Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Broward County Shore Protection Project, North County Line to Hillsboro Inlet (Segment I) General Reevaluation Report, Located in Broward County, FL, 17134-17135 [2010-7599]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
17134
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 2010 / Notices
31314–4928. Written comments may be
mailed to this address or e-mailed to
Charles.Walden4@us.army.mil.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Dina McKain, Public Affairs Office, at
(912) 435–9874 during normal business
hours.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: To meet
the needs of the Soldiers at Fort Stewart,
additional ranges and garrison support
facilities are required. This DEIS
examines the potential environmental
and socioeconomic impacts of the
construction and operation of 12 ranges
and 2 garrison support facilities to be
constructed over a 4-year time period. It
also examines potential impacts to
surrounding lands and/or local
communities.
The DEIS evaluates the following: A
Multipurpose Machine Gun Range, an
Infantry Platoon Battle Course, a Known
Distance Range, two Modified Record
Fire Ranges, a Qualification Training
Range, an Infantry Squad Battle Course,
a Fire and Movement Range, a Digital
Multipurpose Training Range, a 25
Meter Zero Range, a Combat Pistol
Range, and a Convoy Live-Fire Course
and associated engagement boxes. The
Garrison Support Facilities are a Sky
Warrior Unmanned Aerial System
(UAS) facility and a 10th Engineering
Battalion Complex, which would be
constructed in the cantonment area.
Three alternatives are considered:
Alternative A—No Action, and two
action alternatives (Alternatives B and
C). The No Action Alternative is to
continue the current mission and
support activities already occurring at
Fort Stewart. The action alternatives
would greatly enhance Soldier training
and overall unit readiness. Alternatives
B and C offer different sitings for the
ranges and garrison support facilities.
Specified screening criteria were
applied to each alternative to ascertain
and rate the impact, from both an
environmental and an operational
perspective. Where possible, Alternative
B sites tend to utilize footprints of
existing ranges, limit the isolation of
useful maneuver terrain, be located in
relative close proximity to the
cantonment area for operational tempo,
and utilize the existing impact area
without creating any new impact areas.
Alternative C sites tend to locate ranges
on new ground where there has not
been a range in the past. Alternative C
sites also have a greater impact on
training, range operation, off-site noise,
and environmental resources. Overall,
Alternative B will not have as severe an
environmental impact as Alternative C,
although some individual sites may.
After consideration of all anticipated
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Apr 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
operational and environmental impacts,
Alternative B is the Army’s preferred
alternative.
Impacts are analyzed for a wide range
of environmental resource areas
including, but not limited to, air quality,
noise, water resources, biological
resources (to include protected species),
cultural resources, socioeconomics,
infrastructure (utilities and
transportation), land use, solid and
hazardous materials/waste, and
cumulative environmental effects. No
significant impacts are anticipated on
any of these environmental resources.
The Army invites the public to
comment on the DEIS and to participate
in public meetings which will be
announced in local news media. The
DEIS is available at local libraries
surrounding Fort Stewart and the
document may also be accessed at
https://www.Fortstewart-mmp.eis.com.
Comments from the public will be
considered before any decision is made
regarding implementing the proposed
action at Fort Stewart.
Dated: March 19, 2010.
Addison D. Davis, IV,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
(Environment, Safety and Occupational
Health).
[FR Doc. 2010–7452 Filed 4–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710–08–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of
Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for
the Broward County Shore Protection
Project, North County Line to Hillsboro
Inlet (Segment I) General Reevaluation
Report, Located in Broward County, FL
AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps), Jacksonville District,
intends to prepare a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement
(DSEIS) for the Broward County Shore
Protection Project(Segment I) General
Re-Evaluation Report. The project is
being sponsored locally by the city of
Deerfield Beach.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Planning Division,
Environmental Branch, P.O. Box 4970,
Jacksonville, FL 32232–0019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Pat Griffin, by email
Patrick.M.Griffin@usace.army.mil or by
telephone at (904) 232–2286.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
a. The city of Deerfield Beach has
secured the appropriation of Federal
funds from Congress in the FY 03 and
FY 04 Energy and Water Resources
Development Act appropriations,
respectively, for the USACE to initiate
the preparation of the General
Reevaluation Report (GRR). Preparation
of a GRR for Segment I was authorized
by the Conference Report for FY 2003
Appropriations (H.R. 108–10 pg. 808).
