Programmatic Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding Iron Dome Defense System-Army, 12122-12123 [2022-04465]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
12122
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Notices
19, 2021). The output of this scaling,
where appropriate, is incorporated into
an adjusted total take estimate that is
the basis for NMFS’ small numbers
determinations, as depicted in Table 1.
This product is used by NMFS in
making the necessary small numbers
determinations, through comparison
with the best available abundance
estimates (see discussion at 86 FR 5322,
5391; January 19, 2021). For this
comparison, NMFS’ approach is to use
the maximum theoretical population,
determined through review of current
stock assessment reports (SAR;
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/
marine-mammal-protection/marinemammal-stock-assessments) and modelpredicted abundance information
(https://seamap.env.duke.edu/models/
Duke/GOM/). For the latter, for taxa
where a density surface model could be
produced, we use the maximum mean
seasonal (i.e., 3-month) abundance
prediction for purposes of comparison
as a precautionary smoothing of monthto-month fluctuations and in
consideration of a corresponding lack of
data in the literature regarding seasonal
distribution of marine mammals in the
GOM. Information supporting the small
numbers determinations is provided in
Table 1.
TABLE 1—TAKE ANALYSIS, URSA LOA
Authorized
take
Species
Rice’s whale .....................................................................................................
Sperm whale ....................................................................................................
Kogia spp .........................................................................................................
Beaked whales ................................................................................................
Rough-toothed dolphin ....................................................................................
Bottlenose dolphin ...........................................................................................
Clymene dolphin ..............................................................................................
Atlantic spotted dolphin ...................................................................................
Pantropical spotted dolphin .............................................................................
Spinner dolphin ................................................................................................
Striped dolphin .................................................................................................
Fraser’s dolphin ...............................................................................................
Risso’s dolphin .................................................................................................
Melon-headed whale .......................................................................................
Pygmy killer whale ...........................................................................................
False killer whale .............................................................................................
Killer whale ......................................................................................................
Short-finned pilot whale ...................................................................................
0
1,650
3 611
7,197
1,237
5,760
3,439
2,339
15,608
4,182
1,343
394
1,010
2,306
538
856
7
667
Scaled take 1
n/a
698.1
218.5
726.9
354.9
1,653.1
987.1
671.3
4,479.4
1,200.3
385.5
113.1
297.9
680.4
158.7
252.5
n/a
196.8
Abundance 2
51
2,207
4,373
3,768
4,853
176,108
11,895
74,785
102,361
25,114
5,229
1,665
3,764
7,003
2,126
3,204
267
1,981
Percent
abundance
n/a
31.6
5.0
19.3
7.3
0.9
8.3
0.9
4.4
4.8
7.4
6.8
7.9
9.7
7.5
7.9
2.6
9.9
1 Scalar ratios were applied to ‘‘Authorized Take’’ values as described at 86 FR 5322, 5404 (January 19, 2021) to derive scaled take numbers
shown here.
2 Best abundance estimate. For most taxa, the best abundance estimate for purposes of comparison with take estimates is considered here to
be the model-predicted abundance (Roberts et al., 2016). For those taxa where a density surface model predicting abundance by month was
produced, the maximum mean seasonal abundance was used. For those taxa where abundance is not predicted by month, only mean annual
abundance is available. For the killer whale, the larger estimated SAR abundance estimate is used.
3 Includes 33 takes by Level A harassment and 578 takes by Level B harassment. Scalar ratio is applied to takes by Level B harassment only;
small numbers determination made on basis of scaled Level B harassment take plus authorized Level A harassment take.
Based on the analysis contained
herein of Shell’s proposed survey
activity described in its LOA
modification request and the anticipated
take of marine mammals, NMFS finds
that small numbers of marine mammals
will be taken relative to the affected
species or stock sizes and therefore is of
no more than small numbers.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Authorization
18:23 Mar 02, 2022
[FR Doc. 2022–04449 Filed 3–2–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–22–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
NMFS has determined that the level
of taking for the LOA modification
request is consistent with the findings
made for the total taking allowable
under the incidental take regulations
and that the amount of take authorized
under the modified LOA is of no more
than small numbers. NMFS has
modified the LOA to Shell authorizing
the take of marine mammals incidental
to its planned survey activity, for the
reasons described above.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Dated: February 25, 2022.
Kimberly Damon-Randall,
Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service.
Jkt 256001
Programmatic Environmental
Assessment and Draft Finding of No
Significant Impact Regarding Iron
Dome Defense System—Army
Department of the Army,
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
AGENCY:
The Department of the Army
(Army) announces the availability of a
Programmatic Environmental
Assessment (PEA) and a Draft Finding
of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
regarding the proposed fielding of two
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Iron Dome Defense System—Army
(IDDS–A) batteries. In accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), the PEA analyzes the potential
environmental impact of IDDS–A at
each candidate-installation. That is, the
PEA analyzes the potential
environmental impact of the additional
soldiers, materiel, and training that are
required to field IDDS–A. The Proposed
Action would enhance the defensive
capability of fixed and semi-fixed assets
against aerial threats.
DATES: Comments must be received by
April 4, 2022 to be considered in
finalizing the PEA and Draft FONSI.
ADDRESSES: Please mail comments to
U.S. Army Environmental Command,
ATTN: IDDS–A Public Comments, 2455
Reynolds Road, Mail Stop 112, JBSAFort Sam Houston, TX 78234–7588, or
email comments to usarmy.jbsa.imcomaec.mbx.nepa@army.mil with ‘‘IDDS–A
Public Comments’’ in the subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Cathy Kropp, U.S. Army Environmental
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 42 / Thursday, March 3, 2022 / Notices
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Command Public Affairs Office, by
email (usarmy.jbsa.imcomaec.mbx.nepa@army.mil), by mail (U.S.
Army Environmental Command, ATTN:
Public Affairs, 2455 Reynolds Road,
Mail Stop 112, JBSA-Fort Sam Houston,
TX 78234–7588), or by phone (210–466–
1590 or 210–488–6061).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
purpose of the Proposed Action is to
field two batteries of IDDS–A in fiscal
year (FY) 2022 and improve the defense
of fixed and semi-fixed sites (e.g.,
airfields and forward operating bases).
IDDS–A would enhance the Army’s
capacity to defend against attacks from
aircraft, cruise missiles (CM), unmanned
aerial systems (UAS), and rocket,
artillery, and mortar (RAM) fire. The
Army has been developing an air
defense system for years, but it is not yet
ready to deploy. The Proposed Action
ensures compliance with Section 112 of
the John S. McCain National Defense
Authorization Act for FY 2019 (Pub. L.
115–232), which requires the Army to
deploy an interim missile defense
capability while the Army continues to
develop an enduring solution. After
evaluating existing air defense systems,
the Army chose IDDS–A as the interim
capability. This capability is part of an
air and missile defense modernization
strategy that seeks to improve systems
across the air defense portfolio.
IDDS–A is a mobile, all-weather, air
defense system designed to intercept
RAM threats fired from distances of up
to 70 km. It is also effective against CM,
UAS, airplane, and helicopter threats.
Each IDDS–A battery would consist of
approximately 60 soldiers, 13 heavy
expanded mobility tactical trucks, six
missile-firing units, one radar system,
battle management and communications
systems, and support equipment. All
soldiers would be outfitted with a
standard set of small arms and
equipment. Since IDDS–A is an interim
solution, the Army does not intend to
construct additional office space,
maintenance space, barracks, or training
ranges in support of IDDS–A at this
time.
The Army considered multiple
locations at which existing temporary or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:23 Mar 02, 2022
Jkt 256001
permanent infrastructure can
accommodate IDDS–A units and at
which training can be accomplished
through live fire or approved
simulations. These installations met a
number of mission-related screening
criteria. The Action Alternative is to
field the IDDS–A batteries at one or two
of seven installations: Fort Bliss, TX;
Fort Hood, TX; Fort Campbell, KY; Fort
Riley, KS; Fort Sill, OK; Fort Stewart,
GA; and Joint Base Lewis-McChord,
WA.
