[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 236 (Tuesday, December 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64813-64816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32104]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Record of Decision for the Realignment of the Naval Sea Systems
Command
AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.
[[Page 64814]]
ACTION: Notice of record of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy announces its decision to relocate
the Naval Sea Systems Command from leased spaces in Arlington, Virginia
to the Washington Navy Yard, Washington DC.
DATES: This Record of Decision is effective December 1, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tom Peeling, Office of the Chief
of Naval Operations (N456), Crystal Plaza #5, 2211 South Clark Place,
Arlington, VA 22244, (703) 604-1232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the entire Record of Decision is
provided as follows:
Notice of Record of Decision for the Realignment of the Naval Sea
Systems Command.
Pursuant to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990
(DBCRA), Pub.L. 101-510, Section 102(2)C of the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and the Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations for implementing NEPA procedures (40 CFR 1500-1508), the
Department of the Navy (Navy) announces its decision to relocate the
Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) from leased space in Arlington,
Virginia to the Washington Navy Yard (WNY) Washington, DC. The
realignment will be accomplished as set out in Alternative One
described in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) as the
preferred alternative.
The Recommendations of the 1995 Defense Base Closure and
Realignment (DBCR) Commission, which were approved by the President and
accepted by the Congress, directed the Navy to relocate NAVSEA to the
WNY or other Government-owned property in the metropolitan Washington,
DC area. Section 2904 of the DBCRA requires the completion of this
realignment no later than six years from the date the President
transmitted the recommendations of the 1995 DBCR Commission to
Congress. Consequently, the Navy must complete the NAVSEA realignment
no later than July 2001.
In response to the 1995 DBCR Commission recommendation, the Navy
established criteria for screening available sites in the metropolitan
Washington, DC area. To qualify as a receiver site for NAVSEA, each
site must: (1) have sufficient capacity to accommodate the office space
required for the 4,100 NAVSEA employees. Based upon a detailed analysis
of NAVSEA space needs, one million square feet of office and associated
space is required to accommodate NAVSEA personnel and functions; (2)
have sufficient capacity to allow location of NAVSEA facilities in a
single building or in a closely related complex of buildings; (3) have
the capacity to meet National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC)
criteria that large federal employment centers be served by public
transportation and that federal development be consistent with local
development plans and policies; and (4) be available to the Navy on a
timely and unencumbered basis, so that NAVSEA's realignment can be
completed by July 2001.
Using these criteria, the Navy evaluated eighteen Navy-owned or
occupied sites in the metropolitan Washington, DC area. Of these sites,
only the Washington Navy Yard met the criteria to accommodate a
realigned NAVSEA. Fifteen of those sites did not have sufficient
physical capacity to accommodate NAVSEA due to lack of available
buildable land and were eliminated from detailed analysis. The Naval
Surface Warfare Center at White Oak, Maryland had sufficient buildable
land, but was eliminated from detailed analysis because it was
identified for closure by the 1995 DBCR Commission. Federal Office
Building 2 (Navy Annex) in Arlington, Virginia also had sufficient
space, but was eliminated from detailed analysis because the facility
could not be cleared of its current occupants, renovated, and re-
occupied by NAVSEA by July 2001. Additionally, the Office of the
Secretary of Defense owns the Navy Annex and plans to dispose of the
property after renovation of the Pentagon is complete.
To determine whether other government-owned property in the
metropolitan Washington, DC area would be available for NAVSEA use, the
Navy sent letters to the Army and Air Force requesting that they
identify any properties which could be utilized. Both services
responded by letter that no suitable property in the Washington, DC
metropolitan area under their ownership could be made available.
Additionally, the Navy considered General Services Administration (GSA)
property for potential use by NAVSEA. However, because the WNY already
has been shown to have sufficient capacity to accommodate a command the
size of NAVSEA, use of GSA property would be inconsistent with Federal
Property Management Regulations, 41 CFR Ch 101.
While a No-Action alternative was initially identified, it was
eliminated from detailed analysis because Section 2905(c) of the DBCRA
expressly exempts decisions to close or realign facilities from NEPA
analysis. The four construction alternatives focused on a group of
existing buildings within the western area of the WNY. The alternatives
vary in the degree of renovation, demolition and new construction
required. Alternative One is a mixture of renovation of existing
buildings and demolition and new construction. Alternative Two includes
the renovation of existing facilities to meet the office space
requirement and construction of a twelve level parking garage.
Alternative Three favors demolition and new construction over
renovation. Alternative Four involves extensive demolition and new
construction and a minor amount of renovation.
Alternative One, identified as the Preferred Alternative in the
FEIS, provides excellent functionality for the NAVSEA Headquarters.
Components of NAVSEA, which must work closely together, are located in
a small number of tightly clustered buildings. The employee parking
garage is sited directly in the center of the NAVSEA complex with
optimum pedestrian access to NAVSEA occupied buildings. The garage can
be laid out in a highly efficient four bay configuration, and is served
on two sides by two collector streets. Although Alternative One
involves potentially adverse impacts on cultural resources due to the
demolition of several buildings, the Navy developed a mitigation plan
for these impacts. The District of Columbia Office of Historic
Preservation and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation reviewed
and approved that plan. The mitigation plan is documented in a
Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Navy, the District of
Columbia Office of Historic Preservation and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation on 23 December 1996.
Alternative Two, which consists entirely of renovating existing WNY
buildings and involves no demolition, is the environmentally preferable
alternative because it minimizes adverse effects on cultural resources.
However, it fragments NAVSEA offices into six separate buildings. This
dispersed configuration would adversely affect the functioning of
NAVSEA as a systems command headquarters. Additionally, the retention
of all the existing WNY buildings leaves no suitable site for the
required employee parking garage. The garage would be forced into an
awkward and inefficient linear configuration allowing only one bay of
parking spaces with extensive external ramping to serve its twelve
levels. Also, the garage would be served by only one collector street,
increasing the potential for traffic
[[Page 64815]]
conflicts and bottlenecks within the base.
Alternatives Three and Four were not selected because they would
have greater adverse impacts on cultural resources than either
Alternative One or Two and they do not offer significantly better
functionality than Alternative One.
There are no significant environmental impacts resulting from
implementation of Alternative One. The Navy will implement all
practical means to avoid or minimize other impacts to the environment.
The mitigation measures are summarized at pages 4-28 through 4-31 of
the FEIS.
Comments Received on the FEIS: In response to the FEIS, the Navy
received comments from one private individual, an environmental
planning group associated with the General Services Administration
Southeast Federal Center, and the Arlington County (Virginia) Chamber
of Commerce. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) informed the
Navy that it could not comment within the 30-day comment period. To
date, the Navy has received no comments from EPA. Responses to similar
comments are grouped by issue of concern.
All commentors expressed concern over impacts to local traffic in
the vicinity of the WNY. The Navy considered traffic as one of the more
important issues of concern related to the proposed action, and
acquired the services of a professional traffic consultant familiar
with local/regional transportation to conduct studies, analyze
potential impacts and advise the Navy concerning traffic related
matters. The results of these efforts are contained in the FEIS and a
WNY Traffic Management Plan. Although the Navy does not have the
authority to regulate off-base traffic or personal privileges of its
employees with regard to travel to or from their place of employment,
it will limit the development of new parking at the WNY, and modify
internal circulation and increase operation of the M Street and Isaac
Hull Gate to mitigate potential impacts to local traffic from the
mandated realignment. The results of traffic analysis for the proposed
action show that the resulting traffic related impacts will not be
significant.
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce expressed concern that the
Navy Annex was not included in the FEIS as a reasonable alternative for
the NAVSEA Headquarters. The Navy provided a discussion in the FEIS of
the criteria and rationale used to identify reasonable alternatives and
a brief discussion of the reasons for eliminating other alternatives.
As stated in the Background Section of the FEIS, office space at the
Navy Annex is currently occupied by Headquarters Marine Corps and the
Bureau of Naval Personnel and is therefore unavailable to meet the
requirements in terms of space and timing. Utilization of Navy Annex as
the receiver site for NAVSEA Headquarters is infeasible because it
cannot be vacated of its existing tenants, renovated for new occupancy
and re-occupied by NAVSEA within the legally mandated six year
timeframe. In addition the property is owned by the Department of
Defense, which does not intend to retain this building beyond the
completion of the Pentagon renovation project. As a result, it is not
analyzed as a feasible alternative in the FEIS.
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce expressed concern over the
adequacy of contamination studies data at the WNY relative to assessing
the risks to relocated personnel, and disposal of contaminated
materials encountered through project construction. Investigation of
contamination at the WNY is being conducted in accordance with
established procedures of the Installation Restoration Program and in
coordination with the Environmental Protection Agency. These protocols
are designed to guide property owners and regulators in deducing the
presence of contamination and, if necessary, the appropriate remedial
actions. A risk assessment for employees at the WNY, conducted in
accordance with Environmental Protection Agency guidelines for
contaminated sites, found that there is no significant risk to office
workers at the Installation. In direct support of the DBCRA relocation,
the Navy also conducted an environmental site investigation of the
buildings which will be affected by the NAVSEA projects (Baker,
November 1997). The report included several recommendations which will
be incorporated into the construction contract to mitigate potential
impacts. These mitigations are identified in Section 4.8 of the FEIS.
Implementation of the recommendations/mitigation will serve to fully
protect construction workers, employees at the WNY, individuals in the
surrounding community and the environment. As discussed in the FEIS,
specific requirements will be included in the construction contract for
the NAVSEA facilities to deal with contaminated materials encountered
during construction. These requirements implement applicable regulatory
procedures for appropriate treatment and/or disposal of contaminated
materials should such materials be found during construction.
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce also expressed concern
that construction of facilities for NAVSEA at the WNY would impede
future remediation efforts at the Installation. Surface soil
contamination within the project site (former coal storage area), has
been remediated. Implementation of Alternative One will not impede
future remediation efforts, if required, because it does not
significantly affect access to subsurface soil or ground water. Future
remediation of subsurface contaminants, if required, would most likely
involve a flushing method which would be unaffected by implementation
of Alternative One.
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce expressed concern over the
effects of stormwater runoff from the project site. As stated in the
FEIS, the project site is covered by impermeable surfaces and
construction at the project site will not increase surface runoff.
Surface contamination within the project site, associated with the
former coal storage pit, has been remediated as part of the
Installation Restoration Program. An approved Erosion and Sediment
Control Plan for the project will be implemented to contain eroded
materials on-site. Water associated with excavation sites will be
tested and treated prior to discharge into the sanitary system in
coordination with the District Water and Sewer Authority Pretreatment
Office. Stormwater control structures will be incorporated into the
project design in accordance with regulatory guidance. The repair and/
or replacement of existing stormwater conveyances structures throughout
the Installation will be completed as part of the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System Permit requirements for the Installation.
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce expressed concern that
airborne material from construction activities will impact surrounding
communities. Airborne contaminants associated with project construction
will be controlled through the implementation of specific plans
prepared in accordance with regulatory guidance. These include an
Asbestos Plan, Lead (paint) Removal and Disposal Plan, an erosion and
Sediment Control Plan, and various construction related requirements
such as the application of dust suppressants, wet mopping, vacuuming,
wet cutting and covering open bed haul trucks. Controlling airborne
pollutants at the source protects construction workers, WNY employees
and the surrounding community.
[[Page 64816]]
The Arlington County Chamber of Commerce expressed concern that the
FEIS failed to address Environmental Justice issues with regard to the
effectiveness of onsite mitigation to protect the surrounding community
and that implementation of the DBCRA action takes precedence over
Installation Restoration Program efforts at the WNY. The protection
provided to on-site personnel through implementation of project related
mitigation would extend to those outside the immediate area of the
project site. As discussed in the FEIS, the NAVSEA DBCRA action is
separate from remediation at the WNY conducted under the Installation
Restoration Program. Each has its own regulatory guidelines, scheduling
and funding. Development of facilities at the WNY and implementation of
the DBCRA realignment of NAVSEA has no bearing on the priority for
scheduling of activities conducted under the authority of Installation
Restoration Program. Moreover, the relocation of NAVSEA to the WNY will
bring jobs to the area and has the potential to benefit current
residents of the neighborhood.
The Navy carefully considered all comments received on the FEIS.
The FEIS fully addresses all of the issues and concerns identified in
the comments received on the FEIS. Therefore, no additional discussion
is necessary in this Record of Decision.
Based on the analysis contained in the FEIS and support provided in
the administrative record, I select Alternative One to implement the
realignment of NAVSEA.
Dated: December 1, 1997.
Duncan Holaday,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Installations and Facilities).
[FR Doc. 97-32104 Filed 12-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P