Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Notices 27545 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army 

Preparation of the Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement 

(PEIS) for the Growth of the United 

States Army 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DOD 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The President of the United 

States has directed the growth of the 

United States Army. In an unpredictable 

and rapidly changing global security 

environment, this directive is designed 

to ensure the Nation has the ground 

forces necessary to meet its strategic 

security and defense needs. These 

needs, as outlined in the National 

Security Strategy, include the 

disruption of terrorist networks, the 

prevention of nuclear proliferation, the 

support of peace and regional stability, 

the denial of rogue Nation support to 

terrorist organizations, and the 

promotion and advancement of 

democratic forms of government. The 

President has determined that the 

implementation of these security goals 

in the 21st century will require 

increased numbers of U.S. Army forces 

to sustain the military operaitons 

required to support these objectives. 

The Army, therefore, intends to prepare 

a PEIS to analyze alternatives for 

executing the Presidentially directed 

growth required to support the defense 

and security missions of the Nation in 

the 21st century. 

The Presidential decision directs the 

Army to add 74,200 active and reserve 

component Soldiers to its total end 

strength. This growth includes the 

addition of six Brigade Combat Teams 

(BCTs) and the combat support (CS) and 

combat service support (CSS) units 

required to support them. In addition, 

the growth of the force will include 

‘‘right sizing’’ or rebalancing the Army 

force structure to add increaed numbers 

of high demand critical skills which 

have been identified as shortfalls. 

Military skills, such as military police, 

engineers, and explosive ordnance 

detachments, must be added to the force 

in greater numbers to meet the increased 

needs for these types of units in 

operational theaters abroad. Rebalancing 

of the Army’s force is needed to ensure 

the Army has the proper capabilities to 

sustain operations for promoting global 

and national security now and into the 

foreseeable future. 

In addition to this growth, the Army 

recognizes the need to continue with 

initiatives to restructure its forces to 

implement the standard modular unit 

configurations directed by the 

Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) in 

2001 and 2006. Modularity is a critical 

component of Army Transformation and 

the Army continues to implement the 

QDR directive to standardize its units 

and their force structure. This 

standardization of Army force structure 

will continue to improve management 

and generate increased operational 

efficiencies within the Army. Stationing 

actions supporting modularity will be 

evaluated and considered in 

conjunction with stationing actions 

required to support Army growth. 

The PEIS will assess the 

environmental capacity of the Army’s 

installations to accommodate different 

types and combinations of new units as 

part of the growth and restructuring. 

The PEIS will examine the potential 

environmental and socioeconomic 

impacts at installations resulting from 

various combinations of new unit 

stationing actions. These stationing 

actions could include additional CS or 

CSS units, the addition of different 

types of modular BCTs, or combinations 

of these actions at a given stationing 

location. Under the Army’s modularity 

initiative, which standardizes BCT force 

structure, there are three types of 

maneuver BCTs that will be discussed 

in the PEIS. These include the infantry 

BCT which consists of approximately 

3,500 Soldiers; the Stryker BCT which 

consists of approximately 4,000 

Soldiers; and the heavy BCT which 

consists of approximately 3,800 

Soldiers. Potential impacts resulting 

from stationing actions of new CS and 

CSS units and these maneuver BCTs 

will be discussed and assessed at 

installation locations that have potential 

to support the growth and restructuring 

of the Army. The PEIS will analyze the 

proposed action’s impacts upon the 

natural, cultural, and man-made 

environments at those stationing 

locations best able to meet the needs of 

the Army and its Soldiers and Families. 

The Army intends to analyze the 

following alternatives in the PEIS: (1) 

Grow and restructure the Army by 

permanently stationing new units at 

existing Army installations within the 

United States and retaining some units 

at overseas installations outside of the 

continental United States that were 

originally scheduled to return to the 

United States; (2) Grow and restructure 

the Army by permanently stationing 

units at existing stationing locations 

within the United States. As part of this 

alternative, overseas installations would 

be used to temporarily accommodate a 

portion of Army growth while 

permanent facilities were constructed at 

existing Army installations within the 

United States; and (3) Grow and 

restructure the Army by permanently 

stationing new units at new and existing 

Army stationing locations within the 

United States. This alternative would 

include the construction of permanent 

party facilities at locations where the 

Army owns land but does not currently 

station permanent party personnel. As 

part of this alternative, overseas 

installations would be used to 

temporarily accommodate a portion of 

Army growth while permanent facilities 

were constructed within the United 

States. 

In addition to the above alternatives, 

the no-action alternatives will be 

considered and used as a baseline for 

comparison of alternatives. The noaction alternative is to retain the U.S. 

Army at its current and strength and 

force structure. The no-action 

alternative includes those realignments 

and stationing actions directed by Base 

Realignment and Closure legislation in 

2005, Army Global Defense Posture 

Realignment, and Army Modular Forces 

initiatives. The no-action alternative 

serves as a baseline for the comparison 

only and is not a viable means for 

meeting the current and future strategic 

security and defense requirements of the 

Nation. 

Viable alternative stationing locations 

considered in this analysis for the 

growth of the Army are those 

installations that are best able to meet 

Army unit requirements for training 

ranges and maneuver space, housing 

and office space, maintenance and 

vehicle parking, and Soldier and Family 

quality of life (e.g., schools, gyms, 

medical facilities, reducing family 

disruption). The proposed action will 

require the Army to balance strategic, 

sustainment, and environmental 

considerations with evolving world 

conditions and threats to national 

defense and security. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Robert E. DiMichele, Public Affairs 

Officer, U.S. Army Environmental 

Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, 

MD 21010; phone (410) 436–2556. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The global 

security environment is turbulent, 

unpredictable, and rapidly changing. It 

has placed considerable demands on the 

Nation’s military, and highlighted the 

need for the Army to correct shortfalls 

in high demand skills while reassessing 

its force capability. No one has felt the 

impacts of the recent demands of the 

modern security environmental more 

than Soldiers and their Families. To 

meet the challenges of the wider range 

of security threats present in the 21st 

century the Army requires the growth 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
27546 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Notices 

and restructuring of its forces in order 

to sustain the broad range of operations 

required for national and global 

stability. 

