- Planning Guidance Notebook
- Planning Bulletins
Memoranda and Implementation Guidance
- SMART Guide
The online Planning SMART Guide
provides an introduction and overview of the execution and delivery of feasibility
- Policy Guidance on Implementation
of Supplemental Appropriations in the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018
This document, issued by the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works),
provides implementation guidance for supplemental appropriations in the
Investigations, Construction, Mississippi River and Tributaries (MR& T), Operation
and Maintenance, and Expenses appropriations. Implementation guidance for the
Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies appropriation is provided separately, dated
11 May 2018.
- Directors Policy Memorandum Civil
Works: Principals of Delivery for the 2018 Emergency Supplemental
USACE received $17.1B dollars in Emergency Supplemental funding as
appropriated in Public Law 115-123. The purpose of this Directors Policy
Memorandum is to ensure that all USACE team members clearly understand
enterprise intent for the aggressive and high-quality delivery of projects and
studies included in the Emergency Supplemental.
- Directors Policy Memorandum Civil Works Program 2018-05: Improving
Efficiency and Effectiveness in USACE Civil Works Project Delivery (Planning Phase
and Planning Activities)
This Memorandum covers the actions that must
be taken within the planning phase of the USACE Civil Works project delivery
process in order to embrace and operationalize risk informed decision making to
make initial project delivery processes, as well as the full project lifecycle
processes, more efficient and effective. This Memorandum is applicable to all
Headquarters USACE (HQUSACE) elements, Divisions, Districts, laboratories, and
field operating activities related to USACE Civil Works projects. The actions and
policies in this memorandum will also be applied in the execution of studies funded
by the 2018 Disaster Relief supplemental appropriations (P.L. 115- 123).
- FY18 Emergency Supplemental Long-term Disaster Recovery Investment
Program Performance Management Governance
USACEHQ Civil Works Programs
Integration Division has issued project/ performance management guidance for
studies and projects funded under the Emergency Supplemental, which will be
tracked under a new Performance Management System. The objectives of the
Performance Management System are to drive aggressive project delivery, assist in
proactive management, and minimize upward reporting. A final version of this
guidance will replace this draft once complete.
- Summary of Recent USACE Planning Policy Updates: September
2018 - March 2019
USACE policy and guidance continues to evolve to reflect the most recent changes
in law (WRDAs), Administration priorities, and USACE leadership. This presentation
summarizes and provides context for key USACE Planning policy and guidance
updates released between September 2018 and March 2019.
Interim Guidance on Streamlining Independence External Peer Review
(IEPR) for Improved Civil Works Product Delivery
summarizes the current guidance on delegated IEPR authorities to the field, and
provides updated guidance on IEPR mandatory triggers. In particular, it streamlines
the mandatory triggers to reflect only the statutory requirements for Type I IEPR.
When the statutory requirements for IEPR were first introduced in the WRDA 2007,
USACE adopted a broad application of these reviews. In the nearly 12 years since,
USACE improved its quality management and strengthened all layers of review.
IEPR remains an important aspect of USACE's overall quality management strategy
for producing sound federal investment decisions and projects. In a resources
constrained environment, USACE must focus its IEPR implementation on the most
complex, highest cost projects, as well as those that pose a high risk to public
safety, the economy, and the environment.
- Policy Memorandum-Policy
Guidance on Real Estate Implementation of Supplemental Appropriations in the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018
This memo provides additional guidance
related to the real estate aspects of the 9 August 2018 memo, Policy Guidance on
Implementation of Supplemental Appropriations in the Bipartisan Budget Act of
2018. The memo clarifies that for all supplemental projects, the non-federal
sponsor (NFS) remains responsible for the provision of LERRDs (lands, easements,
rights of way, relocations and disposal sites) and provides additional detail on NFS
and USACE requirements.
- Fact Sheets, FAQ and Webinars
Civil Works Partnership Fact Sheet (PDF)
Civil Works Partnership Fact Sheet (Word)
Project Planning with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (April 2015)
This PowerPoint deck provides an overview of implementing a cost-shared single phase feasibility study with the Army Corps of Engineers. It is posted in PowerPoint so that Corps Districts can adapt it to their local needs and the needs of their sponsors.
