Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 34711 

(3) Private organizations (including 

educational institutions) and 

individuals for authorized health 

research in the interest of the Federal 

government and the public. When not 

considered mandatory, patient 

identification data shall be eliminated 

from records used for research studies. 

(4) Officials and employees of the 

National Research Council in 

cooperative studies of the National 

History of Disease of prognosis and of 

epidemiology. Each study in which the 

records of members and former 

members of the Air Force are used must 

be approved by the Surgeon General of 

the Air Force. 

(5) Officials and employees of local 

and state governments and agencies in 

the performance of their official duties 

pursuant to the laws and regulations 

governing local control of 

communicable diseases, preventive 

medicine and safety programs, child 

abuse and other public health and 

welfare programs. 

(6) Authorized surveying bodies for 

professional certification and 

accreditations. 

(7) The individual’s organization or 

government agency as necessary when 

required by Federal statute, Executive 

Order or by treaty. 

The DoD ‘‘Blanket Routine Uses’’ 

published at the beginning of the Air 

Force’s compilation of record system 

notices apply to this system, except as 

stipulated in ‘Notes’ below. 

NOTE: Records of identity, diagnosis, 

prognosis or treatment of any client/patient, 

irrespective of whether or when he/she 

ceases to be a client/patient, maintained in 

connection with the performance of any 

alcohol/drug abuse treatment function 

conducted, requested, or directly or 

indirectly assisted by any department or 

agency of the United States, shall, except as 

provided herein, be confidential and be 

disclosed only for the purposes and under 

the circumstances expressly authorized in 42 

U.S.C. 290dd–2. These statutes take 

precedence over the Privacy Act of 1974 in 

regard to accessibility of such records except 

to the individual to whom the record 

pertains. The DoD ‘Blanket Routine Uses’ do 

not apply to these types of records. 

Note: This system of records contains 

individually identifiable health information. 

The DoD Health Information Privacy 

Regulation (DoD 6025.18–R) issued pursuant 

to the Health Insurance Portability and 

Accountability Act of 1996, applies to most 

such health information. DoD 6025.18–R may 

place additional procedural requirements on 

the uses and disclosures of such information 

beyond those found in the Privacy Act of 

1974 or mentioned in this system of records 

notice. 

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, 

RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND

DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

STORAGE: 

Paper records and electronic storage 

media. 

RETRIEVABILITY: 

By name, Social Security Number 

(SSN), or by Military Service Number. 

SAFEGUARDS: 

Records are accessed by commanders 

of medical centers, hospitals and 

clinics; by custodian of the record 

system; and by person(s) responsible for 

servicing the record system in 

performance of their official duties and 

by authorized personnel who are 

properly screened and cleared by needto-know. Records are stored in locked 

rooms and cabinets, and access to 

automated records is controlled and 

limited. 

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: 

While on active duty, the Health 

Record of a U.S. military member is 

maintained at the medical unit at which 

the person receives treatment. 

On separation or retirement, records 

are forwarded to the Department of 

Veterans Affairs, Records Management 

Center in St. Louis, MO or to the 

appropriate Veterans Affairs Regional 

Office if a Veterans Affairs claim has 

been filed. 

Records of non-active duty personnel 

are mailed to the next military medical 

facility at which treatment will be 

received or the records are retained at 

the treating facility until 2 years after 

the end of the calendar year of the last 

date of treatment and then retired to the 

National Personnel Record Center 

(NPRC) or other designated depository, 

such as, but not limited to, Medical 

Director, American Red Cross, 

Washington, DC 20006 for Red Cross 

personnel. At NPRC all inpatient, 

outpatient, and APV records are 

retained for 50 years after date of last 

document. 

In addition, military records sent to 

the DVA after 1 May 1994 are 

maintained for 50 years after date of last 

document. 

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: 

The Surgeon General, Headquarters 

United States Air Force. 

Chief of Air Force Reserve, 

Headquarters United States Air Force. 

Director of Air National Guard, 

Headquarters United States Air Force. 

Commanders of medical centers, 

hospitals, clinics, medical aid stations: 

Commander, Air Force Personnel 

Center. Official mailing addresses are 

published as an appendix to the Air 

Force’s compilation of system notices. 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Individuals seeking to determine 

whether this system of records contains 

information about themselves should 

address inquiries to or visit the system 

manager. Official mailing addresses are 

published as an appendix to the Air 

Force’s compilation of record systems 

notices. 

Requester must submit full name, 

Social Security Number (SSN) (or 

Military Service Number) through 

whom eligibility for care is established: 

date (at least year) treatment was 

provided; name of facility providing 

treatment; and whether treatment was as 

inpatient or outpatient. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

Individuals seeking access to records 

about themselves contained in this 

system should address requests to the 

system manager. Official mailing 

addresses are published as an appendix 

to the Air Force’s compilation of 

systems notices. 

Requester must submit full name, 

Social Security Number (SSN) (or 

Military Service Number) through 

whom eligibility for care is established: 

date (at least year) treatment was 

provided; name of facility providing 

treatment; and whether treatment was as 

inpatient or outpatient. 

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: 

The Air Force rules for accessing 

records and for contesting contents and 

appealing initial agency determinations 

are published in Air Force Instruction 

37–132; 32 CFR part 1806b; or may be 

obtained from the system manager. 

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: 

Physicians and other patient care 

providers such as nurses, dietitians, and 

physicians assistants. Administrative 

forms are completed by appropriate 

military or civilian officials. 

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: 

None. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14712 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army, Corps of 

Engineers 

ZRIN 0710–ZA04 

Suspension of Nationwide Permit 21 

AGENCY: United States Army Corps of 

Engineers, Department of Defense. 

ACTION: Notice. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
34712 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers (Corps) is immediately 

suspending Nationwide Permit (NWP) 

21, which authorizes discharges of 

dredged or fill material into waters of 

the United States for surface coal 

mining activities, in the Appalachian 

region of Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 

Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. 

This suspension is an interim measure 

to protect the aquatic environment 

while we evaluate modification of NWP 

21 or until NWP 21 expires in 2012. 

While the suspension is in effect, 

individuals who seek authorization for 

discharges of dredged or fill material 

into waters of the United States for 

surface coal mining projects in the 

affected region will have to obtain 

Department of the Army authorization 

under the Clean Water Act (CWA), 

through the individual permit process. 

Individual permits will result in 

increased public involvement in the 

permit evaluation process, including an 

opportunity for public comment on 

individual projects. NWP 21 activities 

that have been verified by District 

Engineers prior to the effective date of 

this suspension in the affected region 

continue to be authorized by that NWP 

until it expires on March 18, 2012, 

unless the District Engineer takes action 

to modify, suspend or revoke a 

particular NWP authorization on a caseby-case basis in accordance with the 

procedures at 33 CFR 330.5(d). District 

engineers may not modify previously 

issued NWP 21 verifications in this 

region to authorize additional 

discharges of dredged or fill material 

into waters of the United States; such 

discharges must be applied for and 

evaluated under the individual permit 

process. This suspension of NWP 21 

does not apply to other regions of the 

United States. The suspension will 

remain in effect until the Corps takes 

further action on NWP 21 or until NWP 

21 expires on March 18, 2012. The 

Corps will publish its decision 

concerning the proposed NWP 21 

modification in a future Federal 

Register notice. 

DATES: The effective date of the 

suspension of NWP 21 in the 

Appalachian region of Kentucky, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and 

West Virginia is June 18, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Attn: CECW–CO (Attn: Ms. 

Desiree Hann), 441 G Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20314–1000. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Desiree Hann, Headquarters, Operations 

and Regulatory Community of Practice, 

Washington, DC at 202–761–4560. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

On June 11, 2009, the Army, the U.S. 

Department of the Interior, and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

signed a Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) that addresses 

actions to strengthen the environmental 

review of Appalachian surface coal 

mining. A copy of this MOU is available 

at: http://www.usace.army.mil/CECW/ 

Pages/moumoas.aspx. The MOU 

includes an Interagency Action Plan 

(IAP) that was developed to reduce the 

adverse environmental impacts of 

surface coal mining activities in the 

Appalachian region of Kentucky, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and 

West Virginia, while ensuring that 

future mining remains consistent with 

the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the 

Surface Mining Control and 

Reclamation Act. One of the action 

items in the MOU was for the Corps to 

issue a public notice proposing to 

modify NWP 21, which authorizes 

discharges of dredged or fill material 

into waters of the United States for 

surface coal mining activities, to 

preclude its use to authorize the 

discharge of fill material into streams 

and other waters of the United States for 

surface coal mining activities in the 

Appalachian region of those six states, 

and to seek public comment on the 

proposed action. 