The PEIS is being prepared to comply 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) and meet Army NEPA procedures, 

which are outlined in Environmental 

Analysis of Army Actions (32 CFR part 

651). These regulations require the 

Army to consider the environmental 

impacts of its proposed action and 

alternatives and to solicit the views of 

the public so it can make an informed 

final decision regarding how to proceed. 

Proposed alternatives to grow the 

Army could involve three primary 

action depending on the installation 

being analyzed. These actions include 

the construction of housing and quality 

of life facilities (i.e., schools, 

gymnasiums, hospitals), the 

construction of new training ranges and 

infrastructure, and changes in the 

intensity of use of maneuver land and 

firing ranges associated with the 

increased frequency of training events. 

Evaluations will include strategic 

military and national security 

considerations for new stationing 

actions at locations which, if selected, 

are capable of supporting the National 

Security Strategy (2006), the QDR 

(2006), National Military Strategy, and 

the Army Campaign Plan. These 

strategic guidance documents have been 

incorporated into the Army’s decisionmaking process. All of these individual 

components will be considered in the 

Army’s PEIS for growth of the force in 

order to ensure a range of reasonable 

alternatives are carried forward which 

support the Nation’s security 

requirements. 

Based on public scoping and the 

factors discussed above, the Army will 

refine its range of reasonable 

alternatives to the extent possible to 

accommodate both mission 

requirements and quality of life 

considerations. In reaching its decision, 

the Army will assess and consider 

public concerns. The PEIS compares the 

direct, indirect, and cumulative 

environmental effects that may result 

from stationing actions connected with 

initiatives to grow the Army. The 

primary environmental issues to be 

analyzed will include those identified 

as the result of the scoping process and 

installation-specific considerations. 

These issues may include impacts to 

soil, water and air quality, airspace 

conflicts, natural and cultural resources, 

land use compatibility, noise, 

socioeconomics, environmental justice, 

energy use, human health and safety 

considerations, and infrastructure and 

range/training requirements. 

Scoping and Public Comment: All 

interested members of the public, 

federally-recognized Indian Tribes, 

Native Alaskans, Native Hawaiian 

groups, federal, state, and local agencies 

are invited to participate in the scoping 

process for the preparation of the PEIS. 

Written comments identifying 

environmental issues, concerns and 

opportunities to be analyzed in the PEIS 

will be accepted for 30 days following 

publication of this Notice of Intent in 

the Federal Register. Comments may be 

sent to Mr. Robert E. DiMichele at the 

above address. 

Dated: May 11, 2007. 

Addison D. Davis, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army, 

(Environment, Safety, and Occupational 

Health). 

[FR Doc. 07–2405 Filed 5–15–07; 8:45am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Submission for OMB Review; 

Comment Request 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, 

Regulatory Information Management 

Services, Office of Management 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 15, 

2007. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be addressed to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Attention: Education Desk Officer, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street, NW., Room 10222, 

Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are 

encouraged to submit responses 

electronically by e-mail to 

oira_submission@omb.eop.gov or via fax 

to (202) 395–6974. Commenters should 

include the following subject line in 

their response ‘‘Comment: [insert OMB 

number], [insert abbreviated collection 

name, e.g., ‘‘Upward Bound 

Evaluation’’]. Persons submitting 

comments electronically should not 

submit paper copies. 

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 

consultation to the extent that public 

participation in the approval process 

would defeat the purpose of the 

information collection, violate State or 

Federal law, or substantially interfere 

with any agency’s ability to perform its 

statutory obligations. The IC Clearance 

Official, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of 

Management, publishes that notice 

containing proposed information 

collection requests prior to submission 

of these requests to OMB. Each 

proposed information collection, 

grouped by office, contains the 

following: (1) Type of review requested, 

e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or 

reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of 

the collection; (4) Description of the 

need for, and proposed use of, the 

information; (5) Respondents and 

frequency of collection; and (6) 

Reporting and/or Recordkeeping 

burden. OMB invites public comment. 

Dated: May 10, 2007. 

James Hyler, 

Acting Leader, Information Management Case 

Services Team, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of Management. 

Federal Student Aid 

Type of Review: Extension. 

Title: Pell Grant, ACG, and National 

SMART Reporting under the Common 

Origination and Disbursement (COD) 

System. 

Frequency: As needed. 

Affected Public: 

Not-for-profit institutions; Businesses or 

other for-profit; State, Local, or Tribal 

Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. 

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour 

Burden: 

Responses: 5,655,000. 

Burden Hours: 494,950. 

Abstract: The Federal Pell Grant, 

ACG, and National SMART Programs 

are student financial assistance 

programs authorized under the Higher 

Education Act of 1965 (HEA), as 

amended. These programs provide grant 

assistance to an eligible student 

attending an institution of higher 

education. The institution determines 

the student’s award and disburses 

program funds to the student on behalf 

of the Department (ED). To account for 

the funds disbursed, institutions report 

student payment information to ED 

electronically. COD is a simplified 

process for requesting, reporting, and 

reconciling Pell Grant, ACG, and 

National SMART funds. 

Requests for copies of the information 

collection submission for OMB review 

may be accessed from http:// 

edicsweb.ed.gov, by selecting the 

‘‘Browse Pending Collections’’ link and 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES