Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24547

7The Proposed Consent Order also includes

provisions for an ‘‘Interim Trustee’’ (i.e., an auditor)

and a licensing trustee. The Interim Trustee

provision assures early assessment and monitoring

of Digital’s agreements with the licensees and

continuing monitoring and reporting to the

Commission of how the provisions are working.

The licensing trustee provision is triggered if the

parties to a licensing agreement fail to agree within

the requisite time.

8An architectural integrity provision in the Order

preserves backward compatibility for existing

applications written to exploit the architecture, and

to make designing easier for applications

developers that have not yet ported applications to

Alpha. If Digital fails to innovate and improve the

performance of the Alpha architecture, however,

the Order allows AMD to modify the base

architecture without Digital approval.

marketing, and development of Alpha

products. The Proposed Consent Order

requires Digital to enter into or to

continue certain licensing arrangements

and alliances with Advanced Micro

Devices, Inc. (‘‘AMD’’), Samsung

Electronics Co., Ltd. (‘‘Samsung’’), or

some other Commission-approved

licensee, and to be begin the process of

certifying International Business

Machines, Inc. (‘‘IBM’’), or some other

Commission-approved company, to

become an Alpha foundry. The purpose

of these provisions is to establish two

licensees and another foundry as

providers and developers of Alpha

devices, independent of Intel.

The Proposed Consent Order binds

Digital to comply with the terms of

agreements it already has entered into

with Samsung. Under those agreements,

Samsung will obtain an architectural

license and technical support.

Furthermore, Digital will grant to

Samsung a non-exclusive

AlphaPowered trademark license and

the assistance and support necessary to

enable Samsung to enter rapidly and

expand the merchant market segment

for Alpha products.7 Under the current

version of the Samsung-Digital

agreement, Samsung will be creating a

U.S. subsidiary, to be known as the

Alpha Volume Company, that plans to

market Alpha chips to the merchant

market segment. Furthermore, Digital

has committed to purchase substantial

volumes of its Alpha products needs at

a competitive price from Samsung, thus

reducing its reliance on Intel.

The Proposed Consent Order also

requires Digital to enter into a broad

license with AMD, or a Commissionapproved licensee, that includes a

license to the Alpha architecture and

software tools that enable AMD to

develop microprocessors compatible

with the Alpha architecture. Digital

must provide technical and engineering

support until AMD is capable of

independently developing and

producing products based on the Alpha

architecture, but in no event for more

than two years.

The licenses with AMD and Samsung

(or two other Commission-approved

companies) are architectural licenses,

meaning that the license is to the Alpha

architecture, as defined by convention

in Digital’s official reference manual.

Under such license, the licensee is free

to create its own implementations and

derivative works—that is, to design

original chips around the architecture—

with the one caveat that it maintain

backward compatibility with the

existing Alpha architecture.8 In this

way, a licensee will have every

incentive to develop the merchant

market aggressively because it will have

the ability to create Alpha-derivative

innovations that can give it profitable

‘‘design wins’’—that is, agreements with

computer system manufacturers by

which the computer system

manufacturers will design a computer

line around the licensee’s chip. These

architectural licenses also provide

assurance to customers who commit to

the Alpha architecture because the

licenses provide independent sources of

supply and innovation for these

microprocessors.

The Proposed Consent Order also

requires Digital to enter into an

agreement, subject to Commission

approval, with IBM or some other

Commission-approved company to

evaluate that company as a potential

foundry for Alpha parts and to inform

that foundry partner of the steps

necessary to become a qualified supplier

of Alpha products. Submission of that

agreement is required within six months

of Commission approval of the Proposed

Consent Order. Alternatively, the

Proposed Consent Order permits Digital

to demonstrate why such an agreement

is unnecessary.

Samsung is a leading supplier of

DRAM technology, is considered to

have excellent manufacturing quality,

and will receive marketing assistance

from Digital. Samsung is already in the

merchant market and the Order should

empower Sumsung to further its

marketing efforts in this important

segment. AMD is the leading challenger

to Intel for x86-compatible

microprocessors and already a major

merchant market supplier, with

excellent design capabilities. Though

AMD does not yet produce Alpha chips,

it should have every ability to do so.