In accordance with the Corps 

regulations for implementing the 

Nationwide Permit Program, an 

interested party may request that the 

Corps consider changes to existing 

NWPs, including modification or 

revocation of any of those NWPs, at any 

time (see 33 CFR 330.5(b)(1)). Based 

upon the concerns expressed in the June 

11, 2009 MOU and its IAP about the 

potential for more than minimal 

individual and cumulative 

environmental effects of surface coal 

mining activities in certain states in 

Appalachia, the Corps agreed to seek 

public comment on a proposal to 

modify and suspend NWP 21 in the 

Appalachian region of Kentucky, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and 

West Virginia. That proposal was 

published in the July 15, 2009, issue of 

the Federal Register (75 FR 34311). All 

38 Corps districts also published local 

public notices to inform citizens of the 

proposal and their opportunity to 

provide comments or request public 

hearings. 

Impacts to waters of the United States 

that typically occur in association with 

surface coal mining activities include 

valley fill construction activities (e.g., 

the placement of rock and soil into 

headwater streams and their valleys), 

sediment pond construction, road 

construction, and slurry impoundment 

construction. Activities authorized by 

NWP 21 have impacted thousands of 

linear feet of ephemeral, intermittent, 

and perennial streams at numerous 

mine sites across the region. 

Compensatory mitigation has been 

required to ensure NWP 21 activities 

result in only minimal individual and 

cumulative adverse environmental 

effects. This mitigation must be 

successfully implemented to adequately 

offset the unavoidable impacts to waters 

authorized by NWP 21. Since 2002, the 

Corps has collected information with 

respect to the technical challenges 

associated with mitigation required for 

surface coal mine permits issued in 

Appalachia. Based on this information, 

and based on the 2008 mitigation rule, 

which emphasizes the importance of 

selecting mitigation sites based on their 

likelihood to be ecologically successful, 

we better understand how site selection 

and project design criteria could be 

improved to provide ecologically 

successful compensation to offset 

unavoidable losses of jurisdictional 

waters associated with surface coal 

mining projects. 

The July 15, 2009, proposal involved 

two actions concerning NWP 21. First, 

the Corps proposed to modify NWP 21 

to prohibit its use to authorize 

discharges of dredged or fill material 

into waters of the United States for 

surface coal mining activities in the 

Appalachian region of Kentucky, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and 

West Virginia until it expires on March 

18, 2012. Second, the Corps proposed to 

suspend NWP 21, and to require 

individual permit reviews in the 

Appalachian region of these states, until 

it completes the longer term process of 

deciding whether to modify NWP 21. 

The suspension of NWP 21 in these 

states would provide enhanced 

protection of aquatic resources while 

the Corps evaluates the proposal to 

modify NWP 21 by requiring surface 

coal mining projects in the affected 

region to obtain individual permits 

under the CWA, which would include 

increased public involvement in the 

permit review process, and an 

opportunity for public comment on 

individual projects. 

The Corps regulations governing the 

issuance, modification, suspension, or 

revocation of NWPs are found at 33 CFR 

330.5. As described in those regulations, 

suspension is a measure for halting the 

use of an NWP in the short-term in 

response to identified concerns about 

impacts to waters of the United States 

or other public interest review factors, 

while modification of an NWP is the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 34713 

long-term solution for addressing those 

concerns. The suspension will provide 

additional protection to the aquatic 

environment until the Corps makes its 

decision on the future of NWP 21. 

In accordance with the suspension 

and modification procedures provided 

in the NWP regulations, the Corps 

invited public comment, as well as an 

opportunity to request public hearings. 

The initial comment period was 

extended from August 14, 2009 to 

September 14, 2009 (see 74 FR 40815). 

In response to requests received from a 

number of interested parties, the Corps 

held public hearings in each of the six 

states proposed to be affected by the 

suspension and modification of NWP 

21. The public hearings were 

announced in the September 10, 2009, 

issue of the Federal Register (74 FR 

46582) and the comment period was 

extended again to October 26, 2009, to 

allow written comments to be submitted 

to supplement the hearing records. 

In response to the July 15, 2009, 

Federal Register notice, the Corps 

received approximately 23,000 written 

comments, of which approximately 950 

were non-form letters expressing 

support for the suspension of NWP 21 

and approximately 750 were non-form 

letters expressing opposition to the 

suspension of NWP 21. Comments may 

be viewed at http://www.regulations.gov 

under docket number COE–2009–0032. 

