Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Notices 33983 

ADDRESSES: To obtain a copy of the FEIS 

contact the Fort Carson National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPAP) 

Coordinator, Directorate of 

Environmental Compliance and 

Management, 1638 Elwell Street, 

Building 6236, Fort Carson, Colorado 

80913–4000; e-mail: 

carsdecamnepa@conus.army.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fort 

Carson NEPA Coordinator at (719) 526–

4666 or fax (719) 526–1705. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Final 

Fort Carson Transformation EIS 

evaluates the environmental and 

socioeconomic effects of implementing 

three Army transformation programs at 

Fort Carson: BRAC 2005, Integrated 

Global Presence and Basing Strategy 

(also known as Global Defense Posture 

Realignment), and the Army Modular 

Force initiative. These programs are part 

of the overall Army restructuring and 

are needed to prepare the Army’s 

combat forces for deployment around 

the world. 

The Proposed Action evaluated in the 

Final Fort Carson Transformation EIS is 

the Army’s preferred alternative to 

implement the three transformational 

programs. The Proposed Action 

includes three primary components: (1) 

Changes in force structure resulting in a 

net gain of military units and personnel; 

(2) facility construction, renovation, and 

demolition; and (3) increased frequency 

of live-fire and maneuver training. The 

EIS also documents the compliance of 

the Proposed Action with the General 

Conformity Rule requirements of the 

Clean Air Act. In addition, the Final EIS 

evaluates the environmental effects of 

renewal of the current withdrawal and 

reservation of 3,133.02 acres of public 

land and 11,415.16 acres of federally 

owned minerals at Fort Carson (as 

required by Section 2908 of Public Law 

104–201). 

Under the Proposed Action 

alternative, the number of troops at Fort 

Carson will increase by approximately 

8,500 Soldiers. Military dependent, 

civilian, and contractor worker 

populations supported by Fort Carson 

also will increase. In total, Soldiers, 

their dependents, and support 

personnel will grow to approximately 

59,700 by 2011, an increase of 

approximately 21,300 persons (60 

percent) over the implementation 

period. 

The Army will construct 25 projects, 

primarily in the Cantonment area. In 

addition, facilities and infrastructure no 

longer needed to support the Proposed 

Action alternative will be demolished; 

facilities will be relocated to support 

new construction; and existing facilities 

and infrastructure will be renovated to 

support the new population and 

training activities. 

The Proposed Action alternative will 

provide for increased frequency of 

training for existing and new units 

stationed at Fort Carson. The 

installation’s downrange area will be 

used more frequently for individual and 

crew live fire, maneuver, and combined 

live fire and maneuver training. Fort 

Carson will continue to implement its 

existing land and environmental 

management programs to balance 

training requirements and land 

sustainability. Large area maneuver 

training for Fort Carson’s troops will 

continue to occur at the Pinon Canyon 

Maneuver Site, which is Fort Carson’s 

maneuver-training area located 

approximately 150 miles southeast of 

Fort Carson. 

The Final EIS also evaluated the No 

Action alternative, which would result 

in not implementing the Proposed 

Action troop restationing; construction, 

renovation, and demolition projections; 

and increased frequency of training. The 

No Action alternative is not feasible 

because restationing has been directed 

by BRAC 2005. It was included in the 

Final EIS, as required by the Council on 

Environmental Quality and the Army’s 

NEPA implementing regulations, to 

provide a benchmark by which to 

compare the magnitude of 

environmental effects of the Proposed 

Action. 

Permanent restationing alternatives, 

therefore, were not considered in the 

Final EIS in accordance with the BRAC 

Act of 1990, which does not permit 

decisions on restationing troops to 

alternate installations to be revisited in 

NEPA documents. Other alternatives 

considered by the Army, but determined 

not to be feasible, included training 

troops at other locales, acquiring 

additional land for training, or varying 

training schedules to account for 

operational deployments. These 

alternatives were determined not to be 

reasonable because they either did not 

meet the purpose and need of the action 

or unreasonably restricted the Army’s 

ability to react to changing conditions. 

The Proposed Action has the potential 

to result in adverse effects to land use, 

air quality, geology and soils, water 

resources, biological resources, cultural 

resources, transportation, utilities, and 

hazardous and toxic materials. It could 

also result in cumulative environmental 

effects. Beneficial effects of the 

Proposed Action will result for 

socioeconomic resources. With 

implementation of mitigation measures 

and best management practices, 

significant adverse environmental 

impacts will not occur. 

An electronic version of the Final EIS 

can be viewed or downloaded online at 

http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/brac/ 

nepa_eis_docs.htm. Copies can be 

requested from the Fort Carson NEPA 

Coordinator or viewed at local libraries. 

Dated: June 13, 2007. 

Addison D. Davis, IV 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army 

(Environmental, Safety and Occupational 

Health). 

[FR Doc. 07–3025 Filed 6–19–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army 

Notice of Availability (NOA) of the Final 

Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site (PCMS) 

Transformation Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIS) and Evaluation of 

Environmental Effects of Continued 

Land and Mineral Withdrawal Under 

Public Law 104–201 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, 

Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice of availability. 

SUMMARY: The Army announces the 

availability of the Final PCMS 

Transformation EIS evaluating the 

environmental effects of implementing 

restationing actions of the Base 

Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 

and other Army transformation 

programs at the PCMS training area in 

Las Animas County in southeastern 

Colorado. The Final EIS also documents 

the U.S. Army’s evaluation of 

environmental effects of withdrawal of 

public land and mineral rights under 

Public Law 104–201. 

DATES: The waiting period for the Final 

EIS will end 30 days after publication of 

an NOA in the Federal Register by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

ADDRESSES: To obtain a copy of the FEIS 

contact the PCMS National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

Coordinator, Directorate of 

Environmental Compliance and 

Management, 1638 Elwell Street, 

Building 6236, Fort Carson, CO 80913–

4000; e–mail: 

carsdecampcmsnepa&conus.army.mil 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

PCMS NEPA Coordinator at (719) 526–

0912 or fax (719) 526–17050. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Final 

PCMS Transformation EIS evaluates the 

environmental and socioeconomic 

effects of implementing three Army 

transformation programs at the Fort 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
33984 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 20, 2007 / Notices 

Carson: BRAC 2005; Integrated Global 

Presence and Basing Strategy (also 

known as Global Defense Posture 

Realignment); and the Army Modular 

Force initiative. These programs are part 

of the overall Army restructuring and 

are needed to prepare the Army’s 

combat forces for deployment around 

the world. 

The Proposed Action evaluated in the 

Final PCMS Transformation EIS is the 

Army’s preferred alternative to 

implement the three transformation 

programs. The Proposed Action 

includes: (1) Increased use of the PCMS 

training areas to provide training for 

approximately 8,500 realigned Active 

Component (AC) soldiers and additional 

Reserve Component (RC) soldiers 

assigned to, or otherwise under the 

control of, Fort Carson, and (2) 

construction of facilities in the 

cantonment and training areas. The 

Final EIS also evaluates the 

environmental effects of the current 

withdrawal and reservation of 2,517.12 

acres of public land and 130,139 acres 

of federally owned minerals within the 

PCMS borders (as required by Section 

2908 of Pub. L. 140–201. 

The Proposed Action will provide for 

increased frequency of training for 

existing and new units stationed at, or 

otherwise assigned to Fort Carson. 

Training and maneuver activities would 

be similar to the types of activities that 

presently occur on the PCMS. The 

increased training requirements of 

additional AC and RC units, however, 

will result in increased frequency of use 

of the training areas. The Army will 

continue to implement land and 

environmental management programs 

and practices to sustain its training 

lands for continued use. 

Support facilities will be constructed 

in the PCMS cantonment area, including 

a brigade support complex, medical 

facilities, storage facilities, minimum 

soldier support functions, a vehicle 

maintenance facility, motor pools and 

upgrade of roads and utilities. Similar to 

existing facilities at the PCMS, the 

cantonment facilities constructed under 

the Proposed Action alternative would 

be austere. No units will be permanently 

stationed at the PCMS; therefore, the 

PCMS will not support long-term 

soldier care and will have no role in 

providing permanent support for 

dependents, civilian contractors, or 

personnel other than minimal custodial 

staff. Outside the cantonment, the Army 

will construct and operate a live hand 

grenade range, ammunition holding 

area, protective equipment training 

facility, and communication facilities, 

and upgrade an existing small-arms 

range building. These projects are 

necessary to allow the PCMS to certify 

soldiers for operational deployments. 

The Final EIS also evaluated the No 

Action alternative in accordance with 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

and Army NEPA implementing 

regulations to provide a benchmark 

against which to compare the magnitude 

of environmental effects of the Proposed 

Action. Under the No Action 

alternative, no additional soldiers 

would train at the PCMS despite the 

stationing of significant numbers of 

additional soldiers at Fort Carson. The 

Proposed Action’s construction would 

not occur. Existing land and 

environmental management programs 

would continue. This alternative is not 

feasible because restationing at Fort 

Carson has been directed by BRAC 

2005, and soldiers assigned to Fort 

Carson need to be trained. 

Alternatives for the BRAC 

realignment at Fort Carson were not 

considered in the Final EIS in 

accordance with the BRAC Law, which 

exempts such alternatives from 

consideration. Other alternatives 

considered by the Army, but determined 

not to be feasible, included training 

troops at other locales, acquiring 

additional land for training, or varying 

training schedules to account for 

operational deployments. These 

alternatives were determined not to be 

reasonable because they did not meet 

the purpose and need of the action or 

unreasonably restricted the Army’s 

ability to react to changing conditions. 

Acquisition of additional land was also 

not considered reasonable, in part, 

because not enough information about it 

is currently known. 

The Proposed Action has the potential 

to result in adverse effects to land use, 

air quality, noise, geology and soils, 

water resources, biological resources, 

cultural resources, transportation, 

utilities, and hazardous and toxic 

substances. With implementation of 

mitigation measures and best 

management practices, none of the 

impacts would be significant. Minor 

temporary beneficial effects will occur 

for socioeconomic resources. 

The Proposed Action does not include 

expansion of the PCMS or land 

acquisition. The Proposed Action 

incorporates modifications to training 

requirements to best meet current 

training needs. The Army plans to 

prepare a separate EIS for PCMS land 

expansion once a proposed action and 

initial set of alternatives have been 

developed for that action. 

An electronic version of the Final EIS 

can be viewed or downloaded from the 

following Web site: http:// 

www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/brac/ 

nepa_eis_docs.htm. Copies can be 

requested from the PCMS NEPA 

Coordinator or viewed at local libraries. 

Dated: June 13, 2007. 

Addison D. Davis, IV, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army 

(Environment, Safety and Occupational 

Health). 

[FR Doc. 07–3026 Filed 6–19–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

Notice of Proposed Information 

Collection Requests 

AGENCY: Department of Education. 

SUMMARY: The Acting Leader, 

Information Management Case Services 

Team, Regulatory Information 

Management Services, Office of 

Management, invites comments on the 

proposed information collection 

requests as required by the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Interested persons are invited to 

submit comments on or before August 

20, 2007. 

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 Acting 

Leader, Information Management Case 

Services Team, 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. 

The Department of Education is 

especially interested in public comment 

addressing the following issues: (1) Is 

this collection necessary to the proper 

functions of the Department; (2) will 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES