Draft Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Campus Development at Fort Meade, MD, 36371-36372 [2010-15457]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 122 / Friday, June 25, 2010 / Notices
Deletions
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
I certify that the following action will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The major factors considered for this
certification were:
1. If approved, the action will not
result in additional reporting,
recordkeeping or other compliance
requirements for small entities.
2. If approved, the action may result
in authorizing small entities to furnish
a product and a service to the
Government.
3. There are no known regulatory
alternatives which would accomplish
the objectives of the Javits-WagnerO’Day Act (41 U.S.C. 46–48c) in
connection with a product and a service
proposed for deletion from the
Procurement List.
End of Certification
The following product and service are
proposed for deletion from the
Procurement List:
Product
Paper Holder & Micro Note Holder
NSN: 7510–01–484–0011
NPA: The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc.
(Seattle Lighthouse), Seattle, WA
Contracting Activity: Federal Acquisition
Service, GSA/FSS OFC SUP CTR–Paper
Products, New York, NY
Service
Service Type/Location: Facilities
Maintenance, NASA Dryden Flight
Research Center, Edwards, CA
NPA: PRIDE Industries, Roseville, CA
Contracting Activity: National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, NASA
Headquarters, Washington, DC
Patricia Briscoe,
Deputy Director, Business Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–15489 Filed 6–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6353–01–P
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
Agency Information Collection
Activities Under OMB Review
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Notice; Information Collection
3038–0019, Stocks of Grain in Licensed
Warehouses.
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.), this notice announces that
the Information Collection Request (ICR)
abstracted below has been forwarded to
the Office of Management and Budget
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jun 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
(OMB) for review and comment. The
ICR describes the nature of the
information collection and its expected
costs and burden; it includes the actual
data collection instruments [if any].
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before July 26, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR A COPY
CONTACT: Gary Martinaitis at CFTC,
(202) 418–5209; FAX: (202) 418–5527;
e-mail: gmartinaitis@cftc.gov and refer
to OMB Control No. 3038–0019.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Stocks of Grain in Licensed
Warehouses, OMB Control No. 3038–
0019.
This is a request for extension of a
currently approved information
collection.
Abstract: Under Commission
Regulation 1.44, 17 CFR 1.44, contract
markets must require operators of
warehouses regular for delivery to keep
records on stocks of commodities and
make reports on call by the
Commission. The regulation is designed
to assist the Commission in prevention
of market manipulation and is
promulgated pursuant to the
Commission’s rulemaking authority
contained in section 5a of the
Commodity Exchange Act, 7 U.S.C. 7a.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the CFTC’s regulations
were published on December 30, 1981.
See 46 FR 63035 (Dec. 30, 1981). The
Federal Register notice with a 60-day
comment period soliciting comments on
this collection of information was
published on April 13, 2010 (75 FR
18824).
Burden statement: The respondent
burden for this collection is estimated to
average 1 hour per response. This
estimate includes the time needed to
review instructions; develop, acquire,
install, and utilize technology and
systems for the purposes of collecting,
validating, and verifying information,
processing and maintaining information
and disclosing and providing
information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable
instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a
collection of information; and transmit
or otherwise disclose the information.
Respondents/Affected Entities: 3.
Estimated number of responses: 156.
Estimated total annual burden on
respondents: 156 hours.
Frequency of collection: Weekly.
Send comments regarding the burden
estimated or any other aspect of the
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
36371
information collection, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to
the addresses listed below. Please refer
to OMB Control No. 3038–0019 in any
correspondence.
Gary Martinaitis, Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, 1155 21st Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20581 and Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Attention: Desk Office for CFTC, 725
17th Street, Washington, DC 20503.
Issued in Washington, DC, on June 21,
2010.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–15377 Filed 6–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
Addressing Campus Development at
Fort Meade, MD
Department of Defense (DoD).
Notice of availability; notice of
public meeting; request for comments.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Defense
(DOD) announces the availability of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) as part of the environmental
planning process for a Campus
Development Project at Fort George G.
Meade, Maryland (hereafter referred to
as Fort Meade). The DOD proposes the
development of a portion of Fort Meade
(referred to as ‘‘Site M’’) as an
operational complex and to construct
and operate consolidated facilities to
meet the National Security Agency’s
(NSA) continually evolving
requirements and for Intelligence
Community use. The purpose of the
proposed action is to provide facilities
that are fully-supportive of the
Intelligence Community’s mission. The
action is driven by the need to co-locate
key partnering organizations to ensure
required capabilities for current and
future missions are achieved.
This notice announces a 45-day
comment period and provides
information on how to participate in the
public review process. The public
comment period for the Draft EIS will
officially end 45 days after publication
of U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s Notice of Availability in the
Federal Register.
DATES: There will be an open house
beginning at 4:30 p.m. followed by a
public meeting from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on
July 21, 2010 (see ADDRESSES for
meeting location). The public meeting
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES
36372
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 122 / Friday, June 25, 2010 / Notices
may end earlier or later than the stated
time depending on the number of
persons wishing to speak. All materials
that are submitted in response to the
Draft EIS should be received by August
13, 2010, to provide sufficient time to be
considered in preparation of the Final
EIS.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Draft EIS are
available for your review at the Fort
Meade Main Post Library, 4418
Llewellyn Avenue, Fort Meade, MD
20755. You may also call (301) 688–
2970 or send an e-mail to
CampusEIS@hdrinc.com to request a
copy of the Draft EIS.
The open house and scoping meeting
will be held at the Fort Meade Middle
School, 1103 26th Street, Fort Meade,
Maryland 20755. Oral and written
comments will be accepted at the
scoping meeting. You can also submit
written comments to ‘‘Campus
Development EIS’’ c/o HDR|e2M, 2751
Prosperity Avenue, Suite 200, Fairfax,
VA 22031 or submitted by e-mail to
CampusEIS@hdrinc.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Jeffrey Williams at (301) 688–2970, or email jdwill2@nsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The NSA is a tenant
DOD agency on Fort Meade. NSA is a
high-technology organization that is on
the frontier of communications and data
processing. In order to meet evolving
mission requirements, the development
of a modern operational complex is
needed at the NSA campus on Fort
Meade.
Proposed Action and Alternatives:
The Campus Development Project was
initiated to provide a modern
operational complex to meet the
evolving mission requirements of NSA
and the Intelligence Community.
Development is proposed for a portion
of Fort Meade (referred to as ‘‘Site M’’)
adjacent to the NSA campus. Site M is
divided into northern (Site M–1, 137
acres) and southern (Site M–2, 90 acres)
portions. DOD proposes that
development of Site M occur in three
option phases over a horizon of
approximately 20 years.
• Proposed Action (Phase I).
Development would occur in the near
term (approximately 2012 to 2014) on
the eastern half of Site M–1, supporting
1.8 million square feet (ft2) of facilities
for NSA to consolidate mission
elements, enabling services, and support
services across the campus based on
function; servicing the need for more
collaborative environment and optimal
adjacencies, including associated
infrastructure (e.g., electrical substation
and generator plants providing 50
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Jun 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
megawatts of electricity) and
administrative functions for up to 6,500
personnel. This phase would also
include a steam and chilled water plant,
water storage tower, and electrical
substations and generator facilities
capable of supporting the entire
operational complex on Site M.
• Alternative 1 (Phases I and II).
Alternative 1 would include the
implementation of the Proposed Action
(Phase I) along with Phase II. Phase II
would occur in the mid-term
(approximately 2020) on the western
half of Site M–1, supporting 1.2 million
ft2 of administrative facilities.
• Alternative 2 (Phases I, II, and III).
Alternative 2 would include the
implementation of the Proposed Action
(Phase I) along with Phases II and III.
Development would occur on Site M–2
in the long term (approximately 2029),
supporting an additional 2.8 million ft2
of administrative facilities, bringing
built space to 5.8 million ft2 for up to
11,000 personnel.
Alternatives identified include each
of the development phases identified
above, as well as three options for
redundant emergency backup power
generation and various pollution control
systems. The No Action Alternative (not
undertaking the Campus Development
Project) will also be analyzed in detail.
Summary of Environmental Impacts:
The level of potential environmental
impacts resulting from the Proposed
Action and alternatives would primarily
be dependent on the alternative
ultimately selected. Environmental
impacts would generally be more
adverse for Alternatives 1 and 2 than for
the Proposed Action due to the increase
in building footprint and the number of
additional personnel associated with the
alternatives.
Generally, construction and
demolition activities would be expected
to result in some amount of ground
disturbance. Short-term adverse on-site
impacts on soil and water resources as
a result of sedimentation, erosion, and
storm water runoff are unavoidable.
Construction and demolition activities
also generate solid waste. These kinds of
impacts would be expected regardless of
the alternative chosen. Long-term
operation of the complex would be
expected to result in negligible to
moderate impacts on land use,
transportation, noise, air quality,
biological resources, infrastructure,
hazardous materials and waste, and
socioeconomic resources. Potential
significant impacts on cultural resources
could occur under Alternative 2 if
potentially historic properties are not
treated as a design constraint and
avoided.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Best Management Practices and
Mitigation Measures. The Proposed
Action has the potential to result in
adverse environmental impacts. The
Proposed Action includes best
management practices, mitigation
measures, and design concepts to avoid
adverse impacts to the extent
practicable. Unavoidable impacts would
be minimized or compensated for, to the
extent practicable. In accordance with
Council on Environmental Quality
regulations, mitigation measures must
be considered for adverse
environmental impacts. Once a
particular impact associated with a
proposed action is considered
significant, then mitigation measures
must be developed where it is feasible
to do so.
Copies of the Draft EIS are available
for public review at local repositories
and by request (see ADDRESSES). The
DOD invites public and agency input on
the Draft EIS. Please submit comments
and materials during the 45-day public
review period to allow sufficient time
for consideration in development of the
Final EIS (see DATES).
Dated: June 22, 2010.
Mitchell S. Bryman,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010–15457 Filed 6–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Advisory Panel on Department of
Defense Capabilities for Support of
Civil Authorities After Certain Incidents
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Homeland Defense
and America’s Security Affairs), DoD.
ACTION: Notice of multiple meetings by
audio teleconference.
SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the
Federal Advisory Committee Act of
1972 (5 U.S.C., Appendix, as amended),
the Government in the Sunshine Act of
1976 (5 U.S.C. 552b, as amended), and
41 CFR 102–3.150, the Department of
Defense announces that the Advisory
Panel on Department of Defense
Capabilities for Support of Civil
Authorities after Certain Incidents
(hereinafter referred to as the Advisory
Panel) will take place by audio
teleconference on July 7, 8, 9, and 12,
2010.
DATES: The meetings will be held:
Wednesday, July 7, 2010, from 11:00
a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time
(hereinafter referred to as EDT).
E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM
25JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 122 (Friday, June 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36371-36372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-15457]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Draft Environmental Impact Statement Addressing Campus
Development at Fort Meade, MD
AGENCY: Department of Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Notice of availability; notice of public meeting; request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Defense (DOD) announces the availability of
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) as part of the
environmental planning process for a Campus Development Project at Fort
George G. Meade, Maryland (hereafter referred to as Fort Meade). The
DOD proposes the development of a portion of Fort Meade (referred to as
``Site M'') as an operational complex and to construct and operate
consolidated facilities to meet the National Security Agency's (NSA)
continually evolving requirements and for Intelligence Community use.
The purpose of the proposed action is to provide facilities that are
fully-supportive of the Intelligence Community's mission. The action is
driven by the need to co-locate key partnering organizations to ensure
required capabilities for current and future missions are achieved.
This notice announces a 45-day comment period and provides
information on how to participate in the public review process. The
public comment period for the Draft EIS will officially end 45 days
after publication of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Notice of
Availability in the Federal Register.
DATES: There will be an open house beginning at 4:30 p.m. followed by a
public meeting from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on July 21, 2010 (see ADDRESSES
for meeting location). The public meeting
[[Page 36372]]
may end earlier or later than the stated time depending on the number
of persons wishing to speak. All materials that are submitted in
response to the Draft EIS should be received by August 13, 2010, to
provide sufficient time to be considered in preparation of the Final
EIS.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the Draft EIS are available for your review at the
Fort Meade Main Post Library, 4418 Llewellyn Avenue, Fort Meade, MD
20755. You may also call (301) 688-2970 or send an e-mail to
CampusEIS@hdrinc.com to request a copy of the Draft EIS.
The open house and scoping meeting will be held at the Fort Meade
Middle School, 1103 26th Street, Fort Meade, Maryland 20755. Oral and
written comments will be accepted at the scoping meeting. You can also
submit written comments to ``Campus Development EIS'' c/o
HDR[bond]e\2\M, 2751 Prosperity Avenue, Suite 200, Fairfax, VA 22031 or
submitted by e-mail to CampusEIS@hdrinc.com.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeffrey Williams at (301) 688-
2970, or e-mail jdwill2@nsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background: The NSA is a tenant DOD agency on Fort Meade. NSA is a
high-technology organization that is on the frontier of communications
and data processing. In order to meet evolving mission requirements,
the development of a modern operational complex is needed at the NSA
campus on Fort Meade.
Proposed Action and Alternatives: The Campus Development Project
was initiated to provide a modern operational complex to meet the
evolving mission requirements of NSA and the Intelligence Community.
Development is proposed for a portion of Fort Meade (referred to as
``Site M'') adjacent to the NSA campus. Site M is divided into northern
(Site M-1, 137 acres) and southern (Site M-2, 90 acres) portions. DOD
proposes that development of Site M occur in three option phases over a
horizon of approximately 20 years.
Proposed Action (Phase I). Development would occur in the
near term (approximately 2012 to 2014) on the eastern half of Site M-1,
supporting 1.8 million square feet (ft\2\) of facilities for NSA to
consolidate mission elements, enabling services, and support services
across the campus based on function; servicing the need for more
collaborative environment and optimal adjacencies, including associated
infrastructure (e.g., electrical substation and generator plants
providing 50 megawatts of electricity) and administrative functions for
up to 6,500 personnel. This phase would also include a steam and
chilled water plant, water storage tower, and electrical substations
and generator facilities capable of supporting the entire operational
complex on Site M.
Alternative 1 (Phases I and II). Alternative 1 would
include the implementation of the Proposed Action (Phase I) along with
Phase II. Phase II would occur in the mid-term (approximately 2020) on
the western half of Site M-1, supporting 1.2 million ft\2\ of
administrative facilities.
Alternative 2 (Phases I, II, and III). Alternative 2 would
include the implementation of the Proposed Action (Phase I) along with
Phases II and III. Development would occur on Site M-2 in the long term
(approximately 2029), supporting an additional 2.8 million ft\2\ of
administrative facilities, bringing built space to 5.8 million ft\2\
for up to 11,000 personnel.
Alternatives identified include each of the development phases
identified above, as well as three options for redundant emergency
backup power generation and various pollution control systems. The No
Action Alternative (not undertaking the Campus Development Project)
will also be analyzed in detail.
Summary of Environmental Impacts: The level of potential
environmental impacts resulting from the Proposed Action and
alternatives would primarily be dependent on the alternative ultimately
selected. Environmental impacts would generally be more adverse for
Alternatives 1 and 2 than for the Proposed Action due to the increase
in building footprint and the number of additional personnel associated
with the alternatives.
Generally, construction and demolition activities would be expected
to result in some amount of ground disturbance. Short-term adverse on-
site impacts on soil and water resources as a result of sedimentation,
erosion, and storm water runoff are unavoidable. Construction and
demolition activities also generate solid waste. These kinds of impacts
would be expected regardless of the alternative chosen. Long-term
operation of the complex would be expected to result in negligible to
moderate impacts on land use, transportation, noise, air quality,
biological resources, infrastructure, hazardous materials and waste,
and socioeconomic resources. Potential significant impacts on cultural
resources could occur under Alternative 2 if potentially historic
properties are not treated as a design constraint and avoided.
Best Management Practices and Mitigation Measures. The Proposed
Action has the potential to result in adverse environmental impacts.
The Proposed Action includes best management practices, mitigation
measures, and design concepts to avoid adverse impacts to the extent
practicable. Unavoidable impacts would be minimized or compensated for,
to the extent practicable. In accordance with Council on Environmental
Quality regulations, mitigation measures must be considered for adverse
environmental impacts. Once a particular impact associated with a
proposed action is considered significant, then mitigation measures
must be developed where it is feasible to do so.
Copies of the Draft EIS are available for public review at local
repositories and by request (see ADDRESSES). The DOD invites public and
agency input on the Draft EIS. Please submit comments and materials
during the 45-day public review period to allow sufficient time for
consideration in development of the Final EIS (see DATES).
Dated: June 22, 2010.
Mitchell S. Bryman,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 2010-15457 Filed 6-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
