Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Notices 5803

quality, energy needs, safety, and the

general needs and welfare of the people.

If applicable the DEIA will also apply

guidelines issued by the Environmental

Protection Agency, under the authority

of Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water

Act of 1977 (Pub. L. 95–217).

6. The public involvement program

will include workshops, meetings, and

other coordination with interested

private individuals and organizations,

as will as with concerned Federal, state

and local agencies. Coordination letters

and newsletters have been sent to

appropriate agencies, organizations, and

individuals on an extensive mailing list.

Additional public information will be

provided through print media, mailings,

and radio and television

announcements.

7. In addition to the Corps, Howard

County and the Maryland Department of

the Environment, other participants that

will be involved in the study and DEIS

process include the following: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency; U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service; U.S. Forest

Service; U.S. Geological Survey; Natural

Resource Conservation Service; and

Maryland Department of Natural

Resources. The Baltimore District

invites potentially affected Federal,

state, and local agencies, and other

organizations and entities to participate

in this study.

8. The DEIS is scheduled to be

available for public review in the spring

of 1998.

Dr. James E. Johnson,

Chief, Planning Division.

[FR Doc. 97–3046 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–41–M

Corps of Engineers

Intent to Prepare a Draft Environmental

Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Upper

North Branch Potomac River

Environmental Restoration Feasibility

Study, Maryland and West Virginia

AGENCY: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

DOD.

ACTION: Notice of intent.

SUMMARY: In accordance with the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA), the Baltimore District, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers is initiating

the Upper North Branch Potomac River

Environmental Restoration Feasibility

Study. The riparian and aquatic

environmental integrity of this has been

severely degraded by urbanization, acid

mine drainage and industrial

encroachment. Potential environmental

restoration of streambanks and

remediation of wetlands and forest

buffers could restore several acres of

riparian and aquatic habitat, in addition

to improving water quality, low base

flows, and sedimentation. A DEIS will

be integrated into the feasibility study to

document existing conditions, project

actions, and project effects and

products. the non-Federal sponsors for

the project are the Maryland Department

of Natural Resources, the West Virginia

Division of Natural Resources and the

West Virginia Division of

Environmental Protection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Questions about the proposed action

and DEIS can be addressed to Ms. Erika

Hieber, Study Manager, Baltimore

District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

ATTN: CENAB–PL–P, P.O. Box 1715,

Baltimore, Maryland 21203–1715,

telephone (410) 962–4633. E-mail

address: erika.j.hieber@ccmail.

nab.usace.army.mil

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1. The

U.S. House of Representatives,

Committee on Public Works and

Transportation, authorized the North

Branch Potomac River Water Resources

Feasibility Study in a resolution

adopted May 13, 1993.

2. The Upper North Branch watershed

of the Potomac River extends from the

Potomac River headwaters down to the

Jennings Randolph Lake. The study area

includes portions of Garret and

Allegeny counties in Maryland, and

portions of Grant and Mineral Counties

in West Virginia. A particular focus of

this study is the Corps of Engineers’

multi-purpose Jennings Randolph Lake.

The most significant problems in the

Upper North Branch watershed are acid

mine drainage, the loss of biodiversity,

and water quality degradation. As a

result, environmental resources and

aquatic habitats have become degraded.

3. A watershed study is being

conducted to investigate the feasibility

of restoring the habitat and

environmental integrity of the Upper

North Branch watershed. The purpose

of this study is to develop an ecosystem

restoration plan that will address

improvement of aquatic and terrestrial

habitat, water quality, and recreation.

The goal of this study is to improve the

aquatic and riparian ecosystem within

the Upper North Branch watershed. To

achieve this goal, the Corps will further

define the problems and opportunities

in the Upper North Branch watershed;

analyze and forecast environmental

resource conditions; formulate,

evaluate, and compare alternative plans

for multiple sites; develop detailed

designs and costs at selected sites; and

recommend a cost effective plan for the

Upper North Branch watershed. The

proposed environmental restoration

plan would potentially include a

evaluation of acid mine drainage sites

that individually contribute to a

significant amount of the acid loading in

the watershed. To accomplish the

proposed environmental restoration

plan, an alternative analysis will be

conducted. The analysis would include

an evaluation of passive and active acid

mine drainage treatment and control

technologies that would improve

degraded aquatic habitat and water

quality by neutralizing acidity,

decreasing metal concentrations, and

raising pH levels.

4. The decision to implement these

actions will be based on an evaluation

of the probable impact of the proposed

activities on the public interest. That

decision will reflect the national

concern for both protection and

utilization of important resources. The

benefit which reasonably may be

expected to accrue from the proposal

will be balanced against its reasonably

foreseeable costs. The Baltimore District

is preparing a DEIS which will describe

the impacts of the proposed projects on

environmental and cultural resources in

the study area and the overall public

interest. The DEIS will be in accordance

with NEPA and will document all

factors which may be relevant to the

proposal, including the cumulative

effects thereof. Among these factors are

conservation, economics, aesthetics,

general environmental concerns,

wetlands, cultural values, fish and

wildlife values, flood hazards,

floodplain values, land use, recreation,

water supply and conservation, water

quality, energy needs, safety, and the

general needs and welfare of the people.

If applicable, the DEIS will also apply

guidelines issued by the Environmental

Protection Agency, under the authority

of Section 404(b)(1) of the Clean Water

Act of 1977 (Public Law 95–217).

5. The public involvement program

will include workshops, meetings, and

other coordination with interested

private individuals and organizations,

as well as with concerned Federal, state

and local agencies. Coordination letters

and newsletters have been sent to

appropriate agencies, organizations, and

individuals on an extensive mailing list.

Additional public information will be

provided through print media, mailings,

and radio and television

announcements.

6. In addition to the Corps, the

Maryland Department of Natural

Resources, West Virginia Division of

Natural Resources, West Virginia

Division of Environmental Protection,

and other participants that will be

involved in the study and DEIS process
5804 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 26 / Friday, February 7, 1997 / Notices

include the following: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency; U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service; U.S. Forest

Service; U.S. Geological Survey; Natural

Resource Conservation Service; and the

U.S. National Park Service. The

Baltimore District invites potentially

affected Federal, state, and local

agencies, and other organizations and

entities to participate in this study.

7. The DEIS is tentatively scheduled

to be available for public review in the

winter of 1998.

Dr. James F. Johnson,

Chief, Planning Division.

[FR Doc. 97–3047 Filed 2–6–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–41–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Policy and Planning Guidance for

Community Transition Activities

AGENCY: Office of Worker and

Community Transition, Department of

Energy.

ACTION: Notice of interim guidance and

opportunity for public comment.

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy

today publishes for public comment

Interim Guidance for Community

Transition Activities that has been

issued primarily for the benefit of field

organizations and community reuse

organizations responsible for

implementing and administering a

financial assistance program to alleviate

the adverse impact of downsizing

defense nuclear facilities on affected

local economies.

DATES: Written comments (7 copies) are

due on or before April 8, 1997. The

interim guidance is effective March 10,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be

submitted to: U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Worker and

Community Transition, WT–1, 1000

Independence Avenue, SW,

Washington, DC 20585.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Deborah Swichkow, U.S. Department of

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue,

SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586–

0876.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of

1954 (AEA), the Department of Energy

(DOE) owns defense nuclear facilities in

various locations in the United States

that are operated by management and

operating contractors. As a result of the

end of the Cold War, many of these

facilities are undergoing work force

restructuring that often has a significant

impact on local economies. The Atomic

Energy Act of 1954 contains broad

authority to adopt and carry out

policies, subject to the availability of

appropriations, for downsizing these

facilities and for alleviating the adverse

impacts on affected local communities.

42 U.S.C. 2201.

Section 3161 of the National Defense

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993,

42 U.S.C. 7274h, provides additional

and specific authority for DOE to

provide impact assistance to

communities that are adversely affected

by work force restructuring. Section

3161 further requires DOE to coordinate

the provision of such assistance with

programs carried out by the

Departments of Labor, Commerce, and

Defense. In devising a local impact

assistance program under section 3161,

DOE has chosen to follow the example

of the Department of Defense under the

Defense Economic Adjustment,

Diversification, Conversion, and

Stabilization Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101–

510) which is referenced in section

3161. Like the Department of Defense,

DOE has developed a financial

assistance program that, for the most

part, consists of awards to broadly

representative, community reuse

organizations (CROs) who either expend

or sub-award the funds for projects to

stimulate the local economy under an

approved Community Transition Plan

developed with public input. CROs may

be governmental or non-governmental

organizations. If a CRO is nongovernmental and applies for financial

assistance, it would have to be

organized under local law and be able

to enter into, and assume the obligations

of a DOE financial assistance agreement.

Although section 3161 does not require

CROs, DOE use of such organizations is

consistent with the Congressional

requirement to coordinate the provision

of local impact assistance, as

appropriate, with the Department of

Defense programs under the Defense

Economic Adjustment, Diversification,

Conversion, and Stabilization Act.

The award and administration of DOE

financial assistance agreements is

subject to generally applicable

regulations set forth at 10 CFR part 600.

The interim guidance in this notice

supplements those regulations and

provides a general decision making

framework to guide the exercise of

discretion by DOE field organizations.

Issuing policy in the form of guidance

allows for greater flexibility to modify

policy if the facts and circumstances

warrant modification.

Various aspects of the interim

guidance appeared previously in DOE’s

August 24, 1994, Report on the

Department of Energy’s Worker and

Community Transition Program.

Today’s notice will clarify the roles and

responsibilities of DOE Headquarters,

DOE field organizations, and CROs. The

interim guidance is subject to revision

in light of public comments received in

response to this notice.

II. Description of Key Provisions

Although this notice contains policies

applicable to funding decisions in DOE

Headquarters, for the most part, it

contains interim guidance to DOE field

organizations on economic development

activities of CROs, approval of CRO

plans to expend funds, evaluation

criteria for funding decisions, CRO

performance measures and reporting.

Much of the interim guidance is selfexplanatory. This document highlights

policy decisions embodied in various

provisions of the interim guidance that

may be of interest to members of the

public. First, the financial assistance is

targeted on communities substantially

impacted by work force restructuring

plans under section 3161 for ‘‘defense

nuclear facilities’’ which are listed in

Appendix B to the interim guidance.

Second, the CROs are intended to be

broadly and fairly representative of local

community interests. To that end, the

interim guidance contains minimum

evaluation criteria at paragraph II.C.3 for

approving CROs that all DOE field

organizations should follow. The

interim guidance also provides for

application of the conflict of interest

avoidance policy in 10 CFR 600.142 to

all subagreements under a financial

assistance agreement including, but not

limited to, subcontracts, subgrants,

loans, etc.

Third, the interim guidance provides

for start-up, planning, administrative,

and project financial assistance, and

indicates the range of amounts of

assistance for each type of activity.

These ranges are based on experience

with pilot activities financed by local

impact assistance grants already

awarded under section 3161. The

evaluation criteria provide for

consideration of cost-sharing offered by

an applicant. However, cost-sharing is

not a requirement because DOE does not

believe Congress intended that

assistance be denied for proposals from

sources who are unable to offer cost

sharing.

Fourth, consistent with DOE’s

experience in this program, the interim

guidance provides for program and

project assistance for sources other than

CROs. These provisions are useful

because some CROs prefer to serve in an

advisory role in the selection of projects