Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9637 

The Wilmington District will 

periodically issue Public Notices 

soliciting public and agency comment 

on the proposed action and alternatives 

to the proposed action as they are 

developed. 

Dated: February 8, 2012. 

Henry M. Wicker, 

Acting Chief, Wilmington Regulatory District. 

[FR Doc. 2012–3751 Filed 2–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army, Corps of 

Engineers 

Process for Requesting a Variance 

From Vegetation Standards for Levees 

and Floodwalls; Additional Filings 

AGENCY: United States Army Corps of 

Engineers, Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) is updating the 

process for requesting a variance from 

vegetation standards for levees and 

floodwalls to reflect organizational 

changes and incorporate current agencywide review processes. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

submitted on or before April 17, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number COE– 

2010–0007 by any of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Email: 

tammy.conforti@usace.army.mil. 

Include the docket number, COE–2010– 

0007 in the subject line of the message. 

Mail: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Attn: CECW–CE, Tammy Conforti, 441 

G Street NW., Washington, DC 20314– 

1000. 

Hand Delivery/Courier: Due to 

security requirements, we cannot 

receive comments by hand delivery or 

courier. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

docket number COE–2010–0007. All 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available on-line at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the commenter indicates that the 

comment includes information that is 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

information that you consider to be CBI, 

or otherwise protected, through 

regulations.gov or email. The 

regulations.gov web site is an 

anonymous access system, therefore, if 

you wish to provide your identity or 

contact information it must be included 

in the text of your comment. If you send 

an email directly to USACE, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, we 

recommend that you include your name 

and other contact information in the 

body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If we 

cannot read your comment because of 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, we may not be able 

to consider your comment. Electronic 

comments should avoid the use of any 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to 

www.regulations.gov. All documents in 

the docket are listed. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, such as CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tammy Conforti, Levee Safety Program 

Manager, Headquarters, USACE, 

Washington, DC at 202–761–4649. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

variance request process was developed 

to implement Section 202(g) of the 

Water Resources Development Act 

(WRDA) of 1996. Consistent with our 

regulations for implementing NEPA for 

our Civil Works programs, we have 

included a Finding of No Significant 

Impact (FONSI) for review. 

To comply with the requirements of 

the National Environmental Policy Act, 

a draft environmental assessment (EA) 

has been prepared. A copy of the draft 

EA is available at www.regulations.gov 

in docket number COE–2010–0007. If 

you would like to submit comments on 

the draft EA, you must do so before the 

end of the comment period specified in 

the DATES section above. 

The current commenting period is the 

second solicitation for comments on the 

revised Process for Requesting a 

Variance from Vegetation Standards for 

Levees and Floodwalls. The first 

comment period was open from 9 

February 2010 to 26 April 2010. USACE 

reviewed and considered 561 comments 

from 110 separate organizations and 

individuals. The USACE response to 

these comments received can be found 

at http://www.nfrmp.us/guidance.cfm. 

Authority: We are proposing to issue this 

Policy Guidance Letter under the authority of 

33 U.S.C. 701n. 

Dated: February 7, 2012. 

James C. Dalton, 

Chief, Engineering and Construction, 

Directorate of Civil Works. 

Policy Guidance Letter (PGL)—Process 

for Requesting a Variance From 

Vegetation Standards for Levees and 

Floodwalls 

1. Purpose. This policy guidance 

letter (PGL) revises the procedures for 

obtaining a variance from U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (USACE) mandatory 

vegetation-management standards 

contained in Engineer Technical Letter 

(ETL) 1110–2–571—‘‘Guidelines for 

Landscape Planting and Vegetation 

Management at Levees, Floodwalls, 

Embankment Dams, and Appurtenant 

Structures’’ pursuant to Section 202(g) 

of the Water Resources Development 

Act (WRDA) of 1996. This PGL also 

includes timeframes and options for 

existing variances. These procedures 

align with the USACE Levee Safety 

Program goals of ensuring life safety as 

a top priority and applying consistent 

processes to make well-informed 

decisions. This PGL supersedes the 

existing regional variance policy and 

process contained in Engineer 

Regulation (ER) 500–1–1 and Engineer 

Pamphlet (EP) 500–1–1 (including 

Appendix E), dated 30 September 2001, 

and will serve as the applicable 

guidance until this process is 

incorporated into a USACE engineer 

publication. 

2. Applicability. This PGL applies to 

all Headquarters USACE (HQUSACE) 

elements, Major Subordinate Commands 

(MSCs), districts, and field operating 

activities having responsibility for Civil 

Works projects. This policy applies to 

levees within the USACE Levee Safety 

Program, including those (1) USACE 

operated and/or maintained; (2) 

federally authorized, typically USACE 

constructed, and locally operated and 

maintained; and (3) locally constructed 

and locally operated and maintained, 

but associated with the USACE 

Rehabilitation and Inspection Program 

(RIP) (also known as the Pub. L. 84–99 

program). 

3. References. 

a. Engineer Regulation (ER) 500–1–1, 

Emergency Employment of Army and 

Other Resources, Civil Emergency 

Management Program, 30 September 

2001. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

9638 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 

b. Engineer Circular (EC) 1110–2– 

6066, Design of I–Walls, 1 April 2011. 

c. Engineer Circular (EC) 1165–2–209, 

Civil Works Review Policy, 31 January 

2010. 

d. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 500–1–1, 

Emergency Employment of Army and 

Other Resources, Civil Emergency 

Management Program—Procedures, 30 

September 2001. 

e. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110–2– 

1913, Design and Construction of 

Levees, 30 April 2000. 

f. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110–2– 

1601, Hydraulic Design of Flood Control 

Channels, 30 June 1994. 

g. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110–2– 

2502, Retaining and Flood Walls, 29 

September 1989. 

h. Engineer Technical Letter (ETL) 

1110–2–575, Evaluation of I-walls, 1 

September 2011. 

i. Engineer Technical Letter (ETL) 

1110–2–571, Guidelines for Landscape 

Planting and Vegetation Management at 

Levees, Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, 

and Appurtenant Structures, 10 April 

2009. 

j. Engineer Technical Letter, (ETL) 

1110–2–569, Design Guidance for Levee 

Underseepage, 1 May 2005. 

k. Memorandum, HQ USACE (CECW– 

HS), Subject: Policy for Development 

and Implementation of System-wide 

Improvement Frameworks (SWIFs), 29 

November 2011. 

4. Background. The purpose stated in 

Section 202(g) of WRDA of 1996, is ‘‘to 

provide a coherent and coordinated 

policy for vegetation management for 

levees’’ so as to ‘‘address regional 

variations in levee management and 

resource needs.’’ In general, the 

resulting policy set forth in ER 500–1– 

1 allowed the levee sponsor, meeting all 

eligibility criteria for rehabilitation 

assistance pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 701n 

(Pub. L. 84–99), to seek a variance to 

USACE vegetation standards when such 

a variance would preserve, protect, and/ 

or enhance natural resources and/or 

protect rights of Tribal Nations. 

However, it was required that the safety, 

structural integrity, and functionality of 

the levee, in addition to accessibility for 

inspection and floodfighting purposes 

be retained. 

5. Definitions. For use in this 

document: 

a. A levee consists of one or more 

earthen embankment or floodwall 

segments. 

b. A levee system consists of one or 

more segments of earthen embankment 

or floodwall, and all appurtenant 

structures (such as closures, berms, 

pumping stations, culverts, and interior 

drainage) which are interconnected and 

necessary to reasonably reduce the 

potential of floodwater entering a 

defined area. 

c. A variance is defined as alternative 

vegetation management standards to be 

applied to a levee system or portion 

thereof that provide for the same levee 

functionality as intended in ETL 1110– 

2–571. 

6. Eligibility Requirements for 

Requesting a Vegetation Variance. 

a. For consideration of a vegetation 

variance that preserves, protects, and/or 

enhances natural resources, the 

requester must demonstrate that a 

variance is the only reasonable means to 

achieve the following criteria: 

(1) Comply with applicable law 

concerning the environment, cultural or 

historic preservation; or 

(2) Protect the rights of Tribal Nations, 

pursuant to treaty, statute, or Executive 

Order; or 

(3) Address a unique environmental 

consideration, such as to maintain 

sensitive species populations and to 

preclude the need for future federal 

listings under the Endangered Species 

Act (ESA), endorsed by the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) or 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(USFWS). 

b. Levee systems as described below 

do not have to meet the criteria 

established in Paragraph 6.a. in order to 

be eligible to request a variance: 

(1) Existing levees, federal or nonfederal, in which it can be demonstrated 

through written documentation that 

there is an existing vegetation variance 

or vegetation deviation agreement 

between the local USACE District and 

the levee sponsor prior to the date of 

this memorandum; or, 

(2) Levee systems for which a 

variance is requested for a planting 

berm. 

c. A USACE District may submit a 

vegetation variance request for the 

following situations (Note: For 

Paragraphs 1–3 below, criteria 

established in Paragraph 6.a. do not 

have to be met and the USACE District 

must have concurrence from the levee 

sponsor): 

(1) Federally authorized levees that 

have advanced into the preconstruction, 

engineering, design (PED) or 

construction phase of development, but 

for which USACE has not provided 

written notice of their completion and 

of the levee sponsor’s duty to begin 

operation, maintenance, repair, 

rehabilitation, and replacement as of the 

date of this memorandum; or, 

(2) Existing federally authorized 

levees in which it can be demonstrated 

that vegetation was previously part of 

the original design prior to the date of 

this memorandum or, 

(3) Existing federally authorized 

levees in which the existing operations 

and maintenance (O&M) manual allows 

vegetation within the vegetation-free 

zone or, 

(4) Levee systems for which USACE 

has operations and/or maintenance 

responsibilities; or, 

(5) In areas with ESA considerations 

or where the rights of Tribal Nations 

pursuant to treaty, statute, or Executive 

Order may be impacted, the USACE 

District may submit, in advance of 

actual need, cross-sections for Public 

Law 84–99 repairs that include 

vegetation, for a specific levee system. 

The submittal must: 

(a) Have concurrence from the levee 

sponsor and, if different from the levee 

sponsor, the maintaining entity and, 

(b) Have been shared with and 

commented on by the appropriate 

USFWS and/or NMFS office in order to 

anticipate measures that are likely to 

adequately address impacts to listed 

species and critical habitat in order to 

streamline formal consultation when 

repairs are to be implemented. 

d. In addition to the requirements in 

Paragraph 6.a., all vegetation variance 

requests must also demonstrate that the 

following are retained: 

(1) Structural integrity, and 

functionality of the levee system; and, 

(2) Accessibility for operations, 

maintenance, repair, inspection, 

monitoring, and floodfighting of the 

levee system. 

7. Process. A request for a vegetation 

variance can originate from a USACE 

District (see Paragraph 6.c.) or a levee 

sponsor. In cases where a levee sponsor 

is considering applying for a vegetation 

variance, it is recommended that the 

levee sponsor contact their respective 

USACE District and review minimum 

requirements as set forth in Enclosures 

1–3. Early coordination between USACE 

and the levee sponsor is strongly 

recommended because it will aid in 

focusing efforts and minimizing costs. 

Once the vegetation variance request 

has been submitted, the following 

describes the process USACE will 

follow to review the request. 

a. The USACE District shall ensure 

timely coordination with appropriate 

federal and state agencies and Tribal 

Nations concerning regional 

environmental, cultural, and historic 

considerations throughout the 

vegetation variance request process. The 

USACE District shall notify the 

appropriate regional offices of the 

federal resource agencies and Tribal 

Nations in writing within 30 days upon 

initiation of a vegetation variance 

request or when a request has been 

received. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9639 

b. The USACE District (along with the 

levee sponsor if appropriate) shall 

initiate timely coordination upon 

initiation of a vegetation variance 

request with the MSC and the 

Vegetation Variance Lead for the Risk 

Management Center (RMC) to assure 

that the review process is well 

coordinated and allows for timely 

feedback on submittal requirements. 

This early coordination in the 

development of the variance request is 

intended to appropriately scale the 

scope of the request and/or identify 

conditions for which variance approval 

is unlikely. 

c. The USACE District Levee Safety 

Officer (LSO) shall review the variance 

request for completeness and 

compliance and recommend initiation 

of an Agency Technical Review (ATR) 

to the RMC. 

d. The RMC shall lead and manage 

the ATR for each variance request. 

HQUSACE will fund the ATR. The 

timeline for the ATR will depend on the 

complexity of the request, but will not 

exceed 90 days after the ATR team 

receives the final request package unless 

special circumstances warrant 

additional time. The ATR will be 

documented and certified as per 

requirements in EC 1165–2–209. Final 

ATR documentation shall be part of the 

variance request package. The following 

are the typical disciplines that will be 

included on the ATR team: 

geotechnical, geological, hydraulics/ 

hydrology, environmental/biological 

sciences, emergency management, 

operations/maintenance, and landscape 

architecture. Other disciplines will be 

added to the ATR team as needed and 

based on the variance request. 

e. Following completion of the ATR, 

the USACE District Commander shall 

either endorse or not endorse the 

request and provide the rationale for the 

recommendation. If the request is 

endorsed, the District Commander shall 

submit the request package through the 

MSC LSO to the MSC Commander. The 

USACE MSC LSO shall review the 

request and recommend to the MSC 

Commander, either for or against 

endorsement. The USACE MSC 

Commander shall either endorse or not 

endorse the request and provide the 

rationale for the recommendation. If 

endorsed, the USACE MSC Commander 

shall submit the request to HQUSACE, 

via the Regional Integration Team (RIT) 

process, for approval. 

f. The HQUSACE LSO, or the 

HQUSACE LSO designee, will be the 

final approving official for the request 

and will document the basis for the 

decision. 

g. The USACE District shall serve as 

the main point of contact for 

coordination with the levee sponsor 

throughout the variance request process, 

including providing the levee sponsor 

with documentation of final decision of 

the vegetation variance request. 

h. All final documentation for the 

vegetation variance request shall be 

uploaded by the USACE District to the 

National Levee Database (NLD). 

i. Upon final approval but prior to 

implementation of the variance, the 

USACE District and the requester shall 

sign a Vegetation Variance Agreement, 

based on the template at Enclosure 2. 

The USACE District shall involve the 

District Office of Counsel in the drafting 

of the agreement. The agreement can be 

approved and executed at the District 

level unless changes to the template are 

made that would affect the terms of the 

approved variance. For levee systems 

with multiple levee sponsors, each levee 

sponsor must sign the agreement and 

certificate of authority. 

j. During inspections, levees will be 

rated for eligibility for federal 

rehabilitation assistance under Public 

Law 84–99 in accordance with the levee 

inspection checklist and requirements 

set forth in an approved variance(s). 

Levee systems with an Acceptable or 

Minimally Acceptable rating will 

remain eligible for federal rehabilitation 

assistance under Public Law 84–99, 

including any features associated with 

an approved variance such as planting 

berms and overbuilt sections 

k. The associated vegetation 

management plan and approved 

variance shall be added to the levee’s 

operation and maintenance (O&M) 

manual as an addendum. 

8. Vegetation Variance Request 

Submittal Requirements. Submittal 

requirements are detailed in Enclosure 

3. 

9. Special Considerations. The 

following points should be considered 

prior to initiating a vegetation variance 

request. 

a. This vegetation variance policy 

does not apply to embankment dams 

and their appurtenant structures, 

channels, or shore-line or river-bank 

protection systems such as revetments, 

sand dunes, and barrier islands. 

b. New federally authorized costshared levee projects shall be designed 

to meet the current vegetation 

management standards. It should be 

noted that landside planting berms may 

be incorporated into a new levee project 

design without a vegetation variance 

request. 

c. Regional variances or variances that 

cover all levees within a geographical 

area will not be issued. Vegetation 

variances will be considered only for 

individual levee systems or portions 

thereof. However, regional conditions, 

with regard to soils, local climate and 

vegetation, and other pertinent factors, 

will be taken into consideration. 

d. To ensure the ability to implement 

floodfighting activities, such as 

placement of sandbags or other 

temporary floodfight measures near the 

waterside crown, and to see areas of 

distress on the landside during a flood 

event, typically the upper third of the 

waterside slope, the crown, the landside 

slope, and within 15 feet of the landside 

toe (subject to preexisting real estate 

interest) of the levee needs to remain 

vegetation free, as defined in ETL 1110– 

2–571. Any vegetation variance requests 

proposed for these areas will be 

carefully evaluated to ensure 

requirements in Paragraph 6 are met. 

e. The types of approvable vegetation 

variances near floodwalls may be very 

limited, especially for I-walls of concern 

as identified per Paragraph 3.h. For 

floodwalls, the landside and waterside 

corridors are areas of particular concern 

due to potential impacts of root damage 

to joints, drains, and foundations, as 

well as, acute tree-overturning damage 

(breakage, destabilization and 

displacement). Any vegetation variance 

requests proposed for areas containing 

floodwalls will be carefully evaluated to 

ensure requirements in Paragraph 6 are 

met. 

f. The vegetation variance process is 

not a mechanism to validate conditions 

that have developed as a result of 

inadequate levee operations and 

maintenance. 

g. Past USACE inspection reports that 

did not identify noncompliant 

vegetation as a deficiency do not 

constitute an existing vegetation 

variance or approved deviation. 

h. In the case of a levee sponsor 

seeking initial eligibility for federal 

rehabilitation assistance under Public 

Law 84–99, prior to acceptance, the 

levee system must meet all eligibility 

requirements including current 

vegetation standards or an approved 

vegetation variance must be obtained if 

criteria in Paragraph 6 are met. 

i. To avoid duplication of effort, 

vegetation variance applications 

involving planting berms that are part of 

a study or PED should take advantage of 

the analysis and documentation review 

performed as part of the authorized 

project (see Enclosure 3, Figure 3). 

j. If implementation of a vegetation 

variance will constitute a modification 

or is part modification of a federally 

authorized levee, then the levee sponsor 

must also seek approval under 33 U.S.C. 

408 as part of the vegetation variance 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

9640 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 

request. The levee sponsor should work 

with the USACE District to ensure that 

the variance request satisfies the 

requirements of the current guidance on 

the implementation of 33 U.S.C. 408. 

k. USACE District costs for processing 

or submitting a vegetation variance 

request shall be funded by the 

appropriate account based on 

authorization of the levee system 

(Operations and Maintenance (O&M) 

General, Inspection of Completed 

Works, or Flood Control and Coastal 

Emergencies). 

l. For instances in which a request for 

a vegetation variance accompanies or is 

part of other actions that require the 

execution of an agreement between the 

levee sponsor and USACE (e.g., 

modifications under 33 U.S.C. 408 or 

Public Law 84–99 repairs), a single 

agreement that satisfies the 

requirements for each of the actions 

should be used. In such cases, the 

template agreement at Enclosure 2 need 

not be used, but the substantive terms 

from the template should be 

incorporated into the agreement that is 

signed. The USACE District shall ensure 

coordination with USACE District 

Office of Counsel on final agreements. 

m. The process outlined in this 

memorandum may be implemented as 

part of a system-wide improvement 

framework (SWIF) per Paragraph 3.k. 

Enclosure 4 contains scenarios for the 

vegetation variance process and SWIFs. 

10. Timeframes for Existing 

Vegetation Variances or Other 

Vegetation Deviations. Deviation from 

the national standards as defined in ETL 

1110–2–571 is permitted only through a 

vegetation variance approved by the 

HQUSACE LSO via the process 

described herein. USACE recognizes 

that areas with sensitive environmental 

considerations will require planning 

and coordination; therefore, the 

following provisions are being provided: 

a. For levees meeting the 

requirements of Paragraph 6.b.1, the 

levee sponsor will have one year from 

the date of this memorandum to submit 

a letter of intent to their respective 

USACE District expressing intent to 

either submit a vegetation variance 

request or develop a system-wide 

improvement framework (SWIF) as per 

Paragraph 3.k. 

(1) If the decision is to submit a 

vegetation variance, the levee sponsors 

will have one additional year to submit 

a vegetation variance request. Until the 

vegetation request is submitted and the 

review process is complete, the levee 

system will continue to be inspected in 

accordance to the existing vegetation 

variance or other vegetation deviation 

for determining Public Law 84–99 

rehabilitation assistance eligibility. 

(2) If the decision is to develop and 

implement a SWIF, procedures in 

Paragraph 3.k. shall be followed. For 

levee sponsors already implementing an 

agreed SWIF, no letter of intent is 

required. 

b. For levee sponsors with existing 

vegetation variances or deviations that 

do not submit a letter of intent, 

vegetation variance request, or SWIF by 

the required timelines, the existing 

vegetation variances, agreements, or 

other deviations applied to their levees 

may no longer be considered valid. The 

USACE District should verify with the 

levee sponsors if they wish to continue 

participating in Public Law 84–99. If the 

levee sponsor does choose to continue 

their participation, the USACE District 

LSO will inform the levee sponsor via 

letter (copy furnished to the MSC and 

HQUSACE LSO) of the vegetation 

management standards to be applied to 

that levee. 

c. For levees that meet the 

requirements of Paragraph 6.c.2 and/or 

6.c.3 and currently have an Acceptable 

or Minimally Acceptable inspection 

rating, excluding the vegetation 

designed into the levee by USACE and/ 

or allowed by USACE in the O&M 

manual (in other words the levee has 

been properly maintained in accordance 

to the current O&M manual), the USACE 

District will have one year from the date 

of this memorandum to submit a letter 

to the MSC LSO expressing intent to 

either submit a vegetation variance 

request or pursue a plan to meet ETL 

1110–2–571. It must be demonstrated 

that the letter of intent was coordinated 

with the levee sponsor(s). For levees 

that meet the requirements of Paragraph 

6.c.2 and/or 6.c.3 and currently have an 

Unacceptable inspection rating, the 

levee sponsor must correct the 

unacceptable deficiencies, excluding the 

vegetation designed into the levee by 

USACE and/or allowed by USACE 

through the O&M manual, prior to the 

USACE District taking action to seek a 

vegetation variance or plan to meet ETL 

1110–2–571. Should the levee sponsor 

seek a SWIF per Paragraph 3.k, then the 

USACE District shall ensure that its 

action to pursue a variance or other 

means to meet ETL 1110–2–571 is 

incorporated into the comprehensive 

SWIF process. 

d. For levees meeting the 

requirements of Paragraph 6.c.1, 

depending on the status of the project 

phase, USACE Districts must either 

submit vegetation variance request or 

pursue a plan to meet ETL 1110–2–571 

as soon as possible. 

e. For levee systems operated and 

maintained by USACE, the USACE 

District will have one year from the date 

of this memorandum to submit a letter 

to the MSC LSO expressing intent to 

either submit a vegetation variance 

request or pursue a plan to meet ETL 

1110–2–571. 

f. USACE Districts should copy 

furnish all letters of intent to the 

HQUSACE LSO. 

11. Environmental Compliance. 

USACE is responsible for assuring 

compliance with all applicable 

environmental requirements before a 

decision can be made on a vegetation 

variance request. As a condition of the 

levee sponsor choosing to participate in 

Public Law 84–99, the levee sponsor is 

responsible for providing all 

background studies, data, and other 

information required by USACE to 

complete the environmental compliance 

processes under the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), ESA, 

and any other applicable environmental 

resource protection statute (except for 

those instances in which a USACE 

District is the proponent of a variance as 

provided in Paragraph 6.c.). The 

documentation must analyze, as 

alternatives, the effects of the 

implementation of the proposed 

vegetation variance and the 

implementation of the national 

standards. The levee sponsor must 

commit to implementation of any 

measures (such as monitoring, 

reasonable and prudent alternatives, 

etc.) needed to comply with ESA or 

other legal requirements before the levee 

sponsor may participate, or continue 

participation, in the Public Law 84–99 

program and must commit to bearing 

the costs for implementation of these 

measures. 

12. Submittal Process for New 

Vegetation Related Science and 

Technology. For instances in which an 

entity would like to submit new science 

or technology related to vegetation for 

USACE consideration, submitters must 

ensure that any submitted document 

produced from research be peer 

reviewed prior to following the 

submittal process described below. 

Documents submitted to USACE 

through this process must be submitted 

by the author(s) of the documents. 

Submittal packages should be sent to 

the US Army Engineer Research and 

Development Center (ERDC), 3909 Halls 

Ferry Road, Vicksburg, MS, 39180, Point 

of Contact (POC): To Be Determined 

(TBD). 

a. Submittal of a peer-reviewed final 

document must include the following: 

(1) Cover letter by the submitter 

requesting USACE consideration for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9641 

identified relevant areas of application 

within USACE existing policies; and, 

(2) Documentation of the peer review 

demonstrating that a standard procedure 

for peer review was followed; and, 

(3) Relevant documents for the 

science and technology submitted. 

b. Once a submittal package is 

received, the responsibilities of ERDC 

are as follows: 

(1) Inform HQUSACE (CERD) of 

receipt of the submittal; and, 

(2) Review the submittal package to 

ensure that peer review requirements 

have been met; and, 

(3) Review, evaluate, and summarize 

the methods, procedures, and results; 

and 

(4) Provide the ERDC evaluation and 

submittal package to HQUSACE within 

60 days of receiving the submittal 

package. 

c. Once the ERDC review is received, 

the responsibilities of HQUSACE (CERD 

in coordination with applicable 

Communities of Practice) are as follows: 

(1) Review the ERDC summary and 

submittal documents for potential 

applicability within USACE; and, 

(2) Further coordinate with ERDC, if 

needed; and, 

(3) Provide a written response letter 

and the basis for the HQUSACE 

determination to the submitters within 

60 days of receiving the ERDC 

evaluation. 

13. After vegetation variance request 

packages are reviewed through this 

process, results will be posted by the 

HQUSACE LSO to the Levee Safety 

Community of Practice page, on the 

Technical Excellence Network (TEN) at 

https://ten.usace.army.mil. 

14. The points of contact for this 

guidance are (TBD). 

James C. Dalton, P.E., SES, 

Chief, Engineering and Construction 

Directorate of Civil Works 

Enclosures: 

1. Submittal Checklist and Review and 

Approval Signature Sheet 

2. Vegetation Variance Agreement 

3. Submittal Requirements 

4. Scenarios and Timelines for Attaining 

Compliance with USACE Standards 

5. Scenarios of Responsibility for PreExisting Variances and Other Documented 

Deviations 

Enclosure 1—Submittal Checklist 

Vegetation Variance Request Submittal 

Checklist 

The items checked below are 

submitted herewith, consistent with the 

requirements outlined in Enclosure 3 

(Vegetation Variance Request Submittal 

Requirements) of Policy Guidance Letter 

(PGL)—Process for Requesting a 

Variance from Vegetation Standards for 

Levees and Floodwalls, dated TBD. 

b (1) A general description of the 

levee system. 

b (2) A brief narrative describing the 

proposed vegetation variance. 

b (3) A brief narrative explaining 

why the proposed changes are necessary 

to address the criteria presented in PGL 

Paragraph 6. 

b (4) Detailed, annotated, plan and 

section drawings and photographs. 

b (5) All pertinent engineering 

analyses: cross-section, hydraulic, 

geotechnical, and structural, as needed. 

b (6) The most recent Routine 

Inspection Report and Periodic 

Inspection Report completed by the 

USACE District. 

b (7) A summary of levee system 

performance history for all significant 

flood events. 

b (8) A Vegetation Management Plan, 

detailing the conditions to be 

maintained. 

b (9) Any National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species 

Act (ESA), or other environmental 

compliance documentation that the 

USACE District determines necessary to 

the review. 

b (10) Any requested excerpts of the 

current project O&M manual. 

b (11) Any other information, as 

appropriate to specific conditions. 

b (12) ATR team review 

documentation. 

b (13) The Requester’s primary 

point(s) of contact (POCs) for this 

request, as follows. 

NAME: 

ORGANIZATION: 

TITLE: 

TELEPHONE: 

E-MAIL ADDRESS:

Enclosure 1—REVIEW AND APPROVAL 

SIGNATURE SHEET 

SUBMITTED BY: 

lllllllllllllllllllll

The (name of entity) (signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) (title, in full) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

(If a USACE District is the submitter, 

additional levee sponsor signature blocks 

shall be added to ensure all levee sponsors 

concur. If a levee system has multiple levee 

sponsors, additional levee sponsor signature 

blocks shall be added for each levee 

sponsor’s signature.) 

REVIEWED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (insert name) 

District 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

Levee Safety Officer 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

ENDORSED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Risk 

Management Center 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

Leader, Agency Technical Review Team 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

ENDORSED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (insert name) 

District 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

Commander 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

REVIEWED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (insert name) 

MSC 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

Levee Safety Officer 

ENDORSED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (insert name) 

MSC 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

Commander 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

APPROVED BY: 

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, HQ 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(full name, typed) 

Levee Safety Officer 

lllllllllllllllllllll

DATE 

Enclosure 2—VEGETATION 

VARIANCE AGREEMENT 

Vegetation Variance Agreement 

for 

(enter the levee system name, location 

and ID number, as defined in the 

National Levee Database) 

I. Purpose. The purpose of this 

Agreement is to allow for specific and 

limited variance from US Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) vegetation 

standards, for the levee named above. 

II. Authority. This Agreement is made 

pursuant to the authority of Public Law 

99, 84th Congress (33 U.S.C. 701n), as 

regulated by Title 33, Code of Federal 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

9642 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 

Regulations, Sections 203 and 208.10, 

and as implemented by policy guidance 

letter, Subject: Policy Guidance Letter— 

Requesting a Variance from Vegetation 

Standards for Levees and Floodwalls, 

dated TBD. 

III. Applicability. This Agreement is 

applicable only to those portions of the 

above-named levee system that are 

identified as vegetation variance zones 

in the attached submittal drawings. 

IV. References. (Insert any references 

that are applicable, including the 

existing project cooperation agreement. 

This could include state law, county 

ordinances, Federal or state court 

documents, technical manuals, etc. 

References may be incorporated into 

this Agreement). 

V. Scope. A detailed description of 

the conditions proposed under this 

Agreement is provided in attachment 

(attach approved vegetation request 

package). 

VI. Actions During and After 

Emergencies 

A. Definition of Emergency. For the 

purposes of application of this 

Agreement, the term emergency is 

defined as any situation as declared by 

the District Commander in which a 

levee is threatened with either failure or 

overtopping. 

B. Definition of Flood Fight. For the 

purposes of application of this 

Agreement, the term flood fight is 

defined as actions taken immediately 

before or during a flood to protect 

human life and reduce flood damages, 

such as evacuation, emergency 

sandbagging and diking, and providing 

assistance to flood victims. 

C. Conduct of Flood Fight Activities. 

During an emergency, any responsible 

party engaged in flood fight activities, to 

specifically include the USACE, the (list 

states, cities, or counties as necessary), 

and the levee sponsor may take 

whatever actions are necessary to 

preserve the structural integrity of the 

levee addressed by this Agreement. 

Actions necessary to preserve the 

structural integrity of the system may 

include removal of any and all 

vegetation on or near the levee or 

floodwall. 

D. Rehabilitation. Any levee repairs, 

modifications, or improvements 

following the emergency event shall be 

in accordance with current USACE 

vegetation management standards or the 

approved vegetation variance for the 

levee. 

VII. Obligations of the Levee Sponsor 

A. The levee sponsor agrees to 

maintain the levee system in accordance 

with the attached approved vegetation 

variance and assume the responsibility 

for implementing and bearing the costs 

of any measures that are required for 

compliance with the ESA or any 

mitigation requirements that result from 

environmental compliance processes 

such as the NEPA or required permits. 

B. The levee sponsor shall hold and 

save the Government free from all 

damages arising from any and all 

activities associated with this 

Agreement. 

VIII. Notices 

A. All notices, requests, demands, and 

other communications required or 

permitted to be given under this 

Agreement shall be deemed to have 

been duly given if in writing and 

delivered personally, given by prepaid 

telegram, or mailed by first-class 

(postage prepaid), registered, or certified 

mail, to the address provided. 

B. A party may change the address to 

which such communications are to be 

directed by giving written notice to the 

other parties in the manner provided in 

Paragraph C (below). 

C. Any notice, request, demand, or 

other communication made pursuant to 

this Article shall be deemed to have 

been received by the addressee at such 

time as it is personally delivered, or, 

seven calendar days after it is mailed. 

IX. Expiration of This Agreement 

(Approval of this agreement may be 

contingent upon agreement to an 

expiration mechanism. Use one of the 

three conditions below to complete 

this paragraph.) 

(This Vegetation Variance is intended to 

be permanent.) 

(This Vegetation Variance shall expire 

on [insert date].) 

(This Vegetation Variance shall expire 

upon [explain event].) 

However, the Corps reserves the right 

to revoke this Agreement if USACE 

determines that it results in conditions 

that threaten levee system reliability 

and public safety. 

X. Signatures 

IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties 

hereto have executed this Agreement, 

which shall become effective upon the 

date it is signed by the USACE District 

Commander. 

THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

BY: lllllllllllllllllll

(signature) 

(full name, typed) 

DISTRICT COMMANDER 

(district name) DISTRICT 

DATE: lllllllllllllllll

BY: 

lllllllllllllllllllll

(name of requester) 

(signature) 

(full name, typed) 

(title) 

DATE: lllllllllllllllll

(Other signature blocks may be added as 

necessary.) 

XI. Certificate of Authority 

Certificate of Authority 

I, lllllllllllllll

llllllllllllllll

llllll, do hereby certify that I am 

the principal legal officer of the (Name 

of Public Sponsor), that (Name of Public 

Sponsor) is a legally constituted public 

body with full authority and legal 

capability to perform the terms of the 

Agreement between the Department of 

the Army and the (Name of Public 

Sponsor) in connection with this 

Vegetation Variance Request and 

Agreement Addressing the Vegetation 

Standards for (enter the levee system 

name and location, as defined in the 

National Levee Database) and that the 

persons who have executed this 

Agreement on behalf of (Name of Public 

Sponsor) have acted within their 

statutory authority. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have made 

and executed this certification this l

lllllllllllll day of 

lllllllllllll 20ll. 

(Name of Counsel for signing entity) 

(Full Formal title) 

Enclosure 3—VEGETATION 

VARIANCE REQUEST SUBMITTAL 

REQUIREMENTS 

Submittal Requirements 

Recommended First Steps 

1. Contact the local USACE District. 

Early coordination may help to focus 

efforts and minimize costs. 

2. Consider submittal requirement in 

Paragraph 4.b.(2) below. If the prism is 

not smaller than the existing levee cross 

section, it is unlikely that a variance 

involving woody vegetation will be 

approved without compensating 

structural modifications. 

3. Please note the following points: 

a. A variance may not result in an 

expected level of reliability below that 

provided by a structure designed to 

minimum standards as detailed in the 

following USACE Engineer Manuals 

(EMs), Engineer Technical Letters 

(ETLs), and Engineer Circular (EC). 

(1) EM 1110–2–1913, Engineering and 

Design—Design and Construction of 

Levees, 30 April 2000 

(2) EM 1110–2–1601, Engineering and 

Design—Hydraulic Design of Flood 

Control Channels, 30 June 1994 

(3) EM 1110–2–2502, Engineering and 

Design—Retaining and Flood Walls, 29 

September 1989 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9643 

(4) ETL 1110–2–575, Evaluation of Iwalls, 1 September 2011 

(5) ETL 1110–2–569, Engineering and 

Design—Design Guidance for Levee 

Underseepage, 1 May 2005 (in-effect 

through August 2012, content to be 

incorporated into other guidance) 

(6) EC 1110–2–6066, Engineering and 

Design—Design of I–Walls, 1 April 2011 

b. Minimum design standards may 

not be sufficient for all situations: 

sufficiency of minimum standards, for 

specific conditions, will be subject to 

engineering analysis and evaluation. 

c. The levee, or floodwall, and any 

appurtenant structures are designed to 

function together, as a system. Any 

likely incidental impacts to system 

functionality must also be considered. 

d. A request for a vegetation variance 

for a planting berm need not satisfy the 

environmental or Tribal criteria 

outlined in Paragraph 6.a. of the PGL, 

and it need not address the associated 

submittal requirement in Paragraph 3 

(below). 

e. The graphic information provided 

in response to the submittal 

requirements in Paragraph 4 (below), 

and the vegetation management plan 

provided in response to Paragraph 8 

(below), together shall fully define the 

extent and conditions of the vegetation 

variance. 

f. The USACE District shall assure the 

accuracy of all information submitted in 

satisfaction of the Submittal 

Requirements. 

Submittal Requirements 

Information satisfying the numbered 

requirements below shall be submitted 

in Adobe Systems portable document 

format (PDF), under cover of the 

completed Submittal Checklist provided 

herein, Enclosure 1. The Review and 

Approval Signature Sheet shall then be 

attached to the vegetation variance 

request package for tracking of the 

review process. Advance coordination 

between the requestor(s), the USACE 

District/MSC, and the Risk Management 

Center (RMC), prior to preparing the 

variance request, is recommended and 

may result in situation-specific 

amendment to these submittal 

requirements. Any clarifications to this 

guidance, and examples of vegetation 

variance request documents, will be 

available through the USACE District. 

1. A general description of the levee 

system including system name, project 

authority, location, and National Levee 

Database (NLD) identification number 

(available through the USACE District). 

2. A brief narrative describing the 

proposed deviations from the USACE 

vegetation-free-zone standards 

prescribed in ETL 1110–2–571 

Guidelines for Landscape Planting and 

Vegetation Management at Levees, 

Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, and 

Appurtenant Structures. Include a 

general description of existing and 

proposed plant locations, and type of 

vegetation (e.g. tree or shrub). Also 

include a representative list of species 

and the following characteristics of 

each, at maturity and, if different, at the 

maximum maturity to be permitted 

under the vegetation management plan: 

height, crown diameter, and root pattern 

and extent (horizontal and vertical). Cite 

source(s) used for information on plant 

characteristics. 

3. A brief narrative explaining why 

the proposed variance(s) are necessary 

to address the criteria presented in 

Paragraph 6.a. of the main policy 

memorandum. Explain why these needs 

cannot be satisfied at a location other 

than on the levee; what alternatives to 

a vegetation variance were considered, 

and why the requested variance the only 

reasonable means to address applicable 

criteria. If Paragraph 6.a. of the PGL 

does not apply then simply state why it 

does not. 

4. Detailed, annotated, plan and 

section drawings, and photographs, 

using an 11 x 17 format at a scale and 

resolution appropriate to the level of 

detail and enlarged on-screen viewing, 

which clearly convey pertinent 

information as follows: 

a. Provide a plan-view drawing, 

showing the overall levee system, in 

context, and identifying each reach to 

which the variance is to apply. As used 

here, the term ‘‘reach’’ may be defined 

as follows: a length of levee that may be 

accurately represented by a single crosssection drawing and set of conditions. 

Provide overall stationing (in feet or 

miles), and identify the beginning and 

ending points for each levee reach to be 

considered. The variance request should 

not include any portion of the levee 

system for which there are reasonable 

alternatives; for example, a variance will 

not be granted for an entire levee system 

when only a portion of that system 

meets the criteria described in 

Paragraph 6.a. of the PGL. 

b. Provide a cross-section drawing for 

each levee reach to which the variance 

is to apply. Each cross-section drawing 

shall include the following information. 

(1) Show, label, and dimension the 

entire levee and/or floodwall. Include 

any existing or proposed planning 

berms. Include any appurtenant 

structures (e.g. berms, reinforcement, 

cut-off walls, drains, relief wells) 

necessary for reliable performance. 

Include the stream bank (to the stream 

bottom) and any other pertinent 

features, such as roads or trails. 

(2) Show, label, and dimension the 

levee prism (see Figure 1). The prism is 

the minimum analytical cross section 

that, given site-specific soil conditions, 

satisfies all applicable design criteria 

with regard to seepage and slope 

stability, as defined in EM 1110–2–1913 

and ETL 1110–2–569. In addition, if the 

USACE District levee design standards 

exceed the minimums defined in EM 

1110–2–1913, or conditions warrant, the 

USACE District may require a larger 

prism. The prism must also satisfy the 

requirements of any other applicable 

standard. For example, some USACE 

District projects adhere to the Code for 

Utilization of Soil Data for Levees, 

Mississippi River Commission, 

Vicksburg, Mississippi, April 1947, 

applicable to Mississippi River and 

Tributaries levees. The determination 

and documentation of site-specific soil 

conditions shall be consistent with the 

requirements and procedures outlined 

in EM 1110–2–1913, and must be 

confirmed by the District. The prism 

shall assume loading to the top of the 

structure; or, where loading to top of 

structure is not possible, maximum 

possible loading. Note: variance 

approval is unlikely where the 

analytical prism is equal to or larger 

than the existing levee cross section. 

(3) Show, label, and dimension the 

project right-of-way. 

(4) Show to-scale, annotated soil 

profiles, to an appropriate depth but not 

less than 20 feet below the levee toe. 

The determination and documentation 

of site-specific soil conditions shall be 

consistent with the requirements and 

procedures outlined in EM 1110–2– 

1913. 

(5) Show, label, and dimension the 

extent of the requested Variance Zone 

and the remaining Vegetation-Free 

Zone. 

(6) Show, label, and dimension any 

structural modifications proposed in 

conjunction with existing or proposed 

vegetation. 

(7) Include a graphic velocity profile, 

on the waterside, indicating flow rates 

at pertinent water surface elevations, 

including the design-event, the flood of 

record, and top-of-structure. 

(8) Indicate the normal water 

elevation. For variance purposes, the 

normal water elevation is that below 

which riparian terrestrial plant species 

are unable to thrive, due to the 

frequency and duration of inundation. 

(9) Indicate the Ordinary High Water 

Mark. The Ordinary High Water Mark is 

used to establish waterway boundaries, 

it is a regulatory term defined in ETL 

1110–2–571 and in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR)—33 CFR Part 328.3 

(e). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

9644 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 

(10) List the dominant plant species 

likely to occupy the proposed variance 

zone: include those known to be the 

largest (in cross-sectional crown area) 

and to have the most extensive root 

systems. Cite source(s) used for 

information on plant characteristics. 

(a) Of these species, select the one 

with the most extensive likely root 

system: this will often be the species 

with the largest cross-sectional crown 

area at maturity. If two species have the 

most extensive likely root system (one 

for depth and one for spread) select 

both. 

(b) Develop a cross-sectional 

illustration of the selected species: if 

two species were selected, the 

illustration shall show the larger of the 

two, with a composite root system 

showing the complete root systems of 

both. The entire individual (or 

composite) shall be shown to-scale, at 

maturity (or, if different, at the 

maximum maturity to be permitted 

under the vegetation management plan), 

as developed in-the-open, under local 

conditions (e.g. climate, soils, and 

moisture conditions)—and shall clearly 

show the typical extent and character of 

the mature root system, truncated at the 

point where roots are no greater than 0.5 

in. in diameter. Root depth assumptions 

must be developed specific to species 

and local conditions. Unless reliable 

information to the contrary is presented, 

it shall be assumed that roots greater 

than 0.5 in. in diameter will extend to 

the edge of the natural canopy of the 

mature tree or shrub. The ATR team will 

determine the acceptability of 

information on a case-by-case basis. 

(c) Place the completed illustration of 

this individual in the cross-section 

drawing(s). If specific planting locations 

are not known, then place an instance 

of the illustration, centered, on both the 

upper and lower boundary line of the 

proposed variance area. If the distance 

between the two is such that the 

illustrated root systems do not meet or 

overlap, then place one or more 

additional illustrations between the two. 

In the cross section below each of these 

illustrations, show the potential pit, as 

an arc (as shown in Figure 2b.), centered 

under the trunk of each illustrated tree. 

c. For each levee reach, provide 

representative, appropriately-scaled 

photographs both plan view (aerial) and 

cross-sectional (oblique angle photos 

taken from ground level looking towards 

the cross-sectional view) of the levee 

clearly showing existing conditions. 

d. Provide details of any structural 

measures (such as armoring or overbuilt 

sections) intended to preserve system 

reliability and resiliency by preventing 

or mitigating vegetation impacts. 

5. Provide the following analyses 

illustrating that the changes proposed 

will result in conditions consistent with 

the criteria in PGL Paragraph 6.d. of this 

policy. Include graphics, text, and other 

information (e.g. construction materials, 

methods, and standards) as needed to 

clearly support conclusions. Analyses 

must show that the levee prism (or 

floodwall) remains intact and consistent 

with the design and performance intent 

of the USACE design standards detailed 

in EM 1110–2–1913 (EM 1110–2–2502 

and/or EC 1110–2–6066 (with 

consideration of ETL 1110–2–575) for 

floodwalls) and ETL 1110–2–569. 

a. Cross section analysis. The crosssection drawing(s) must demonstrate the 

following. 

(1) No significant roots (those greater 

than 0.5 in. in diameter) will enter the 

levee prism or approach within 8 feet of 

structures critical to performance, such 

as drains or seepage-cutoff walls. 

(2) No tree-overthrow pit will 

penetrate the levee prism. The assumed 

pit/mound is illustrated in Figure 2a 

and, in plan-view, is less than a full 

circle; however, because the tree may 

fall in any direction, the potential pit 

must be assumed to be a full circle. 

Unless reliable information to the 

contrary, acceptable to the ATR team, is 

available for a specific situation, the 

dimensions provided in Figure 2 shall 

be used. These dimensions, which are 

consistent with USACE observation and 

experience, were derived from field data 

presented in the following paper: 

Clinton, B.D. and C.R. Baker. 2000. 

‘‘Catastrophic windthrow in the 

southern Appalachians: characteristics 

of pits and mounds and initial 

vegetation responses.’’ Forest Ecology 

and Management 126:51–60. 

(3) No roots or tree-overthrow pit will 

significantly impact the function of any 

appurtenant structure, such as those 

designed to control seepage. 

b. Hydraulic analyses must 

demonstrate the following, assuming 

worst-case combinations of flow, 

elevation, hydraulic roughness, 

duration, and velocity. Analysis must 

include the full range of flows 

encompassing the lowest levee-toe 

elevation to the highest top-of-levee 

elevation within the variance reach. 

Generally, the worst-case hydraulic 

condition results from a high-flow/lowtailwater-elevation combination. 

However, a full range of flow/tailwater 

combinations should be analyzed to 

ensure that the worst-case condition is 

accounted for. The worst-case size and 

density of vegetation must also be 

considered, assuming the highest 

annual crown foliage density. 

(1) The overall level of flood risk 

reduction and reliability of the system 

must be maintained. Channel geometry 

and roughness changes shall result in no 

increase in water surface elevations for 

the required range of flows, as 

demonstrated by a graphic and a tabular 

summary of changes in water surface 

elevation and velocity that extends 

sufficiently upstream, because hydraulic 

impacts are typically transmitted 

upstream. If an increase in water surface 

elevations or velocities cannot be 

avoided, they must be mitigated. 

(2) Erosion and scour, associated with 

standing vegetation, will not impact the 

levee prism. This analysis should utilize 

an appropriate methodology, such as 

application of an adapted bridge scour 

model or 2D/3D hydraulic design 

model, with sediment transport, that 

shall provide a quantitative assessment 

of the maximum extent of erosion and 

local scour potential. This analysis shall 

provide an estimate of the maximum 

extent of erosion and scour, which shall 

be illustrated in the cross-section 

drawing(s). This assessment shall cover 

long-term trends as well as event-driven 

scour/erosion. 

(3) In the event of waterside tree 

overthrow, subsequent erosion and 

scour at the overthrow site will not 

impact the levee prism. Analyses must 

consider assumed pit/mound 

topography (as illustrated in Figure 2a) 

at all possible points on the variance 

cross section, determining the worstcase orientation to flow and the 

resulting extent of erosion and scour. 

