Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Notices 44109

information from contractors and

subcontractors regarding restrictions on

the Government’s right to use or

disclose technical data and computer

software. The information is used to

identify and protect such data or

computer software from unauthorized

release or disclosure; to facilitate public

use of technical data and computer

software developed at Government

expense; and to enable contracting

officers to determine whether the

Government has otherwise paid to

obtain rights in the technical data or

computer software.

Affected Public: Business or OtherFor-Profit; Not-For-Profit Institutions.

Frequency: On Occasion.

Respondent’s Obligation: Required to

Obtain or Retain Benefits.

OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Peter N. Weiss.

Written comments and

recommendations on the proposed

information collection should be sent to

Mr. Weiss at the Office of Management

and Budget, Desk Officer for DoD, Room

10236, New Executive Office Building,

Washington, DC 20503.

DoD Clearance Officer: Mr. Robert

Cushing.

Written requests for copies of the

information collection proposal should

be sent to Mr. Cushing, WHS/DIOR,

1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite

1204, Arlington, VA 22202–4302.

Dated: August 14, 1997.

Patricia L. Toppings,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison

Officer, Department of Defense.

[FR Doc. 97–21972 Filed 8–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

Record of Decision (ROD) for the

Disposal of Kelly Air Force Base (AFB),

Texas

On July 24, 1997, the Air Force signed

the ROD for the Disposal of Kelly AFB.

The decisions included in this ROD

have been made in consideration of, but

not limited to, the information

contained in the Final Environmental

Impact Statement (FEIS) filed with the

United States Environmental Protection

Agency (U.S. EPA) and made available

to the public on May 30, 1997.

Kelly AFB will close on or before July

13, 2001, pursuant to the Defense Base

Closure and Realignment Act, Pub. L.

101–510, (10 U.S.C. § 2687 note), and

recommendations of the Secretary of

Defense’s Commission on Base

Realignment and Closure. This ROD

documents the Kelly AFB disposal

decisions.

Approximately 50% of Kelly AFB and

all associated easements consisting of

the runway and all property west of the

runway will be transferred to Lackland

AFB for continued Air Force needs.

Approximately 1876 acres fee will be

conveyed by an Economic Development

Conveyance (EDC) to the Greater Kelly

Development Corporation (GKDC). The

remaining 3 acres will be conveyed to

the City of San Antonio, for use by

representatives of the homeless.

All personal property identified by

the GKDC as suitable and necessary to

implement the Master Plan will be

included in the EDC, except for that

which is transferred to representatives

of the homeless. Critical, high value,

limited assets that are only useable in

connection with a special weapon

system may be included in the EDC, but

any decision to transfer will be deferred

until completion of public/private

competition for the Kelly AFB

maintenance workload associated with

this personal property.

A portion of the property in Parcel A

contains two buildings and personal

property that are under an order of the

United States District Court for the

District of Columbia, dated July 22,

1997, prohibiting the sale, transfer, or in

any manner the disposition of those

assets as part of the EDC unless and

until the Order is dissolved or expires

or a subsequent order is issued.

The implementation of the closure

and reuse action and associated

mitigation measures will proceed with

minimal adverse impact to the

environment. This action conforms with

applicable Federal, State and local

statutes and regulations and all

reasonable and practical efforts have

been incorporated to minimize harm to

the local public and environment.

Any questions regarding this matter

should be directed to Mr. Charles R.

Hatch, Program Manager, Division C.

Correspondence should be sent to

AFBCA, Division C, 1700 N. Moore

Street, Suite 2300, Arlington, VA

22209–2809.

Barbara A. Carmichael,

Alternate Air Force Federal Register Liaison

Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–21847 Filed 8–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3910–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army

Environmental Assessment for

Promulgation of Revised Army

Regulation (AR) 200–4 ‘‘Cultural

Resources Management’’

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of Availability.

SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED

ACTION: The Department of the Army

has, consistent with the procedures

established by the National

Environmental Policy Act, the

regulations published by the Council on

Environmental Quality, and internal AR

200–2, ‘‘Environmental Effects of Army

Actions,’’ prepared an Environmental

Assessment (EA) to fully consider and

disclose the environmental impacts

associated with the proposal to adopt a

uniform Department of the Army

Regulation (AR), AR 200–4, ‘‘Cultural

Resources Management.’’ AR 200–4 is a

revision of AR 420–40, ‘‘Historic

Preservation,’’ dated 15 May 1984. Upon

adoption, AR 200–4 will supersede AR

420–40. The EA considered and

disclosed the environmental impacts

associated with alternatives to the

proposed action, including the ‘‘No

Action’’ alternative. The EA is hereby

incorporated by reference.

The Department of the Army

established and forwarded the proposed

action for the following purposes: (1) To

develop a uniform Department of the

Army policy for management of cultural

resources that ensures compliance with

all applicable legal requirements

including Federal statutes, regulations,

Executive Orders, Presidential

documents, and best management

practices applicable to cultural resource

management; (2) to provide a

comprehensive approach to cultural

resource management that goes beyond

the singular focus of AR 420–40,

‘‘Historic Preservation,’’ on management

of historic properties; and (3) to identify

the appropriate roles and

responsibilities of Army officials in the

cultural resource management process

at all levels of the Army.

The proposed action is necessary in

order to provide a uniform, up-to-date,

Department of the Army cultural

resource management policy for

distribution to and implementation in

the field. It is mandatory for the policy

adopted to address cultural resources

management on a comprehensive basis,

to provide clear direction and guidance

for compliance with all applicable legal

requirements across resources and to

eliminate the present ad hoc approach

to management of cultural resources.
44110 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 160 / Tuesday, August 19, 1997 / Notices

ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: The EA

considered, evaluated and assessed

three alternatives: (1) the ‘‘No Action’’

alternative (continue activities under

AR 420–40); (2) rescind AR 420–40 (no

policy for cultural resources

management); and (3) the proposed

action alternative which is adoption of

AR 200–4.

ALTERNATIVE CHOSEN: Consideration of

the alternatives analyzed in the EA

leads the Army to choose adoption of

AR 200–4. The ‘‘No Action’’ alternative

and the ‘‘Rescind AR 420–40’’

alternative do not meet the purpose and

need as expressed in both this

document and the EA. The ‘‘No Action’’

alternative would allow a continued ad

hoc approach to management of cultural

resources without a comprehensive

consideration of all cultural resources.

The ‘‘Rescind AR 420–40’’ alternative

would leave the Army with no policy

for management of cultural resources.

AR 200–4, on the other hand, provides

clear guidance and direction for

management of cultural resources on a

comprehensive basis. Management in

this manner will facilitate overall Army

compliance with applicable legal

requirements, and will otherwise

provide the agency with the ability to

act as a more responsible steward of the

cultural resources entrusted to its care.

ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: As

noted in the EA, the nature and scope

of the analysis was programmatic. This

analysis is directly related to the nature

of the decision being made. The

Department of the Army is choosing to

adopt AR 200–4, an internal agency

policy for management of cultural

resources. This decision alone is not

likely to result in any quantifiable,

concrete, on-the-ground impacts.

Rather, its effect will be felt as resource

managers develop site-specific cultural

resource management plans and

implement management activities

consistent with the direction and

guidance contained in AR 200–4. That

second level of planning and decision

making will involve additional

environmental review which considers

on-the-ground impacts. In addition,

while AR 200–4 formalizes a

comprehensive and uniform policy for

managing cultural resources and

eliminates the present ad hoc approach,

many of the management practices

presently applied in the field will

continue to be applied. The effect of

adoption and implementation of AR

200–4, therefore, should be beneficial

for Army cultural resources.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on a review of the

EA, and for the reasons stated

immediately above, it is not anticipated

that adoption of AR 200–4 will either

independently or cumulatively present

significant environmental impacts to the

quality of the human environment.

Further, based on the analysis in the EA,

the Army expects that adoption of AR

200–4 will result in beneficial impacts

on cultural resources.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Requests for

copies of the EA and questions

regarding the Finding of No Significant

Impact (FNSI) may be directed by mail

to the Commander, U.S. Army

Environmental Center, ATTN: SFIM–

AEC–PA (Mr. Tom Hankus), Aberdeen

Proving Ground, MD 21010–5401, or by

phone at (410) 671–1267. The Army also

solicits written comments on the EA

and FNSI.

COMMENTS: Such comments must be

submitted by mail to the above address

on or before September 18, 1997.

Dated: August 12, 1997.

Raymond J. Fatz,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army,

(Environment, Safety and Occupational

Health), OASA (I,L&E).

[FR Doc. 97–21844 Filed 8–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Corps of Engineers, Department of the

Army

Humboldt Bay Harbor, Recreation and

Conservation District’s Ordinance No.

15 Establishing General Tariff No. 1 for

the Humboldt Harbor and Bay

Deepening, California Project

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

DOD.

ACTION: Correction.

SUMMARY: In previous Federal Register

notice (Vol. 62, No. 124, pages 34697–

34702) Friday, June 27, 1997, make the

following correction: On Page 34702 in

column one, Section VI. (Designation of

Official and Setting Deadline for Receipt

of Comments Concerning Proposed

Harbor Usage Fee), ninth line, change

the date from August 20, 1997 to August

28, 1997. Per 33 U.S.C.

2236(a)(5)(A)(iii), at least a sixty day

public comment period is required from

the date of publication in the Federal

Register. Accordingly, the public

comment period on the proposed tariff

is extended to 4 p.m., PDT, August 28,

1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions regarding the General Tariff

may be directed to Mr. David Hull,

Chief Executive Officer, Humboldt Bay

Harbor, Recreation and Conservation

District (707) 443–0801.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: None.

Gregory D. Showalter,

Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 97–21967 Filed 8–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–19–M

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy

Community Redevelopment Authority

and Available Surplus Buildings and

Land at Military Installations Designed

for Closure: Naval Shipyard, Long

Beach, California

SUMMARY: This notice provides

information regarding the local

redevelopment authority that has been

established to plan the reuse of the

Naval Shipyard, Long Beach, California

and the surplus property that is located

at the base closure site.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1995,

the Naval Shipyard, Long Beach,

California, was designated for closure

pursuant to the Defense Base Closure

and Realignment Act of 1990, as

amended. Pursuant to this designation,

on September 28, 1995, land and

facilities at this installation were

declared excess to the Department of the

Navy and available for use by other

Department of Defense components and

other federal agencies. It is not

anticipated that any land or facilities

will be made available to such

components or other federal agencies.

Notice of Surplus Property

Pursuant to paragraph (7)(B) of

section 2905(b) of the Defense Base

Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, as

amended, the following information

regarding the redevelopment authority

and the surplus property at the Naval

Shipyard, Long Beach, California is

published in the Federal Register:

Redevelopment Authority

The redevelopment authority for the

Naval Shipyard, Long Beach, California,

for purposes of implementing the

provisions of the Defense Base Closure

and Realignment Act of 1990, as

amended, is the City of Long Beach. The

City has established a local community

advisory committee to provide

recommendations to the City concerning

the redevelopment of the shipyard. This

committee is known as the Shipyard

Reuse Advisory Committee. Day-to-day

operations of the local redevelopment

authority are handled by Mr. Gerald

Miller, 200 Pine Avenue, Suite 400,

Long Beach, CA 90802, telephone (310)

570–3853, facsimile (310) 570–3897.