AMD is a major supplier of

microprocessors and should have

significant incentives to develop an

Alpha-based business because it does

not otherwise have a 64-bit architecture

capable of challenging the upcoming

Intel IA–64 architecture. IBM is an

established high-performance

microprocessor foundry, likely to be

capable of producing Alpha products.

All three of these companies, or other

licensees, help to ensure adequate and

independent supplies of Alpha

microprocessors.

V. Opportunity for Public Comment

The Proposed Consent Order has been

placed on the public record for sixty

(60) days for receipt of comments by

interested persons about both the

appropriateness of the relief provided

herein as well as the suitability of

Samsung, AMD, and IBM as licensees

who can ensure alternative sources for

the manufacture, marketing, and

development of Alpha products.

Comments received during this period

will become part of the public record.

After sixty days, the Commission will

again review the Proposed Consent

Order and the comments received and

will decide whether it should withdraw

from the Proposed Consent Order or

make it final.

By accepting the Proposed Consent

Order subject to final approval, the

Commission anticipates that the

competitive problems alleged in the

Complaint will be resolved. The

purpose of this analysis is to invite

public comment on the Proposed

Consent Order, including the proposed

licenses and alliances, to help the

Commission determine whether to make

final the Proposed Consent Order

contained in the agreement. This

analysis is not intended to constitute an

official interpretation of the Proposed

Consent Order, nor is it intended to

modify the terms of the Proposed

Consent Order in any way.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–11798 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

GENERAL SERVICES

ADMINISTRATION

Notice of Availability (NOA); Record of

Decision (ROD); Immigration and

Naturalization Service (INS) Lease

Construction and Consolidation, Dade

County, Florida

April 23, 1998.

This is the Record of Decision (ROD)

for the GSA Proposed Action, which is

to lease a building to be constructed at

9300–9499 NW 41st Street in Western

Dade County, Florida. This building

would consolidate the INS District
24548 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

Office, the Executive Office for

Immigration Review (EOIR), and the

Asylum Office. This is the GSA

preferred alternative.

The purpose of this project is to

consolidate the INS into one facility to

accommodate their legislatively

mandated growth. INS needs a

consolidated facility to better

accommodate this growth, to better

coordinate its functions, and to meet the

need to locate closer to the Krome

Service Processing Center, and to its

operation at the Miami International

Airport (MIA). This consolidation

would improve the overall efficiency of

the INS operations. Current

inefficiencies result from separated

functions at their existing facilities that

can not accommodate projected INS

requirements. Employees and clients

must often travel over an hour between

locations. Separated functions require

duplicate functions transportation of

records and personnel around Metro

Dade County. This lengthens the time it

takes the INS to administer its case load.

The distance between the District Office

and the Krome Center has caused

serious administrative and security

problems. A consolidated facility

located closer to the Krome Center and

west of the MIA would provide more

effective coordination of functions,

including the INS Foreign Inspection

Service located at MIA.

The current District Office at 7880

Biscayne Boulevard can not

accommodate the projected growth. The

building has small floor plates,

inadequate waiting areas, and elevator

and building systems that are not

adequate to service the requirements of

the current and projected INS space

needs.

Pursuant to Section 102(2)(C) of the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) of 1969, the Council on

Environmental Quality Regulations (40

CFR part 1500–1508), and GSA Order

PBS P 1095.4B, GSA prepared an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

for the Proposed Action. The purpose of

the EIS is to:

• Identify the alternatives considered

including the Proposed Action;

• Solicit public comments and

incorporate response into the analysis;

• Identify potential impacts of the

alternatives considered;

• Disclose potential impacts resulting

from the alternatives considered;

• Identify measures to mitigate

adverse impacts;

• Incorporate the impacts and

mitigation into the decision process.

This ROD will communicate GSA’s

decision on implementing the Proposed

Action, the basis for that decision, and

identify mitigation measures to be

implemented as part of the decision.

The Draft and Final EIS documents are

incorporated into this ROD by reference,

and are available upon request from

GSA.

This EIS was prepared because of the

level and intensity of public response

received by GSA during the final

comment period after GSA had

completed an Environmental

Assessment (EA). GSA completed an EA

in July 1996 and executed a Findings of

No Significant Impact (FONSI). GSA

provided 30-days of final public

comment prior to taking action. Because

of the level and intensity of the public

responses received, GSA determined

that there were ‘‘potentially significant’’

issues associated with proceeding with

the Proposed Action. GSA therefore

elected to elevate its environmental

analysis to an EIS, the highest level of

analysis. GSA then began the

environmental process a second time

with the publication of a Notice of

Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS in the

Federal Register on September 27TH.

Notice was also placed in the Miami

Herald and letters were mailed to all

potentially impacted parties as part of a

second public scoping process.

The EIS examined the impacts for

both the Proposed Action and the No

Action. If GSA proceeds with the

Proposed Action, there are potential

impacts to both the ‘‘Doral’’ area from

the relocation of INS, and potential

impacts to the 7880 Byscayne Boulevard

area that would result from INS vacating

the current location. Conversely, in the

case of the No Action, there are

potential impacts to the 7880 Byscayne

area from the INS remaining at their

current location and potential impacts

to the INS from continued operations in

their current facilities.

GSA released the Draft EIS with

publication in the Federal Register for

a 45-day public comment period that

began on January 24, 1997. A Public

Meeting was conducted in Miami on

February 12TH. The Final EIS was

released for a 30-day public comment

period with publication in the Federal

Register on March 28TH. The final

comment period closed on April 28TH.

GSA provided written notices of

availability for these documents in the

Federal Register, the Miami Herald,

through the Metro-Dade Library, and

through direct mailings to interested

parties and using a mailing list provided

by the West Dade Federation of

Homeowners Associations (WDFHA).

GSA distributed approximately 150

copies of the Draft and Final EIS to

Federal, State and local governments,

elected officials, neighborhood

associations, the business community,

and to all interested parties identified

during scoping process.

GSA made diligent efforts to solicit

input from all potentially impacted

parties, and GSA also made diligent

efforts to keep the community fully

informed during the NEPA process. This

was accomplished using newspaper

Public Notices, direct mailings, written

correspondence, a Public Meeting, and

through keeping an open dialogue with

representatives of the WDFHA. GSA

communicated regularly and openly

with the WDFHA, to keep all parties

fully informed during the

environmental process. GSA provided

factual information to interested parties

in a timely manner. GSA also extended

the comment periods several times,

when requested to do so, so as to

provide additional time for those

wishing to provide comments.

Alternatives Considered

GSA spent over three years exploring

and analyzing alternatives to meet the

requirements of the INS consolidation

within the Delineated Area (DA). In

1992 the INS provided GSA with the

Delineated Area (DA). This DA was

outlined by the INS as a 95 square mile

area surrounded by Flagler Street on the

South, 135th Street on the North,

LeJeune Road on the East, and 107th

Avenue on the West.

The DA was selected based on the

accessibility of major thoroughfares

including the Florida Turnpike, the

Palmetto and Dolphin Expressways, and

LeJeune Road. The requirement was that

the DA to be in a more centralized

portion of Dade County with access to

major roadways, MIA, and the Krome

Facility. The survey conducted as part

of the EIS concluded that during the

survey period, 25.4% of the INS client

visits originated from outside Dade

County. A 1991 INS survey indicated

that 78% of clients who filed petitions

with the INS lived either west of

LeJeune Road or north of Flagler Street.

Demographic forecasts predict that the

majority of future residential and

commercial growth will occur in the

western side of Miami.

During the period from 1993 until

April 1996, GSA analyzed and

considered over 20 alternative locations

and delivery options within the DA.

This included leasing existing

building(s), building(s) purchase, and

the consideration of lease construction

alternatives at various sites that would

be either donated to GSA or made

available through a no cost purchase

option.

GSA conducted financial analysis on

the methods available for delivering the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24549

needed space to meet the INS’

requirements. This was done to

determine the most economical and cost

effective delivery method. As part of the

Prospectus submittal process, GSA used

both the Net Present Value and an

Income/Expense approach, to compute

the lowest cost to the taxpayer. This

analysis concluded that leasing was the

most cost effective method and the

lowest cost to the taxpayer. In April

1995 GSA received Congressional

approval to lease 214,607 occupiable

square feet of space within the DA to

meet the requirements of the INS. Only

lease acquisition was authorized by

Congress under this Prospectus

approval. The Draft and Final EIS

contain a complete and comprehensive

explanation of the alternative

development and screening processes

followed by GSA for this project from

1992 to date.