This analysis should utilize an 

appropriate methodology, such as 

application of an adapted bridge scour 

model or 2D/3D hydraulic design 

model, with sediment transport, that 

considers the erosion mechanisms and 

local scour potential. This analysis shall 

provide an estimate of the maximum 

extent of erosion and scour, which shall 

be illustrated in the cross-section 

drawing(s). 

c. Geotechnical analyses or review 

must determine that the levee prism, 

defined in submittal requirement in 

Paragraph 4.b.(2) (above), is sufficiently 

buffered from vegetation impacts. 

d. Structural analyses must determine 

that floodwalls and other non-earthen 

structures are sufficiently buffered from 

vegetation impacts and that any 

proposed structures will function as 

intended. 

e. Analysis must find that access is 

retained, consistent with the intent of 

Paragraph 6.d of the main PGL. 

6. Provide the most recent Routine 

Inspection Report and Periodic 

Inspection Report completed by the 

USACE district. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9645 

7. Provide a summary of levee 

performance history for all significant 

flood events. Indicate the levee’s 

authorized capacity (formerly referred to 

as the design flood or design water 

surface elevation) and, for each event, 

the year of occurrence, event probability 

(e.g., the 0.2% flood), flood duration, 

and description of any floodfighting 

challenges, failures, and outcomes. 

8. Provide a vegetation management 

plan, detailing (1) the vegetation 

conditions to be maintained, (2) how 

and on what schedule the maintenance 

will be performed, and (3) how the 

boundaries of the vegetation variance 

zone will be clearly identifiable, on site, 

for maintenance and inspection 

purposes. The vegetation management 

plan shall also stipulate that all grades 

and cross sections shall be maintained 

as approved and that any reduction to 

grade or cross section will be restored in 

a timely fashion. 

9. Provide any National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 

Endangered Species Act (ESA), or any 

other environmental compliance 

documentation that the district 

determines is required to conduct the 

review. Identify the pertinent 

paragraphs or sections. 

10. Provide excerpts of the current 

project operations and maintenance 

(O&M) manual as requested as 

supplemental information for the review 

process. 

11. Provide other information, as 

appropriate to specific conditions. 

12. Provide the levee sponsor’s 

primary point of contact (POC) for this 

request. 

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN 

FIGURES 1–3 

Bank (Figure 1) 

The bank is the ground line between 

the bottom and the top of the channel. 

When there is no significant horizontal 

separation between the top of the bank 

and the waterside levee toe, such that 

the bank slope and the waterside levee 

slope are essentially continuous, then 

the bank becomes critical to levee 

reliability, as significant erosion of the 

bank may result in a loss of prism. 

Corridors (Figure 1) 

Corridors provide a functional 

platform from which to conduct 

operations and maintenance activities, 

especially those involving major 

improvements or repairs. In addition, 

the landside corridor provides critical 

access during floodfighting operations, 

especially under conditions that prevent 

adequate access from the crown. 

Crown (Figure 1) 

The crown is the level top of the levee 

design cross section. It serves as the 

primary means of access for routine 

operations, but during major flood 

events may not be useable due either to 

saturation-induced reduction in stability 

or to floodfighting measures such as 

sandbagging. 

Design Cross Section (Figure 1) 

The design cross section consists of 

the prism plus any additional material 

provided to increase crown width and/ 

or flatten slopes in order to reduce 

erosion or improve accessibility. 

Additional material and placement 

methods are often similar or identical to 

that used for the prism. While 

accessibility may be the purpose, the 

additional material also increases levee 

resiliency. A levee that meets USACE 

design standards has a design cross 

section that is equal to or larger than the 

prism. 

Pit/Mound Topography (Figure 2) 

The topography that results from the 

overturning of a tree; it includes the pit, 

the mound (or rootball) and the 

overturned tree. 

Planting Berm—Landside (Figure 3) 

Additional cross section required to 

accommodate desired vegetation. It 

preserves access and protects the prism 

from root-related damage. Analyses 

results may require cross section in 

excess of the prescribed minimums. To 

serve as compensation for lost landside 

access, the planting-berm crown must 

support all vehicular access necessary to 

inspection, maintenance, and 

floodfighting. 

Planting Berm—Waterside (Figure 3) 

Additional cross section required to 

accommodate desired vegetation. It 

preserves access and protects the prism 

from root-related damage. Analyses 

results may require cross section in 

excess of the minimums. Analysis must 

show no unacceptable impacts to 

channel capacity. The berm crown must 

support all vehicular access necessary to 

conduct inspection, maintenance, and 

floodfighting. 

Prism (Figure 1) 

The prism is the portion of the levee 

identified as the minimum acceptable 

cross section as defined in Paragraph 

4.b. 2 (above, Enclosure 3), for a given 

water elevation, such as the design flood 

event. Prism dimensions, slopes, 

materials, and placement methods are 

designed to meet standards that will 

give reasonable assurance of successful 

performance. The prism is not typically 

designed to control underseepage. 

Setbacks (Figure 1) 

Setbacks are a sustainability measure 

for both the levee and environment. 

Setbacks are an important consideration 

that should be addressed in the planformulation process. While they are 

critical to sustainability of a floodplain, 

they are not specifically prescribed in 

the levee design manual (EM 1110–2– 

1913). The waterside setback provides 

space in which to maintain a measure 

of floodplain function and riparian 

habitat: this serves the environment, but 

also protects the levee from pressures to 

develop critical riparian habitat. 

Additionally, in-place riparian habitat 

serves as a protective buffer between the 

levee and erosive flows. The landside 

setback reserves space for future levee 

improvements or repairs: while this 

space is in reserve it may be used as a 

recreational greenway and/or a 

landscape buffer between the levee and 

adjacent development. 

Slopes (Figure 1) 

Levee slopes, among other 

considerations, must be sufficiently 

accessible to facilitate effective 

operation and maintenance activities 

that might be impractical on steeper 

prism slopes. A slope may have a 

spatial/functional relationship 

coincident with a bank (see Figures 1a. 

and 1b., respectively). 

Toe (Figure 1) 

The landside toe is generally the point 

at which the levee slope intersects with 

adjacent level ground. The waterside toe 

is generally the point on the waterside 

slope at which the elevation is equal to 

that of the landside toe. This is a general 

definition and there are nuances and 

exceptions. 

Vegetation–Free Zone 

The vegetation free zone (VFZ) 

includes the ground on, or within 15 

feet of, the levee and its appurtenant 

structures. The VFZ shall remain free of 

any vegetation other than grasses, 

except as allowed in ETL 1110–2–571 

and USACE vegetation variance policy. 

BILLING CODE 3720—58–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

9646 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN17FE12.008</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9647 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN17FE12.009</GPH>
9648 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN17FE12.010</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 9649 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN17FE12.011</GPH>
9650 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 33 / Friday, February 17, 2012 / Notices 

[FR Doc. 2012–3701 Filed 2–16–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–C 


mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICESEN17FE12.012</GPH>