33302 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

Dated: May 18, 2000.

Raymond J. Fatz,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army

(Environment, Safety and Occupational

Health) OASA (I&E).

[FR Doc. 00–12972 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy

Record of Decision for the Disposal

and Reuse of Naval Air Station Agana,

Guam

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy

(Navy), pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4332(2)(C)

(1994), and the regulations of the

Council on Environmental Quality that

implement NEPA procedures, 40 C.F.R.

Parts 1500–1508, hereby announces its

decision to dispose of Naval Air Station

(NAS) Agana, which is located in the

United States Territory of Guam. Guam

is the southernmost island of the

Mariana archipelago in the western

Pacific Ocean.

Navy analyzed the impacts of the

disposal and reuse of NAS Agana in an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

as required by NEPA. The EIS analyzed

four reuse alternatives and identified

the NAS Agana Base Reuse Master Plan

(Reuse Plan), approved by the

Government of Guam on July 8, 1997,

and described in the EIS as the Airport/

Business/Industry Alternative, as the

Preferred Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative proposed to

use NAS Agana for commercial aviation;

for industrial and commercial activities;

to develop parks and recreational areas;

and to build and expand roads and

highways. The Government of Guam is

the local Redevelopment Authority

(LRA) for NAS Agana. Department of

Defense Rule on Revitalizing Base

Closure Communities and Community

Assistance (DOD) Rule), 32 C.F.R.

§ 176.20(a).

Navy intends to dispose of NAS

Agana in a manner that is consistent

with the Reuse Plan. Navy has

determined that the mixed land use

proposed for NAS Agana will meet the

goals of achieving local economic

redevelopment and creating new jobs

while limiting adverse environmental

impacts and ensuring land uses that are

compatible with adjacent property. This

Record Of Decision does not mandate a

specific mix of land uses. Rather, it

leaves selection of the particular means

to achieve the proposed redevelopment

to the acquiring entities and the local

zoning authority.

Background

Under the authority of the Defense

Base Closure and Realignment Act of

1990 (DBCRA), Public Law 101–510, 10

U.S.C. § 2687 note (1994), the 1993

Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Commission recommended the closure

of Naval Air Station Agana. The

Commission also recommended that

navy retain the Air Station officers

housing to support Navy personnel

stationed at Andersen Air Force Base in

the northern part of Guam. These

recommendations were approved by

President Clinton and accepted by the

One Hundred Third Congress in 1993.

Naval Air Station Agana closed on

March 31, 1995.

Prior to closure of the Air Station, the

A. B. Won Pat Guam International

Airport Authority (GIAA) operated the

Guam International Airport at NAS

Agana through a joint use agreement

with Navy. Under this agreement,

Guam’s International Airport Authority,

which owns and operates a passenger

terminal and maintenance area adjacent

to NAS Agana, used the Naval Air

Station runways and taxiways and

relied upon Navy’s air traffic controllers

for civilian air operations. After NAS

Agana closed, GIAA assumed

responsibility for all air operations and

began using Navy’s maintenance

hangars through a lease with Navy. The

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

currently provides air traffic control

services.

The 1995 Defense Base Closure and

Realignment Commission modified the

1993 Commission’s recommendation by

directing Navy to close the officers

housing at NAS Agana. The 1995

Commission’s recommendation was

approved by President Clinton and

accepted by the One Hundred Fourth

Congress in 1995.

Naval Air Station Agana is located in

the central part of Guam, about three

miles northeast of the Village of Agana,

which has been renamed Hagatna. The

area around the base is also known as

Tiyan. The Air Station covers an area of

about 1,824 acres of Navy property, and

Navy controls an additional 208 acres

near the Air Station by way of

easements for air operations and

drainage. Navy plans to transfer its

interests in these easements to GIAA.

Disposal and reuse of the officers

housing, covering 93 acres, were treated

in a separate environmental analysis

and document.

Naval Air Station Agana is oriented

along a northeast-southwest axis and

has a generally triangular shape. The

base is bounded on the north by a steep

bluff and Route 10A; on the east and

southeast by Route 16; and on the south

by the intersection of Routes 16, 10, and

8; on the southwest by Route 8; and on

the west and northwest by Route 1 and

Agana Bay.

The Village of Tamuning, the Airport

Authority’s passenger terminal and

maintenance area, and the Harmon

industrial area are located north of the

base property. The Village of Dededo is

located northeast of the Air Station.

Barrigada Heights and facilities

associated with the United States Naval

Computer and Telecommunications

Station, Guam are located, respectively,

east and southeast of the Air Station.

The Village of Barrigada is located south

of the Air Station; and the villages of

Mongmong, Toto, and Maite are located

southwest of the base.

During the Federal screening process,

two Federal agencies requested

interagency transfers of base closure

property at NAS Agana. These were the

National Weather Service of the

Department of Commerce’s National

Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration and the Federal

Aviation Administration.

On July 23, 1998, Navy transferred

three acres just south of the runways to

the National Weather Service, which is

building a weather forecasting facility

on the site. Navy will transfer the

control tower and base operations

building (Building 17–75) and a

transmitter building (Building 16–3231)

and two non-contiguous parcels

covering about three acres in this part of

the base to the Federal Aviation

Administration for air traffic control

activities. The remaining 1,725 acres of

Navy property at NAS Agana are

surplus to the needs of the Federal

Government.