After GSA Congressional approval of

the lease Prospectus in April 1995, a

market survey was initiated by GSA to

identify lease alternatives and to

identify prospective offerors. On

December 1, 1995, GSA issued a

Solicitation for Offers (SFO), an open

market competitive request for offers to

provide leased space that would meet

the requirements of the INS

consolidation as outlined in the SFO. A

total of seven initial offers were received

by GSA. Best and Final Offers (BAFO)

were due by April 28, and all but one

offeror withdrew their offers prior to

BAFO. Only one offer remained open at

BAFO.

Therefore, the EIS analyzed the two

alternatives remaining open and viable

to GSA. These alternatives are the

Proposed Action Alternative and the No

Action Alternative. All other

alternatives were either withdrawn prior

to BAFO, or were initially screened

from consideration by GSA based on

economic, technical, or operational

criteria.

No Action Alternative

Under this alternative, the INS would

continue to be housed at its current

locations, and would meet its increased

space requirements through a series of

ad hoc leases. The INS would continue

to operate at dispersed locations and in

overcrowded conditions at the District

Office. INS would meet its growth needs

by leasing additional space in close

proximity to its current locations.

Proposed Action

Under this alternative, the GSA would

execute an agreement with a private

developer, already selected by GSA

through an open and competitive

procurement, for the lease construction

of a building to house the consolidated

INS. The building would be 214,607 osf,

would employ about 500 persons in

1998 increasing to 763 persons by the

year 2005. The building would provide

885 parking spaces. Approximately

1,100 persons would visit the facility

daily to transact business with the INS.

The building would be constructed with

three floors and a parking garage in rear.

The building would be designed as a

modern office building to fit the style

and character of the commercial

buildings that currently surround the

vacant site. The building would be

designed to efficiently accommodate the

unique requirements of the INS. This is

the GSA preferred alternative.

Environmental Consequences and

Mitigation

Based on the analysis contained in

both the EA and the EIS, there were no

potentially significant environmental

impacts from either the Proposed Action

or the No Action except for those

discussed in this ROD. These impacts

were associated with public controversy

and land use issues, and not with

impacts to the natural environment.

Therefore, neither alternative was

considered to be environmentally

preferred over the other. Additional

potential impacts to the natural and

human environment were considered

and found to be minor or not significant.

This is documented in both the Draft

EIS and the Final EIS by reference.

The Proposed Action

The issues that were identified during

the scoping process fall into one of the

following general categories: Impacts to

streets and traffic; impacts to property

values (primarily residential), impacts

to the character and economic stability

of the neighborhood and surrounding

community, and impacts to the area

from increased crime.

The Proposed Action would result in

the construction of a building to suit

facility to house the INS, and would

require a lease agreement to be executed

between GSA and a private developer.

GSA would assume a leasehold interest

in the building for a period of 10 years.

There would be no Federal ownership

of the facility. The developer would be

responsible for obtaining all local and

state approvals prior to beginning

construction. These would include all

zoning approvals, Concurrency Review,

land use approvals, and all building

permits that require conformance to

various local, State, and Federal

statutes.

The approval and permitting process

would be the responsibility of the

developer, and thus obtaining permits

and Concurrency review would serve to

mitigate many of the impacts that have

been identified.

Concurrency is the process by which

Dade County examines proposed

projects and determines whether the

necessary public facilities and

infrastructure capacity is available.

Seven agencies are involved in the

review process for Concurrency in Dade

County and they are: Building and

Zoning; Department of Environmental

and Resource Management (DERM); Fire

Department; Metro Dade Transit

Authority; Parks and Recreation; Public

Works; and Solid Waste.

Concurrency is part of the permitting

process. The infrastructure and service

capacity must be available before a

developer is granted a Final

Development Order. The analysis of

potential impacts undertaken in the EIS

is based on the Standards for

Concurrency required by Dade County.

The Concurrency review and a Final

Development Order application takes

place at the County level, and these

permitting decisions are based on the

available capacity at the time of the

application by a developer.

Traffic

A traffic study was undertaken by

traffic consultants Carr-Smith

Associates, to determine the potential

impact of the Proposed Action on the

roadways around the potentially

affected area. To determine the number

of vehicle trips that would be generated,

an internal survey was conducted by the

INS to determine the origin and

destination of all employees and visitors

during a five day period (October 23–29,

1996). This was considered a typical

work week. Employees located at the

District Office and at other INS offices

that would be part of the consolidation

were included in the survey. A total of

438 current INS employees would move

to the proposed facility. A total of 1092

client visits per day were identified for

the survey week.

All employees would not be onsite

everyday, and the arrivals of the clients

occurred throughout the business day.

These factors were considered in the

formula for computing the number of

the vehicle trips generated. Levels of

Service (LOS) standards were provided

by the Metro-Dade Planning Department

for the surrounding roadways. Current

traffic counts were taken. LOS levels

were computed using the current data

collected and using the projected

growth rates provided by Dade County.

The LOS levels with the Proposed

Action were calculated and found to

remain within acceptable Dade County

LOS Standards.
24550 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices

Based on the findings of this traffic

study, the impact of the proposed INS

facility is within Metro-Dade County’s

Concurrency requirements. In addition,

planned expansions in the transit

service to the area and soon to be

implemented changes in the INS

application and processing procedures,

will serve to mitigate some of the

resulting traffic impacts of the new

facility. Because of technology

improvements in the processing

procedures, and because of expected

reductions in both staff and applicants

in the Citizenship USA program, INS

projects that the number of daily client

visits to be less than the 1,092 persons

who visited the current INS facilities

during the survey period of October 23–

29, 1996. These anticipated reductions,

coupled with anticipated route

alterations of the mass transit system,

will serve to mitigate some of the

increased traffic projected to be

associated with the INS facility.

A copy of the traffic study, will full

analysis and conclusions and

methodology, is contained in the EIS.

The developer would be required to

meet Concurrency Review for traffic

prior to permitting any proposed

construction.

Mass Transit

Metro Dade transit Authority does not

alter bus routes until a project has

established a completion date and

demonstrates a need for additional

service. GSA and INS will contact Metro

Dade Transit Authority at the

appropriate time in this process, and

formally request that additional service

be provided to the facility based on the

need and date of occupancy. GSA

anticipates no difficulties in increasing

the service levels once the need is

demonstrated to the Metro Dade Transit

Authority. Increased levels of public

transportation to the facility will serve

to mitigate some of the vehicle trips

generated by the INS.

Metro-Bus service is available directly

in front of the site. However, there is

currently only one bus in the morning

and one in the afternoon serving the

site. Busses currently service 84th

Avenue (No. 87 Bus) every 30 minutes

during peak hours, and every hour

during non-peak hours, from 6AM to

9PM. This route provides direct service

from Dadeland and the Metrorail to the

south, from the Okeechobee Metrorail

Station to the north. The route also has

connections at Flagler Street from

Downtown (Route 11, running every 10

minutes, all day). This route runs about

one mile east of the proposed site.

Alteration of this route west to 97th

Avenue would provide regular bus

service to the facility throughout the

day.

Other potential mitigation measures

would be the INS promoting ride

sharing, staggered work hours, and

subsidized public transportation for

employees. Still others include the

addition of express busses, and private

jitney minibus service as regulated

countywide by the 1985 Jitney

Ordinance.

The Proposed Action would be

required to under go Concurrency

review for by Metro-Dade Transit

Authority.

Parking

The proposed facility would include

885 spaces. Dade County requires one

space for every 300 osf or 715 required

spaces. The Proposed facility exceeds

the Dade County parking requirement.

Land Use/Zoning

The Proposed Action is in substantial

compliance with Land Use and Zoning

Comprehensive Plans for the area. The

developer would be required to obtain

Zoning and Land Use approvals prior to

construction and as part of the

Concurrency review.

Impacts to Property Values

The site of the Proposed Action is

surrounding by commercial office

buildings on both the east and the west

and the proposed use is in conformance

with Dade County land use plans.