Duplicate comments are not posted in 

the regulations.gov docket. 

The public hearings were held in the 

following cities on October 13–15, 2009: 

Charleston, West Virginia; Cambridge, 

Ohio; Pikeville, Kentucky; Knoxville, 

Tennessee; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; 

and Big Stone Gap, Virginia. 

Approximately 400 people provided 

oral testimony at these public hearings, 

with approximately two-thirds of the 

testimony in opposition to the proposed 

action of suspension and one-third in 

support of the proposed suspension. 

In response to the Federal Register 

notice and oral testimony collected at 

the public hearings, approximately 

16,500 commenters expressed support 

for the proposed suspension and 6,500 

objected to the proposed suspension. 

Most of the commenters supporting the 

proposed suspension stated that NWP 

21 activities have resulted in more than 

minimal individual and cumulative 

adverse effects on the aquatic 

environment, and commented on other 

public interest review factors. 

Commenters opposing the proposed 

suspension said that the current rules 

governing implementation of NWP 21, 

including the pre-construction 

notification (PCN) requirement and 

stringent review process, provide the 

Corps with the authority to exercise 

discretionary authority and require an 

individual permit if the impacts on the 

aquatic environment will be more than 

minimal on an individual or cumulative 

basis, or if warranted by other public 

interest review factors. A more detailed 

summary of the comments is provided 

in the decision document for the 

suspension of NWP 21, which is 

available at the Corps Headquarters 

‘‘National Notices and Program 

Initiatives’’ page at: http:// 

www.usace.army.mil/CECW/Pages/ 

nnpi.aspx and the regulations.gov Web 

site under docket number COE–2009– 

0032. 

The same commenters also provided 

comments on the proposed modification 

of NWP 21, but those comments will be 

summarized and addressed in a separate 

document at a later time. 

Suspension of NWP 21 

To make a decision on the proposed 

suspension, the Corps considered 

comments, established decision criteria, 

and evaluated alternatives. This 

evaluation is provided in the decision 

memorandum referenced above. The 

Corps has concerns that continued use 

of this permit in the Appalachian region 

of these six states may result in more 

than minimal individual and 

cumulative adverse effects to aquatic 

resources. Under Section 404(e) of the 

CWA, only those activities that result in 

no more than minimal individual and 

cumulative adverse effects to the aquatic 

environment may be authorized under a 

NWP. Activities resulting in more than 

minimal individual and cumulative 

impacts to the aquatic environment 

cannot be authorized by NWPs or other 

general permits. We have determined 

that suspension of this permit in the 

Appalachian region of these six states is 

necessary to ensure that the Corps 

evaluates these complex activities, 

through the individual permit process, 

while it considers whether to modify 

NWP 21. 

NWP 21 is suspended in the following 

counties of Kentucky, Ohio, 

Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, and 

West Virginia: 

Kentucky: Adair, Bath, Bell, Boyd, 

Breathitt, Carter, Casey, Clark, Clay, 

Clinton, Cumberland, Edmonson, 

Elliott, Estill, Fleming, Floyd, Garrard, 

Green, Greenup, Harlan, Hart, Jackson, 

Johnson, Knott, Knox, Laurel, Lawrence, 

Lee, Leslie, Letcher, Lewis, Lincoln, 

McCreary, Madison, Magoffin, Martin, 

Menifee, Metcalfe, Monroe, 

Montgomery, Morgan, Nicholas, 

Owsley, Perry, Pike, Powell, Pulaski, 

Robertson, Rockcastle, Rowan, Russell, 

Wayne, Whitley, and Wolfe. 

Ohio: Adams, Ashtabula, Athens, 

Belmont, Brown, Carroll, Clermont, 

Columbiana, Coshocton, Gallia, 

Guernsey, Harrison, Highland, Hocking, 

Holmes, Jackson, Jefferson, Lawrence, 

Mahoning, Meigs, Monroe, Morgan, 

Muskingum, Noble, Perry, Pike, Ross, 

Scioto, Trumbull, Tuscarawas, Vinton, 

and Washington. 

