61298 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices 

3. Alternative 3: Expand CVW 

capabilities by adding three additional 

aircraft to each existing CVW VAQ 

squadron and augmenting the FRS by 

eight additional aircraft (a net increase 

of 35 aircraft); and 

4. Alternative 4: Expand EXP and 

CVW capabilities by establishing two 

new EXP VAQ squadrons, adding two 

additional aircraft to each existing CVW 

VAQ squadron, and augmenting the FRS 

by eight additional aircraft (a net 

increase of 36 aircraft). 

In developing the proposed range of 

alternatives, the DoN utilized longestablished operational considerations 

which are more fully described in the 

2005 and 2012 EAs for the replacement 

of the EA–6B Prowler aircraft with the 

newer EA–18G Growler aircraft at NAS 

Whidbey Island. These considerations 

include the fact that all of the Navy’s 

electronic attack mission and training 

facilities are located at NAS Whidbey 

Island, including the substantial 

infrastructure and training ranges that 

have developed in more than 40 years 

of operation, the location of a suitable 

airfield that provides for the most 

realistic training environment, the 

distance aircraft would have to travel to 

accomplish training, and the expense of 

duplicating existing capabilities 

elsewhere. As a result, the DoN is not 

considering alternative locations for 

FCLP training, or squadron relocation. 

Short-term detachments to meet training 

requirements would continue, as 

needed. 

The environmental analysis in the EIS 

will focus on several aspects of the 

proposed action: aircraft operations at 

Ault Field and OLF Coupeville; facility 

construction; and personnel changes. 

Resource areas to be addressed in the 

EIS will include, but not be limited to: 

Air quality, noise, land use, 

socioeconomics, natural resources, 

biological resources, cultural resources, 

and safety and environmental hazards. 

The analysis will evaluate direct and 

indirect impacts, and will account for 

cumulative impacts from other relevant 

activities near the installation. Relevant 

and reasonable measures that could 

avoid or mitigate environmental effects 

will also be analyzed. Additionally, the 

DoN will undertake consultations 

applicable by law and regulation. 

As outlined in 36 CFR Part 800, 

‘‘Protection of Historic Properties,’’ the 

DoN plans to comply with Section 106 

of the National Historic Preservation Act 

of 1966, as amended (NHPA), in 

conjunction with the NEPA process. 

The Section 106 process will include 

consultation with the State Historic 

Preservation Officer, Native American 

Tribes and Nations, other parties with a 

demonstrated interest in cultural 

resources for the project, and the 

Advisory Council on Historic 

Preservation. Pursuant to 36 CFR 

800.2(d), the DoN intends to use the 

public scoping open house meetings to 

facilitate public involvement pursuant 

to Section 106 of the NHPA. The DoN 

will present information about cultural 

resources and the Section 106 process 

for the project at the public scoping 

open house meetings. Comments on 

cultural resources or Section 106 issues 

or concerns that are received from the 

public during the scoping process will 

be addressed as part of the Section 106 

process. 

No decision will be made to 

implement any alternative until the EIS 

process is completed and a Record of 

Decision is signed by the Assistant 

Secretary of the Navy (Energy, 

Installations and Environment) or 

designee. The scoping process will be 

used to identify community concerns 

and local issues to be addressed in the 

EIS. Federal agencies, state agencies, 

local agencies, Native American Indian 

Tribes and Nations, the public, and 

interested persons are encouraged to 

provide comments to the DoN to 

identify specific issues or topics of 

environmental concern that the 

commenter believes the DoN should 

consider. All comments provided orally 

or in writing at the scoping meetings or 

by mail during the scoping period will 

receive the same consideration during 

EIS preparation. All comments must be 

postmarked no later than November 17, 

2014. 

The DoN will not release the names, 

street addresses, email addresses and 

screen names, telephone numbers, or 

other personally identifiable 

information of individuals who provide 

comments during scoping unless 

required by law. However, the DoN may 

release the city, state, and 5-digit zip 

code of individuals who provide 

comments. Each commenter making oral 

comments at the a public scoping 

meetings will be asked by the 

stenographer if he/she otherwise elects 

to authorize the release of their 

personally identifiable information prior 

to providing their comments. 

Commenters submitting written 

comments, either using comment forms 

or via the project Web site, may elect to 

authorize release of personally 

identifiable information by checking a 

‘‘release’’ box on the comment form. 

To be included on the DoN’s mailing 

list for the EIS (or to receive a copy of 

the Draft EIS, when released), electronic 

requests can be made on the project 

Web site at www.whidbeyeis.com. 

Requests via the U.S. Postal Service 

should be submitted to: EA–18G EIS 

Project Manager (Code EV21/SS); Naval 

Facilities Engineering Command 

(NAVFAC) Atlantic, 6506 Hampton 

Blvd., Norfolk, VA 23508. The same 

policy for release of personally 

identifiable information as identified 

above for scoping comments will be 

maintained by DoN for individuals 

requesting to be included on the EIS 

mailing list. 

Dated: October 6, 2014. 

N.A. Hagerty-Ford, 

Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate 

General, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24223 Filed 10–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

Notice of Availability of Record of 

Decision for the Final Environmental 

Impact Statement for U.S. Navy F–35C 

West Coast Homebasing 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy, 

after carefully weighing the strategic, 

operational, and environmental 

consequences of the proposed action, 

announces its decision to provide 

facilities and functions to support 

homebasing of F–35C aircraft at Naval 

Air Station (NAS) Lemoore, California, 

by accomplishing the proposed action 

as set out in Alternative 2 of the 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

for U.S. Navy F–35C West Coast 

Homebasing. Under Alternative 2, a 

total of 100 F–35C aircraft in seven 

Navy Pacific Fleet squadrons (10 aircraft 

per squadron) and the Fleet 

Replacement Squadron (30 aircraft) will 

be homebased at NAS Lemoore 

beginning in 2016. The proposed action 

will be completed in the 2028 

timeframe. The 100 F–35C aircraft will 

replace 70 aging FA–18 Hornet aircraft. 

As a result, aircraft loading at NAS 

Lemoore will gradually increase by a net 

of 30 aircraft over the 13-year period. 

There will be no changes in aircraft 

loading at Naval Air Facility (NAF) El 

Centro, California, under Alternative 2. 

Homebasing the F–35C at NAS Lemoore 

will result in an increase of 

approximately 68,400 operations per 

year at NAS Lemoore and an increase of 

approximately 800 operations per year 

at NAF El Centro. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

complete text of the Record of Decision 

(ROD) is available on the project Web 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 197 / Friday, October 10, 2014 / Notices 61299 

site at www.navyf35cwestcoasteis.com, 

along with the Final EIS U.S. Navy F– 

35C West Coast Homebasing, dated May 

2014 and supporting documents. Single 

copies of the ROD are available upon 

request by contacting: U.S. Navy F–35C 

EIS Project Manager, Naval Facilities 

Engineering Command Southwest, Attn: 

Code EV21.AK, 1220 Pacific Highway, 

Building 1, 5th Floor, San Diego, 

California 92132. 

Dated: October 6, 2014. 

N.A. Hagerty-Ford, 

Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate 

General, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2014–24224 Filed 10–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Navy 

Notice of Public Hearing for the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

the Disposal and Reuse of Former 

Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach, 

Detachment Concord, Concord, 

California 

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 

1969 (Pub. L. 91–190, 42 United States 

Code [U.S.C.] 4321–4347), as 

implemented by the Council on 

Environmental Quality Regulations 

implementing NEPA (40 Code of 

Federal Regulations [CFR] parts 1500– 

1508), the Department of the Navy 

(DoN) has prepared and filed the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) 

to evaluate the potential environmental 

consequences associated with the 

disposal of the former Naval Weapons 

Station Seal Beach, Detachment 

Concord, Concord, California (NWS 

Concord), and its subsequent reuse by 

the local community. The DoN is 

initiating a 45-day public comment 

period to provide the community an 

opportunity to comment on the Draft 

EIS. Federal, state, and local elected 

officials and agencies and the public are 

encouraged to provide written 

comments. A public meeting will also 

be held to provide information and 

receive written comments on the Draft 

EIS. 

Dates and Addresses: An open house 

public meeting will be held at the 

location listed below and will allow 

individuals to review and comment on 

the information presented in the Draft 

EIS. DoN representatives will be 

available during the open house to 

clarify information presented in the 

Draft EIS as necessary. There will not be 

a formal presentation. 

Thursday, November 13, 2014 (4:00 

p.m. to 8:00 p.m.), Concord Senior 

Citizens Center (Wisteria Room), 2727 

Parkside Circle, Concord, California 

94519. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Director, NAVFAC BRAC PMO West, 

Attn: Ms. Erica Spinelli, NEPA Project 

Manager, 1455 Frazee Road, Suite 900, 

San Diego, California 92108–4310, 

telephone: 619–532–0980, fax: 619– 

532–0995; email: erica.spinelli@

navy.mil. 

For more information on the NWS 

Concord EIS, visit the Navy BRAC PMO 

Web site (http://

www.bracpmo.navy.mil/). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DoN 

has prepared the Draft EIS for the 

Disposal and Reuse of the Former NWS 

Concord in accordance with the 

requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 

Sections 4321–4347) and its 

implementing regulations (40 CFR Parts 

1500–1508). A Notice of Intent (NOI) to 

prepare this Draft EIS was published in 

the Federal Register on March 14, 2013 

(Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 50/

Friday, March 14, 2013/Notices). The 

DoN is the lead agency for the proposed 

action, with the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers serving as a cooperating 

agency for the preparation of this EIS. 

The DoN closed the former NWS 

Concord on September 30, 2008, in 

accordance with Public Law (Pub. L.) 

101–510, the Defense Base Closure and 

Realignment Act (DBCRA) of 1990, as 

amended in 2005. The DBCRA exempts 

the decision-making process of the 

Defense Base Closure and Realignment 

Commission from the requirements of 

NEPA. The DBCRA also relieves the 

DoN from the NEPA requirements to 

consider the need for closing, 

realigning, or transferring functions and 

from looking at alternative installations 

to close or realign. However, in 

accordance with NEPA, before 

disposing of any real property, the DoN 

must analyze the environmental effects 

of the disposal. 

The purpose of the proposed action is 

to dispose of surplus property at the 

former NWS Concord for subsequent 

reuse in a manner consistent with the 

policies adopted by the City of Concord 

during reuse planning that took place 

between 2008 and 2012. The need for 

the proposed action is to provide the 

local community the opportunity for 

economic development and job creation. 

The Draft EIS has considered two 

redevelopment alternatives for the 

disposal and reuse of NWS Concord. 

Both redevelopment alternatives would 

be generally consistent with the policies 

developed by the City of Concord 

during the reuse planning process that 

took place between 2008 and 2012. Both 

alternatives focus on the preservation of 

a significant amount of open space and 

conservation areas, and sustainable 

development characterized by walkable 

neighborhoods, transit-oriented 

development, and ‘‘complete streets’’ 

that balance multiple types of 

transportation. Under both alternatives, 

most installation facilities would be 

demolished, and the western side of the 

property would be developed as a series 

of mixed-use ‘‘development districts,’’ 

with a higher concentration of 

development at the north end, near 

State Route 4 and the North Concord/

Martinez Bay Area Rapid Transit 

Station. Redevelopment under either 

alternative would include parks and 

open spaces, best management practices 

for stormwater management, and green 

and sustainable design and planning 

principles. Full build-out under either 

alternative would be implemented over 

a 25-year period. A No Action 

alternative was also considered, as 

required by NEPA and to provide a 

point of comparison for assessing 

impacts of the redevelopment 

alternatives. 

Alternative 1 includes the disposal of 

the former NWS Concord by the DoN 

and its reuse in a manner consistent 

with the adopted Concord Reuse Project 

(CRP) Area Plan. This alternative has 

been identified as the Preferred 

Alternative by the DoN. Under this 

alternative, redevelopment of 

approximately 2,500 acres of the former 

installation property would take place 

and would include a mix of land use 

types and densities. This alternative 

would also result in the preservation of 

a significant area of open space and 

conservation areas. The redevelopment 

would include approximately 6.1 

million square feet of commercial floor 

space and up to 12,272 residential 

housing units. 

Alternative 2 provides for the disposal 

of the former installation property by 

the DoN and its reuse in a manner 

similar to the Area Plan but with a 

higher density of residential 

development than under Alternative 1 

and within a smaller footprint. Under 

this alternative, redevelopment of 

approximately 2,200 acres of the former 

installation property with a mix of land 

use types and densities would take 

place. This alternative would also 

include the preservation of a significant 

amount of open space and conservation 

areas. The alternative calls for 

approximately 6.1 million square feet of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES