"Where the proposed work is non-water dependent and alternative upland sites are available, the Service will insist on the use of such upland sites irrespective of costs or other burdens on the sponsor of the proposed work. "For water dependent works, the Service will insist on minimizing the loss of or damage to productive wetlands and shallows, their fish and wildlife, and human uses. "The Service will insist on guarantees that the work is actually carried out as promised and/or as required by conditions of the permit, provisions of law, or agreements formalized in writing." (Emphasis in original.) But this important provision was mysteriously omitted from the August 1972 draft. The latest version quite properly finds that wetlands "constitute a productive and valuable public resource," rather than just stating this fact in terms of a rebuttable presumption. It also finds that their "alteration or destruction * * * or use for purposes not dependent on wetland resources, is detrimental to the public interest." But, as we noted above, the August 1972 draft fails to tell the corps' district engineers, the permit applicant, and the public that, as a result of these findings, permit applications for work in wetland areas "will ordinarily not be granted" where the purpose is (a) "not dependent on waterfront access", or (b) "can be satisfied by the use of an alternative site or by use of existing facilities." It is clear that the long delay in issuing the draft wetland regulations has been detrimental to the public interest. However, the August 1972 draft wetlands regulation must be substantially revised (i) to include the above quoted paragraph (b), and (ii) to require, even in the case of water-dependent works, the applicant to show that the work is in the public interest, that there is no prudent and feasible alternative to utilizing the particular wetlands area. If the regulation is not so revised, we believe that it would be largely rhetoric without substance, and therefore would mislead the public into believing that it will result in some added protection for the Nation's valuable and irreplaceable wetlands. III Our letter of January 5, 1973, requested that you promptly provide to us a copy of all Federal agency comments received thus far by your Department and/or the corps on the various draft versions of the wetland and other regulations mentioned in your January 19 letter to us. Mr. Ford's letter overlooked this request. We repeat the request. Sincerely, HENRY S. REUSS, Chairman, Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee. Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee. Hon. HENRY S. REUSS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Chairman, Subcommittee on Conservation and Natural Resources, DEAR MR. REUSS: In the absence of Secretary Froehlke I am taking the liberty of responding to your letter of January 29, 1973. This letter will also further clarify my letter of January 19th concerning the status of regulations being revised by the Corps of Engineers to include, among other changes, a policy statement relative to permits for work in wetland areas. A final draft of the regulation will be published shortly in the Federal Register. I will provide you with a copy of this draft as soon as it is ready for publication and will provide you with all comments received thereafter as a result of publication of the proposed regulation. With regard to your request for comments received by the Department of the Army or by the Corps of Engineers last year on earlier draft versions of the regulations, Mr. Weinberger in his letter to you of July 25, 1972, noted that these comments were solicited by the Office of Management and Budget and were forwarded to the Department of the Army for its internal use only. Accordingly, I do not have authority, under standard inter-agency procedures, to release these comments. A copy of the regulation has been furnished to the Department of Justice, requesting initiation of discussion on delegation of authority to United States Attorneys and corps district engineers for direct referral of cases at field level. In the interim, direct referral on an ad hoc basis is being authorized, and this procedure is avoiding needless administrative delays. Sincerely, CHARLES R. FORD, Chief, Office of Civil Functions. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE, Washington, D.C., March 27, 1973. Hon. ROBERT F. FROEHLKE, DEAR SECRETARY FROEHLKE: Our subcommittee's letter to you dated January 29 requested copies of the comments which various Federal agencies made on the Corps of Engineers' draft of regulations concerning wetlands and other matters, and sent to the Office of Management and Budget in January 1972. Mr. Charles R. Ford, Chief, Office of Civil Functions, of your Department responded on March 22 that he lacks "authority, under standard agency procedures" to release those comments to us. Please advise us, by April 6, 1973, the statutory basis for your Department's refusing to supply these interagency comments to this subcommittee. Also, please provide to us by that date a copy of the documents which set forth the "standard interagency procedures" cited by Mr. Ford. Sincerely, HENRY S. REUSS, Chairman, Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee. Hon. HENRY S. REUSS. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, Chairman, Subcommittee on Conservation and Natural Resources, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. REUSS: The Secretary of the Army has asked me to reply to your letter of March 27, 1973, regarding your earlier correspondence. In that letter, you ask to be advised of the basis for the statement in my letter of March 22, that the Army lacks "authority, under standard inter-agency procedures" to release the requested comments. As I noted in my earlier letter, the only comments received by the Army on earlier draft versions of the regulations currently under preparation were those to which Mr. Caspar Weinberger, then Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), referred in his letter to you of July 25, 1972. In his letter, Mr. Weinberger stated. "The agency comments and policy recommendations on certain possible revisions of the regulations, which OMB solicited as part of its interagency coordination functions, were forwarded to the Department of the Army for its internal use during this review." In that same letter. Mr. Weinberger responded to your request for these comments by stating: "[I]nternal exchanges of opinion within the executive branch have traditionally never been released in order to protect and maintain the free and frank expressions of views essential to the development of policy positions. *** Since your request for agency comments relates to the preliminary exchanges of opinion prior to adoption of a final agency position, it would, in accordance with both theory and practice, be inappropriate for us to make them available." The requested comments are not records originated by the Army. The Office of Management and Budget furnished them to the Army for its internal use only, and has not authorized the Army to release them. I hope that this letter will clarify for you the basis for our Department's action on this matter. If you wish to pursue the matter of these comments further, you should again contact the Office of Management and Budget. Sincerely, CHARLES R. FORD, Chief, Office of Civil Functions. PART C.-THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT'S WETLANDS GUIDELINES [NOTE. These guidelines were circulated among all regional offices of the available to the public through publication in the Federal Register or any other document.] Navigable Waters Handbook introduction 1. Introduction 1 to 1A(1) This brings together the policy and procedural guidelines and pertinent reference materials applicable to the program of the Division of River Basin Studies, Fish and Wildlife Service, regarding dredge, fill, and related, as well as other, Federal and federally permitted activities conducted in and adjoining the Nation's waters. The guidelines are presented in this 10-section main part of the handbook, and the reference materials are organized in 9 appendixes: A through I. Appendixes A, B, and C include, respectively, form letters and reports, recording forms and other procedural aids, and standard recommendations. Appendix D contains legal and related references; Appendix E, official policy statements of Interior; Appendix F, official policy statements of other entities; Appendix G, Technical references; Appendix H, General educational material; and Appendix I, Procedural references, including definitions of terms. The handbook is applicable to all works and dredge, fill and - - Works and activities in navigable waters, federally Leasing of Outer Continental Shelf lands for mineral Use, occupancy, and filling of and removal of sand, Navigable Waters Handbook Introduction 1A(1) Cont. to 1A(2) Discharge of pollutants into navigable waters, federally Disposal of dredged and fill material in navigable waters, Disposal of sewage sludge which would result in any pollutant entering navigable waters, federally permitted by the EPA or by a State with oversight by the EPA under Sec. 405 of the FWPCA, App. D-2s. Bridges and causeways over navigable waters federally Federal navigation projects including maintenance dredging and spoiling as well as all types of construction. Federal hurricane protection projects. Federal beach erosion control and nourishment projects. Other federally conducted or sanctioned work such as Steam electric plants and other cooling water using facilities, which are the subject of a separate handbook and covered here only in summary fashion (because they frequently require a permit from the Corps under Sec. 10 of the 1899 Act and a NPDES permit under Sec. 402 of the FWPCA as well as a construction permit and operating license from the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) if nuclear fueled). (2) Corps, EPA, and Coast Guard Permits The Secretary of the Army is authorized by the Act of |