2018 Supplemental Appropriation Study Initiation: Fundamental Steps and Documentation
Overview of key steps to initiating a feasibility study being funded under the 2018 Emergency Supplemental appropriations: processes, documentation, and decisions in the first 90 days of a new feasibility study.
Webinar: Implementing Single Phase Feasibility Studies: Getting to the Alternatives Milestone (5 March)
Brian Harper from the Institute for Water Resources provided useful tips for new start feasibility studies implementing single phase studies (without reconnaissance).
Webinar: Implementation of WRRDA Section 1002 Single-Phase Planning & Notification of Study Schedules (19 February)
Sue Hughes and Lisa Kiefel from the Planning Community of Practice provided a preview of the changes to the feasibility study process and notification requirements established by Section 1002 of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA).
PCoP Webinar Series
includes several webinars on SMART Planning, lessons learned, and more
Partnering with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Guide for Communities, Local Governments, States, Tribes, and Non-Governmental Organizations
Partnering with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: A Guide for Communities, Local Governments, States, Tribes, and Non-Governmental Organizations provides potential sponsors with information on the programs and processes available for non-Federal partners and USACE representatives to work together to address the Nations water resources problems. The Guide includes an overview of the USACE Civil Works Program and describes how USACE can work with local, State, Tribal, and Federal agencies and other non-Federal partners on activities ranging from technical services and advice to planning and constructing water resources projects. A previous version of this document was originally published as the Project Partnership Kit by IWR back in 1996 and revised in 2001.
Talking Points & Frequently Asked Questions: Section 1001 of WRRDA 2014 Vertical Integration and Acceleration of Studies (April 2015)
Talking Points & Frequently Asked Questions: Section 1002 of WRRDA 2014 - Consolidation of Studies
- Templates and Forms
Feasibility Study Vertical Team Coordination: Key HQ and MSC Tasks
This document summarizes key Vertical Team and Headquarters tasks associated with feasibility study coordination, review, milestone meetings, report approval and processing the final report package in preparation for a signed Chief's Report or Director's Report. It includes tasks delegated to the MSCs that have previously been a HQ responsibility associated with policy and legal review and milestone decision making. It does not include tasks/activities such as District Quality Control, Quality Assurance, technical reviews (Agency Technical Review or Independent External Peer Review), etc.
Supplemental Appropriation Study Initiation Checklist
This checklist provides a guide of essential tasks in the first 90 days of a new feasibility study being funded by 2018 Emergency Supplemental appropriations. It is not an exhaustive list of tasks or requirements for feasibility study execution.
Single Phase Feasibility Study Letter of Intent
Communities and potential project sponsors can submit a Letter of Intent to their local District expressing interest and willingness in partnering with the Corps in a feasibility study. Contact your district for more information.
Developing a Project Management Plan and Review Plan
Example notification letter on Project Schedules
Example letter for use by Project Delivery Teams to meet the requirement of WRDA Section 1002. The Corps is required to provide the study schedule for key milestones to each non-federal sponsor of an active feasibility study.
Review Plan Template Package
The Review Plan Template Package provides detailed information related to the development and approval of Review Plans for Civil Works decision documents. The items in this package are intended to assist Project Delivery Teams in preparing Review Plans as required in Engineer Circular (EC) 1165-2-217 - Review Policy for Civil Works. Collectively, these documents offer a roadmap for teams to use in drafting and submitting Review Plans for approval. The package includes: an overview of Civil Works review; a guide for review plan preparation; a review plan template; a checklist of required elements of a Review Plan; the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for review plan development and approval.
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BBA 2018) Model Agreement for New Feasibility Studies Implementation Memo
This implementation memo provides instructions on how to use the Model Agreement for new feasibility studies funded by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Emergency Supplemental), including on use and signature requirements.
Model Agreement for New feasibility Studies Funded by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (Emergency Supplemental)
This model agreement is for new feasibility studies that will be funded by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BBA 2018), Public Law 115-123, at full federal expense. The model agreement is to be used only for studies for which no feasibility cost sharing agreement using Investigations appropriations has been executed previously. The responsibility for review and approval of an agreement that does not deviate from the model is delegated to the MSC Commander and may not be further delegated.