Section 408 Approval Process
(New 408 Regional General Permit)
Richard J. Muraski Jr.
Colonel, Corps of Engineers
Commander
Fort Worth District
US Army Corps of Engineers
BUILDING STRONG®
Overview








408 Approval Authority
Flood Risk Paradigm
Why Streamline?
Streamlining Initiatives
408 RGP – What is it?
Key Takeaways
POCs / Resources
Questions & Answers
BUILDING STRONG®
How are they Applied?
Stakeholder Projects
Federal Project
RGP
Waters of the US
PEA
408
404 / 10
BUILDING STRONG®
408 Approval Authority
 33 USC 408 (Rivers & Harbors Appropriations
Act of 1899)
 Title 33 – Navigation and Navigable Waters
408 – Taking possession of, use of, or injury
to harbor or river improvements
► Section
• Unlawful for any person or persons to build upon, alter,
deface work built by the US to prevent floods unless
SecArmy grants permission based on determination that the
proposed project will:


Not be injurious to the public interest (NEPA Component)
Not impair the usefulness of the Federal project
BUILDING STRONG®
Flood Risk Paradigm
THEN
NOW
Flood Damage Reduction (FDR)
Flood Risk Management (FRM)
Paradigm: Federal Protection
“We are Safe”
Paradigm: Shared Risk Reduction
• Individual Agency Processes
• Project-by-Project
• Focus on reducing damages by
managing floods
• Minimal consideration to future
land use or other social effects
• Decisions based on reducing the
potential for failure
• Integrated Agency & Stakeholder
processes to buy-down risks to a
tolerable level
• Focus on reducing probability of
flooding & consequences should
flooding occur
• Systems Approach (weakest link)
• Integrate environmental, social,
and economic factors
BUILDING STRONG®
Levee Safety
Program Activities
BUILDING STRONG®
Why Streamline?
 Perception: Some projects have required multiple years for
review
►
Reality: Acquiring sufficient data for proper review & required
Agency determination has sometimes been lengthy
 Contributing Factors
Lack of Stakeholder understanding of roles,
responsibilities and process
► Insufficient Corps Guidelines for technical and NEPA
submittals
► Failure to coordinate/secure Sponsor review & approval
► Incomplete submittal packages
► Insufficient technical analysis
► Lack of sufficient environmental compliance
documentation
►
BUILDING STRONG®
Fort Worth District
Streamlining Initiatives




Developing Standard Business Process
Regional General Permit
Programmatic EA
Section 214
BUILDING STRONG®
Standard Business Process
 Developing Standard Business Process
► Increase
efficiency & reliability
► Define Roles & Responsibilities
► Process Map / Responsibility Matrix
► Submittal Checklists
► Increase Clarity / Decrease Anxiety
BUILDING STRONG®
408 RGP – What is it?
 Permit Name: Modification and Alterations of
Corps of Engineers Projects
 Permit Number: CESWF-09-RGP-12
► Issued
24 FEB 2010
► Expires 23 FEB 2015
 Purpose: Eliminate unnecessary duplication
of work where the environmental
consequences of the proposed action are
individually and cumulatively minimal
BUILDING STRONG®
Programmatic Environmental Assessment
 Certain Conditions must be met to use
► Must
be a Minor Section 408
► Only affect grassland habitats or be covered
under a Nationwide Permit or the RGP
► Must not result in significant adverse impacts
to cultural resources
► Must not impact threatened or endangered
species
BUILDING STRONG®
WRDA Section 214 Authority
 Legislation allows the Corps to accept funds from Non-Federal
Public Entities to expedite 408 Actions & Regulatory Permits
 Program Must:
 Serve Public Interest with Accountability & Transparency
 Ensure Impartial Decision Making
 Expedite Permits
 NCTCOG & USACE entered into a MOA October 2008 to
process Regulatory Permits
 COG is applicant & sets priorities for projects
 Completed 30 Permit Actions to Date; 31 Pending Projects
 Draft MOA being processed with NTCOG to process 408
Actions
BUILDING STRONG®
Comparison of Section 214 Projects VS
Regulatory Branch Performance in 2010
 Section 214 - 100% of Individual Permits issued in 120
days
 Branch - 54.8% of Individual Permits issued in 120 days
 Section 214 – General Permit verification averaged 7.6
days
 Branch – General Permit verification averaged 25.7 days
BUILDING STRONG®
Current Section 408 Actions
 Major Modifications
 No Major Section 408’s have been processed by the Ft Worth District for final
approval by HQ
 Cities of Irving and Dallas have Section 408 100-year levee remediation projects
in process
 May become minor Section 408’s if the modifications are determined to be
insignificant
 Anticipate several upcoming bridge/roadway levee crossings will be major
actions
 Estimated review & approval costs in the $150,000 range
 Minor Modifications
 Receiving numerous requests to modify DFW area projects
 Goal to process and approve actions within 30 days of final submittal package
 Review costs dependent on complexity but usually less than $10,000/ action
BUILDING STRONG®
Key Takeaways
 USACE is standardizing the process
 Shared Risks – Shared Responsibility
►
Help improve Stakeholder understanding – embrace the concept
 Early coordination with Sponsor by applicant will help
reduce/minimize USACE review times.
 Better integration of engineering design with
environmental impacts needed to comply with NEPA and
CWA (404) and RHA (Sec 10)
 Ensure complete, comprehensive 408 submittal
packages
BUILDING STRONG®
POCs / Resources
 408 Business Process (Primary Contact)
►
►
►
Terry Bachim, Chief Maintenance Section
Terry.bachim@usace.army.mil
hyperlink
 Regional General Permit (RGP)
►
►
►
Stephen Brooks, Chief Regulatory Branch
Stephen.brooks@usace.army.mil
http://www.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/environ/Regulatory/permit
ting/rgp/CESWF_09_RGP_12_Final_Signed.pdf
 Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA)
►
►
►
Rob Newman, Chief Environmental Branch
Rob.newman@usace.army.mil
http://www.swf.usace.army.mil/pubdata/Notices/Minor408PEA/Fin
al_Minor_408_PEA.pdf
 Section 214
►
►
Elston Eckhardt, Chief Civil Programs
Elston.eckhardt@usace.army.mil
BUILDING STRONG®
Q&A
BUILDING STRONG®