CESPD-CM-P
31 August 2001
MEMORANDUM FOR See Distribution
SUBJECT: Guidance for the Development of Watershed
Management Plans
1. References.
e. Fundamentals of Planning for Watershed
Resources Management (Draft Report), by IWR, dated 25 May 2001.
f.
Planning Manual, IWR Report 96-R-21, dated November 1996.
2. Purpose.
The purpose of this memorandum is to consolidate, integrate and supplement existing
Headquarters guidance relative to the development of watershed management plans.
3. General Policy – The Watershed
Perspective. Civil Works planning should
incorporate a watershed perspective, whether that planning involves a project feasibility
study or a more comprehensive watershed study. Such
planning should be accomplished within the context of an understanding and appreciation of
the impacts of considered actions on other natural and human resources in the watershed. In carrying out planning activities, we should
encourage the active participation of all interested groups and use of the full spectrum
of technical disciplines in activities in decision-making.
We also should take into account: the interconnectedness of water and land
resources (a systems approach); the dynamic nature of the economy and the environment; and
the variability
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT:
Guidance for the Development of Watershed Management Plans
of social interests over time. Specifically, Civil Works planning should consider
the
sustainability of future watershed
resources, specifically taking into account environmental quality, economic development
and social well-being. (ER 1105-2-100)
4. Definitions:
a.
Watershed is an area of land within which all surface waters flow to a single
point. It encompasses the area necessary to
adequately scope, analyze, and manage related water and related resources (PGL 61). A coastal watershed is similar and includes all
areas that impact a specific reach of coastline.
b. Watershed Management is the
administration of and potential adjustment to the level and type of interaction among
various human activities and natural processes occurring in the watershed. Watershed management includes the planning,
development, use, monitoring, regulation and preservation of the water and land resources. It should achieve a desirable balance among
multiple, and often competing, watershed goals and objectives. (PGL 61)
c. Watershed Studies are planning
initiatives that have a multi-purpose and multi-objective scope and that accommodate
flexibility in the formulation and evaluation process.
The outcome of a watershed study will generally be a watershed management plan.
(PGL 61)
d. Watershed Management Plans are documents
that identify the combination of recommended actions to be undertaken by various partners
and stakeholders in order to meet the needs and achieve the opportunities identified in
the study and may or may not identify further Corps studies or projects for
implementation. (PGL 61) Other terms that are commonly used synonymously
with watershed management plans include: master plans, comprehensive plans, river basin
plans, watershed assessments and river basin assessments.
5. Characteristics and Processes.
a. Study Intent. The intent of watershed studies is to develop a
framework of implementation strategies in the context of a comprehensive watershed plan,
rather than solely identifying potential Corps projects.
The study should identify and scope the host of problems and opportunities in a
watershed, look beyond traditional mission boundaries and acknowledge that integrated,
collaborative watershed planning is necessary to effectively and efficiently achieve
sustainable watershed resources management.
b. The Planning Process. Recognizing that no two situations involving Corps
participation in a watershed study will be the same, all watershed studies will, however,
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT: Guidance for the Development of Watershed
Management Plans
follow the Corps basic six step
planning process. This process is described
in the Planning Manual, Reference 1.f.
c. Geographical Scope. The geographical scope of different watershed
studies may vary considerably. They may be
limited to a small local watershed in a single jurisdiction, or they may be much larger
and include multiple states, Indian nations or countries.
The common characteristic is that they will extend beyond the area that would be
addressed by a Civil Works project. All watershed studies will have multiple stakeholders
and may have multiple cost-sharing sponsors.
d.
Environmental and Other Documents. As
a watershed study will normally fall short of recommending a Federal action as defined by
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the preparation of an environmental impact
statement will not normally be required. The
study will, however, give full consideration to environmental impacts in the development
of the watershed management plan, as required by NEPA.
Inventories, impact assessments and agency coordination should be accomplished in a
manner that will support and facilitate the preparation of follow-on NEPA documents, or
other environmental documentation required by non-Federal interests to implement portions
of the watershed management plan. Whenever
recommendations for Federal authorization do result from a watershed study, either
programmatic or project specific NEPA documents will be prepared. Watershed planning efforts may include the
development or provide information that will lead to the development of: flood management
plans, resource conservation plans, and special area management plans.
e. Findings and Recommendations. The watershed study should: (1) provide guidance
and direction to the stakeholders for the development of watershed management tools, data,
and strategies for implementing recommendations, (2) identify opportunities for
integration of the various Civil Works programs and on-going activities into the
watershed, and (3) determine the feasibility and Federal (Corps) interest in pursuing the
development of authorization documents for water resource improvements that address the
high budget priority Corps mission areas (ecosystem restoration, navigation, and flood
damage reduction). Where possible, the
recommendations will identify who should undertake the recommended actions.
6. South Pacific Division Milestones. If a watershed management plan includes a
recommendation for Congressional authorization, then the District will follow the standard
South Pacific Division milestone system for feasibility phase studies and the report will
be processed through Headquarters. Normally,
however, a watershed management plan does not include a recommendation for authorization
and the study will follow the milestone system for feasibility phase studies, with the
following exceptions:
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT:
Guidance for the Development of Watershed Management Plans
a. Rather than an Alternative Formulation
Briefing, an optional Issue Resolution Conference may be held to reach an agency consensus
on projects identified in the comprehensive watershed management plan that will be pursued
further for potential Congressional authorization. This conference may also be used to
reach consensus on the scope of feasibility phase studies required to support a
recommendation for authorization. An issue resolution conference between the draft and
final report (at the time of a feasibility review conference) would only be held if
requested by the district.
b. As most watershed management plans will
normally not be forwarded for authorization, the district commander’s report will be
the final report. Upon receipt of the final
report at the Division, the public notice of study completion will normally be delegated
to the district commander. Copies of the
district’s final report will be forwarded to the South Pacific Division and
Headquarters for information.
c. Requested study-specific deviations to the
milestone system should be established in the Section 905(b) Analysis developed in the
reconnaissance phase that recommends the watershed study.
Any deviations to standard quality management requirements will also be justified
in the Section 905(b) Analysis.
7. Budgetary Priority. High priority watershed studies would include a
full array of planning objectives that includes one or more of the Corps’ high
budgetary priority outputs. Budgetary
priority is not dependent upon a likelihood that the studies would result in potential
Corps projects.
8. Alternative Watershed Planning
Authorities
a.
Specifically Authorized Studies. The most widely recognized authorities that have
the greatest potential for accommodating watershed planning efforts are the specifically
authorized feasibility studies with language that allows for the investigation of a suite
of water resource management opportunities within a watershed. Even though certain aspects of a Corps
comprehensive watershed study may not have a direct correlation to the authorization
language, that does not mean they should not be included in the scope of the study. True comprehensive watershed resources management
includes a variety of programs and activities, many of which will not pertain directly to
the Corps mission areas. The idea is to view
all the relevant programs in concert with each other, especially since the relationships
among the activities are critical to determining the cumulative effects of certain
watershed actions. Initiation of the
watershed management study would be considered as a recommendation of an expedited
reconnaissance phase study under the normal budget process.
The scope of the watershed study will be established and approved in the Section
905(b) Analysis.
b. Watershed
and River Basin Assessments. Section 202 of
WRDA 2000 amends Section 729 of WRDA 1986 to provide the Secretary discretionary authority
to assess the
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT: Guidance
for the Development of Watershed Management Plans
water resources needs of river basins and watersheds of the
United States including needs related to ecosystem protection and restoration; flood
damage reduction; navigation and ports; watershed protection; water supply; and, drought
preparedness. It also establishes cost
sharing provisions, defines cooperation and consultation requirements, and expands the
authority from $5 million to $15 million. Reference
1.d. provides implementation guidance for these studies.
Significant features that differentiate this program from the normal development of
a comprehensive watershed management plan include:
1) The
objective of the watershed assessments will be a watershed planning document that furthers
watershed resource management. Watershed
planning documents may be watershed management plans, but if not, the documents must
provide information that would feed into subsequent watershed management planning efforts.
2) The activities will be cost shared 50/50,
however, for this authority, in-kind services may not exceed 25 percent of the assessment
costs.
3) The assessments shall be carried out in
cooperation and coordination with: the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of
Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency; and the heads of other appropriate agencies.
4) The program is limited to the authorized
level of appropriations ($15,000,000).
c. Watershed Management, Restoration, and
Development. Section 503 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (WRDA 96)
authorizes the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide technical, planning and design
assistance to non-Federal interests for carrying out watershed management, restoration and
development projects at specified locations. The assistance may be in support of
non-Federal projects for the following purposes: management and restoration of water
quality, control and remediation of toxic sediments, restoration of degraded streams,
rivers, wetlands, and other water bodies to their natural condition as a means to control
flooding, excessive erosion, and sedimentation, protection and restoration of watersheds,
including urban
watersheds and demonstration of
technologies for nonstructural measures to reduce destructive impacts of flooding. Guidance in Reference 1.b. indicates that if a
potential study appears to be in accordance with current program guidance and budget
priorities, the study should be considered as a recommendation of an expedited
reconnaissance phase study under the normal budget process. This program is also limited
to the authorized level of appropriations ($15,000,000). This authority has been used to
pursue activities that are not traditional Corps missions and does not enjoy any budgetary
priority. Where there is a specific study
authority, the specific authority should be used.
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT: Guidance for the Development of Watershed
Management Plans
9. Implementation of Identified Projects.
a. Where the comprehensive watershed study
identifies potential projects for Corps implementation, additional study effort will
normally be required to support a recommendation for Congressional authorization. As indicated above, one of the normal findings of
a watershed management study is a determination of Federal (Corps) interest in pursuing
the development of authorization documents for water resource improvements that address
the high budget priority Corps mission areas (ecosystem restoration, navigation, and flood
damage reduction). Key to the decision to
pursue such a Corps project, is the determination that the proposed improvements are
consistent with either the selected comprehensive watershed management plan or consistent
with all of the watershed management plan alternatives that are under consideration.
b. When a project for early Corps
implementation is identified during the reconnaissance phase, it may be pursued
independently in a separate interim feasibility study under the overall study authority. The approach would be established in the Section
905(b) Analysis, which could recommend separate feasibility phase studies for the
watershed management study and for the specific project.
Alternately, the studies to support a recommendation to Congress could be included
in the Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement and Project Management Plan for the watershed
management study.
c. If there is a strong likelihood that
projects for potential Corps implementation will be identified during the conduct of the
watershed management study, the cost estimate for the feasibility phase of the watershed
management study may include up to a total of $100,000 for the negotiation of one or more
Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreements and Project Management Plans to develop one or more
feasibility reports that can support recommendations for Congressional authorization. This one-time cost will be fully Federally funded.
d. Identified projects that meet the
requirements of the Continuing Authorities Program may be initiated under the Continuing
Authorities Program upon the request of a local sponsor and upon the determination that
the project would be consistent with the comprehensive watershed plan.
FOR THE COMMANDER
/s/
KEN ORTH
Chief, Planning and Policy Division
Directorate of Civil Works and Management
CESPD-CM-P
SUBJECT: Guidance for the Development of Watershed
Management Plans
DISTRIBUTION
CESPD-CM-P
CESPD-CM
CESPD-CM-C
CESPA-PM-C
CESPN-ET-P
CESPL-PD
CESPK-PD