This Record of Decision addresses the

disposal and reuse of those parts of NAS

Agana that are surplus to the needs of

the Federal Government. The Air

Station contains two parallel runways in

a northeast-southwest alignment: a

10,000-foot primary runway (Runway

06L–24R) and an 8,000-foot secondary

runway (Runway 06R–24L). Navy plans

to transfer its interests in the air

operations easements and the drainage

easements to GIAA. The base contains

about 592 buildings and structures that

were used for aviation operations,

training, housing, administrative and

support activities. The surplus

property’s undeveloped areas on the

western side of the base contain

wetlands and, on the eastern side of the

base, a forest with limestone soil. There

is an archaeological site eligible for

listing on the National Register of

Historic Places in a developed area

south of the airfield.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices 33303

Of the 1,725 acres of surplus property

at NAS Agana, about 249 acres are

available to the Government of Guam for

economic redevelopment. The

Government of Guam proposes to

develop industrial and commercial

facilities on this property.

Navy plans to dispose of the

remaining 1,476 acres of surplus

property at NAS Agana by way of

various public benefit conveyances.

Navy plans to convey about 1,361 acres

to the Guam International Airport

Authority for use as an airport after

approval by the United States

Department of Transportation. Navy

plans to assign about 72 acres to the

Federal Highway Administration for

subsequent conveyance to the

Government of Guam to permit

development of the proposed Laderan

Tiyan Parkway north of the airfield,

Mariner Parkway south of the airfield,

and the proposed extension of Route 10

south of the airfield.

Navy plans to assign about 41 acres in

the southern part of the base to the

United States Department of the Interior

for subsequent conveyance to the

Government of Guam for use as parks

and recreational areas. Navy plans to

convey the Air Station’s chapel and

religious center and two acres in the

southern part of the base to the

Government of Guam after the United

States Department of Housing and

Urban Development approves a legally

binding agreement between the LRA

and homeless assistance providers.

Navy published a Notice Of Intent in

the Federal Register on January 22,

1996, announcing that Navy and the

FAA as a cooperating agency would

prepare an EIS for the disposal and

reuse of NAS Agana. Navy held two

public scoping meetings in the

Government of Guam’s Executive

Building at Adelup on January 24, 1996.

The scoping period concluded on

February 23, 1996.

Navy distributed the Draft EIS (DEIS)

to Federal and local government

agencies, elected officials, community

groups and associations, and interested

persons on April 9, 1999, and

commenced a 45-day public review and

comment period. During this period,

Federal and local agencies and one

person submitted written comments

concerning the DEIS. On May 13, 1999,

Navy held a public hearing to receive

comments on the DEIS at the San

Vicente/San Roke Catholic Church’s

social hall in Barrigada.

Navy’s responses to the public

comments were incorporated in the

Final EIS (FEIS), which was distributed

to the public on December 30, 1999, for

a review period that concluded on

January 28, 2000. Navy did not receive

any comments on the FEIS.

Alternatives

NEPA requires Navy to evaluate a

reasonable range of alternatives for the

disposal and reuse of this surplus

Federal property. In the FEIS, Navy

analyzed the environmental impacts of

four reuse alternatives. Navy also

evaluated a ‘‘No Action’’ alternative that

would leave the property in caretaker

status with Navy maintaining the

physical condition of the property,

providing a security force, and making

repairs essential to safety. Under this

alternative, Guam’s International

Airport would continue to operate

under the existing joint use agreement

between Navy and GIAA, and there

would be no expansion of the airport,

no improvement of roadways within the

base’s boundaries, and no transfers of

easements.

In Executive Order No. 94–07, dated

July 8, 1994, the Governor of Guam,

Joseph F. Ada, established the Komita

Para Tiyan to prepare a reuse plan for

NAS Agana. The Kometia conducted the

planning process for NAS Agana in two

parts: it developed an airport master

plan for submission to the FAA that

proposed civilian reuse of the NAS

Agana facilities and it developed a reuse

plan for all of the surplus property. The

Komitea solicited expressions of interest

in reuse and redevelopment of the

property and received notices of interest

from local government agencies, private

businesses, homeless assistance

providers, and nonprofit organizations.

The Komitea Para Tiyan developed

three reuse proposals designated as

business/industry, education/heritage,

and housing/community. Each proposed

a similar expansion of Guam’s

International Airport. At four public

meetings in November 1994 and at three

public meetings in June 1995, the

Komitea solicited comments concerning

the three reuse proposals. On December

22, 1995, the Komitea solicited

comments concerning the three reuse

proposals. On December 22, 1995, the

Kometea adopted the business/industry

alternative and approved the NAS

Agana Base Reuse Master Plan. In letters

to the Department of Defense and the

Department of Housing and Urban

Development (HUD) dated December 26,

1995, the Governor of Guam, Carl T.C.

Gutierrez, submitted this reuse plan to

the Federal Government.

In a letter to HUD dated July 8, 1997,

Governor Gutierrez submitted

modifications to the December 1995

reuse plan. The Governor designated

two acres in the southern part of the

base for use by homeless assistance

providers. Additionally, the

modifications changed the proposed use

of 27 acres in the western part of the

base from parks and recreational

activities to airport operations and

changed the proposed use of 20 acres in

the eastern part of the base from

industrial and commercial activities to

airport operations.