Pennsylvania: Allegheny, Armstrong, 

Beaver, Bedford, Blair, Bradford, Butler, 

Cambria, Cameron, Carbon, Centre, 

Clarion, Clearfield, Clinton, Columbia, 

Crawford, Elk, Erie, Fayette, Forest, 

Fulton, Greene, Huntingdon, Indiana, 

Jefferson, Juniata, Lackawanna, 

Lawrence, Luzerne, Lycoming, McKean, 

Mercer, Mifflin, Monroe, Montour, 

Northumberland, Perry, Pike, Potter, 

Schuylkill, Snyder, Somerset, Sullivan, 

Susquehanna, Tioga, Union, Venango, 

Warren, Washington, Wayne, 

Westmoreland, and Wyoming. 

Tennessee: Anderson, Bledsoe, 

Blount, Bradley, Campbell, Cannon, 

Carter, Claiborne, Clay, Cocke, Coffee, 

Cumberland, De Kalb, Fentress, 

Franklin, Grainger, Greene, Grundy, 

Hamblen, Hamilton, Hancock, Hawkins, 

Jackson, Jefferson, Johnson, Knox, 

Lawrence, Lewis, Loudon, McMinn, 

Macon, Marion, Meigs, Monroe, 

Morgan, Overton, Pickett, Polk, Putnam, 

Rhea, Roane, Scott, Sequatchie, Sevier, 

Smith, Sullivan, Unicoi, Union, Van 

Buren, Warren, Washington, and White. 

Virginia: Alleghany, Bath, Bland, 

Botetourt, Buchanan, Carroll, Craig, 

Dickenson, Floyd, Giles, Grayson, 

Henry, Highland, Lee, Montgomery, 

Patrick, Pulaski, Rockbridge, Russell, 

Scott, Smyth, Tazewell, Washington, 

Wise/Norton, and Wythe. 

West Virginia: All counties. 

The above list of counties is based on 

the Appalachian Regional Commission’s 

list of counties in Appalachia. 

This suspension of NWP 21 goes into 

effect on June 18, 2010. The suspension 

temporarily prohibits the use of NWP 21 

to authorize discharges of dredged or fill 

material into waters of the United States 

for surface coal mining activities in 

these Appalachian counties, until the 

Corps makes a final determination on 

the proposed modification of NWP 21 or 

until NWP 21 expires in March 2012. In 

light of the suspension, project 

proponents for surface coal mining 

activities involving discharges of 

dredged or fill material into waters of 

the United States will have to obtain 

Department of the Army authorization 

under the Clean Water Act, through the 

individual permit process. 

Using the individual permit process 

for those activities will provide more 

information for the Corps to consider in 

making decisions on these permit 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
34714 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 117 / Friday, June 18, 2010 / Notices 

applications because of increased public 

involvement, such as the opportunity to 

comment on public notices for 

individual surface coal mining activities 

in Appalachia. This additional 

information could help improve not 

only the Corps analysis of potential 

individual and cumulative adverse 

effects of the proposed activity on the 

aquatic environment, but also on the 

potential adverse effects on other public 

interest review factors listed at 33 CFR 

320.4(a)(1), such as conservation, 

aesthetics, economics, land use, 

recreation, fish and wildlife values, 

energy needs, and general 

considerations of property ownership, 

to the extent that those public interest 

factors are relevant to waters of the 

United States subject to CWA 

jurisdiction and within the Corps 

Federal control and responsibility. 

Concurrent with this Federal Register 

notice, all Corps districts will issue 

local public notices announcing the 

suspension of NWP 21 as of the effective 

date identified above. 

Grandfathering of Existing NWP 21 

Authorizations 

Today’s action prohibits District 

Engineers from issuing NWP 21 

verifications in response to PCNs for 

surface coal mining activities in the 

Appalachian counties listed above 

during the period of suspension. In 

other words, District Engineers cannot 

continue to process NWP 21 PCNs that 

are pending as of June 18, 2010 or 

accept new or revised NWP 21 PCNs for 

surface coal mining activities in the 

Appalachian region of those six states 

unless the suspension is lifted and NWP 

21 is reinstated in this region. 

Proponents of proposed surface coal 

mining activities in the Appalachian 

region of these six states will have to 

submit applications for individual 

permits instead of NWP 21 PCNs. 

NWP 21 activities that have been 

verified by District Engineers prior to 

June 18, 2010 in the Appalachian region 

of Kentucky, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 

Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia, 

continue to be authorized by that NWP 

until it expires on March 18, 2012, 

unless the District Engineer takes action 

to modify, suspend or revoke a 

particular NWP authorization on a caseby-case basis in accordance with the 

procedures at 33 CFR § 330.5(d). District 

engineers may not modify previously 

issued NWP 21 verifications to 

authorize additional discharges of 

dredged or fill material into waters of 

the United States in the affected 

Appalachian counties; such discharges 

must be applied for and evaluated under 

the individual permit process. 

