Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 31713 

of appreciation, travel requests, military 

airlift requests and other related 

documents. 

AUTHORITY FOR MAINTENANCE OF THE SYSTEM: 

5 U.S.C. 301, Departmental 

Regulations; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 31, 

Records Management by Federal 

Agencies; DoD Directive 5015.02, DoD 

Records Management Program; DoD 

Directive 5110.4, Washington 

Headquarters Services (WHS); and E.O. 

9397 (SSN). 

PURPOSE(S): 

Information is collected on behalf of 

the Secretary of Defense to support the 

functions of the Department of Defense 

and maintain a record of actions taken 

and responses to the President, White 

House staff, other Cabinet officials, 

Congress, state and local officials, 

corporate officials, members of the 

Department of Defense and the public. 

ROUTINE USES OF RECORDS MAINTAINED IN THE

SYSTEM, INCLUDING CATEGORIES OF USERS AND

THE PURPOSES OF SUCH USES: 

In addition to those disclosures 

generally permitted under 5 U.S.C. 

552a(b) of the Privacy Act of 1974, these 

records may specifically be disclosed 

outside the Department of Defense as a 

routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

552a(b)(3) as follows: 

The DoD ’Blanket Routine Uses’ set 

forth at the beginning of the OSD’s 

compilation of systems of records 

notices apply to this system. 

POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR STORING, 

RETRIEVING, ACCESSING, RETAINING, AND

DISPOSING OF RECORDS IN THE SYSTEM: 

STORAGE: 

Maintained in paper files and 

electronic storage media. 

RETRIEVABILITY: 

Last name and first name initial of the 

individual, subject and date of the 

document. 

SAFEGUARDS: 

Records are maintained in a 

controlled facility. Physical entry is 

restricted by the use of locks, guards, 

and is accessible only to authorized 

personnel. Access to records is limited 

to person(s) responsible for servicing the 

record in performance of their official 

duties and who are properly screened 

and cleared for need-to-know. Access to 

computerized data is restricted by 

Common Access Card (CAC). 

RETENTION AND DISPOSAL: 

Records are cut off annually and 

destroyed when 7 years old. 

SYSTEM MANAGER(S) AND ADDRESS: 

Chief, Correspondence Control 

Division, Executive Services Directorate, 

Washington Headquarters Services, 

1155 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–1155. 

NOTIFICATION PROCEDURE: 

Individuals seeking to determine 

whether information about themselves 

is contained in this system should 

address written inquiries to the Chief, 

Correspondence Control Division, 

Executive Services Directorate, 

Washington Headquarters Services, 

Room 3C843, 1155 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–1155. 

The requests should contain the 

individual’s last name, first name 

initial, subject and document date. 

RECORD ACCESS PROCEDURES: 

Individuals seeking access to records 

about themselves contained in this 

system of records should address 

written inquiries to the Office of the 

Secretary of Defense/Joint Staff Freedom 

of Information Act, Requester Service 

Center, Office of Freedom of 

Information, 1155 Defense Pentagon, 

Washington, DC 20301–1155. 

Individuals should provide the name 

and number of this system of records 

notice, the individual’s last name, first 

name initial, subject, date of document 

and be signed. 

CONTESTING RECORD PROCEDURES: 

The Office of the Secretary of Defense 

rules for accessing records, for 

contesting contents and appealing 

initial agency determinations are 

published in Office of the Secretary of 

Defense Administrative Instruction 81; 

32 CFR part 311; or may be obtained 

from the system manager. 

RECORD SOURCE CATEGORIES: 

Individuals and those writing on their 

behalf, and official records. 

EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED FOR THE SYSTEM: 

During the course of preparing a 

response to some types of incoming 

communications from the public, 

exempt materials from other systems of 

records may in turn become part of the 

case records in this system. To the 

extent that copies of exempt records 

from those ‘other’ systems of records are 

entered into this correspondence case 

record, the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense hereby claims the same 

exemptions for the records from those 

‘other’ systems that are entered into this 

system, as claimed for the original 

primary systems of records which they 

are a part. 

[FR Doc. E9–15623 Filed 7–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army; Corps of 

Engineers 

Deauthorization of Water Resources 

Projects 

AGENCY: Army Corps of Engineers, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of project 

deauthorizations. 

SUMMARY: The Corps of Engineers is 

publishing the list of water resources 

projects deauthorized under the 

provisions of section 1001(b)(2) of the 

Water Resources Development Act of 

1986, Public Law 99–662, as amended, 

(33 U.S.C 579a(b)(2)), and lists of 

projects removed from the 

deauthorization list due to obligations of 

funds, or deauthorized earlier. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Headquarters, U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers, Washington, DC 20314–1000, 

Attention: CECW–IN, Ms. Agnes W. 