The initial authorization for the overall
project provided for construction by the
local sponsor with reimbursement of the
Federal share of eligible costs. This
authorization was provided in House
Document No. 91/89 dated February 18,
1965, as described in the Chief’s Report
dated June 15,1964.
b. Objectives. As the local sponsor for
this study, it is the city of Deerfield
Beach’s expectation and desire that the
USACE will in a cost effective manner
conduct the GRR and the NEPA
document for Segment I (north county
line to Hillsboro Inlet), Broward County,
FL and associated studies on behalf of
the communities of Deerfield Beach and
the Town of Hillsboro Beach and
citizens of Broward County, FL. The city
anticipates that the study will provide
valuable economic, hurricane, storm
and erosion data and related
environmental and biological
information regarding Deerfield’s
beaches and those in Segment I. This
information will assist the city in its ongoing efforts to provide a healthy and
sustainable beach to residents and
visitors. Additionally, the city expects
the GRR and associated studies will
provide in-depth analysis on the
condition of the beaches within the
study area and a determination as to
whether or not the beaches within
Segment I are eligible to receive Federal
funding assistance for on-going and
routine beach nourishment and to
provide the recommended and
appropriate levels and schedule
necessary to conduct activities which
will maintain a healthy beach profile.
c. Alternatives. Alternatives will be
developed during this scoping period.
Information on the proposed
alternatives will be included in future
documents and will be available for
review during public meetings and
document comment periods. Ideas on
potential alternatives are welcome and
will be considered.
d. Issues. The DEIS will consider the
possible effects of placing compatible
material on the beaches located within
the boundaries of Segment I, impacts of
dredging materials from an offshore
borrow area, coral reefs and other
hardbottom communities, as well as
E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM
05APN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 64 / Monday, April 5, 2010 / Notices
other project related impacts on
protected species, water quality, fish
and wildlife resources, cultural
resources, essential fish habitat, socioeconomic resources, coastal processes,
aesthetics and recreation, cumulative
impacts, and other impacts identified
through scoping, public involvement,
and agency coordination.
e. Scoping Process. The scoping
process as outlined by the Council on
Environmental Quality would be
utilized to involve Federal, State, and
local agencies, and other interested
persons and organizations. A scoping
letter would be sent to the appropriate
parties requesting comments and
concerns regarding issues to consider
during the study. Public scoping
meetings would be held. Exact dates,
times, and locations would be published
in local papers.
f. Coordination. The proposed action
is being coordinated with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the
National Marine Fisheries Service under
Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act, with the FWS under the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act, and with the
State Historic Preservation Officer.
g. Other Environmental Review and
Consultation. The proposed action
would involve evaluation for
compliance with guidelines pursuant to
section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act;
application (to the State of Florida) for
Water Quality Certification pursuant to
section 401 of the Clean Water Act;
certification of state lands, easements,
and rights of way; Essential Fish Habitat
with National Marine Fisheries Service;
and determination of Coastal Zone
Management Act consistency.
h. Agency Role. The non-Federal
sponsor (city of Deerfield Beach) will
provide extensive information and
assistance on the resources to be
impacted, mitigation measures if
warranted, and alternatives.
i. DSEIS Preparation. It is estimated
that the DEIS will be available to the
public on or about May 2012.
Dated: March 24, 2010.
Eric P. Summa,
Chief, Environmental Branch.
[FR Doc. 2010–7599 Filed 4–2–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Notice of Proposed Information
Collection Requests
Department of Education.
SUMMARY: The Acting Director,
Information Collection Clearance
Division, Regulatory Information
AGENCY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:35 Apr 02, 2010
Jkt 220001
Management Services, Office of
Management, invites comments on the
proposed information collection
requests as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before June 4,
2010.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires
that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) provide interested
Federal agencies and the public an early
opportunity to comment on information
collection requests. OMB may amend or
waive the requirement for public
consultation to the extent that public
participation in the approval process
would defeat the purpose of the
information collection, violate State or
Federal law, or substantially interfere
with any agency’s ability to perform its
statutory obligations. The Acting
Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Regulatory
Information Management Services,
Office of Management, publishes that
notice containing proposed information
collection requests prior to submission
of these requests to OMB. Each
proposed information collection,
grouped by office, contains the
following: (1) Type of review requested,
e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or
reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary of
the collection; (4) Description of the
need for, and proposed use of, the
information; (5) Respondents and
frequency of collection; and (6)
Reporting and/or Recordkeeping
burden. OMB invites public comment.
The Department of Education is
especially interested in public comment
addressing the following issues: (1) Is
this collection necessary to the proper
functions of the Department; (2) will
this information be processed and used
in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate
of burden accurate; (4) how might the
Department enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (5) how might the
Department minimize the burden of this
collection on the respondents, including
through the use of information
technology.
Dated: March 30, 2010.
Stephanie Valentine,
Acting Director, Information Collection
Clearance Division, Regulatory Information
Management Services, Office of Management.
Office of Planning, Evaluation and
Policy Development
Type of Review: Revision.
Title: Evaluation of the Teacher
Incentive Fund (TIF) Program.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
17135
Frequency: On Occasion.
Affected Public: State, Local, or Tribal
Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs
Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour
Burden:
Responses: 2,841.
Burden Hours: 2,044.
Abstract: In 2006, the U.S.
Department of Education launched the
Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF), which
awards competitive grants to develop
and implement performance-based
compensation systems in high-need
schools. The purpose of the evaluation
is to describe the implementation of the
program and its relationship to any
increases in recruitment and retention
of effective teachers and principals. If
feasible, this evaluation will also seek to
analyze TIF’s relationship to increasing
student achievement.
This evaluation of the TIF program
includes an implementation study of the
Cohort 1 and 2 TIF grantees. The
implementation study will describe the
central features of the local TIF
performance-pay programs, the
implementation of the programs, and
similarities and differences in
performance pay programs. Data
collection activities will be iterative,
beginning with telephone interviews of
key stakeholders in all the TIF sites
(completed winter 2010), followed by
two rounds of more in-depth case
studies in a sample of sites.
Representative surveys of principals and
teachers will also be conducted to
represent the full range of program
knowledge and experiences in each
grantee program. The implementation
study may be used in conjunction with
outcomes data (if the Department
exercises optional outcomes tasks) to
help explain the relationship between
program characteristics and system
supports and program outcomes.
Requests for copies of the proposed
information collection request may be
accessed from https://edicsweb.ed.gov,
by selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending
Collections’’ link and by clicking on link
number 4249. When you access the
information collection, click on
‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view.
Written requests for information should
be addressed to U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW.,
LBJ, Washington, DC 20202–4537.
Requests may also be electronically
mailed to ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed
to 202–401–0920. Please specify the
complete title of the information
collection when making your request.
Comments regarding burden and/or
the collection activity requirements
should be electronically mailed to
ICDocketMgr@ed.gov. Individuals who
E:\FR\FM\05APN1.SGM
05APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 64 (Monday, April 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17134-17135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-7599]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army; Corps of Engineers
Intent To Prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the
Broward County Shore Protection Project, North County Line to Hillsboro
Inlet (Segment I) General Reevaluation Report, Located in Broward
County, FL
AGENCY: Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Jacksonville
District, intends to prepare a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (DSEIS) for the Broward County Shore Protection
Project(Segment I) General Re-Evaluation Report. The project is being
sponsored locally by the city of Deerfield Beach.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Planning Division,
Environmental Branch, P.O. Box 4970, Jacksonville, FL 32232-0019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Pat Griffin, by email
Patrick.M.Griffin@usace.army.mil or by telephone at (904) 232-2286.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
a. The city of Deerfield Beach has secured the appropriation of
Federal funds from Congress in the FY 03 and FY 04 Energy and Water
Resources Development Act appropriations, respectively, for the USACE
to initiate the preparation of the General Reevaluation Report (GRR).
Preparation of a GRR for Segment I was authorized by the Conference
Report for FY 2003 Appropriations (H.R. 108-10 pg. 808). The initial
authorization for the overall project provided for construction by the
local sponsor with reimbursement of the Federal share of eligible
costs. This authorization was provided in House Document No. 91/89
dated February 18, 1965, as described in the Chief's Report dated June
15,1964.
b. Objectives. As the local sponsor for this study, it is the city
of Deerfield Beach's expectation and desire that the USACE will in a
cost effective manner conduct the GRR and the NEPA document for Segment
I (north county line to Hillsboro Inlet), Broward County, FL and
associated studies on behalf of the communities of Deerfield Beach and
the Town of Hillsboro Beach and citizens of Broward County, FL. The
city anticipates that the study will provide valuable economic,
hurricane, storm and erosion data and related environmental and
biological information regarding Deerfield's beaches and those in
Segment I. This information will assist the city in its on-going
efforts to provide a healthy and sustainable beach to residents and
visitors. Additionally, the city expects the GRR and associated studies
will provide in-depth analysis on the condition of the beaches within
the study area and a determination as to whether or not the beaches
within Segment I are eligible to receive Federal funding assistance for
on-going and routine beach nourishment and to provide the recommended
and appropriate levels and schedule necessary to conduct activities
which will maintain a healthy beach profile.
c. Alternatives. Alternatives will be developed during this scoping
period. Information on the proposed alternatives will be included in
future documents and will be available for review during public
meetings and document comment periods. Ideas on potential alternatives
are welcome and will be considered.
d. Issues. The DEIS will consider the possible effects of placing
compatible material on the beaches located within the boundaries of
Segment I, impacts of dredging materials from an offshore borrow area,
coral reefs and other hardbottom communities, as well as
[[Page 17135]]
other project related impacts on protected species, water quality, fish
and wildlife resources, cultural resources, essential fish habitat,
socio-economic resources, coastal processes, aesthetics and recreation,
cumulative impacts, and other impacts identified through scoping,
public involvement, and agency coordination.
e. Scoping Process. The scoping process as outlined by the Council
on Environmental Quality would be utilized to involve Federal, State,
and local agencies, and other interested persons and organizations. A
scoping letter would be sent to the appropriate parties requesting
comments and concerns regarding issues to consider during the study.
Public scoping meetings would be held. Exact dates, times, and
locations would be published in local papers.
f. Coordination. The proposed action is being coordinated with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries
Service under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, with the FWS
under the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, and with the State
Historic Preservation Officer.
g. Other Environmental Review and Consultation. The proposed action
would involve evaluation for compliance with guidelines pursuant to
section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act; application (to the State of
Florida) for Water Quality Certification pursuant to section 401 of the
Clean Water Act; certification of state lands, easements, and rights of
way; Essential Fish Habitat with National Marine Fisheries Service; and
determination of Coastal Zone Management Act consistency.
h. Agency Role. The non-Federal sponsor (city of Deerfield Beach)
will provide extensive information and assistance on the resources to
be impacted, mitigation measures if warranted, and alternatives.
i. DSEIS Preparation. It is estimated that the DEIS will be
available to the public on or about May 2012.
Dated: March 24, 2010.
Eric P. Summa,
Chief, Environmental Branch.
[FR Doc. 2010-7599 Filed 4-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720-58-P
