signed, 3 copies of the signed Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement and Project Study Plan will be sent by the district to the South Pacific Division, Programs Management Directorate (CESPD-PM). The assigned program manager will forward 1 copy to the Headquarters, Programs Management Division (CECW-B) and 1 copy to the Headquarters, Planning Division (CECW-PE), for information. The program manager will inform other members of the district support team.

6. Feasibility Phase Reports.

a. Feasibility Scoping Meeting.

1) This is the first South Pacific Division milestone conference held during the feasibility study. For those studies initiated with an expedited reconnaissance phase study, it will usually include Headquarters participation. It is also referred to as the F3 milestone conference in the South Pacific Division milestone system, which is described further in Table 1. The purpose of the conference is to reach consensus on the without project conditions, screen preliminary plans and address potential changes to the Project Study Plan.

2) Prior to the conference, the Division’s planning program manager will coordinate with Headquarters, Planning Division (CECW-PE) to determine the extent of Headquarters participation in the conference. If Headquarters does participate, then the conference will be conducted as an IRC and follow the procedures in Paragraph 3.c. and Appendix O of ER 1105-2-100.

3) If Headquarters decides not to participate, then the district planning chief will chair the conference. In this case, 5 copies of the pre-conference documentation will be transmitted by the district to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P), at least two weeks before the conference. The planning program manager will then distribute the pre-conference documentation to the district support team for review and coordinate the district support teams participation in the conference. After the conference, the district will provide a copy of the district planning chief’s memorandum of the conference to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P).

b. Alternative Review Conference. This conference is the second South Pacific Division mandatory milestone conference, also referred to as the F4 conference. The purpose of the conference is to screen the final plans, reach a consensus that the evaluations are adequate to select a plan and identify potential issues for the Alternative

Formulation Briefing. If Headquarters is not in attendance, then it will be chaired by the district planning chief, as described in Paragraph 3.a. If Headquarters does participate, then it is conducted as an Issue Resolution Conference (IRC), as described in Paragraph 3.c.

c. Alternative Formulation Briefing.

1) The goal of the Alternative Formulation Briefing process is to obtain Headquarters approval to prepare the draft report and release it for public review concurrent with forwarding the draft to Headquarters. The Alternative Formulation Briefing (AFB) will be held in accordance with the instructions in Appendix O of ER 1105-2-100. The Alternative Formulation Briefing includes participation by Headquarters and will be chaired by the South Pacific Division’s Chief, Planning Division, or the Division’s planning program manager on behalf of the Chief, Planning Division.

2) The district will submit 5 copies of the pre-conference documentation to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P) and the planning program manager will endorse the documentation to Headquarters and coordinate arrangements for the Alternative Formulation Briefing. Concurrently the district will submit 2 copies of the documentation to Headquarters, Planning Division (CECW-P) and 10 copies of the documentation to Headquarters, Policy Review Branch (CECW-AR). The South Pacific Division endorsement must arrive at Headquarters at least 35 days before the date of the conference. The documentation will include a draft proposed WRDA fact sheet for the proposed project. The planning program manager will distribute the pre-conference documentation to the district support team for review and coordinate the district support team’s participation in the conference.

3) Upon receipt, the planning program manager will distribute electronic copies of the Headquarters comments to the district and the district support team. The Alternative Formulation Briefing will normally be held in the field, but it may also be held as a teleconference. A draft memorandum that documents the Alternative Formulation Briefing will be prepared by district, Division and Headquarters representatives during the conference.

4) The planning program manager will facilitate informal coordination with Headquarters and the district to finalize the final memorandum for the Alternative Formulation Briefing and the final memorandum will be signed at Headquarters approximately 10 days after the conference. Upon receipt of the signed memorandum from Headquarters, the planning program manager will endorse the memorandum to the district. Electronic copies of the memorandum will be provided to other members of the district support team for information.

d. Draft Report and Feasibility Review Conference.

1) The purpose of the Feasibility Review Conference (FRC) is to resolve outstanding policy issues raised in the Headquarters review of the draft report and identify actions that are required to complete the final report. The Feasibility Review Conference includes participation by Headquarters and will be chaired by the South Pacific Division Chief, Planning Division, or the planning program manager on behalf of the Chief, Planning Division.

2) The district will transmit 5 copies of the draft report, AFB compliance memorandum, revised WRDA fact sheet and other documentation to the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P). The planning program manager will endorse the report and documentation to the Headquarters Planning Division (CECW-P) and coordinate arrangements for the Feasibility Review Conference. Concurrently the district will submit 2 copies of the report and documentation to Headquarters, Planning Division (CECW-P) and 10 copies of the report and documentation to Headquarters, Policy Review Branch (CECW-AR). Additional requirements are that one copy of the Draft Engineering Appendix will be submitted only to the South Pacific Division (this can be done electronically), and single copies of the MCACES cost estimate will be submitted to both the South Pacific Division and to Headquarters, Policy Review Branch. The South Pacific Division’s endorsement must arrive at Headquarters at least 35 days before the date of the conference. The planning program manager will distribute the report and documentation to the district support team for review and coordinate the support teams participation in the conference.

3) Upon receipt, the planning program manager will distribute electronic copies of the Headquarters comments to the district and the district support team. If no significant issues are raised subsequent to the Alternative Formulation Briefing, the Feasibility Review Conference may be waived. A draft memorandum that documents the Feasibility Review Conference will be prepared by district, Division and Headquarters representatives during the conference.

4) The planning program manager will facilitate informal coordination with Headquarters and the district to finalize the final memorandum of the Feasibility Review Conference and the final memorandum will be signed at Headquarters approximately 10 days after the conference. Upon receipt of the signed memorandum from Headquarters, the planning program manager will endorse the memorandum to the district. Copies of the endorsement will be provided to other members of the district support team for information.

e. Final Report and Division Commander’s Public Notice. The district will transmit 8 copies of the final report, FRC compliance memorandum, revised WRDA fact sheet, and one copy of the MCACES cost estimate, the Engineering Appendix and a proposed Division Commander’s Public Notice and other supporting documentation to the South Pacific Division (CESPD-ET-P). The planning program manager will coordinate the Division Commander’s Public Notice, related correspondence and supporting documentation with the district support team. The report will be sent to Headquarters upon the signing of the Division Commander’s Public Notice and processing correspondence. Concurrent with the Division’s transmittal of the report to Headquarters, the district will submit 2 copies of the report and documentation to the Headquarters Planning Division (CECW-P) and 15 copies (including one copy of the MCACES cost estimate and Engineering Appendix) to the Headquarters Policy Review

Branch (CECW-AR). The district will retain 65 copies of the main report and EIS for the state and agency review and for review by those on the EIS mailing list. Report documentation requirements are specified in ER 1105-2-100 and EC 1165-2-203.

f. Changes to the Model PED Agreement. The draft PED agreement is developed during the feasibility phase. Requested changes to the model PED agreement will be sent by the district to the South Pacific Division, Programs Management Directorate. The assigned program manager will coordinate the action with the other members of the

district support team and endorse the request to Headquarters Policy Review Branch (CECW-AR). The Headquarters approval of the changes will be endorsed to the district

by the assigned program manager, who will inform other members of the district support team.

g. Departmental Agency Coordination and Headquarters Review Assessment. Once the report has undergone a short preliminary review, the Headquarters Policy Review Branch (CECW-AR) will provide the district with letters for state and agency review; letters to interested parties for the EIS; and, a letter for filing the EIS with the Environmental Protection Agency. Responses to letters received will be informally coordinated through the South Pacific Division’s planning program manager. Upon completion of the Headquarters review, the planning program manager will distribute electronic copies of the Headquarters comments on the final report to the district and the district support team. The district will send their responses to the planning program manager. The planning program manager will provide electronic copies of the responses to the district support team and coordinate the responses with Headquarters. This may include one or more teleconferences with district and district support team participation. When the final assessment is provided to the division, the planning program manager will provide electronic copies to the district and district support team.

h. Chief’s Report. Coordination of the Chief’s report, based on the initial draft submitted by the district with the final feasibility report, will be through the South Pacific Division’s planning program manager. When the final Chief’s report is received, copies will be provided to the district by the planning program manager. The assigned planning program manager will inform other members of the district support team of the approval and provide electronic copies of the Chief’s report.

7. Post-Authorization Decision Documents.

a. Approval Authorities. The guidance that is presented in the paragraphs above, for the processing of feasibility phase reports, also applies to the processing of post-authorization decision documents in those cases where the approval authority is either at the South Pacific Division or the Washington level. These approval authorities are outlined in CESPD-ET-P Memorandum, dated 30 April 1999, Guidance for Post-Authorization Decision Documents.

b. Electronic Submissions. If the report is to be approved at the South Pacific Division, then the reports and supporting documentation may be submitted electronically. If the approval of the report is to be at the Washington level, however, then printed copies of the reports and documentation are required

c. Conferences. The terminology used for the conferences differs from the feasibility phase. The conferences that are required as part of a post-authorization review and would normally be referred to as Issue Resolution Conferences (IRCs). Some post-authorization reviews may be limited in scope and not require reformulation of the project. In these cases, one or more of the South Pacific Division milestone conferences

may not be required. Proposals to streamline the processing requirements for reviews of limited scope should be coordinated with the South Pacific Division, Planning Division (CESPD-ET-P) and the planning program manager will coordinate with other members of the district support team.

Table 1 -  CESPD Milestone System

MIL1 MILESTONE NAME DESCRIPTION

RECONNAISSANCE PHASE

FEASIBILITY PHASE

RETURN TO PLANNING GUIDANCE PAGE