[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 13 (Friday, January 18, 2002)]
[Notices]
[Page 2644]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-1405]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of The Army


Notice of Availability of the Environmental Assessment (EA)/
Finding of No Significant Impact (FNSI) for the Programmatic Treatment 
of Capehart and Wherry Era Housing

AGENCY: Department of the Army, DoD.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This announces the availability of the EA/FNSI for the 
Programmatic Treatment of Capehart and Wherry Era Housing under 36 CFR 
800.14(e). The Army intends to sign the FNSI unless public comments 
identify significant impacts or issues that have not been considered. 
The Department of the Army (Army) is pursing a programmatic approach to 
compliance under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act 
for its Capehart and Wherry Era Housing (1949-1962). The Army is facing 
a significant challenge that has direct implications for soldiers' 
quality of life as this housing represents 54% of the Army's total 
family housing stock and 70% of it is considered inadequate (defined as 
requiring a major repair, component upgrade, component replacement or 
total upgrade by the Army Family Housing Master Plan 2000). As such, 
the Army anticipates that all of this housing will be subject to 
rehabilitation, maintenance and repair, demolition and replacement, 
transfer, sale or lease in the next 10 years.
    Development of the EA was preceded by coordination with the 
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the National 
Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO), and the 
National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). In addition, the 
process of gathering public input and coordinating comment on this 
program was initiated by The Army at a symposium to seek the comments 
and suggestions of experts on the proposed treatment to these 
properties. The EA gives full consideration of request and 
implementation of Program Comments in accordance with 36 CFR 800.14(e) 
as the proposed action, and two reasonable alternatives to the proposed 
action.

DATES: Submit comments on or before February 19, 2002.

ADDRESSES: To obtain copies of the EA and FNSI, contact U.S. Army 
Environmental Center, ATTN: SFIM-AEC-PA (Bob DiMichele), Aberdeen 
Proving Ground, MD 21010-5401.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lee Foster at (703) 693-0675.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The EA considered, evaluated and assessed 
alternatives: (i) The no action alternative (continued project-by-
project review under 36 CFR Part 800); (ii) the Programmatic Agreement 
Alternative; and (iii) the proposed action alternative, request and 
implement Program Comments in accordance with 36 CFR 800.14(e). 
Consideration of the alternatives analyzed in the EA leads to The 
Army's decision to request and implement Program Comments. The no 
action alternative would allow a continued ad hoc approach to 
compliance with Section 106 and management of historic properties. With 
the anticipated growth in The Army's historic properties inventory, 
continued review of undertakings on a case-by-case basis will likely 
remain inefficient and lead to increased program costs. This could have 
adverse impacts on the ability of The Army to provide suitable housing 
for military families. The Programmatic Agreement (PA) Alternative 
better meets the stated purpose and need since it would provide a 
programmatic basis for Section 106 compliance. The PA approach, 
however, would require development of several separate compliance 
agreements. This approach would not be as comprehensive in scope and 
would not assure predictability as management actions are carried out. 
Like the no action alternative, the PA alternative could result in 
adverse impacts to The Army's ability to provide suitable housing to 
military families. The proposed action more squarely meets the stated 
purpose and need for action and provides the necessary balance between 
preservation and the need to expeditiously provide suitable housing to 
military families. While the proposed action has the potential to 
adversely impact historic properties, those impacts are not likely to 
be significant. The Army will ensure that effects on historic 
properties are considered and addressed up front through programmatic 
treatment.

    Dated: January 15, 2002.
Raymond J. Fatz,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety, and 
Occupational Health) OASA(I&E).
[FR Doc. 02-1405 Filed 1-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-M