reational facilities in the market area of the consumer, the population base and distribution, institutional analysis of potential cost-sharing partners, constraints, the transportation network, the needs identified by local, State and Federal agencies, and the State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP).

$279.8 Synthesis and analysis.

(a) Option, synthesis and analysis. The project resources and market area information should be aggregated and analyzed to determine what trade-offs can be made among the possible options to establish objectives that can meet the highest and best use of the natural and man-made resources, efficiently meet the needs of the public to be served, and be of lasting value to the region and the nation as a whole. The options determined in the first step should be synthesized to combine the separate elements. Compatible options in the two parts would result in rational resource use objectives. Conflicting options require trade-off analysis to determine to what extent compromise can be made, or if any compromise is possible to achieve acceptable objectives. In both cases the impacts, beneficial and adverse, of implementing the compatible or compromise objective(s) should be stated. For example, the preservation of wildlife habitat could limit the development of high intensity recreational facilities in a physically suitable area, resulting in a lower attainment of tangible recreation benefits. However, preservation of the existing habitat would produce intangible benefits to society by enhancing a species otherwise likely to be lost to the area.

(b) Diversity of opportunities. In regions where there are a number of Corps projects, this analysis must consider the larger regional context of interrelationships which will result in a diversity of opportunities available and emphasize the particular qualities of each project. For example, one project may emphasize swimming, another project weekend camping and power boating, while still another project may provide fishing and passive recreation use such as hiking trails, nature, and ecological study areas.

(c) Constraints. In addition to constraints imposed by the authorizing legislation, other project purposes and resource capabilities, the resource use objectives must be consistent and compatible with State and Regional planning activities and programs. As an example, Corps management actions to achieve resource use objectives must be compatible with the State approved Best Management Practices (BMP) for waste treatment (and non-point sources of pollution) as prescribed by section 208, Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-500), as amended.

§ 279.9 Objective rationale.

(a) Statement of objectives. The last step in this process is the summarization of the preceding work by clearly stating the objective(s) and providing the rationale, impact, and basic management measures for their accomplishment. The logic, trade-offs, and judgments made in the process should be presented in a concise and readable manner. The impacts, both beneficial and adverse, that will result from attaining objectives selected must be presented. General implementation measures (e.g., campground development, use of fish attractors, limiting use in environmentally sensitive areas, lake fluctuation control, etc.) should be stated as a guide for the preparation of detailed development plans and management actions to achieve the objectives.

(b) Purpose of objectives. The resource use objectives for each project will guide the design, development and management of the resource base to obtain the greatest possible benefit through meeting the needs of the public and to protect and enhance environmental quality. The resource use objectives should be reflected in reports and plans relating to a study or restudy of water resource projects. Management actions on existing projects, including leasing and licensing, will also be directed towards the attainment of the approved resource use objectives.

$279.10 Implementation.

(a) Resource use objectives through development and management programs will be incorporated into Phase

I, and Phase II General Design Memoranda and Master Plans for authorized and completed water resource projects (report requirements depend on AE&D status of project). The establishment of resource use objectives for projects formulated under the part 290 of this chapter planning process should not require a great deal of additional effort to bring them in compliance with this regulation. However, more effort may be required for completed projects with existing use patterns and constructed facilities.

(b) Regional studies are prerequisite to effective project planning for establishment of resource use objectives. Division engineers are responsible for issuing criteria and instructions, for use by district engineers, on establishing regional boundaries, conduct of regional studies and content and format of report requirements. As a minimum, one criteria to consider is that a regional boundary could be formed by double the estimated distance from the centroids of population located within the market area of any operating project. Regional boundaries need not be restricted either to States or to District hydrologic boundaries. In those cases where a region may cross District boundaries, division engineers will establish administrative responsibility. District engineers are responsible for preparation of districtwide regional boundary plans, scheduling of study efforts, and report preparation. Boundary plans, study schedules and reports shall be submitted for approval in accordance with instructions issued by the division engineer. Four copies of the approved regional boundary plan and regional study report will be furnished to HQDA (DAEN-CWP-P), WASH DC 20314 for comment, in accordance with procedures given in ER 1110-2-1150. Investigations and report preparation for regional studies may be accomplished with funds from Operation and Maintenance General appropriations programmed for preparation of individual project Master Plans. Through implementation of the regional analysis approach, it is expected that an overall savings in individual Master Plan preparation can be realized. In any event, it is not expected

that the overall program cost will increase.

(c) District engineers will incorporate the establishment of resource use objectives into the on-going Master Plan preparation process. Those Master Plans currently being prepared or updated and not substantially completed should be modified to reflect this policy. Those projects with high quality resources and/or conflicts between use and current resource management should be given a high priority so that redirection of facility development and management programs can be implemented as soon as possible.

$279.11 Responsibilities.

Division engineers will review the Districts Master Plan priority schedule and monitor regional studies and Master Plan preparation to insure timely compliance on development of resource use objectives. Future budget submissions and expenditures of construction and operation and maintenance funds will be reviewed by division engineers as to their relationship to the approved resource use objectives and management implementation. Questions and requests for technical assistance concerning implementation of the concept and guidance set forth in this regulation may be directed to HQDA (DAENCWP-P) WASH DC 20314 or DAENCWO-R.

APPENDIX A TO PART 279—SAMPLE
RESOURCE USE OBJECTIVES

This appendix presents some example resource use objectives that might be derived for a water resource project. They are presented for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to represent any specific project or the full range of objectives that could be developed.

The following sample resource use objectives reflect what could result from a detailed analysis and evaluation of the resources on the project, the resources and opportunity in the general region, and the needs of the public. Each objective has a brief discussion on why that particular objective would be selected.

Resource use objective: To provide high quality swimming opportunity with a variety of high density day-use which include picnicking, beaches, play fields, tot lots, open space, walks, and non-power boating.

(Discussion) The analysis of regional and site specific factors indicates that this proj

with its small water surface and excelwater quality is not suitable for power Ling; is in a suburban area with housing lopments already adjacent to the project ndaries or presently planned; the natural urces have already been extensively disbed; the soil conditions would be suscepOto extensive landscaping and could withid high levels of public use; the water lity and waterland form characteristics ideal for swimming and wading; there is rrently a deficiency in available lake imming, open space and day use activity cilities in the going market area; and there ists a non-Federal government agency to sist in carrying out this objective. Resource use objective: To establish and aintain a high quality warm water fishery nich would support an initial use of 70,000 shermen recreation days.

(Discussion) The analysis of pertinent facrs indicates that there exists a high deand for warm water fishing; that the water ality and other necessary environmental ctors are present which would support a arm water fishery; that modified reservoir learing, water level management and proviion for fish shelters would provide necessary nputs for improved fish production; that ome zoning on boat usage in certain mbayments will decrease the conflicts beween fishing and boating; and that current state fishery programs will provide assistance and the necessary technical advice.

Resource use objective: To establish an ecological study area at Wakulla Wash for the protection and study of its unique vegetative associations.

(Discussion) The analysis of pertinent factors indicates that high intensity recreation use demand can be satisfied at other areas on the project; the soil in the wash would be highly susceptible to erosion if the vegetation were removed; soil compaction would cause loss of ground cover; trails can be designed to avoid drainage and erosion problems; unique associations of vegetation exist in the wash; the nearest vehicle access point is one mile from the site; during public meetings local environmental groups have expressed an interest to preserve the area for educational purposes; there is a large population base within two hours drive of the project; two local universities have volunteered to administer the area in conjunction with their environmental course work and related work; and the County is zoning the adjacent land to protect the watershed of the Wash.

Resource use objective: To provide overnight use to accommodate transient cross-county travelers.

(Discussion) The analysis of regional and site factors indicate that this project with its small water surface and lack of scenic qualities does not experience much local use. A heavily traveled Interstate Highway with

an interchange is within a quarter mile of the project boundary. The location of this project is such that it is within a days travel from major recreation areas; the soil conditions are suitable for high density public use and there is a deficiency of transient camping along this portion of the Interstate.

Resource use objective: To provide a high quality diversified recreation opportunity that would satisfy requirements for destination or vacation type activities.

(Discussion) The analysis of regional and site factors indicate that this project with its outstanding scenic qualities and its location, is suitable for destination or vacation type recreation activities. Private interest have expressed desires to provide sophisticated lodging and camping facilities together with other recreation development to provide for a diversity of recreation activities.

Resource use objective: To establish a cultural interpretive area for the protection, study and viewing of its unique archeological (historical) resource.

(Discussion) The analysis of pertinent factors indicates that high intensity recreation use demand can be satisfied at other areas on the project. The archeological (historical) site is one of the few sites that has not been destroyed over the years. The local archeological (historical) society has expressed an interest during public meeting in preserving and interpreting the site as part of their society program.

the detrimental impacts. This is known as the "public interest review." The program is one which reflects the national concerns for both the protection and utilization of important resources.

(2) The Corps is a highly decentralized organization. Most of the authority for administering the regulatory program has been delegated to the thirty-six district engineers and eleven division engineers. If a district or division engineer makes a final decision on a permit application in accordance with the procedures and authorities contained in these regulations (33 CFR parts 320 through 330), there is no administrative appeal of that decision.

(3) The Corps seeks to avoid unnecessary regulatory controls. The general permit program described in 33 CFR parts 325 and 330 is the primary method of eliminating unnecessary federal control over activities which do not justify individual control or which are adequately regulated by another agency.

(4) The Corps is neither a proponent nor opponent of any permit proposal. However, the Corps believes that applicants are due a timely decision. Reducing unnecessary paperwork and delays is a continuing Corps goal.

(5) The Corps believes that state and federal regulatory programs should complement rather than duplicate one another. The Corps uses general permits, joint processing procedures, interagency review, coordination, and authority transfers (where authorized by law) to reduce duplication.

(6) The Corps has authorized its district engineers to issue formal determinations concerning the applicability of the Clean Water Act or the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 to activities or tracts of land and the applicability of general permits or statutory exemptions to proposed activities. A determination pursuant to this authorization shall constitute a Corps final agency action. Nothing contained in this section is intended to affect any authority EPA has under the Clean Water Act.

(b) Types of activities regulated. This part and the parts that follow (33 CFR parts 321 through 330) prescribe the statutory authorities, and general and special policies and procedures applicable to the review of applications for De

partment of the Army (DA) permits for controlling certain activities in waters of the United States or the oceans. This part identifies the various federal statutes which require that DA permits be issued before these activities can be lawfully undertaken; and related Federal laws and the general policies applicable to the review of those activities. Parts 321 through 324 and 330 address special policies and procedures applicable to the following specific classes of activities:

(1) Dams or dikes in navigable waters of the United States (part 321);

(2) Other structures or work including excavation, dredging, and/or disposal activities, in navigable waters of the United States (part 322);

(3) Activities that alter or modify the course, condition, location, or capacity of a navigable water of the United States (part 322);

(4) Construction of artificial islands, installations, and other devices on the outer continental shelf (part 322);

(5) Discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States (part 323);

(6) Activities involving the transportation of dredged material for the purpose of disposal in ocean waters (part 324); and

(7) Nationwide general permits for certain categories of activities (part 330).

(c) Forms of authorization. DA permits for the above described activities are issued under various forms of authorization. These include individual permits that are issued following a review of individual applications and general permits that authorize a category or categories of activities in specific geographical regions or nationwide. The term "general permit” as used in these regulations (33 CFR parts 320 through 330) refers to both those regional permits issued by district or division engineers on a regional basis and to nationwide permits which are issued by the Chief of Engineers through publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER and are applicable throughout the nation. The nationwide permits are found in 33 CFR part 330. If an activity is covered by a general permit, an application for a DA permit does not have to be made. In such cases, a person must only comply

with the conditions contained in the z general permit to satisfy requirements of law for a DA permit. In certain cases E pre-notification may be required before initiating construction. (See 33 CFR 330.7)

(d) General instructions. General policies for evaluating permit applications are found in this part. Special policies that relate to particular activities are found in parts 321 through 324. The procedures for processing individual permits and general permits are contained in 33 CFR part 325. The terms "navigable waters of the United States" and "waters of the United States" are used frequently throughout these regulations, and it is important from the outset that the reader understand the difference between the two. "Navigable waters of the United States" are defined in 33 CFR part 329. These are waters that are navigable in the traditional sense where permits are required for certain work or structures pursuant to Sections 9 and 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. "Waters of the United States" are defined in 33 CFR part 328. These waters include more than navigable waters of the United States and are the waters where permits are required for the discharge of dredged or fill material pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act. $320.2 Authorities to issue permits.

(a) Section 9 of the Rivers and Harbors Act, approved March 3, 1899 (33 U.S.C. 401) (hereinafter referred to as section 9), prohibits the construction of any dam or dike across any navigable water of the United States in the absence of Congressional consent and approval of the plans by the Chief of Engineers and the Secretary of the Army. Where the navigable portions of the waterbody lie wholly within the limits of a single state, the structure may be built under authority of the legislature of that state if the location and plans or any modification thereof are approved by the Chief of Engineers and by the Secretary of the Army. The instrument of authorization is designated a permit (See 33 CFR part 321.) Section 9 also pertains to bridges and causeways but the authority of the Secretary of the Army and Chief of Engineers with respect to bridges and

causeways was transferred to the Secretary of Transportation under the Department of Transportation Act of October 15, 1966 (49 U.S.C. 1155g(6)(A)). A DA permit pursuant to section 404 of the Clean Water Act is required for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States associated with bridges and causeways. (See 33 CFR part 323.)

(b) Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act approved March 3, 1899, (33 U.S.C. 403) (hereinafter referred to as section 10), prohibits the unauthorized obstruction or alteration of any navigable water of the United States. The construction of any structure in or over any navigable water of the United States, the excavating from or depositing of material in such waters, or the accomplishment of any other work affecting the course, location, condition, or capacity of such waters is unlawful unless the work has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of the Army. The instrument of authorization is designated a permit. The authority of the Secretary of the Army to prevent obstructions to navigation in navigable waters of the United States was extended to artificial islands, installations, and other devices located on the seabed, to the seaward limit of the outer continental shelf, by section 4(f) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 as amended (43 U.S.C. 1333(e)). (See 33 CFR part 322.)

(c) Section 11 of the Rivers and Harbors Act approved March 3, 1899, (33 U.S.C. 404), authorizes the Secretary of the Army to establish harbor lines channel ward of which no piers, wharves, bulkheads, or other works may be extended or deposits made without approval of the Secretary of the Army. Effective May 27, 1970, permits for work shoreward of those lines must be obtained in accordance with section 10 and, if applicable, section 404 of the Clean Water Act (see §320.4(o) of this part).

(d) Section 13 of the Rivers and Harbors Act approved March 3, 1899, (33 U.S.C. 407), provides that the Secretary of the Army, whenever the Chief of Engineers determines that anchorage and navigation will not be injured thereby, may permit the discharge of refuse into