Department of the Army May 2020 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

The Department of the Army (Army) announces the availability of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Heavy Off-Road Mounted Maneuver Training Area (HOMMTA) at Fort Benning, Georgia. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Draft EIS analyzes the potential environmental and socioeconomic impacts, and recommends related mitigation measures, associated with constructing, operating, and maintaining a HOMMTA of at least 2,400 contiguous acres at Fort Benning to support off-road mounted maneuver (Proposed Action). The Proposed Action would support the Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCoE) in its mission to train the maneuver forces of the Army and would increase the total amount of heavy off-road maneuver training area on Fort Benning, enabling Fort Benning to conduct realistic training in accordance with current Army training requirements. The Proposed Action would provide a training area to meet existing training needs; it would not result in additional Soldiers, traffic, or any training off of the Installation. Training land development would occur over a 2- to 3-year period; development would primarily include vegetation removal and the construction of tank trails, culverted water crossings, and road upgrades, as well as burying existing overhead utilities. As feasible, buffers would be used to protect environmentally sensitive resources such as streams, wetlands, cemeteries, and archaeological sites. A Draft Finding of No Practicable Alternative (FONPA) addressing potential impacts on wetlands and 100-year floodplains is also available in the Draft EIS for comment.

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announces a proposed public information collection and seeks public comment on the provisions thereof. Comments are invited on: Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed information collection; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and ways to minimize the burden of the information collection on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.