1

DRAFT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND

FINDING OF NO SIGNFICIANT IMPACT

 

POLICY GUIDANCE LETTER (PGL) – PROCESS FOR REQUESTING A 

VARIANCE FROM VEGETATION STANDARDS FOR LEVEES AND 

FLOODWALLS

Purpose and Need

The purpose of this policy guidance letter is to revise the process for requesting 

variances from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) vegetation standards 

for levee systems. These revisions will create a more centralized, consistent and 

clear process for requesting variances. In 2006, the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) built upon the activities of its Rehabilitation and Inspection 

Program to form its Levee Safety Program (LSP) with the mission to assess the 

integrity and viability of levees and recommend courses of action to make sure 

that levee systems do not present unacceptable risks to the public, property and 

environment. USACE subsequently launched a major effort to review and revise 

policies and procedures associated with levees. The revised process aligns with 

the LSP goals that make public safety a top priority and assures application of 

consistent and well-documented approaches. 

Background

An environmental assessment is being prepared to assist USACE in planning 

and decision making with regards to evaluating the variance process. This 

document discusses the factors considered by USACE during the decisionmaking process. 

Section 202(g) of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 1996 

directed the Secretary of the Army to review and revise, in cooperation with 

interested stakeholders, current policy guidelines on vegetation management for 

levees in order to address variations in natural resource needs. Two goals of 

Section 202(g) were “to provide a coherent and coordinated policy for vegetation 

management for levees” and “address regional variations in levee management 

and resource needs.” The resulting policy is reflected in Engineer Regulation 

(ER) 500-1-1, Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, Civil 

Emergency Management Program, Section 5-22. ER 500-1-1, Section 5-22, 

provides an opportunity for local sponsors to apply for a variance from vegetation 

standards for levees active in the USACE Rehabilitation and Inspection Program 

under the authorities of Public Law 84-99. The USACE standards for vegetation 

management are contained in Engineer Technical Letter (ETL) 1110-2-571, 

Guidelines for Landscape Planting and Vegetation Management at Levees, 

Floodwalls, Embankment Dams, and Appurtenant Structures. Procedures and 

considerations for granting variances are contained in Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 

500-1-1, Emergency Employment of Army and Other Resources, Civil 
2

Emergency Management Program – Procedures, Chapter 5. 

The revision to the variance process aligns with the following agency-wide 

approaches: 

 Conducting broader flood risk management planning 

 Applying policy and procedures consistently 

 Addressing levees on a systems basis 

 Utilizing Agency Technical Review (ATR) to ensure quality and credibility 

 Documenting technical decisions 

 Sharing best practices and lessons learned 

Alternatives

We considered two alternatives – no action and revise the variance process. 

The No Action Alternative would result in continued use of a process not 

consistent with other revisions within the agency such as establishment of Levee 

Safety Officers and the Risk Management Center. The preferred alternative 

would be to revise the existing process to incorporate current agency processes, 

ensure national consistency, and clarify roles and responsibilities. 

Affected Environment

Revisions to the process for requesting a variance apply nationally. However, 

changing the process for applying for a variance does not itself affect the 

environment or any species that are listed as threatened or endangered under 

the Endangered Species Act (ESA). It is the decisions on specific variance 

requests that may effect the environment or listed species. The environmental 

effects of each decision on a variance application will be properly evaluated 

before a final decision is rendered. Evaluating environmental effects and 

providing environmental compliance, including NEPA and SA compliance, when 

decisions are made on specific, individual variance applications is appropriate 

because impacts will be highly dependent upon the nature of the variance 

requested and because each variance will likely address a number of 

geographically unique factors, such as the specific flora, fauna and geology of a 

location. Evaluating environmental impacts at the decision stage of the variance 

process will allow for a much more detailed understanding of the environmental 

consequences of the inspection standards applied to particular levee systems. 

Finally, any environmental impact may be dependant upon the levee sponsor’s 

decision whether to participate in the levee inspection program. 

Environmental Consequences

The no action alternative would not achieve the USACE goal of creating a 

consistent method for addressing regional differences while protecting public 
3

safety. The current procedures have led to inconsistent and decentralized 

decision making and record keeping. 

The preferred alternative is expected to result in a more consistent use of 

variances while also preserving public safety. By revising the process, USACE 

will reduce inconsistencies while permitting regional variations. In addition, the 

more centralized process will improve record keeping. Evaluating the 

environmental impacts of determinations of the inspection standards that will 

apply to specific levee systems will allow for the most accurate understanding of 

those impacts and the greatest range of options for addressing them. 

Coordination with Others 

A 30-day comment period was announced by public notice by ______________ 

on__________. 

Finding of No Significant Impact: 

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and its 

implementing regulations at 40 CFR Parts 1500 – 1508, an Environmental 

Assessment has been prepared for this policy. The Corps has chosen to prepare 

NEPA documentation for this Policy Guidance Letter because the Corps 

recognizes that the PGL establishes a process that may require decisions to be 

made on applications for vegetation variances that could have an adverse effect 

on the environment. The environmental review process undertaken for this rule 

has led me to conclude that the publication of the Policy Guidance Letter will not 

have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, and therefore 

an Environmental Impact Statement is not required by §102(2)(C) of NEPA or its 

implementing regulations. A copy of this Environmental Assessment with 

attachments is available from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, HQUSACE. 

 James C. Dalton, P.E., SES 

 Chief, Engineering and Construction 

 Directorate of Civil Works 

 
4

Literature Cited

a. Engineer Regulation (ER) 500-1-1, Emergency Employment of Army and 

Other Resources, Civil Emergency Management Program, Chapter 5, 

Rehabilitation and Inspection Program, 30 September 2001. 

b. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 500-1-1, Emergency Employment of Army and 

Other Resources, Civil Emergency Management Program – Procedures, 

Chapter 5, The Rehabilitation and Inspection Program, and Appendix E, 

Regional Variances to Levee Vegetation Standards, 30 September 2001. 

c. 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.