[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21921-21924]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8800]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Record of Decision To Develop, Test, Deploy, and Plan for 
Decommissioning of the Ballistic Missile Defense System

AGENCY: Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is issuing this Record of 
Decision (ROD) to develop, test, deploy, and plan for decommissioning 
of the Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS). This decision includes 
the development, testing, deployment, and planning for decommissioning 
of land-, sea- and air-based platforms for BMDS weapons components and 
space-based sensors. This action will enable MDA to develop and field 
an integrated, layered, BMDS to defend the United States (U.S.), its 
deployed forces, allies, and friends against all ranges of enemy 
ballistic missiles in all phases of flight. The BMDS is a key component 
of U.S. policy for addressing ballistic missile threats worldwide.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on the BMDS 
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) or this ROD please 
contact Mr. Rick Lehner, MDA Director of Public Affairs at (703) 697-
8997. Downloadable electronic versions of the Final PEIS and ROD are 
available on the MDA public access Internet Web site http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/enviro.html. Public reading copies of the 
Final PEIS and the ROD are available for review at the following public 
libraries:
     Anchorage Municipal Library (Anchorage, AK).
     Mountain View Branch Library (Anchorage, AK).
     California State Library (Sacramento, CA).
     Sacramento Public Library (Sacramento, CA).
     Hawaii State Library (Honolulu, HI).
     University of Hawaii at Manoa (Honolulu, HI).
     Arlington County Public Library, Central Branch 
(Arlington, VA).
     District of Columbia Public Library, Central Branch 
(Washington, DC).

    Dated: April 11, 2008.
Patricia Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. MDA Decision

    The MDA is issuing this ROD, selecting Alternative 1 as described 
in the BMDS PEIS, to develop, test, deploy, and plan for 
decommissioning of the BMDS. This decision includes the development, 
testing, deployment, and planning for decommissioning of land-, sea-, 
and air-based platforms for BMDS weapons components. Alternative 1 also 
includes space-based sensors. MDA is deferring a decision on the 
development, testing, and deployment of space-based interceptors 
(Alternative 2) pending further concept development and policy 
discussion.

B. Background

    The MDA has a requirement to develop, test, deploy, and prepare for 
decommissioning the BMDS to protect the U.S., its deployed forces, 
friends, and allies from ballistic missile threats. The proposed action 
would provide an integrated BMDS using existing infrastructure and 
capabilities, when feasible, as well as emerging and new technologies, 
to meet current and evolving threats in support of the MDA's mission. 
Consequently, the BMDS would be a layered system of defensive weapons, 
sensors, command and control, battle management, and communications 
(C2BMC), and support assets; each with specific functional 
capabilities, working together to defend against all classes and ranges 
of ballistic missile threats in all phases of flight. Multiple 
defensive weapons would be used to create a layered defense comprised 
of multiple intercept opportunities along the trajectory of the 
incoming ballistic missiles. This would provide a layered defensive 
system of capabilities designed to back up one another.
    On December 17, 2002, the President announced his decision to field 
an initial defensive operation capability. The initial fielding would 
provide a modest protection of the U.S. and would be improved over 
time. Prior to the initiation of the BMDS PEIS, MDA and its predecessor 
agencies prepared several programmatic National Environmental Policy 
Act (NEPA) documents regarding ballistic missile defense. In addition, 
each program

[[Page 21922]]

element prepared extensive NEPA documentation to cover its own specific 
test and development activities. Ballistic missile defense has evolved 
to the point that the BMDS PEIS was prepared to consider the integrated 
BMDS as envisioned in the evolution of the MDA.
    A Programmatic EIS, or PEIS, analyzes the broad envelope of 
environmental consequences in a wide-ranging Federal program like the 
BMDS. A PEIS addresses the overall issues in a proposed program and 
considers related actions together in order to review the program 
comprehensively. A PEIS is appropriate for projects that are broad in 
scope, are implemented in phases, and are widely dispersed 
geographically. A PEIS creates a comprehensive, global analytical 
framework that supports subsequent analysis of specific activities at 
specific locations, which could then be tiered from the PEIS.
    The BMDS PEIS is intended to serve as a tiering document for 
subsequent specific BMDS NEPA analyses and includes a roadmap for 
considering environmental impacts and resource areas in developing 
future documents. This roadmap identifies how a specific resource area 
can be analyzed and also includes thresholds for considering the 
significance of environmental impacts to specific resource areas. This 
means that ranges, installations, and facilities at which specific BMDS 
activities may occur in the future could tier their documents from the 
PEIS and have some reference point from which to start their site-
specific analyses.

C. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Process

    The MDA prepared the BMDS PEIS pursuant to the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing the NEPA (40 CFR 
Parts 1500-1508); Department of Defense (DoD) Instruction 4715.9, 
Environmental Planning and Analysis; the applicable service 
environmental regulations that implement these laws and regulations; 
and Executive Order (EO) 12114, Environmental Effects Abroad of Major 
Federal Actions (whose implementation is guided by NEPA and the CEQ 
implementing regulations).
    On April 11, 2003, MDA initiated the public scoping process by 
publishing the Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare the PEIS for the BMDS 
in the Federal Register. MDA held public scoping meetings in Arlington, 
Virginia; Sacramento, California; Anchorage, Alaska; and Honolulu, 
Hawaii. The Notice of Availability (NOA) of the MDA BMDS Draft PEIS was 
published in the Federal Register on September 17, 2004. This initiated 
a public review and comment period for the Draft PEIS. MDA held public 
hearings in Arlington, Virginia; Sacramento, California; Anchorage, 
Alaska; and Honolulu, Hawaii. MDA received approximately 8,500 comments 
on the Draft PEIS; MDA considered all of these comments in preparing 
the Final PEIS. Responses to all of the in-scope comments can be found 
in Appendix K of the PEIS. Three recurring issues of public concern--
orbital debris, perchlorate, and radar impacts to wildlife--were 
addressed in more technical detail in Appendices L, M, and N, 
respectively, of the PEIS.
    The NOA for the Final PEIS was published in the Federal Register on 
February 16, 2007. This ROD is the culmination of the NEPA process.

D. Alternatives Considered

    In developing the alternatives, MDA reviewed the various components 
of the BMDS (i.e., weapons, sensors, C2BMC, and support assets) and the 
acquisition process common to all components (i.e., development, 
testing, deployment, and planning for decommissioning). The components 
are the systems and subsystems of logically grouped hardware and 
software that perform interrelated tasks to provide the BMDS functional 
capabilities. The acquisition process is capability driven and 
component-based. Capability-based planning allows MDA to develop 
capabilities and system performance objectives based on technological 
feasibility, engineering analyses, and the potential capability of the 
threat. Spiral development is an iterative process for developing the 
BMDS by refining program objectives as technology becomes available 
through research and testing with continuous feedback among MDA, the 
test community, and the military operators. Each new technology goes 
through development; promising technologies go through testing and 
demonstration; and proven technologies are incorporated into the BMDS.
     Development. Development includes the various activities 
that support research and development of the BMDS components and 
overall systems. This includes planning, budgeting, research and 
development, systems engineering, site preparation and construction, 
repair, maintenance and sustainment, manufacture of test articles and 
initial testing, including modeling, simulation, and tabletop 
exercises.
     Testing. Testing of the BMDS involves demonstration of 
BMDS elements and components through test and evaluation. The 
successful demonstration of the BMDS would rely on a robust testing 
program aimed at producing credible system characterization, 
verification, and assessment data. To confirm these capabilities, MDA 
would continue to develop test beds using existing and new land-, sea-, 
air-, and space-based assets. Some construction at various geographic 
locations would be required to support infrastructure and assets where 
BMDS components and the overall system would be tested. Testing of the 
BMDS includes ongoing and planned tests (e.g., ground tests, flight 
tests) of components that might be incorporated into the BMDS, as well 
as tests of the layered, integrated BMDS through increasingly realistic 
system integration tests through 2012 and beyond.
     Deployment. Deployment of the BMDS refers to the fielding 
(including the manufacture, site preparation, construction, and 
transport of systems) and sustainment (including operations and 
maintenance, training, upgrades, and service life extension) of the 
BMDS. The evolving BMDS is intended to have the capability over time to 
deploy different combinations of interoperable components. Deployment 
also would involve the transfer of facilities, elements, and programs 
to the military services.
     Decommissioning. Decommissioning would involve the 
demilitarization and final removal and disposal of the BMDS components 
and assets. Plans would be made for decommissioning BMDS components by 
either demolition or transfer to other uses or owners.
    The following presents a discussion of the alternatives considered 
by MDA and presents and contrasts the components and acquisition phases 
that are unique to each alternative.
    No Action Alternative: Under the No Action Alternative, the MDA 
would not develop, test, deploy, or plan for decommissioning activities 
for an integrated BMDS. Instead, the MDA would continue existing 
development and testing of discrete systems as stand-alone ballistic 
missile defense capabilities. Individual systems would continue to be 
tested but would not be subjected to System Integration Tests.
    Alternative 1 (selected alternative): Under Alternative 1, the MDA 
will develop, test, deploy, and plan to decommission an integrated 
BMDS, composed of land-, sea-, and air-based components. Alternative 1 
also includes space-based sensors, but does not include space-based 
interceptors.
    Alternative 2: Under Alternative 2, the MDA would develop, test, 
deploy, and plan to decommission an integrated

