Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 14, 1995 / Notices 8345

The Committee for the Implementation of

Textile Agreements has determined that

these actions fall within the foreign affairs

exception of the rulemaking provisions of 5

U.S.C. 553(a)(1).

Sincerely,

Rita D. Hayes,

Chairman, Committee for the Implementation

of Textile Agreements.

[FR Doc. 95–3625 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–DR–F

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

Cost Comparison Studies

The Air Force is conducting the

following cost comparison studies in

accordance with OMB Circular A–76,

Performance of Commercial Activities.

Installation Cost comparison

study

Maxwell AFB, Alabama Fuels Management.

Maxwell AFB, Alabama Grounds Maintenance.

Maxwell AFB, Alabama Refuse Collection.

Little Rock AFB, Arkansas.Transient Aircraft

Maintenance.

Davis Monthan AFB,

Arizona.

Military Family

Housing Maintenance.

Tyndall AFB, Florida .... Grounds Maintenance.

Tyndall AFB, Florida .... Multi-Function

Study: Base Operating Support &

Backshop Aircraft

Maintenance.

Moody AFB, Georgia ... Military Family

Housing Maintenance.

Andersen AFB, Guam .. Grounds Maintenance.

Andersen AFB, Guam .. Military Family

Housing Maintenance.

Andersen AFB, Guam .. Mess Attendants.

Andersen AFB, Guam .. Refuse Collection.

Columbus AFB, Mississippi.Base Operating

Support.

Keesler AFB, Mississippi.Grounds Maintenance.

Nellis AFB, Nevada ...... Military Family

Housing Maintenance.

Wright Patterson AFB,

Ohio.

Audiovisual.

Altus AFB, Oklahoma ... Aircraft Maintenance.

Tinker AFB, Oklahoma . Grounds Maintenance.

Lackland AFB, Texas ... Trainer Fabrication.

Laughlin AFB, Texas .... Base Operating

Support.

Reese AFB, Texas ....... Base Operating

Support.

Installation Cost comparison

study

Hill AFB, Utah .............. Child Care Center.

Bolling AFB, Washington, DC.Military Family

Housing Maintenance.

Patsy J. Conner,

Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 95–3654 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3910–01–M

Department of the Army

Availability of the Record of Decision

(ROD) for the Environmental Impact

Statement (EIS) for Closure and

Disposal of Sacramento Army Depot,

California

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DOD.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Public

Law 101–510, the Defense Base Closure

and Realignment Act of 1990, the 1991

Defense Base Closure and Realignment

Commission recommended the closure

of Sacramento Army Depot and transfer

of depot missions to other installations/

agencies. Maintenance missions would

be competed to determine location of

transfer. In accordance with the Act, the

Secretary of Defense must implement all

recommendations for closure or

realignment. The EIS focuses on the

environmental and socioeconomic

impacts and mitigations associated with

the disposal and reuse of Sacramento

Army Depot.

No long-term adverse ecological or

environmental health effects are

expected due to this action. The

increase in population anticipated by

the reuse and disposal activities is

expected to have a net positive impact

on the local economy. The preferred

alternative, prepared with the

cooperation of the local community, is

not expected to significantly impact

environmental resources.

DATES: Written public comments and

suggestions can be submitted on or

before March 16, 1995 to the address

shown below.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the ROD can be

obtained by writing to the United States

Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento

District, ATTN: CESPK–ED–M (ISS),

1325 J Street, Sacramento, California

95814–2922.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Wandell Carlton (916) 557–7424.

Dated: February 3, 1995.

Lewis D. Walker,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army,

(Environment, Safety and Occupational

Health) OASA (IL&E).

[FR Doc. 95–3592 Filed 2–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3710–08–M

Department of the Navy

Notice of Public Hearings for the Draft

Environmental Impact Statement for

Disposal and Reuse of Naval Hospital

Long Beach, Long Beach, CA.

Pursuant to Council on

Environmental Quality regulations (40

CFR Parts 1500–1508) implementing

procedural provisions of the National

Environmental Policy Act, the

Department of the Navy has prepared

and filed with the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency a Draft

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)

for disposal and reuse of Naval Hospital

Long Beach.

In accordance with legislative

requirements in the 1990 Base Closure

and Realignment Act (Public Law 101–

510) and the results of the 1991 Defense

Base Closure and Realignment process,

Naval Hospital Long Beach, California

was directed to be closed and made

available for reuse. Navy has analyzed

the environmental effects of reasonably

forseeable reuse alternatives of existing

buildings and for redevelopment of the

site. Five alternatives for potential reuse

have been identified by the City of Long

Beach and through an extensive scoping

process: (1) The Los Angeles County

Office of Education (LACOE); (2) a

Senior Health Care facility; (3) an

industrial park; (4) retail use; and (5)

residential use. Alternatives (1) and (2)

would rehabilitate existing structures

and facilities; alternatives (3) (4) and (5)

would require demolition of existing

structures and subsequent site

redevelopment.

The DEIS has been distributed to

various federal, state, and local

agencies, elected officials, and special

interest groups. Copies of the DEIS have

also been placed in local libraries. A

limited number of copies are available

at the address listed at the end of this

notice.

No implementation of the proposed

action will occur until the National

Environmental Policy Act process has

been completed and the Navy releases a

Record of Decision.

The Department of the Navy will hold

two public hearings to inform the public

of the DEIS findings and to solicit

comments. The first meeting will be

held on Wednesday, March 1, 1995