Chen, Tel. (202) 761–4175. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Water 

Resources Development Act of 1986, 

Public Law 99–662, 100 Stat. 4082– 

4273, as amended, provides for the 

automatic deauthorization of water 

resource projects and separable 

elements of projects. 

Section 1001(b)(2), 33 U.S.C. 

579a(b)(2), requires the Secretary of the 

Army to submit to the Congress a 

biennial list of unconstructed water 

resources projects and separable 

elements of projects for which no 

obligations of funds have been incurred 

for planning, design or construction 

during the prior seven full fiscal years. 

If funds are not obligated within thirty 

months from the date the list was 

submitted, the project/separable 

elements are deauthorized. 

Notwithstanding these provisions, 

projects may be specifically 

deauthorized or reauthorized by law. 

(Note: The provision of section 

1001(b)(2) prior to the 2007 

amendments apply to this action.) 

For purposes of the Water Resources 

Development Act of 1986, ‘‘separable 

element’’ is defined in section 103(f), 

Public Law 99–662, 33 U.S.C. 2213(f). 

In accordance with section 1001(b)(2), 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army 

(Civil Works) submitted a list of 31 

projects and separable elements to 

Congress on 29 September 2006. From 

this list, 27 projects/separable elements 

were deauthorized on March 29, 2009, 

2 were removed due to obligation of 

funds, and 2 were deauthorized on 02 

April 2002 and 01 May 1997 

respectively. 

31714 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 

District Primary 

state Purpose 

Projects Deauthorized on 29 March 2009 Under Section 1001(B)(2) WRDA 1986, as Amended 

MVM ........................................................ AUGUSTA TO CLARENDON LEVEE, LOWER WHITE RIVER, AR 

(UNCOMPLETED PORTION).

AR FC 

MVM ........................................................ CLARENDON LEVEE, LOWER WHITE RIVER, AR ............................................. AR FC 

MVM ........................................................ WEST MEMPHIS & VICINITY, AR ........................................................................ AR FC 

NAE ......................................................... HARTFORD ............................................................................................................ CT E 

NAE ......................................................... NEW HAVEN .......................................................................................................... CT E 

MVR ......................................................... GREEN BAY LEVEE & DRAINAGE DISTRICT NO. 2, IA .................................... IA FC 

NAE ......................................................... FALL RIVER AND NEW BEDFORD ...................................................................... MA E 

NAE ......................................................... SAUGUS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, MA ........................................................... MA FC 

NAB ......................................................... BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS, MD & VA (50–FT DEEPENING) ....... MD N

NAE ......................................................... CASCO BAY IN VICINITY OF PORTLAND ........................................................... ME E 

NAE ......................................................... PENOBSCOT RIVER IN VICINITY OF BANGOR ................................................. ME E 

MVS ......................................................... COLDWATER CREEK, MO ................................................................................... MO FC 

MVS ......................................................... MALINE CREEK, MO ............................................................................................. MO FC 

NWO ........................................................ PLATTE RIVER FLOOD & RELATED STREAMBANK EROSION CONTROL, 

NE.

NE SP 

NAE ......................................................... EPPING .................................................................................................................. NH E 

NAE ......................................................... MANCHESTER ....................................................................................................... NH E 

NAN ......................................................... NEW YORK HBR AND ADJACENT CHANNELS, CLAREMONT TERMINAL, NJ NJ N 

NWP ........................................................ COLUMBIA RIVER, SEAFARER’S MEMORIAL, HAMMOND, OR ....................... OR N 

NAB ......................................................... TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PA (MILL RUN RECREATION) ............................... PA FC 

NAE ......................................................... CLIFF WALK, NEWPORT, RI ................................................................................ RI SP 

NAE ......................................................... NARRAGANSETT BAY IN VICINITY OF PROVIDENCE, RI ................................ RI E 

NAE ......................................................... NARRAGANSETT BAY OVERPLOW MGMT FACILITY ....................................... RI E 

NAE ......................................................... NARRAGANSETT TOWN BEACH, NARRAGANSETT, RI ................................... RI N 

NAE ......................................................... QUONSET POINT—DAVISVILLE .......................................................................... RI N 

NWO ........................................................ GREGORORY COUNTY HYDROELECTRIC PUM STORAGE FACILITY, SD .... SD H 

MVM ........................................................ MUD LAKE PUMPING STATION, TN .................................................................... TN FC 

MVM ........................................................ REELFOOT LAKE—LAKE NO 9, TN & KY ........................................................... TN FC 

Total: 27 

Projects Removed from Deauthorization List Due to Obligations of Funds for Planning, Design or Construction 

NAE ......................................................... BRIDGEPORT ........................................................................................................ CT E 

LRE .......................................................... ECORSE CREEK, MI ............................................................................................. MI FC 

Total: 2 

Project Deauthorization on 02 April 2002 

NWW ....................................................... LITTLE WOOD RIVER GOODING/SHOSHONE, ID ............................................. ID FC 

Total: 1 

Project Deauthorization on 01 May 1997 

NWO ........................................................ OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE (WILDLIFE RESTORATION), SD & ND ..................... SD E 

Total: 1 

Key To Abbreviations 

MVD MISSISSIPPI VALLEY DIVISION 

MVM MEMPHIS DISTRICT 

MVN NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT 

MVS ST. LOUIS DISTRICT 

MVK VICKSBURG DISTRICT 

MVR ROCK ISLAND DISTRICT 

MVP ST. PAUL DISTRICT 

NAD NORTH ATLANTIC DIVISION 

NAB BALTIMORE DISTRICT 

NAN NEW YORK DISTRICT 

NAO NORFOLK DISTRICT 

NAP PHILADELPHIA DISTRICT 

NAE NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT 

NWD NORTHWESTERN DIVISION 

NWP PORTLAND DISTRICT 

NWS SEATTLE DISTRICT 

NWW WALLA WALLA DISTRICT 

NWK KANSAS CITY DISTRICT 

NWO OMAHA DISTRICT 

LRD GREAT LAKES & OHIO RIVER 

DIVISION 

LRH HUNTINGTON DISTRICT 

LRL LOUISVILLE DISTRICT 

LRN NASHVILLE DISTRICT 

LRP PITTSBURGH DISTRICT 

LRB BUFFALO DISTRICT 

LRC CHICAGO DISTRICT 

LRE DETROIT DISTRICT 

POD PACIFIC OCEAN DIVISION 

POA ALASKA DISTRICT 

POH HONOLULU DISTRICT 

SAD SOUTH ATLANTIC DIVISION 

SAC CHARLESTON DISTRICT 

SAJ JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT 

SAM MOBILE DISTRICT 

SAS SAVANNAH DISTRICT 

SAW WILMINGTON DISTRICT 

SPD SOUTH PACIFIC DIVISION 

SPL LOS ANGELES DISTRICT 

SPK SACRAMENTO DISTRICT 

SPN SAN FRANCISCO DISTRICT 

SPA ALBUQUERQUE DISTRICT 

SWD SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION 

SWF FORT WORTH DISTRICT 

SWG GALVESTON DISTRICT 

SWL LITTLE ROCK DISTRICT 

SWT TULSA DISTRICT 

Purpose 

E ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION 

FC FLOOD CONTROL 

H WATER SUPPLY 

N NAVIGATION 

SP EROSION CONTROL 

Authority: This notice is required by the 

Water Resources Development Act of 1986, 

Public Law 99–662, section 1001(c), 33 

U.S.C. 579a(c), and the Water Resources 

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 126 / Thursday, July 2, 2009 / Notices 31715 

Development Act of 1988, Public Law 100– 

676, section 52(d), 102 Stat. 4012, 4045. 

Terrence C. ‘‘Rock’’ Salt, 

Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil 

Works). 

[FR Doc. E9–15663 Filed 7–1–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–92–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Department of the Army 

Notice of Availability of the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement 

(FEIS) for the Maneuver Center of 

Excellence (MCOE) Actions at Fort 

Benning, GA 

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability (NOA). 

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army 

announces the availability of the MCOE 

FEIS, which evaluates the potential 

environmental and socioeconomic 

impacts associated with the MCOE 

activities at Fort Benning. The FEIS 

covers the construction, operation, 

facilities maintenance, personnel 

increases, and training activities 

associated with the proposed MCOE 

actions, as well as increased training 

throughput due to Grow the Army 

missions at Fort Benning. 

DATES: The waiting period for the MCOE 

FEIS will end 30 days after publication 

of a notice of availability in the Federal 

Register by the Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

ADDRESSES: To obtain a copy of the 

EElS, contact Mr. John Brent, Fort 

Benning Directorate of Public Works, 

Environmental Management Division, 

6650 Meloy Hall, Building 6, Room 308, 

Fort Benning, GA 31905 or e-mail at: 

john.brent@us.army.mil. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Bridgett Siter at (706) 545–6169 or Mr. 

Anthony O’Bryant at (706) 545–4591 in 

the Fort Benning Public Affairs Office. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

MCOE FEIS covers the construction, 

operation, facilities maintenance, 

personnel increases, and training 

activities associated with the proposed 

MCOE actions at Fort Benning. The 

Proposed Action includes construction, 

operation, and maintenance of facilities 

and training areas in support of the 

Armor School and Infantry training 

mission. 