In Executive Order No. 97–27, dated

October 16, 1997, Governor Gutierrez

disestablished the Komitea Para Tiyan

and established the Base Realignment

And Closure GovGuam Steering

Committee. He assigned the BRAC

GovGuam Steering Committee

responsibility for coordinating all future

redevelopment at NAS Agana.

The Reuse Plan, identified in the FEIS

as the Preferred Alternative, proposed a

mix of land uses for NAS Agana. The

Preferred Alternative would develop

commercial aviation, industrial, and

commercial activities as well as parks

and recreational areas. it will be

necessary to make utility infrastructure

and roadway improvements to support

the Reuse Plan’s proposed

redevelopment of NAS Agana.

The Preferred Alternative would

expand Guam’s International Airport to

increase its air traffic capacity. By the

full build-out year of 2015, the number

of annual aircraft operations would

increase from 87,000 to 123,400. The

primary runway (06L–24R) would be

extended from 10,000 to 12,000 feet

(1,000 feet to the northeast and 1,000

feet to the southwest), and the

secondary runway (06R–24L) would be

extended from 8,000 to 11,000 feet

(1,000 feet to the southwest and 2,000

feet to the northeast). This Alternative

would build two new taxiways, one

north of the primary runway and one

south of the secondary runway. It would

build a new air traffic control tower, a

cargo terminal, a general aviation

terminal and service center, aircraft

maintenance facilities, and training

facilities. It would also reserve land for

future expansion of the passenger

terminal, additional flight kitchens, and

aviation businesses such as an express

package and cargo hub.

The Preferred Alternative proposed to

build several new roadways and to

expand other roadways. This

Alternative would build the Laderan

Tiyan Parkway north of the airport’s

operations area to provide an alternate

access to the passenger terminal from

route 8 on the base’s south and

southwest boundary. This roadway

would also provide a link to a proposed

north-south bypass road that would

connect the Village of Tamuning with

the base and communities located south

of the base.

33304 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

In the southern part of the base, the

preferred Alternative would expand

mariner Avenue, a northeast-southwest

road on the base, and rename it Mariner

Parkway. This roadway would provide

access to airport-related activities to the

north as well as to the industrial and

commercial activities and parks and

recreational areas to the south. It would

also serve as a regional transportation

link between the villages of Dededo and

Cabras. The Preferred Alternative would

expand Seagull Avenue between

Mariner Parkway and the intersection of

Routes 16, 10, and 8 at the southern tip

of the base.

The Preferred Alternative proposed to

reserve about 30 acres on the bluff north

of the airport, overlooking the village of

Tamuning, for parks and recreational

uses such as walking paths, bike paths,

and picnic areas. On about 340 acres

located north and south of the runways

and taxiways, this Alternative proposed

to develop airport-related commercial

facilities. To the north, these facilities

could include offices for businesses

interested in a prime airport location, a

trade exhibition center, a 200-room

hotel, and educational facilities such as

an hotel school. To the south, just north

of the proposed Mariner Parkway, the

Preferred Alternative would develop

facilities for commercial activities

related to the airport such as express

package services, an airframe and power

plant school, light industrial activities,

storage, and freight forwarders.

In the southern part of the base, south

of the proposed Mariner Parkway, the

Preferred Alternative proposed to

develop industrial and commercial

activities that would include retail

stores to serve the Barrigada

community. On about 41 acres, it would

develop new recreational facilities and

reuse the existing sports facilities as an

Olympics training center. The Preferred

Alternative designated the Air Station’s

chapel and religious center and two

acres located in the center of the

industrial and commercial area for use

by homeless assistance providers.

Navy analyzed a second ‘‘action’’

alternative, described in the FEIS as

Alternative 2, the Airport/Education/

Heritage Alternative. Alternative 2

proposed expanding the airport and

building extensive roadway

improvements similar to those proposed

by the Preferred Alternative. In

Alternative 2, however, there would be

less airport-related development and

fewer industrial and commercial

activities than proposed in the Preferred

Alternative. Instead, the Alternative

would emphasize educational and

cultural activities and parks and

recreational areas and would provide

housing.

Alternative 2 would expand the

airport’s operations by extending both

runways and by building two new

taxiways. This Alternative would also

build a new air traffic control tower, a

cargo terminal, a general aviation

terminal and service center, aircraft

maintenance facilities, and training

facilities. It would reserve land for

future expansion of the passenger

terminal, additional flight kitchens, and

aviation businesses such as an express

package and cargo hub.

Alternative 2 proposed to build

several new roadways to expand other

roadways similar to those proposed by

the Preferred Alternative. This

Alternative would build the Laderan

Tiyan Parkway north of the airport’s

operations area to provide an alternate

access to the passenger terminal from

Route 8. This roadway would also

provide a link to a proposed north-south

bypass road that would connect the

Village of Tamuning with the base and

communities located south of the base.

In the southern part of the base,

Alternative 2 would expand Mariner

Avenue and rename it Mariner Parkway.

This roadway would provide access to

airport-related activities to the north as

well as to the housing, educational and

cultural facilities, industrial and

commercial activities, and parks and

recreational ares to the south. It would

also serve as a regional transportation

link between the villages of Dededo and

Cabras. Alternative 2 would expand

Seagull Avenue between Mariner

Parkway and the intersection of Routes

16, 10, and 8 to the south.

In the western part of the base, just

south of the officers housing site,

Alternative 2 would develop industrial

activities. East of the officers housing

site, this Alternative would develop

educational and cultural facilities and

open space an recreational areas. It

would also build housing on the bluff

north of the airport, overlooking the

Village of Tamuning, and establish a

parks and recreational area there. In the

northeast corner of the base, there

would be a large open space and

recreational area around the existing

ironwood trees.

South of the northeast ends of the

runways and taxiways, along the

southeast boundary of the Air Station,

Alternative 2 would preserve a forest

with limestone soil. Along the

southwest boundary, from the

intersection of Routes 16, 10, and 8, to

the southwest ends of the runways and

taxiways, it would reserve land for open

space and recreation areas. Alternative 2

also proposed to establish a coconut

plantation in this area.

South of the proposed Mariner

Parkway, Alternative 2 would build an

educational and cultural center. This

center could include a high school, a

vocational training school, and

university research facilities. Adjacent

to the educational center, this

Alternative would build housing and

retail stores for students, faculty, and

workers. It would also develop

industrial activities here. Alternative 2

designated the Air Station’s chapel and

religious center and two acres located in

the educational and cultural area for use

by homeless assistance providers.

Navy analyzed a third ‘‘action’’

alternative, described in the FEIS as

Alternative 3, the Airport/Housing/

Community Alternative. Alternative 3

proposed expanding the airport and

building extensive roadway

improvements similar to those proposed

by the Preferred Alternative. In

Alternative 3, however, there would be

less airport-related development and

fewer industrial and commercial

activities than proposed in the Preferred

Alternative. Instead, this Alternative

would emphasize housing and parks

and recreational areas and would

provide educational and cultural

facilities.

Alternative 3 would expand the

airport’s operations by extending both

runways and by building two new

taxiways. This Alternative would also

build a new air traffic control tower, a

cargo terminal, a general aviation

terminal and service center, aircraft

maintenance facilities, and training

facilities. It would reserve land for

future expansion of the passenger

terminal, additional flight kitchens, and

aviation businesses such as an express

package and cargo hub.

Alternative 3 proposed to build

several new roadways and to expand

other roadways similar to those

proposed by the Preferred Alternative.

This Alternative would build the

Laderan Tiyan Parkway north of the

airport’s operations area to provide an

alternate access to the passenger

terminal from Route 8. This roadway

would also provide a link to a proposed

north-south bypass road that would

connect the Village of Tamuing with the

base and communities located south of

the base.

In the southern part of the base,

Alternative 3 would expand Mariner

Avenue and rename it Mariner Parkway.

Under Alternative 3, this roadway

would be a local access road rather than

a regional transportation link as

proposed in the Preferred Alternative.

The Parkway would provide access to

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices 33305

the airport-related activities to the north

as well as to the housing, educational

and cultural facilities, industrial and

commercial activities, and parks and

recreational areas to the south.

Alternative 3 would also expand Seagull

Avenue between Mariner Parkway and

the intersection of Routes 16, 10, and 8

to the south.

In the western part of the base, south

of the officers housing site, Alternative

3 would develop industrial and

commercial activities. On the bluff

north of the airport, overlooking the

Village of Tamuning, Alternative 3

would build cultural and educational

facilities such as an hotel school. It also

proposed to reserve part of the bluff for

open space and recreational areas.

South of the airport operations area,

Alternative 3 would preserve a forest

with limestone soil on the east side and

establish a coconut plantation on the

west side. Between the forest and the

coconut plantation, on each side of

Mariner Parkway, this Alternative

would build industrial and commercial

facilities for airport-related activities. It

would designate the Air Station’s chapel

and religious center and two acres

located in this area for use by homeless

assistance providers. South of Mariner

Parkway, it would also build singlefamily and multi-family housing,

community facilities, a new high school,

and a town center with retail stores for

the Barrigada community.

Navy analyzed a fourth ‘‘action’’

alternative, described in the FEIS as

Alternative 4, the Airport/Requestor

Alternative. This Alternative

incorporated requests made during the

public scoping process that were not

included in the Komitea’s three reuse

proposals. Alternative 4 proposed

expanding the airport and building new

roads similar to those proposed in the

Preferred Alternative. In Alternative 4,

however, there would be less airportrelated development and fewer

industrial and commercial activities

than proposed in the Preferred

Alternative. Instead, this Alternative

would emphasize government and

business activities and parks and

recreational areas and would provide

educational and cultural facilities and

housing.

Alternative 4 would expand the

airport’s operations by extending both

runways and by building two new

taxiways. This Alternative would also

build a new air traffic control tower, a

cargo terminal, a general aviation

terminal and service center, aircraft

maintenance facilities, and training

facilities. It would reserve land for

future expansion of the passenger

terminal, additional flight kitchens, and

aviation businesses such as an express

package and cargo hub.

Alternative 4 proposed to build

several new roadways and to expand

other roadways similar to those

proposed by the Preferred Alternative.

This Alternative would build the

Laderan Tiyan Parkway north of the

airport’s operations area to provide an

alternate access to the passenger

terminal from Route 8. This roadway

would also provide a link to a proposed

north-south bypass road that would

connect the Village of Tamuning with

the base and communities located south

of the base.