The PEA analyzes the potential
environmental impact associated with
the Proposed Action at each assessed
installation, including direct, indirect,
and cumulative effects. The Army did
not conduct a detailed analysis of
socioeconomic impacts because relative
to the assessed installations’ respective
populations, the IDDS–A batteries
represent a small percentage of total
personnel. The PEA takes into account
minimization measures, standard
procedures, and best practices routinely
employed by the relevant installations
to mitigate the adverse effects of similar
actions.
The PEA also studied a No-Action
Alternative. While the No-Action
Alternative would not satisfy the
purpose of or need for the Proposed
Action, it provides a comparative
baseline against which to examine the
effects of the Proposed Action and the
Action Alternative.
Resources considered in the PEA
include biological resources, cultural
resources, water resources, soils, land
use/compatibility, and facilities. Based
on the PEA’s findings, the Army expects
the environmental impact of the
Proposed Action at all assessed
installations to be less than significant
(i.e., negligible or minor).
Government agencies, Native
American Tribes, and the public are
invited to review and comment on the
PEA and Draft FONSI. The public
comment period begins with
publication of this Notice of Availability
in the Federal Register and lasts for 30
days. The PEA and Draft FONSI are
available on the U.S. Army
Environmental Command website at
https://aec.army.mil/
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12123
index.php?cID=352. If you cannot
access the PEA and Draft FONSI online,
please request a hard copy by contacting
U.S. Army Environmental Command by
email (usarmy.jbsa.imcomaec.mbx.nepa@army.mil), by mail (U.S.
Army Environmental Command, ATTN:
Public Affairs, 2455 Reynolds Road,
Mail Stop 112, JBSA-Fort Sam Houston,
TX 78234–7588), or by phone (210–466–
1590 or 210–488–6061).
The Army will consider all timely
public comments and will thereafter
issue either a Final FONSI or a Notice
of Intent to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement. Comments must be
received or postmarked by April 4, 2022
to be considered.
James W. Satterwhite, Jr.,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022–04465 Filed 3–2–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3711–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Transmittal No. 21–0F]
Arms Sales Notification
Defense Security Cooperation
Agency, Department of Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Arms sales notice.
AGENCY:
The Department of Defense is
publishing the unclassified text of an
arms sales notification.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neil
Hedlund at neil.g.hedlund.civ@mail.mil
or (703) 697–9214.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
36(b)(5)(C) arms sales notification is
published to fulfill the requirements of
section 155 of Public Law 104–164
dated July 21, 1996. The following is a
copy of a letter to the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, Transmittal
21–0F with attached Policy Justification.
SUMMARY:
Dated: February 25, 2022.
Aaron T. Siegel,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
E:\FR\FM\03MRN1.SGM
03MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 42 (Thursday, March 3, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12122-12123]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-04465]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Programmatic Environmental Assessment and Draft Finding of No
Significant Impact Regarding Iron Dome Defense System--Army
AGENCY: Department of the Army, Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Army (Army) announces the availability
of a Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) and a Draft Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) regarding the proposed fielding of two
Iron Dome Defense System--Army (IDDS-A) batteries. In accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the PEA analyzes the
potential environmental impact of IDDS-A at each candidate-
installation. That is, the PEA analyzes the potential environmental
impact of the additional soldiers, materiel, and training that are
required to field IDDS-A. The Proposed Action would enhance the
defensive capability of fixed and semi-fixed assets against aerial
threats.
DATES: Comments must be received by April 4, 2022 to be considered in
finalizing the PEA and Draft FONSI.
ADDRESSES: Please mail comments to U.S. Army Environmental Command,
ATTN: IDDS-A Public Comments, 2455 Reynolds Road, Mail Stop 112, JBSA-
Fort Sam Houston, TX 78234-7588, or email comments to
[email protected] with ``IDDS-A Public Comments''
in the subject line.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Cathy Kropp, U.S. Army
Environmental
[[Page 12123]]
Command Public Affairs Office, by email ([email protected]), by mail (U.S. Army Environmental Command, ATTN:
Public Affairs, 2455 Reynolds Road, Mail Stop 112, JBSA-Fort Sam
Houston, TX 78234-7588), or by phone (210-466-1590 or 210-488-6061).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the Proposed Action is to
field two batteries of IDDS-A in fiscal year (FY) 2022 and improve the
defense of fixed and semi-fixed sites (e.g., airfields and forward
operating bases). IDDS-A would enhance the Army's capacity to defend
against attacks from aircraft, cruise missiles (CM), unmanned aerial
systems (UAS), and rocket, artillery, and mortar (RAM) fire. The Army
has been developing an air defense system for years, but it is not yet
ready to deploy. The Proposed Action ensures compliance with Section
112 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for FY
2019 (Pub. L. 115-232), which requires the Army to deploy an interim
missile defense capability while the Army continues to develop an
enduring solution. After evaluating existing air defense systems, the
Army chose IDDS-A as the interim capability. This capability is part of
an air and missile defense modernization strategy that seeks to improve
systems across the air defense portfolio.
IDDS-A is a mobile, all-weather, air defense system designed to
intercept RAM threats fired from distances of up to 70 km. It is also
effective against CM, UAS, airplane, and helicopter threats. Each IDDS-
A battery would consist of approximately 60 soldiers, 13 heavy expanded
mobility tactical trucks, six missile-firing units, one radar system,
battle management and communications systems, and support equipment.
All soldiers would be outfitted with a standard set of small arms and
equipment. Since IDDS-A is an interim solution, the Army does not
intend to construct additional office space, maintenance space,
barracks, or training ranges in support of IDDS-A at this time.
The Army considered multiple locations at which existing temporary
or permanent infrastructure can accommodate IDDS-A units and at which
training can be accomplished through live fire or approved simulations.
These installations met a number of mission-related screening criteria.
The Action Alternative is to field the IDDS-A batteries at one or two
of seven installations: Fort Bliss, TX; Fort Hood, TX; Fort Campbell,
KY; Fort Riley, KS; Fort Sill, OK; Fort Stewart, GA; and Joint Base
Lewis-McChord, WA.
The PEA analyzes the potential environmental impact associated with
the Proposed Action at each assessed installation, including direct,
indirect, and cumulative effects. The Army did not conduct a detailed
analysis of socioeconomic impacts because relative to the assessed
installations' respective populations, the IDDS-A batteries represent a
small percentage of total personnel. The PEA takes into account
minimization measures, standard procedures, and best practices
routinely employed by the relevant installations to mitigate the
adverse effects of similar actions.
The PEA also studied a No-Action Alternative. While the No-Action
Alternative would not satisfy the purpose of or need for the Proposed
Action, it provides a comparative baseline against which to examine the
effects of the Proposed Action and the Action Alternative.
Resources considered in the PEA include biological resources,
cultural resources, water resources, soils, land use/compatibility, and
facilities. Based on the PEA's findings, the Army expects the
environmental impact of the Proposed Action at all assessed
installations to be less than significant (i.e., negligible or minor).
Government agencies, Native American Tribes, and the public are
invited to review and comment on the PEA and Draft FONSI. The public
comment period begins with publication of this Notice of Availability
in the Federal Register and lasts for 30 days. The PEA and Draft FONSI
are available on the U.S. Army Environmental Command website at https://aec.army.mil/index.php?cID=352. If you cannot access the PEA and Draft
FONSI online, please request a hard copy by contacting U.S. Army
Environmental Command by email ([email protected]), by mail (U.S. Army Environmental Command, ATTN:
Public Affairs, 2455 Reynolds Road, Mail Stop 112, JBSA-Fort Sam
Houston, TX 78234-7588), or by phone (210-466-1590 or 210-488-6061).
The Army will consider all timely public comments and will
thereafter issue either a Final FONSI or a Notice of Intent to prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement. Comments must be received or
postmarked by April 4, 2022 to be considered.
James W. Satterwhite, Jr.,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2022-04465 Filed 3-2-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3711-02-P