[[Page 21923]]

BMDS, composed of land-, sea-, air-, and space-based components. 
Alternative 2 would be identical to Alternative 1, with the addition of 
space-based interceptors. A space-based test bed would be considered 
and evaluated to determine the feasibility of using kinetic energy 
interceptors on space platforms to intercept threat missiles.

E. Environmental Impacts of Alternatives

    The PEIS evaluated potential impacts associated with each 
alternative for each acquisition life cycle phase (i.e., development, 
testing, deployment, and planning for decommissioning) by component 
(i.e., weapons, sensors, C2BMC, and support assets). To evaluate the 
potential impacts of implementing one of the alternatives (i.e., No 
Action Alternative, Alternative 1, or Alternative 2) considered for the 
BMDS, the MDA characterized the existing condition of the affected 
environment in the locations where various BMDS implementation 
activities would occur. The affected environment includes all land, 
air, water, and atmospheric environments where proposed activities are 
reasonably foreseeable. For this PEIS, the affected environment 
includes all locations, ranges, installations, and facilities that the 
MDA has used, uses, or proposes to use for the BMDS both within and 
outside the U.S. The MDA determined that activities associated with the 
proposed BMDS might occur in locations around the world. Therefore, the 
affected environment has been considered in terms of global biomes, 
broad ocean areas, and the atmosphere.
    Each biome covers a broad region, both geographically and 
ecologically for both domestic and international locations where 
components of the proposed BMDS may be located or operated. Climate, 
geography, geology, and distribution and abundance of vegetation and 
wildlife determine the range of the biomes. Using biomes as affected 
environmental designations facilitates future site-specific 
environmental documentation to tier from the BMDS PEIS. Further, BMDS 
test activities would often occur over broad ocean areas, and the 
necessity of launching targets and interceptors to support testing 
would indicate that consideration of the atmosphere and broad ocean 
areas as parts of the affected environment was appropriate.
    To evaluate the potential environmental consequences of the 
alternatives, the components of the BMDS (i.e., weapons, sensors, 
C2BMC, and support assets) were evaluated as they proceed through 
acquisition life cycle phases. MDA evaluated each of the BMDS 
acquisition phases including development, testing, deployment, and 
decommissioning. Not all activities associated with the BMDS are 
expected to produce environmental impacts. Only those activities with 
expected impacts during one or more acquisition phases were identified 
in the PEIS. Further, only those activities that are considered 
reasonably foreseeable were analyzed in the PEIS. Four steps were used 
to analyze impacts in the BMDS PEIS. Step 1 included the identification 
and characterization of BMDS activities. Step 2 included the 
identification of activities with no potential for impact. Step 3 
included the identification of similar activities occurring across 
acquisition life cycle phases. Step 4 included the conduct of 
environmental analyses. The analyses for each alternative are specific 
to each resource area based on the impacts from the activities 
associated with the BMDS components.
    The potential impacts of the various alternatives are summarized in 
Exhibits ES-7 through ES-13 in the Final BMDS PEIS (available on the 
MDA Web site http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/enviro.html and are as 
discussed in the Final BMDS PEIS. This ROD presents a brief discussion 
that highlights the differences between the alternatives.
    Alternative 1 would result in the potential for increased 
environmental consequences over the No Action Alternative due to the 
additional integrated test events and the development and testing of an 
integrated C2BMC. The additional potential for environmental 
consequences associated with the development, testing, deployment, and 
planning for decommissioning of the space-based interceptors in 
Alternative 2 could result in environmental consequences that would be 
in addition to those associated with Alternative 1.
    The increase in potential impacts associated with the development 
and acquisition phases of Alternatives 1 and 2 over the No Action 
Alternative would result from increased testing and the site 
preparation and development of new facilities or the refurbishment of 
existing facilities for C2BMC, or to develop space-based missile 
defense technologies. The site preparation may result in additional 
impacts on the land-based resources (i.e., biological, geology and 
soils, noise, water), but would not impact non-land based resources 
(i.e., airspace or orbital debris).
    The increase in potential impacts associated with the testing 
acquisition phase of Alternatives 1 and 2 over the No Action 
Alternative would result from an increased number of test events, 
specifically, system integration tests. The increase in the number of 
test events would result in additional impacts on all resource areas, 
and based on the specific activities and objectives of an individual 
test event, impacts on some resources might be insignificant as 
demonstrated in the PEIS, while impacts to other resources would be 
more substantial.
    The increase in potential impacts associated with the deployment 
acquisition phase of Alternative 2 over Alternative 1 and the No Action 
Alternative would result from the site preparation, development, and 
emplacement of new facilities or the refurbishment of existing 
facilities for deployment of space-based interceptors. The site 
preparation may result in additional impacts on the land-based 
resources (e.g., biological, geology and soils, noise, water), and 
placing interceptors into space could produce impacts on non-land based 
resources (e.g., airspace or orbital debris).
    The increase in potential impacts associated with the planning for 
decommissioning of Alternative 2 over Alternative 1 and the No Action 
Alternative would result from the additional BMDS components that would 
require decommissioning.
    No significant environmental impacts or cumulative impacts on 
resource areas addressed for any activity considered in implementing 
the BMDS were found in this programmatic impact analysis. There could 
be impacts associated with the specific BMDS program activities at 
specific locations; however, as stated in the PEIS they would be 
addressed, as appropriate, in subsequent NEPA analyses that would tier 
from the PEIS. As appropriate, mitigation measures would be developed 
to address any site-specific significant impacts.

F. Mitigation Monitoring

    MDA did not identify any significant programmatic environmental 
impacts arising from the proposed action and therefore, is not 
identifying specific mitigation measures. However, as discussed above, 
there is the potential for specific BMDS activities at specific 
locations to impact the environment, and mitigation measures would be 
identified, as appropriate, in future NEPA analyses tiered from this 
PEIS. MDA uses a mitigation monitoring database to track the 
implementation of mitigation measures identified in previous NEPA 
analyses and will continue to follow its mitigation monitoring process 
(EMP-3-62, Mitigation Monitoring) to both track and

[[Page 21924]]

monitor the effectiveness of MDA's mitigation measures, including those 
identified in future, site-specific NEPA analyses tiered from this 
PEIS.

G. Environmentally Preferred Alternative

    The findings of the PEIS indicate that the No Action Alternative, 
the continuation of existing program element-based testing and 
development activities with no integration testing, would be the 
environmentally-preferred alternative. As a conservative estimate, MDA 
assumed that stand-alone element component testing as well as system 
integration testing would occur under Alternatives 1 and 2, which would 
result in potentially more adverse effects than the No Action 
Alternative. However, MDA believes that consolidation of stand-alone 
component tests associated with Alternative 1 into the system 
integration tests to the extent practicable could serve to reduce the 
overall environmental consequences as the total number of tests 
conducted by MDA could fall.

H. Conclusion

    I have considered potential environmental impacts as defined in the 
PEIS, cost, technical requirements, applicable statutory and regulatory 
requirements, Presidential direction (the December 17, 2002, 
Presidential announcement to field an initial defensive operation 
capability), MDA's mandate and mission, and public comments in arriving 
at my decision.
    I select Alternative 1 over the other alternatives for 
implementation of the proposed action. Although the No Action 
Alternative has been identified as the environmentally-preferred 
alternative, it does not support the Agency's mandate or mission. 
Alternative 1 has fewer environmental consequences than Alternative 2, 
as described above.
    I have selected Alternative 1 because integration of missile 
defense capabilities as opposed to single element development, testing, 
and deployment is essential to an effective BMDS that can provide a 
layered defense of the United States, its deployed troops, and its 
friends and allies. Any decision to deploy a BMDS capability will be 
subject to Presidential and Congressional authorization and funding.

    Date: April 8, 2008.

Henry A. Obering III,
Lieutenant General, USAF, Director.

 [FR Doc. E8-8800 Filed 4-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P