the LRR includes tables listing individual Owners, their specific § 10 permits, and the number and size of their pipelines. Indeed, portions of the LRR discuss requiring Owners to bear pipeline relocation costs according to the § 10 permit power. {E.g., “The cost for removal and replacement of pipelines and docking facilities located within the area of navigation servi tude are not included in the cost estimate because these costs are owner costs, not project costs.”) Owners contend, erroneously, that WRDA-86 precludes the Corps’ exercising § 10 permit authority to enforce the navigational servitude. For obvious reasons, Congressional waiver of this servitude must be express. See, e.g., United States v. Cherokee Nation of Okla., 480 U.S. 700, 707, 107 S.Ct. 1487, 94 L.Ed.2d 704 (1987) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Bowen v. Public Agencies Opposed to
holding unionnegotiated waiver of employees right to judicial forum for statutory claims must be clear and unmistakable holding that tribes did not waive their immunity by intervening in  administrative proceedings because any waiver must be unequivocal and may not be implied holding waiver of navigational servitude will not be implied but instead must be surrendered in unmistakable terms  holding that clear and unmistakable standard applied to unionnegotiated waiver of employees statutory right to a judicial forum for claims of employment discrimination holding that the word waiver is not required to waive a right even when a statute requires clear and unmistakable evidence of waiver