In 2007, the Army completed its 2005 

Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)/ 

Transformation Actions FEIS and 

subsequent Record of Decision (ROD) 

for Fort Benning. Since the 

announcement of the BRAC/ 

Transformation ElS ROD in 2007, some 

projects that were reasonably 

foreseeable in Fiscal Year (FY) 14 have 

now been funded, programmed and 

planned, and new projects have been 

identified. In addition, some of the 

projects, originally identified for 

implementation in the FY08 to FY13 

timeframe, have changed in location, 

size, and timing and these changes are 

substantial enough to require a reevaluation. The MCOE FEIS analyzes 

these changes. 

The MCOE FEIS also evaluates new 

facilities and training areas to support 

the increased training requirements of 

military personnel and students 

associated with Grow the Army 

missions at Fort Benning. The 

permanent increase in the Army end 

strength, which is being implemented in 

accordance with Congressional 

authorizations, will allow the Army to 

realign its force structure to a force that 

is capable of meeting national security 

and defense objectives. This action 

would bring the Fort Benning 

population (excluding dependents) to a 

total of 35,837 military, civilian, and 

contractor personnel, as well as 16,624 

military students (daily average). 

Alternatives analyzed in the MCOE 

FEIS are: (I) Alternative A (the Army’s 

Preferred Alternative) which consists of 

43 projects and entails cantonment area 

impacts, and maneuver and range 

development impacts to 10,045 acres 

total; (2) Alternative B which consists of 

48 projects in the cantonment, 

maneuver and range areas, and impacts 

24,596 acres total; and (3) the No Action 

Alternative under which FY09 through 

FY13 BRAC/Transformation projects 

identified in the BRAC/Transformation 

EIS are evaluated. Because the BRAC/ 

Transformation actions have been 

approved for implementation, regardless 

of the decision taken under the MCOE 

proposed action, they are included in 

the No Action Alternative. 

The FEIS analyses indicate that the 

implementation of the proposed action 

would have significant impacts on 

cultural resources, soils, water 

resources, special status species 

(particularly the Red-cockaded 

Woodpecker (RCW), relict trillium, and 

gopher tortoise), and Unique Ecological 

Areas (UEA). The action could 

potentially cause compatibility issues 

for lands adjacent to the ranges due to 

noise. Aesthetic and visual resources 

would be affected, but insignificantly. In 

terms of socioeconomics, development 

would take place and population 

increases would result in economic 

gains under both action alternatives, but 

there could be negative impacts if the 

local market cannot support this 

increase. On-post traffic congestion and 

Main Gate build-up during peak hours 

are anticipated, but these impacts would 

be minimized once road expansions and 

new access points are completed. There 

would be short-term construction 

emissions increases, but they would not 

significantly affect regional air quality 

in the long term. Noise contours 

associated with training would grow 

both on- and off-post, increasing the 

potential for annoyance and complaints 

in adjacent communities. Utilities, 

safety, and hazardous and toxic 

materials and waste would not be 

significantly impacted. Through formal 

consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, minimization 

measures, including a Reasonable and 

Prudent Alternative (RPA), were 

developed to minimize the impacts to 

RCW expressed in a Jeopardy Biological 

Opinion. The RPA also includes a 

requirement that field training 

associated with the Scout Leaders 

Course (Army Reconnaissance Course) 

and MCOE heavy mechanized training 

courses be moved from the Southern 

Maneuver Training Area to an off-post 

site yet to be determined. This 

relocation would take place 5 years from 

the start of the Scout Leaders Course 

and would be the subject of further 

NEPA analysis. 

All the alternatives would have 

significant, adverse noise impacts due to 

expansion of noise levels greater than 75 

dBA (Zone Ill) into approximately 96 

family housing buildings adjacent to 

Dixie Road. The family housing on post 

has been privatized via the Residential 

Communities Initiative (RCI). Fort 

Benning is working with the RCI 

program representatives to determine 

the most feasible mitigation options to 

attenuate noise, which will be analyzed 

in a separate NEPA document when 

more information and options are 

identified. 

For all alternatives, significant 

adverse impacts to land use, biological 

resources, water resources, and soils 

would be reduced with the 

implementation of proposed mitigation 

measures. Significant adverse impacts to 

special status species (RCW), vegetation, 

and UEA would be reduced through the 

implementation of the proposed 

mitigation measures and the RPA, but 

residual impacts would still be 

potentially significant as a result of the 

magnitude of the impacts, loss of 

habitat, and operation and maintenance 

activities. 

An electronic version of the FEIS can 

be viewed or downloaded from the 

following Web site: http:// 

www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/brac/ 

nepa_eis_docs.htm.