In the southern part of the base,

Alternative 4 would expand Mariner

Avenue and rename it Mariner Parkway.

Under Alternative 4, this roadway

would be a local access road rather than

a regional transportation link as

proposed in the Preferred Alternative.

The Parkway would provide access to

the airport-related and government and

business activities to the north as well

as to the government and business

activities, educational and cultural

facilities, housing, industrial and

commercial activities, and parks and

recreational areas to the south.

Alternative 4 would also expand Seagull

Avenue between Mariner Parkway and

the intersection of Routes 16, 10, and 8

to the south.

Alternative 4 proposed to develop

about 260 acres located north and south

of the runways and taxiways for airportrelated commercial activities. This

Alternative would reserve land for open

space and recreational areas in three

locations: south of the officers housing

site; on the bluff north of the airport

overlooking the Village of Tamuning;

and in the northeast part of the base.

Additionally, Alternative 4 would build

government and private offices on part

of the bluff. Educational and cultural

facilities would also be built in this

area.

In the southern part of the base, on

either side of Mariner Parkway,

Alternative 4 would develop facilities

for government and private offices and

retail stores. This Alternative would use

the existing barracks in this area for

housing. South of the proposed Mariner

Parkway, Alternative 4 would develop

educational and cultural facilities and

reserve land for parks and recreational

areas. It also designated the Air Station’s

chapel and religious center and two

acres located in the educational and

cultural area for use by homeless

assistance providers.

Environmental Impacts

Navy analyzed the direct, indirect,

and cumulative impacts of the disposal

and reuse of this surplus Federal

property. The FEIS addressed the

impacts of the Preferred Alternative, the

Airport/Education/Heritage Alternative,

the Airport/Housing/Community

Alternative, the Airport/Requestor

Alternative, and the ‘‘No Action’’

Alternative for each alternative’s effects

on soils, drainage, water quality,

terrestrial resources, noise, land use

compatibility, roads and traffic,

infrastructure, air quality,

socioeconomics, public services,

cultural resources, and environmental

contamination. This Record Of Decision

focuses on the impacts that would likely

result from implementation of the Reuse

Plan, identified in the FEIS as the

Preferred Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on soils. The

requirements that would be imposed by

the Guam Environmental Protection

Agency would minimize soil erosion

resulting from new construction. The

potential for contaminating soil during

redevelopment would be minimized by

complying with regulatory

requirements, Best Management

Practices (BMP), and spill prevention

plans. The base does not lie within a

floodplain zone.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on stormwater

runoff and drainage. While the Preferred

Alternative would increase the amount

of stormwater runoff by 43 percent as a

result of the increase in impervious

surfaces, runoff will be managed in

accordance with Federal and local

regulatory requirements, such as the use

of ponding basins that would collect

and hold runoff during storms. There is

sufficient open space available to

accommodate the ponding basins.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on the quality

of groundwater. The potential for future

groundwater contamination would be

minimized by complying with

regulatory requirements, BMP’s, and

spill prevention plans.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on terrestrial

resources. Navy held informal

consultations with the United States

Fish and Wildlife Service pursuant to

Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act

of 1973, 16 U.S.C § 1536 (1994). In a

letter dated November 8, 1999, the Fish

And Wildlife Service concurred with

Navy’s determination that the disposal

and reuse of NAS Agana is not likely to

adversely affect the Federally-listed

endangered Mariana common moorhen

(Gallinula chloropus guami). The

Service’s concurrence was based upon

Navy’s assurance that Navy will erect a

fence around a one-acre freshwater

33306 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

marsh and its upland buffer in the

southwestern part of the base and will

include a restrictive covenant in the

deed requiring maintenance of the

upland buffer area around this marsh. In

an earlier site visit on September 23,

1999, Navy, the Fish And Wildlife

Service, the United States Army Corps

of Engineers, the Guam Environmental

Protection Agency, the Guam Division

of Aquatic and Wildlife Resources, and

the Guam Economic Development

Authority agreed to incorporate the

requirement for a fenced buffer area

around this marsh in a restrictive

covenant.

The Preferred Alternative would have

a significant noise impact on certain

residents in Agana Heights and on the

Mongmong, Toto, and Maite villages

located southwest of the base.

Notwithstanding the increase in

proposed commercial aviation

operations, the exposure to noise from

aircraft would be less than when Navy

operated military jet aircraft at the base.

However, while the substantial

reduction in military jet aircraft

operations and the introduction of

quieter Stage III commercial aircraft

would reduce the noise impact, this

impact would still exceed the Federal

standards for residential exposure to

noise in those areas. The Village of

Dededo northeast of the airfield would

not experience a residential noise

impact in excess of Federal standards.

The Preferred Alternative did not

propose to build any new residential

areas.

The nature and extent of mitigation

measures to address the noise impacts

would be determined in accordance

with the Federal Airport Noise

Compatibility Planning Regulation set

forth at 14 CFR Part 150. Guam’s

International Airport Authority has

received funding from the FAA to

proceed with a noise compatibility

study that will identify measures to

reduce noise levels.

Noise generated by industrial and

commercial activities and on roadways

could increase compared with preclosure levels, but this increase is not

expected to be substantial. Additionally,

noise attenuation treatments can be

applied so that noise levels are

compatible with adjacent land use. To

comply with Guam’s environmental

regulations, it may be necessary for the

acquiring entities to conduct

environmental assessments of proposed

projects so that project planning

incorporates appropriate mitigation for

noise impacts.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on land use

compatibility. The land uses proposed

for NAS Agana would be generally

compatible with each other and with

existing land uses in the adjacent areas.

The view of the bluff north of the airport

from the Village of Tamuning below

could change as a result of building the

north-south bypass road and other

structures on the bluff. This visual

impact would be minimized by

selecting a road alignment that requires

the least amount of excavation and by

imposing building height and setback

limits along the bluff.

The Preferred Alternative would have

significant impacts on traffic. By the

year 2015, this Alternative would

generate about 9,000 peak hour trips

compared with the 1,358 peak hour

trips that were experienced when the

base was an active Air Station.

The proposed Laderan Tiyan Parkway

would reduce the amount of traffic

using Route 1, because it would provide

an alternate access route to the

passenger terminal at the airport. The

proposed north-south bypass road

connecting Route 30 and Route 8 would

also reduce the amount of traffic using

Route 1, because it would provide direct

access to the Village of Tamuning and

to Tumon Bay from the communities

located south of the Air Station. The

proposed Mariner Parkway would take

some traffic from Routes 8 and 16, by

providing an alternate route between the

villages of Dededo and Cabras.

Notwithstanding the development of

these new roads, the projected level of

traffic would still generate substantial

delays at nearly all of the intersections

along Routes 1, 8, and 16. However,

under the ‘‘No Action’’ Alternative,

traffic delays at the intersections along

Route 1 would be greater than those

generated by the Preferred Alternative,

because neither the proposed Laderan

Tiyan Parkway nor the north-south

bypass road would be built.

The Preferred Alternative would have

significant impacts on potable water

pressure, wastewater treatment capacity,

and the demand for electricity. This

Alternative would also have a

significant cumulative impact on solid

waste.

While the supply of potable water is

greater than the demand that would be

generated by the Preferred Alternative,

the 10-inch (diameter) water lines on

the base do not maintain sufficient

water pressure to provide adequate fire

protection during peak periods of water

use. Consequently, it would be

necessary to install additional water

lines or replace the 10-inch water lines.

The Government of Guam’s Agana

Wastewater Treatment Plant does not

have any excess capacity that could be

used to treat the additional wastewater

that would be generated under the

Preferred Alternative. However, there is

adequate excess capacity to treat

wastewater at Guam’s Northern District

Wastewater Treatment Plant.

Consequently, it would be necessary to

redirect wastewater from the Agana

Plant to the Northern District Plant.

Additionally, sections of major sewer

lines on the base do not have sufficient

capacity to support the proposed

redevelopment; thus, it would be

necessary to replace those sewer lines.

There is not enough reserve

generating capacity on Guam to supply

the proposed redevelopment with

sufficient electricity. The

redevelopment’s projected annual

consumption of electricity would

exceed the Air Station’s annual

consumption of electricity and would

also exceed the available excess

generating capacity on the island. As a

result, implementation of the Preferred

Alternative would require the

development of additional facilities to

generate and transmit electricity. In

addition, it would be necessary to

rebuild the electrical distribution

infrastructure at NAS Agana to meet the

increased demand for electricity.

The Preferred Alternative assumed

that the new landfill at Guatali would

replace the Ordot Landfill, which has no

excess capacity and will close. Solid

waste generated by the Preferred

Alternative and other planned

developments on the island would

reduce the projected life of the new

landfill. The acquiring entities,

however, could take actions

recommended by Guam’s Integrated

Solid Waste Management Plan such as

the reuse, recovery, and recycling of

solid waste that would reduce the

cumulative impact to a less than

significant level.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on air quality.

Compliance with the regulatory

requirements that control emissions

such as the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.

7401–7671q (1994), and Guam’s Air

Pollution Control Standards and

Regulations, Guam Public Law 24–322

(1998), would prevent significant

impacts from stationary sources. If the

roadway improvements described in the

Reuse Plan were implemented, there

would not be a significant regional or

local impact on air quality from mobile

sources. There would not be a

significant impact on air quality from

aircraft operations as a result of

expanding the airport. However, further

analysis by the Guam International

Airport Authority would be required to

ensure that the proposed increase in

airport operations after expansion does

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices 33307

not exceed National Ambient Air

Quality Standards.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have any adverse impacts on

socioeconomic. It would create bout

4,500 jobs that would generate a payroll

of about $20 million per year. These

jobs would constitute only about 10% of

the new jobs to be generated on Guam

over the 20-year development period.

Because the total projected job growth

on Guam would exceed the projected

population growth, it would be

necessary to bring people to Guam to fill

about 25% of the new jobs that would

be created. This impact would be spread

out over the 20-year development

period. Thus, any social effects arising

out of the migration of workers would

be minimized. There would be

sufficient time for the Government of

Guam and the business community to

develop training programs and

employee the business community to

develop training programs and

employee support services and to

ensure that an adequate work force is

available when needed.

The Preferred Alternative would have

a significant impact on Guam’s police

and fire protection services. The

establishment of new businesses and the

development of regional roadways

associated with redevelopment of the

Air Station would place substantial

demands on the police and fire

departments. It would be necessary to

increase the police and fire department.

It would be necessary to increase the

police and fire protection budgets by

about 20 to 30 percent to satisfy these

demands. The Preferred Alternative

would not have a significant impact on

Guam’s health care services.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on cultural

resources. Pursuant to Section 106 of

the National Historic Preservation Act of

1966, U.S.C. 470f (1994), Navy

conducted a cultural resource

assessment and determined that one

archaeological site, Site 1562–T18, is

eligible for listing on the National

Register of Historic Places. This site is

believed to be a temporary occupation

site from the early latte period, an

historical period for the Mariana Islands

between 1200 A.D. and 1700 A.D., prior

to European contact. Radiocarbon dating

and ceramic analysis establish this site

as one of the oldest sites identified on

the northern plateau of Guam.

Navy will include protective deed

covenants in the conveyance documents

to ensure protection and preservation of

this archaeological site during

redevelopment. In a letter dated May 24,

1999, the Guam Historic Preservation

Officer concurred with Navy’s

determination that there would not be

any adverse effect arising out of disposal

and reuse of the Air Station if this

archaeological site was protected by a

deed covenant. In a letter dated July 8,

1999, the Advisory Council on Historic

Preservation also concurred with Navy’s

determination.

The Preferred Alternative would not

have a significant impact on the

environment arising out of the use of

petroleum products or the use or

generation of hazardous substances by

the acquiring entities. Hazardous

materials used and hazardous wastes

generated by the Reuse Plan will be

managed in accordance with Federal

and local laws and regulations.

Implementation of the Preferred

Alternative would not have any impact

on existing environmental

contamination at the Air Station. Navy

will inform future property owners

about the environmental condition of

the property and may, when

appropriate, include restrictions,

notifications, or covenants in deeds to

ensure the protection of human health

and the environment in light of the

intended use of the property.

Executive Order 12898, Federal

Actions to Address Environmental

Justice in Minority Populations and

Low-Income Populations, 3 CFR 859

(1995), requires that Navy determine

whether any low income and minority

populations will experience

disproportionately high and adverse

human health or environmental effects

from the proposed action. Navy

analyzed the impacts on low income

and minority populations pursuant to

Executive Order 12898. The FEIS

addressed the potential environmental,

social, and economic impacts associated

with the disposal of NAS Agana and

subsequent reuse of the property under

the various proposed alternatives.

Minority and low income populations

residing within the region will not be

disproportionately affected.

Navy also analyzed the impacts on

children pursuant to Executive Order

13045, Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks, 3 CFR 198 (1998). Under the

Preferred Alternative, there would not

be any large concentration of children,

because the Reuse Plan emphasizes

aviation, industrial, and commercial

redevelopment. The Preferred

Alternative would not impose any

disproportionate environmental health

or safety risks on children.

Mitigation

Implementation of Navy’s decision to

dispose of NAS Agana does not require

Navy to implement any mitigation

measures. Navy will take certain actions

to implement existing agreements and

regulations. These actions were treated

in the FEIS as agreements or regulatory

requirements rather than as mitigation.

Navy will erect a fence around the oneacre freshwater marsh and upland buffer

in the southwestern part of the Air

Station.

The FEIS identified and discussed

those actions that will be necessary to

mitigate the impacts associated with the

reuse and redevelopment of NAS Agana.

The acquiring entities, under the

direction of Federal and local agencies

with regulatory authority over protected

resources, will be responsible for

implementing necessary mitigation

measures.

Comments Received on the Final EIS

Navy did not receive any comments

on the Final EIS.

Regulations Governing the Disposal

Decision

Since the proposed action

contemplates a disposal under the

Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Act of 1990 (DBCRA), Public Law 101–

510, 10 U.S.C. § 2687 note (1994),

Navy’s decision was based upon the

environmental analysis in the FEIS and

application of the standards set forth in

the DBCRA, the Federal Property

Management Regulations (FPMR), 41

CFR Part 101–47, and the Department of

Defense Rule on Revitalizing Base

Closure Communities and Community

Assistance (DoD Rule), 32 CFR Parts 174

and 175.

Section 101–47.303–1 of the FPMR

requires that disposals of Federal

property benefit the Federal

Government and constitute the ‘‘highest

and best use’’ of the property. Section

101–47.4909 of the FPMR defines the

‘‘highers and best use’’ as the use to

which a property can be put that

produces the highest monetary return

from the property, promotes its

maximum value, or serves a public or

institutional purpose. The ‘‘highest and

best use’’ determination must be based

upon the property’s economic potential,

qualitative values inherent in the

property, and utilization factors

affecting land use such a zoning,

physical characteristics, other private

and public uses in the vicinity,

neighboring improvements, utility

services, access, road, location, and

environmental and historic

considerations.

After Federal property has been

conveyed to non-Federal entities, the

property is subject to local land use

regulations, including zoning and

subdivision regulations, and building

33308 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 100 / Tuesday, May 23, 2000 / Notices

codes. Unless expressly authorized by

statute, the disposing Federal agency

cannot restrict the future use of surplus

Government property. As as result, the

local community exercises substantial

control over future use of the property.

For this reason, local land use plans and

zoning affect determination of the

‘‘highest and best use’’ of surplus

Government property.

The DBCRA directed the

Administrator of the General Services

Administration (GSA) to delegate to the

Secretary of Defense authority to

transfer and dispose of base closure

property. Section 2905(b) of the DBCRA

directs the Secretary of Defense to

exercise this authority in accordance

with GSA’s property disposal

regulations, set forth in Part 101–47 of

the FPMR. By letter dated December 20,

1991, the Secretary of Defense delegated

the authority to transfer and dispose of

base closure property closed under the

DBCRA to the Secretaries of the Military

Departments. Under this delegation of

authority, the Secretary of Navy must

follow FPMR procedures for screening

and disposing of real property when

implementing base closures. Only when

Congress has expressly provided

additional authority for disposing of

base closure property, e.g., the economic

development conveyance authority

established in 1993 by Section 2905(b)

of the DBCRA, may Navy apply disposal

procedure other that those in the FPMR.

In Section 2901 of the National

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal

Year 1994, Public Law 103–160,

Congress recognized the economic

hardship occasioned by base closures,

the Federal interest in facilitating

economic recovery of base closure

communities, and the need to identify

and implement reuse and

redevelopment of property closing

installations. In Section 2903(c) or

Public Law 103–160, Congress directed

the Military Departments to consider

each base closure community’s

economic needs and priorities in this

property disposal process. Under

Section 2905(b)(2)(E) of the DBCRA

must consult with local communities

before disposes of base closure property

and must consider local plans

developed for reuse and redevelopment

of the surplus Federal property.

The Department of Defense’s goal, as

set forth in Section 174.4 of the DoD

Rule, is to help base closure

communities achieve rapid economic

recovery through expeditious reuse and

redevelopment of the assets at closing

bases, taking into consideration local

market conditions and locally

developed reuse plans. Thus, the

Department has adopted a consultative

approach with each community to

ensure that property disposal decisions

consider the LRA’s reuse plan and

encourage job creation. As a part of this

cooperative approach, the base closure

community’s interests, as reflected in its

zoning for the area, play a significant

role in determining the range of

alternatives considered in the

environmental analysis for property

disposal. Furthermore, Section

175.(d)(3) of the DoD Rule provides that

the LRA’s plan generally will be used as

the basis for the proposed disposal

action.

The Federal Property and

Administrative Services Act of 1949, 40

U.S.C. § 484 (1994), as implemented by

the FPMR, identifies several

mechanisms for disposing of surplus

base closure property: by public benefit

conveyance (FPMR Sec. 101–47.303–2);

by negotiated sale (FPMR Sec. 10–

47.304–9) and by competitive sale

(FPMR 101–47.304–7). Additionally, in

Section 2905(b)(4), the DBCRA

established economic development

conveyances as a means of disposing of

surplus base closure property.

The selection of any particular

method of conveyance merely

implements the Federal agency’s

decision to dispose of the property.

Decisions concerning whether to

undertake a public benefit conveyance

or an economic development

conveyance, or to sell property by

negotiation or by competitive bid, are

left to the Federal agency’s discretion.

Selecting a method of disposal

implicates a broad range of factors and

rests solely within the Secretary of the

Navy’s discretion.

Conclusion

The LRA’s proposed reuse of NAS

Agana, reflected in the Reuse Plan, is

consistent with the prescriptions of the

FPMR and Section 174.4 of the DoD

Rule. The LRA has determined in its

Reuse Plan that the property should be

used for various purposes including

commercial aviation, industrial,

commercial, and parks and recreational

activities. The property’s location,

physical characteristics, existing

infrastructure, and use as a civilian

airport make it appropriate for the

proposed uses.

The proposed reuse of NAS Agana

responds to local economic conditions,

promotes rapid economic recovery from

the impact of the Air Station’s closure,

and is consistent with President

Clinton’s Five-Part Plan for Revitalizing

Base Closure Communities, which

emphasizes local economic

redevelopment and creation of new jobs

as the means to revitalize these

communities, 32 C.F.R. Parts 174 and

175, 59 Fed. Reg. 16,123 (1994).

Although the ‘‘No Action’’ Alternative

has less potential for causing adverse

environmental impacts, this Alternative

would not take advantage of the

property’s location, physical

characteristics, and infrastructure.

Additional, it would not foster local

economic redevelopment of the base

and expansion of Guam’s International

Airport.

The acquiring entities, under the

direction of Federal and local agencies

with regulatory authority over protected

resources, will be responsible for

adopting practicable means to avoid or

minimize environmental harm that may

result from implementing the Reuse

Plan.

Accordingly, Navy will dispose of

Naval Air Station Agana in a manner

that is consistent with the Government

of Guam’s Reuse Plan for the property.

Dated: May 9, 2000.

William J. Cassidy, Jr.,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy

(Conversion and Redevelopment).

[FR Doc. 00–12964 Filed 5–22–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–M

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Department of Education.

SUMMARY: The Leader, Information

Management Group, Office of the Chief

Information Officer invites comments

on the submission for OMB review as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on or before June 22,

2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attention: Danny Werfel, Desk Officer,

Department of Education, Office of

Management and Budget, 725 17th

Street, NW, Room 10235, New

Executive Office Building, Washington,

DC 20503 or should be electronically

mailed to the internet address

DWERFEL@OMB.EOP.GOV.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires

that the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) provide interested

Federal agencies and the public an early

opportunity to comment on information

collection requests. OMB may amend or

waive the requirement for public