assumptions, data and conclusions of the study will be reviewed by both Corps echelons and the public as the study progresses. The stages of planning have been incorporated into the budgetary process and the Intensive Management Program (see ER 1105-2

10).

§ 291.5 Stage 1-Reconnaissance.

The purpose of the first stage of the planning process is to conduct reconnaissance level investigations to determine whether a survey scope feasibility study is warranted and, if warranted, to develop a detailed scheme for Stage 2 planning. Reconnaissance investigations should address the four functional planning tasks primarily on the basis of available information, coordination and public involvement.

(a) Planning tasks. The general approach should be broad in order to identify the need for additional investigations and analyses in Stages 2 and 3. The emphasis should be on problem identification. The other three planning tasks require less attention during Stage 1.

(1) All activities described in Part 292 of this chapter should be addressed at the reconnaissance level in Stage 1. Public concerns should be actively sought to facilitate a comprehensive approach to the planning effort. This approach will encourage consideration of a broad array of environmental and social values and concerns. Moreover, it will help assure that resources of particular value or critical concern are highlighted for more detailed study in subsequent planning. Based on these and other problem identification activities, an initial definition of the planning objectives should be made. The planning objectives should be as specific as possible at the end of Stage 1, even though they may be refined in Stages 2 and 3.

(2) Formulation should concentrate on identifying potential management

measures.

(3) Impact assessment should concentrate on identifying potentially significant impacts.

(4) Evaluation should concentrate on those analyses which will provide the

basis for determining whether a continuation of the study is warranted.

(b) Public involvement. Public involvement should be addressed in a minimum of three ways in Stage 1. First, lines of communication should be opened with interested and affected agencies and non-governmental groups. Second, the Corps should circulate a draft Reconnaissance Report or other appropriate Stage 1 planning document for public review and conduct a public meeting. And third, a public involvement program for Stage 2 should be developed in detail, with follow-on activities identified for stage

3.

(c) Reconnaissance report. A Reconnaissance Report will be prepared and transmitted to the division engineer for approval at the conclusion of Stage 1. The report will document the need for further study, the results of the investigations accomplished during Stage 1, and, if the recommendation is to continue the study, the detailed management information necessary for accomplishing Stage 2 planning. (See also definition of Reconnaissance Report in Part 290 of this chapter.)

(1) If continuation of the study is recommended, management information should include an updated Study Cost Estimate (PB-6) and a detailed description of Stage 2 work activities. Work activities should be structured into the accounts and subaccounts prescribed by ER 11-9-220 and should be appropriately defined for incorporation into the Resource Analysis/Project Management (RA/PM) system.

(2) If continuation of the study is not recommended, the district engineer should indicate whether the study should be temporarily suspended or whether it should be terminated by the submittal of a report to Congress.

§ 291.6 Stage 2—Development of intermediate plans.

In this stage, a broad range of alternative plans and management measures are explored. Stage 2 results in a screening of alternatives by carrying out sufficient iterations of the four planning tasks to decide which plans, if any, warrant more detailed study in

Stage 3. The Stage 2 screening will reduce the number of alternatives to those which are most feasible under the evaluation criteria provided in Part 295 of this chapter.

(a) The emphasis in this stage is to formulate alternatives that reflect an array of realistic ways of managing the resources of the study area. To accomplish this, detailed problem identification must be conducted to precisely specify the planning objectives. Additional data should be gathered to satisfy any deficiencies in the data base. Technical and institutional measures for addressing the objectives should be more precisely set forth. This should not unduly constrain the breadth of the measures considered. Overdependence on design detail is not appropriate. Developing alternative plans which incorporate nonstructual measures should receive considerable attention during this stage.

(b) Impact assessment should be sufficient to identify major changes from the "without condition." This is accomplished by developing a detailed "without condition" and comparing it to each alternative plan. The level of detail will increase as this stage proceeds. Iterations of the assessment and evaluation tasks will provide the information necessary to allow for the screening out of less responsive alternatives, and the identification of those which appear to be most feasible.

(c) The level of detail should be sufficient for the public and higher authority to review and understand the rationale used in developing and screening the alternatives. (See also the definition of "Intermediate Plan" in Part 290 of this chapter.)