GSA’s contractor, Radian

International, secured a professional

opinion from a Licensed State Certified

Appraiser familiar with the area around

the proposed site. The Appraiser did not

provide data or render an opinion that

the proposed INS facility would have

any direct or unique impacts on the

surrounding property values. Other

private and government buildings, of

similar size and use in the area, have

not had any detrimental impacts on

property values. No cause-effect

relationship was established between

the location of the INS Offices and

surrounding property values.

The proposed site is located on

Section 28, Range 40, Township 53.

Section 28 is 640 acre (one mile square)

area surrounded by four major

roadways: 41st Street on the north; 25th

Street on the south; 87th Avenue on the

east; and 97th Avenue on the west.

There are other government and

commercial uses on the contiguous 640

acre Section 28 including: Metro-Dade

Police Headquarters, an FAA lease for a

radar tower, the Federal Reserve Bank of

Miami, and the just completed US Army

Southern Command Headquarters

Administrative facility (SOUTHCOM).

This Army relocation of the

SOUTHCOM from Panama to Dade

County will be completed by May 31,

1998. This new facility has been leased

by the Army for a 10-year term, is

approximately 154,000 square feet, and

will employee about 900 persons. The

Proposed INS location is located just

northeast of the SOUTHCOM facility

(about three quarters of a mile) on

Section 28. The WDFHA did not oppose

this relocation of SOUTHCOM to the

Doral area. The Appraiser retained by

GSA stated that none of the

aforementioned and varied government

uses on Section 28, demonstrated any

negative impacts to the surrounding

property values.

Crime

Western Dade is projected to develop

both commercially and residentially by

the Dade County Comprehensive

Development Master Plan. As this

growth occurs, an increase in crime is

projected, with or without the INS

consolidation.

The INS facility would be designed to

accommodate the INS needs. These

design factors would include a larger

floor plate, adequate parking, faster

processing times for clients and fewer

people at the site at any one time,

required security procedures, and

assigned waiting areas. These measures

will serve to process INS clients

efficiently at the facility.

The Metro-Dade Police Station is

located on Section 28, (less than one

mile south of the proposed site), and its

presence, would serve to deter crime in

the area. There was no cause-effect

relationship found that would uniquely

link the INS presence to increased crime

rates in the area.

Neighborhood Impacts to the Doral Area

The residents of the Doral area

strongly oppose the proposed INS

location. The Doral area is seeking to

become an independent municipality,

separate from Dade County. The

proposed site in the center of the

proposed City of Doral. The WDFHA

has suggested that the proposed INS

location would be the preferred location

for the new ‘‘Village of Doral’’

municipal complex. If the Doral

Incorporation is successful, the

proposed action would negatively

impact the goals of the community as

stated in their Incorporation Petition.

The Doral community, through its

representative the WDFHA, is on the

record stating that they oppose the INS

locating at the current site, or at any

other site in the same general area.

There has been no previous opposition

by WDFHA to the other government
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 85 / Monday, May 4, 1998 / Notices 24551

uses on Section 28, including the recent

lease construction of 150,000 square

foot building for SOUTHCOM

Headquarters.

Other land use on Section 28 include

several large office buildings (former

Eastern Doral Computer Center and

Headquarters Carnival Cruise Lines), an

FAA radar facility, the Metro-Dade

Police Headquarters, the 80 acre Miami

West Park, and light industrial and

warehouse buildings. Given the mix of

uses, including other substantial

government facilities on Section 28, the

INS at the proposed lease construction

would not be out of character with other

surrounding land uses. Included in the

Police Station complex on Section 28

are four buildings totaling over 300,000

square feet including the Metro-Dade

Police Headquarters, Police District #3

Doral West, maintenance and vehicle

storage, and detention facilities.

The INS facility at the proposed

location would be in substantial zoning

compliance and would conform to land

uses on other surrounding properties.

The building would be designed as a

commercial office building of similar

size and appearance to other nearby

buildings. The above are mitigating

factors demonstrating that the proposed

facility is not out of character to other

land uses in Section 28, and therefore

should have no unqiue impact on the

surrounding community.

A Final Development Order will be

required by Dade County at the

conclusion of the Concurrency review.

This review will determine if public

services and infrastructure are available

to support the proposed project. If the

capacity is not available, then

permitting would not be available to the

developer, or alterations to the proposed

development would be required by

Dade County in order to meet

Concurrency Standards. This process

would serve to mitigate potential

impacts this project would cause to the

infrastructure and public services in the

area.

No Action

INS relocation to Western Dade

County cause would a small negative

impact to the area around the 7880

Biscayne Boulevard location due to

potential loss of retail and service

business. However, due to the high

crime rates in the general area, most INS

employees do not patronize nearby

retail establishments.

Some of the nearby businesses

generate income from the INS clients

who often spend hours waiting in line

due to the inefficient layout at the

current facility. Mitigating factors to

these impacts would include the twoyear lead time the property owner

would have to find a replacement

tenant, and the two-year lead time

period the existing business would have

to make appropriate adjustments in

their business plans. Efforts are

underway by the Biscayne Area

Chamber of Commerce to promote

Downtown Development Initiatives and

obtain grants to stimulate the economy

in the area.

There would be serious adverse

impacts to the INS if they remained long

term in their current facilities. There is

no opportunity for expansion.

Continued operation of physically

separated functions will continue to

hinder the INS in performing its

mission. INS performs an important

function for the United States with the

administration and enforcement of US

Immigration Laws. Operating in

inadequate facilities and separated

locations would negatively impact the

INS’ ability to effectively service its

clients as well as the public.

Rationale for Decision

1. The proposed action was found to

fall within the Dade County

Concurrency Standards for traffic based

on a traffic study conducted as part of

the EIS.

2. Public transportation is available at

the proposed location. Based on the

existing route system, the capacity

exists to increase the level of public

transportation to the proposed facility.

GSA will contact Metro-Dade Transit

Authority at the appropriate point in the

process to facilitate route and service

alteration at the proposed facility to

accommodate the public transportation

needs.

3. The proposed facility is in

compliance with local zoning, land use

and comprehensive plans, contains

more than the required parking, and

would be subject to Concurrency review

as part of the permitting process. The

developer would be required to obtain

permits and local approvals.

4. There are currently other

substantial government facilities located

on Section 28, including the FAA radar

tower, the US Army Southern Command

Headquarters (SOUTHCOM), and the

Metro-Dade Police Station and Doral

Substation including detention

facilities. There was no evidence found

that any of these other public uses have

caused negative impacts to property

values, nor any evidence that the INS

would negatively impact property

values. SOUTHCOM has just leased a

new 150,000 square foot building, less

than a mile southeast of the proposed

site, to house 900 federal employees for

occupancy June 1, 1997. In the opinion

of an Appraiser retained by GSA, the

INS facility would not constitute a

stigma development.

5. The INS facility will be designed to

accommodate the needs of the INS and

to provide a secure building that will be

visually and functionally compatible

with other nearby commercial and

public use buildings.

6. There was no evidence presented to

indicate that this project would

uniquely contribute to increased crime

in the area.

Therefore, having given consideration

to all of the factors discovered during

the 13 month environmental review

process, it is GSA’s decision to proceed

with the Proposed Action: Lease

construction of a building of 214,607

occupiable square feet of space, to house

the INS consolidation on a 7.3 acre site

is located at 9300–9499 NW 41st Street

in Miami.

Dated: April 23, 1998.

Phil Youngberg,

Regional Environmental Officer (PT).

[FR Doc. 98–11719 Filed 5–1–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6820–23–M

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES

Office of Public Health and Science

Region, VI; Announcement of

Availability of a Grant for a Family

Planning Information, Education and

Clinical Services Linkage Innovations

Research Project

AGENCY: Office of Family Planning,

Region VI.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Office of Family Planning

(OPF), Region VI, requests applications

for a new research grant in family

planning services delivery

improvement.

DATES: To receive consideration,

applications must be postmarked or

delivered to the Office of Grants

Management no later than June 15,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Completed applications

should be sent to: Office of Grants

Management, U.S. Public Health

Service, DHHS Region VI, 1301 Young

St., Suite 766, Dallas, XT 75202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Evelyn Glass, Family Planning Unit

Chief—214–767–3088, for assistance on

technical and program aspects; Maureen

Picket, Grants Management Officer—

214–767–3401, to answer questions

about the preparation of grant

applications.