Environmental Documentation 

The decision document for the 

suspension of NWP 21 is available at the 

Corps Headquarters ‘‘National Notices 

and Program Initiatives’’ page at: 

http://www.usace.army.mil/CECW/ 

Pages/nnpi.aspx and the regulations.gov 

Web site under docket number COE– 

2009–0032. It is also available by 

contacting Headquarters, U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers, Operations and 

Regulatory Community of Practice, 441 

G Street, NW, Washington, DC 20314– 

1000. 

Authority 

We are suspending NWP 21 under the 

authority of Section 404(e) of the Clean 

Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) and Section 

10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 

(33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.). 

Dated: June 8, 2010. 

Approved by: 

R.L. Van Antwerp, 

Lieutenant General, U.S. Army, Commanding. 

[FR Doc. 2010–14778 Filed 6–17–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3720–58–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army 

Updated Record of Decision (ROD) for 

Revised Army Growth and Force; 

Structure Realignment Decisions 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of availability (NOA). 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army 

announces the availability of an 

updated ROD for Army Growth and 

Force Structure Realignment. This ROD 

explains that the Army has modified 

previous decisions made in December 

2007 to support Army growth and force 

structure realignment. The Army’s 

decision at the time grew the Army by 

six Infantry Brigade Combat Teams 

(IBCTs), eight active component support 

brigades, and associated growth in 

smaller combat support and combat 

service support units required to 

complement the U.S. Army’s overall 

force structure growth. The decision 

also relocated two Heavy Brigade 

Combat Teams (HBCTs) from Europe to 

the continental United States. This 

updated ROD details how the Army has 

modified growth and realignment 

decisions to better meet operational 

mission requirements. Specifically, the 

original decision is being modified by 

this updated ROD in the following 

ways: 

• Army growth is stopped at 45 active 

component BCTs instead of 48; 

• One IBCT has been established as 

the 43rd BCT at Fort Carson, CO; 

• The 44th BCT has been activated at 

Fort Bliss, TX; and 

• The 45th BCT was established at 

Fort Stewart, GA, as an IBCT. 

• The Army will not stand up new 

growth IBCTs at Fort Bliss, TX; Fort 

Stewart, GA; or Fort Carson, CO in 2011 

as was originally announced in the 2007 

ROD. In place of these BCTs, the Army 

will establish additional combat support 

units at locations across the Army to 

better meet mission requirements and 

man units for upcoming deployments. 

• The Army will convert a Heavy 

Brigade Combat Team (HBCT) (the 1st 

Brigade of the 1st Armored Division (1⁄1

AD)) to a Stryker Brigade Combat Team 

(SBCT) beginning in 2011 at Fort Bliss, 

TX. This conversion involves the 

stationing of approximately 450 

additional Soldiers and their equipment 

at Fort Bliss. 

• An HBCT will no longer be 

returning from Germany to White Sands 

Missile Range in fiscal year 2013. The 

stationing of HBCTs currently assigned 

to Germany will be reassessed in light 

of the Army’s global mission 

requirements. 

These modifications to the original 

Grow the Army decision will better 

allow the Army to respond to security 

threats in an unpredictable global 

security environment. 

ADDRESSES: A request for copy of the 

ROD can be sent to the Public Affairs 

Office, U.S. Army Environmental 

Command, Building E4460, Attention: 

IMAE–PA, 5179 Hoadley Road, 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21010– 

5401. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LTC 

David Patterson, Media Relations 

Division, Office of the Chief of Public 

Affairs, at (703) 697–7592. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In January 

2007, the President asked Congress for 

authority to increase the overall strength 

of the Army by 74,200 Soldiers over the 

next five years. This growth was 

intended to mitigate shortages in units, 

Soldiers, and time to train that would 

otherwise inhibit the Army from 

meeting readiness goals and supporting 

strategic requirements. The Department 

of the Army prepared a Programmatic 

Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) 

that evaluated the potential 

environmental and socioeconomic 

effects associated with alternatives for 

Army growth and realignment. In the 

Final PEIS (published on October 26, 

2007), the Army identified Alternative 3 

as the preferred alternative. Alternative 

3 (adds combat support and combat 

service support units, as well as Army 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES