cfr_sections
Data license: Public Domain (U.S. Government data) · Data source: Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API
11 rows where agency = "USACE" and part_number = 234 sorted by section_id
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
| section_id ▼ | title_number | title_name | chapter | subchapter | part_number | part_name | subpart | subpart_name | section_number | section_heading | agency | authority | source_citation | amendment_citations | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.1 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.1 General. | USACE | (a) This part prescribes the Agency Specific Procedures (ASPs) for the United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to execute its Civil Works mission, in accordance with the Water Resources Principles and Guidelines defined in section 2031 of the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA) of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-114; 42 U.S.C. 1962-3), the Principles, Requirements and Guidelines (PR&G) issued by the Council on Environmental Quality and approved by the Water Resources Council, and as called for in section 110 of WRDA 2020 (Division AA of Pub. L. 116-260). (b) Section 2031 of the WRDA of 2007 (Pub. L. 110-114) directed the Secretary of the Army to revise the March 10, 1983, Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies (P&G) for Corps use and to address the following considerations: advancements in economic and analytic techniques; public safety; low-income communities; nonstructural approaches; interaction with other water resources projects and programs; integrated and adaptive management; and use of public benefits to justify projects. This WRDA provision also provided that the Federal Objective is to reflect national priorities, encourage economic development, and protect the environment by seeking to maximize sustainable economic development, avoid the unwise use of floodplains, and protect and restore natural ecosystems. (c) The PR&G was issued as an interagency effort to modernize the P&G. The PR&G is comprised of the Principles and Requirements (P&R) issued in March 2013 and the Interagency Guidelines issued in December 2014. The PR&G emphasizes that water resources projects should strive to meet the Federal Objective and maximize public benefits relative to public costs. The PR&G is designed to support water infrastructure projects with the greatest public benefits (economic, environmental, and social benefits) relative to costs. (d) Congress directed the Secretary of the Army to issue ASPs to implement the PR&G in section 110 of WRDA 202… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.10 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.10 Compare alternatives. | USACE | (a) Comparing alternatives. Alternatives shall be compared to each other and to the No Action alternative and shall include a comparison of the ability of the alternatives to perform under changing conditions, including climate change. The alternative (or alternatives) that reasonably meets the Federal Objective and maximizes net public benefits shall be identified. In addition, alternatives may be evaluated separately with respect to other considerations, including distributional effects. These considerations may include: (1) Temporal factors, since certain effects may occur at different points in time. (2) Spatial factors, since certain costs, benefits, and transfers may accrue to different regions. Regional-scale analyses may be useful to inform regional-level economic development objectives. It is important to note that such regional analyses, while useful, are completely separate from the calculation of net public benefits described in § 234.4(c). (3) Beneficiaries. Tribal Nations and stakeholders (including other governmental agencies and communities with environmental justice concerns) may indicate different tradeoffs among the various benefits and costs of a Federal action. Tribal reserved rights, including treaty-protected resources and habitats, are not benefits to the Tribal Nation, rather, they are guaranteed by such treaties. Robust engagement at this stage shall focus on eliciting preferences among the alternatives, their component elements, and their effects. When calculating net benefits, these distributional effects can be examined using techniques like income weighting. (b) Tradeoffs. Tradeoffs among potential alternatives will be assessed and described throughout the decision-making process and in a manner that informs decision-making. Based on the available analytical information, the Corps would use its professional judgment in making its recommendations on decisions among tradeoffs. The tradeoff displays shall be understandable, transparent, and constructed in a generally consistent … | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.11 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.11 Select the recommended plan. | USACE | (a) Recommended plan. (1) Plan selection will require decision-makers to assess tradeoffs and to consider the extent of both monetized and non-monetized effects. The basis for selection of the recommended plan should be fully reported and documented in a transparent manner, including the criteria and considerations used. This section must provide a discussion about the extent to which the alternatives achieve the Federal Objective and maximize net public benefits to society. The report must include an explanation of the assumptions in the evaluation of monetized and non-monetized benefits and costs. This section will include a summary of elicited Tribal Nation and stakeholder perspectives on the alternatives and their effects. (2) The Corps should recommend: (i) Authorization of an alternative project, program, or plan; (ii) Implementation of an alternative under existing law; (iii) Implementation of a project, program or plan by others; or (iv) No action. (3) In its studies, the Corps shall analyze, evaluate, fully consider, and justify each separable element of the proposed investment independently of the other separable elements, based on its social, environmental, and economic benefits and costs to society. (4) The Corps should seek to meet water resources objectives and maximize net public benefits, relative to public costs. It is possible that more than one alternative might reasonably and approximately meet these conditions. “Net public benefits” implies that the anticipated benefits will be presented relative to the costs associated with the accrual of those benefits. Net public benefits can include both quantified and non-quantified benefits. Any recommendation will clearly delineate the Federal water resources project(s) or actions being recommended, including any condition precedent for construction. (b) Exceptions. A recommended plan for a Federal water resources investment that does not maximize net public benefits requires an exception from the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil W… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.2 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.2 Definitions. | USACE | Acceptability. The viability and appropriateness of an alternative from the perspective of the Nation's general public and consistency with existing Federal laws, authorities, and public policies. It does not include local or regional preferences for solutions or political expediency. Adaptive management. A deliberate, iterative, and scientific-based process of designing, implementing, monitoring, and adjusting an action, measure, or project to address changing circumstances and outcomes, reduce uncertainty, and maximize one or more goals over time. Completeness. The extent to which an alternative provides and accounts for all features, investments, and/or other actions necessary to realize the planned effects, including any necessary actions by others. It does not necessarily mean that alternative actions need to be large in scope or scale. Effectiveness. The extent to which an alternative alleviates the specified problems and achieves the specified opportunities. Efficiency. The extent to which an alternative alleviates the specified problems and realizes the specified opportunities at the least cost. Federal investment. Investments made by the Corps related to water resources development projects, including flood and storm risk management, ecosystem restoration, land management activities, navigation, recreation, and hydropower. Federal Objective. The fundamental goal of Federal investments in water resources. Federal water resources investments shall reflect national priorities, encourage economic development, and protect the environment. Federal investments should strive to maximize net public benefits. Indigenous Knowledge. Indigenous Knowledge may be described as a body of observations, oral and written knowledge, innovations, practices, and beliefs developed by Tribes and Indigenous Peoples through interaction and experience with the environment, consistent with the definitions used in 43 CFR 2361.5 and 6101.4(h) and the Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Indigenous Knowledge,… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.3 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.3 Exceptions. | USACE | Exceptions to any requirements or policy contained in this part may be requested by the Corps or the non-Federal interest or responsible Tribal, State, or local government. Exceptions must be requested in writing and will be reviewed for a decision by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.4 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.4 Objectives and applicability. | USACE | (a) Introduction. The goal of the Department of the Army's ASPs is to ensure that Army Civil Works consistently applies a common framework for analyzing a diverse range of water resources development projects, programs, activities, and related actions involving Federal investments. The ASPs will advance transparency and consistency of the Corps' Federal investments in water resources. The intention of the ASPs is to outline the steps to apply the PR&G to Corps water resources investments, including a determination of the applicability of the PR&G in the context of the Corps' missions and authorities, to provide a common framework for evaluation of investment alternatives, and to ensure that the Corps adequately addresses the Guiding Principles identified in the P&R. (b) Objectives for Federal water resources investments. Section 2031 of WRDA 2007 (Pub. L. 110-114; 42 U.S.C. 1962-3) specifies that Federal water resources investments shall reflect national priorities, encourage economic development, and protect the environment. The Corps shall accomplish this Federal Objective of water resources planning policy by: (1) Seeking to maximize sustainable economic development; (2) Seeking to avoid the unwise use of floodplains and flood-prone areas and minimizing adverse impacts and vulnerabilities in any case in which a floodplain or flood-prone area must be used; and (3) Protecting and restoring the functions of natural systems and mitigating any unavoidable damage to natural systems. (c) Net public benefits. The Corps shall strive to maximize net public benefits to society. Public benefits encompass economic, environmental, and social goals, include monetized and un-monetized effects, and allow for the consideration of both quantified and unquantified effects. (d) Applicability. (1) The objectives in paragraph (b) of this section shall be embodied in all new Army Civil Works' water resources investments, which include both structural and nonstructural approaches to water resources problems. The PR&G ana… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.5 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.5 Level of analysis. | USACE | (a) Standard and scaled levels of analysis. Once a determination has been made that the PR&G does apply, the level of analysis shall be determined. The level of PR&G analysis required will vary in scope and magnitude across programs and activities. There are two levels of analysis: standard and scaled. In general, the level of analysis should be commensurate with the significance of the Federal investment in terms of dollar value and the potential environmental impacts. While there is not a clear distinction between the different levels of analysis, the two types of analysis can generally be distinguished in several ways: (1) A standard analysis seeks to evaluate all the relevant benefits and costs associated with the project or activity using original or secondary data. This type of analysis is typically used for new or significantly modified actions. The Corps would conduct a benefit-cost analysis of programs and activities that have some effect on the environment. For projects/activities that fall into the category of standard analysis, the analysis should make significantly greater efforts to quantify and monetize impacts. The extent to which effects can and should be monetized should be made on a resource-by-resource basis and should consider the estimated present value cost of the project/activity and the significance of the effects. (2) A scaled analysis is an analysis that is more limited in scope for projects, programs, or plans that have low risk/low cost, have minimal consequences of failure, pose minimal threats to human life or safety, or do not result in significant impacts to the environment. A scaled analysis may rely on benefits function transfer methods and readily available secondary data sources. Benefits function transfer methods are used to estimate monetary values by transferring available information about relationships from studies already completed to another location, context, or issue. Best practices would be applied when using this approach to avoid common pitfalls. (b) Determin… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.6 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.6 The planning process. | USACE | (a) Introduction. The following planning process will be used to implement the common framework summarized in the Interagency Guidelines for analyzing Federal investments in applicable water resources. The planning process will ensure that plan formulation, evaluation, and recommendations for proposed Corps investments reflect the Guiding Principles identified in the P&R: healthy and resilient ecosystems, sustainable economic development, floodplains, public safety, environmental justice, and a watershed approach. The planning process consists of a series of steps that identify or respond to problems and opportunities, as well as specific Tribal, State, and local concerns, and, in most cases, culminates in a recommended plan. The process involves an orderly and systematic approach to making determinations and decisions at each step so that the interested public and decision-makers in the planning organization can be fully aware of the following: the basic assumptions employed; the data and information analyzed; the areas of risk and uncertainty; the reasons and rationales used; and the significant implications of each alternative. The Corps will identify impacts to Tribal treaty and water rights at the earliest phases and throughout the plan evaluation process, screening alternatives that impact Tribal treaty and water rights. The planning process is iterative to adapt to new information and understanding. The result of the planning process is investment advice. The advice may be a recommended plan or plans that seek to maximize net public benefits in addressing the identified water resources problem and a description of the analysis of the benefits and costs of that and other potential plans. (b) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Where Federal investments in water resources require analysis under NEPA and this part, Army Civil Works should integrate, to the extent possible, the analysis in this part into existing planning processes, and may integrate this part and NEPA analyses in a single analytica… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.7 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.7 Evaluation framework. | USACE | (a) General. To inform the overall decision-making process, this section describes the common framework and general requirements to be used by the Corps in evaluating and ensuring full consideration of the social, environmental, and economic benefits and costs to society of any separable elements and potential alternatives for Federal investment. This will include their performance with respect to the Guiding Principles and their contributions to the Federal Objective. Any key assumptions that affect the analysis of alternatives shall be clearly described in the study. (b) Economic, environmental, and social effects. (1) The Corps' analytical framework for evaluating Federal investments should focus on the key economic, environmental, and social effects that are relevant to the investment decision. Typical NEPA analyses emphasize environmental effects and benefits, including ecosystem services, and these should also be used as a core part of water resources alternatives analysis. A benefit-cost analysis would be conducted for each alternative. Ecosystem services are an important benefit-cost category that should be included in the benefit-cost analysis. (2) In addition, the scale of the analysis can be adjusted for a given study. While all analyses should share common elements, how these elements are achieved can depend on the identified problem or opportunity. It is important to establish a consistent analytic approach for each study. When implementing its ASPs, the Corps will consider and, where it deems appropriate, align with the latest Federal methods and guidance (for example, updated OMB Circulars and applicable interagency guidance) to ensure that the analytical framework accounts for all significant economic, environmental, and social costs and benefits, including ecosystem services. Where possible, monetization enables the incorporation of the values placed on the benefits and costs evaluated and provides a way to evaluate trade-offs in common analytical units (dollars). OMB Circulars A-4 and A-94… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.8 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.8 Final array of alternatives. | USACE | (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (c) and (f) of this section, the final array of alternatives shall include, at a minimum, the following six alternatives: (1) A No Action alternative. (2) A nonstructural alternative: An alternative that can effectively address the problem through the feasible use of nonstructural approaches. (3) A nature-based solution alternative: An alternative that can effectively address the problem through the feasible use of nature-based solutions (including natural systems and ecosystem processes). (4) An environmentally preferred alternative. (5) An alternative that seeks to maximize net public benefits to society. In developing this alternative, the Corps shall not consider regional economic development effects. (6) An alternative that is locally preferred. If this alternative differs from the net public benefits alternative, it will be required to have a comparable level of detail and analyzed using the same analytical framework as the net public benefits alternative. (b) The nonstructural and nature-based alternatives do not preclude consideration of these elements in other alternatives. Nonstructural measures and nature-based solutions shall be considered as components of the other alternatives in the final array, essentially providing an integrated or “hybrid” of gray (hard) infrastructure with these other measures. (c) The same alternative may be identified as more than one of these required alternatives. (d) Mitigation of unavoidable adverse effects associated with each alternative must be included in the alternative and in the analyses. (e) If an alternative requires changes in existing laws, regulations, or policies, those changes must be clearly identified and explained. (f) If one or more of the required alternatives is not included because the Corps was not able to identify a potential solution that is feasible and consistent with the purpose of the study, the study must document that decision. (g) The discussion of the final array of alternatives should includ… | |||||||
| 33:33:3.0.1.1.9.0.1.9 | 33 | Navigation and Navigable Waters | II | 234 | PART 234—CORPS OF ENGINEERS AGENCY SPECIFIC PROCEDURES TO IMPLEMENT THE PRINCIPLES, REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES FOR FEDERAL INVESTMENTS IN WATER RESOURCES | § 234.9 Evaluate effects of alternatives. | USACE | (a) Analysis of alternatives. For the final array of alternatives, the analysis should describe, evaluate, and estimate the key social, environmental, and economic effects, and assess the contributions of each alternative to the Guiding Principles. The analysis should identify any impacts to Tribal treaty rights which were unknown earlier in the planning process and which prevent the selection of an alternative. (b) Evaluation procedures. In addition to assessing how alternatives perform with respect to the Guiding Principles, the evaluation procedures shall incorporate methods to evaluate: (1) How public benefits of an alternative compare to its costs, including full consideration of all important social, environmental, and economic benefits and costs. (2) How alternatives perform against the objectives of the study. (3) How alternatives perform against the four formulation criteria: completeness, effectiveness, efficiency, and acceptability. (c) Consideration of benefits and costs. The report should fully account for the effects to society of alternative plans and their respective contributions to the Federal Objective, relative to the No Action alternative. The analysis will evaluate the economic benefits and costs, environmental benefits and costs, and social benefits and costs of alternatives, regardless of how they are included (monetized, quantified, or described). The consideration of benefits to federally recognized Tribes will be done in direct consultation with the respective Tribal Nation and will supplement the public benefit analysis. To the extent practicable, such costs and benefits must be quantified in a scientifically valid and acceptable way, and such quantified costs shall be monetized where practicable. When monetization or quantification is not possible, costs and benefits must be described in sufficient detail to enable the decision-maker to understand the importance and magnitude of potential changes. For monetized costs and benefits, the present value cost of each alternative … |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE cfr_sections (
section_id TEXT PRIMARY KEY,
title_number INTEGER,
title_name TEXT,
chapter TEXT,
subchapter TEXT,
part_number TEXT,
part_name TEXT,
subpart TEXT,
subpart_name TEXT,
section_number TEXT,
section_heading TEXT,
agency TEXT,
authority TEXT,
source_citation TEXT,
amendment_citations TEXT,
full_text TEXT
);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_title ON cfr_sections(title_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_part ON cfr_sections(part_number);
CREATE INDEX idx_cfr_agency ON cfr_sections(agency);