(d) If the ongoing study establishes that there are valid, compelling reasons to plan toward positive Regional Development (RD) and/or Social Well-Being (SWB) contributions, approval should be sought from the Secretary of the Army, through DAENCWP, prior to the conclusion of Stage 2. The Secretary of the Army must approve any exceptions prior to the initiation of Stage 3.

(e) As a general rule, the alternative plans selected for detailed study in

Stage 3 should possess the following characteristics:

(1) Each plan should represent at least one of the following: A way to optimize NED outputs; a way to emphasize EQ; a mix of NED and EQ; an alternative desired by some segment of the public; or an alternative responsive to an OCE policy or plan formulation requirement.

(2) Each plan must be "justified," based on Stage 2 planning, in the sense that its total beneficial contributions (monetary and nonmonetary) are equal to or exceed its total adverse contributions (monetary and nonmonetary).

(3) Each plan will represent uses of the water and related land resources of the study area for either Corps mission-related purposes, or other nonCorps purposes which represent viable alternatives, although each plan need not provide contributions to all planning objectives established for the study.

(4) Plans should reflect distinct differences. These may include differences in technology, institutional arrangements, levels of output, impacts, or public perceptions. These differences should be highlighted so that the Stage 2 documentation will clearly show why each plan is being proposed for more detailed study in Stage 3.

(f) Stage 2 documentation will be prepared to support the above characteristics and will be utilized as part of public involvement and the Intensive Management Program. This documentation should include a detailed description of work activities for Stage 3 planning, or if a determination is made that further studies are not warranted, the Stage 2 documentation shall be made available to State and local planning agencies after termination of the Study has been approved by the division engineer. If a study is terminated during Stage 2, a brief report should be prepared for transmittal to Congress to explain the reasons for termination and actions taken by the Corps to provide State and local interests information which may be useful to them.

§ 291.7 Stage 3-Development of detailed plans.

Stage 3 emphasizes the detailed assessment and evaluation of a small number of alternatives. It involves carrying out the four planning tasks to a level of refinement which assures that each of the plans considered in Stage 3 is formulated in the best possible way to achieve the desired planning objectives, to assure that each of the plans is implementable, and to support the selection of the best plan. If the criteria in § 290.11, of this chapter are met, Stage 3 also includes further development of the selected plan to support a recommendation for Congressional authorization for Corps of Engineers implementation. The primary documentation in Stage 3 will be the draft and final study report.

(a) In addition to the characteristics described in paragraph 6e, Stage 3 plans should also reflect the following: (1) Each plan should represent a complete technical system together with the necessary implementation arrangements.

(2) Each alternative in Stage 3 should be developed to a comparable level of detail with respect to engineering, environmental, economic and social data to the extent necessary to conduct trade-off analysis and to select the best plan for implementation.

(b) After a plan has been selected on the basis of the Stage 3 evaluation and trade-off analysis, a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be completed if Federal implementation action will be proposed. Sufficient environmental data and analyses should be available from the study, conducted under the 1105-2-200 series of regulations, to complete the draft EIS. Additional study effort may be necessary to support the preparation and presentation of recommendations to Congress after the public has commented on the draft EIS and draft Stage 3 report.

(c) Public involvement is an important imput to the evaluation and trade-off analysis throughout Stage 3 planning. The evaluation should be presented at the Stage 3 public meeting. The draft report which includes

§ 292.3 References.

(a) ER 1105-2-200, Multiobjective Planning Framework (33 CFR Part 290).

(b) ER 1105-2-921, Feasibility Reports: System of Accounts (33 CFR Part 393).

(c) EM 1120–2–118.

§ 292.4 General.

This task is undertaken to define the physical area and the nature of water and related land resource management problems that the study will address. As outlined in Figure 1, the task of problem identification culminates in delineation of the planning objectives which guide the formulation of alternative plans. The following paragraphs discuss the activities included in problem identification.

§ 292.5 Identify public concerns.

Initially, problem identification involves eliciting information from the public about the range of needs (opportunities and problems) which the study could address. Properly accomplished, this directs subsequent activities to respond to public, in addition to agency, perceptions.

(a) The types of problems, concerns, and opportunities to be addressed are limited to issues related to water and related land resources management. Issues relasting to regional population growth, economic development, and transportation policies; attitudes about ownership and use of land, community aesthetics, and significant environmental phenomena; and other similar concerns are also to be considered where relevant to the management of water and related resources.