[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 211 (Thursday, October 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64604-64606]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25845]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for 
the Proposed Acquisition of Lands and Establishment of Airspace 
Contiguous to the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine 
Palms, CA

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section (102)(2)(c) of the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(c)), as implemented by the 
Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), 
the Department of the Navy announces its intent to prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to study alternatives for meeting 
Marine Corps Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) sustained, combined 
arms, live-fire and maneuver training requirements. The proposed action 
is to request the withdrawal of federal public lands, acquire state and 
privately owned lands, and to seek the establishment of Special Use 
Airspace with the effect of expanding the Marine Corps Air Ground 
Combat Center (MCAGCC), Twentynine Palms, California. The Department of 
the Navy will prepare the EIS in cooperation with the Bureau of Land 
Management and Federal Aviation Administration.

DATES: All written, oral, or telephonic comments regarding the scope of 
issues that the Department of the Navy should consider during EIS 
preparation must be received before January 31, 2009. Three public 
scoping meetings have been scheduled and the meeting locations are as 
follows:
    1. December 3, 2009, 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., Twentynine Palms, CA;
    2. December 4, 2009, 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., Victorville, CA;
    3. December 5, 2009, 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., Ontario, CA.

ADDRESSES: Written comments or requests for inclusion on the EIS 
mailing list may be submitted to Project Manager (Attn: Mr. Joseph 
Ross), Box 788104, Bldg 1554, Rm 138, MAGTFTC/MCAGCC, Twentynine Palms, 
CA 92278-8104. Public meeting locations are as follows:
    1. Twentynine Palms Junior High School, Hay's Gym, 5798 Utah Trail, 
Twentynine Palms, CA;
    2. Hilton Garden Inn Victorville, 12603 Mariposa Road, Victorville, 
CA;
    3. Convention Center, 2000 E. Convention Center Way, Ontario, CA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Project Manager (Attn: Mr. Joseph 
Ross), Box 788104, Bldg 1554, Rm 138, MAGTFTC/MCAGCC, Twentynine Palms, 
CA 92278-8104; phone: 760-830-3764; e-mail: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Each of the three scoping meetings will 
consist of an informal, open house session with information stations 
staffed by Marine Corps representatives. Public comment forms will be 
available and gathered at the information stations, and a stenographer 
will be available to take oral comments for inclusion in the record. 
Details of the meeting locations will be announced in local newspapers. 
Additional information concerning meeting times and the proposed 
alternatives will be available on the EIS Web site located at http://www.29palms.usmc.mil/las.
    The meetings are designed to solicit input from agencies and the 
affected public regarding issues or interests that should be studied or 
the reasonable alternatives that should be considered for study to meet 
Marine Corps Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB) sustained, combined 
arms, live-fire and maneuver training requirements. The public is 
welcome to comment orally or by written comment forms at the meeting; 
or, by sending a letter to Mr. Joe Ross, Project Manager, 29Palms 
Proposed Training Land/Airspace Acquisition Project, MAGTFTC/MCAGCC, 
Bldg 1554, Box 788104, Twentynine Palms, CA 92278-8104; by an e-mail to 
[email protected]; or by voice mail at 760-830-3764.
    The EIS will consider alternatives for the proposed acquisition of 
training land and accompanying Special Use Airspace sufficient to meet 
the training requirements for three MEB battalions, as a Ground Combat 
Element, and a correspondingly sized Air Combat Element to 
simultaneously maneuver for 48-72 hours, using combined-arms and live 
fire with their supporting Logistics Combat Element and Command 
Element. To meet MEB training requirements which utilize weapons 
systems and platforms currently and foreseeable in the Marine Corps 
inventory, more contiguous military range land and airspace than is now 
available for training anywhere in the United States would be required.
    The requirement for MEB training reflects a shift in doctrine that 
emerged in the 1990s that placed the MEB as the premier fighting force 
that would be deployed to world crises in the foreseeable future. The 
Marine Corps studied locations nationwide that might meet the training 
requirements and concluded that the Southwest Region

[[Page 64605]]

range complex is the best location to meet them. This study further 
determined that expansion at MCAGCC would be necessary to meet the 
sustained MEB training requirement for a three battalion Ground Combat 
Element to maneuver to a single objective. MCAGCC is the Marine Corps' 
service-level training facility for Marine Air Ground Task Force 
training, the place through which nearly all Marine Corps units rotate 
for training before deployment.
    The Marine Corps is studying various alternatives to meet MEB 
training requirements at MCAGCC Twentynine Palms, CA. At this time, it 
is anticipated that the EIS will evaluate five action alternatives and 
the No Action Alternative. The EIS will also consider any other 
reasonable alternatives that are subsequently identified during scoping 
or the preparation of the document. The Marine Corps will also evaluate 
opportunities for co-use of the land, as part of the evaluation of 
alternatives. The following is a summary of the alternatives that are 
currently proposed to be studied in the Environmental Impact Statement.
    Alternative 1 would add approximately 188,000 acres to the West of 
the base and approximately 22,000 acres to the South of the base, and 
accompanying Special Use Airspace. During a MEB training exercise, 
three battalions would begin movement in a westerly direction from 
different starting positions in the current MCAGCC range complex area 
and converge on a single objective in the western part of what is 
called ``Johnson Valley,'' conducting live-fire from ground- and air-
based combat elements throughout the training exercise. During non-MEB 
training periods, any newly acquired installation lands would be used 
for live-fire, combined arms training and other military training of 
smaller units. With regard to any Special Use Airspace, this 
alternative would establish Restricted Airspace over the Western Area 
to accommodate live-fire from aviation and surface units. Special Use 
Airspace over the proposed Southern expansion area would need to be 
converted from Military Operational Airspace to Restricted Airspace.
    Alternative 2 would add approximately 112,000 acres to the West of 
the base, the same 22,000 acres to the South as in Alternative 1, and 
accompanying Special Use Airspace. During a MEB training exercise, 
three battalions would begin movement in a westerly direction from 
different starting positions in the current MCAGCC range complex area 
and converge on a single objective in the center of what is called 
``Johnson Valley,'' conducting live-fire from ground- and air-based 
combat elements throughout the training exercise. During non-MEB 
training periods, any newly acquired installation lands would be used 
for live-fire, combined arms training and other military training of 
smaller units. With regard to Special Use Airspace, this alternative 
would establish Restricted Airspace over the Western Area to 
accommodate combined arms live-fire from aircraft in support of the 
Ground Combat Element and would determine whether the current Special 
Use Airspace over the proposed Southern expansion area would need to be 
converted from Military Operational Airspace to Restricted Airspace.
    Alternative 3 would add the same 22,000 acres of land in the South 
as would be added in Alternatives 1 and 2 and would add approximately 
228,000 acres to the East of the base. During a MEB training exercise, 
two battalions would begin movement from starting positions to the east 
of the MCAGCC current range complex and travel together in a westerly 
direction before separating for individual movement once aboard the 
current MCAGCC. The third battalion would begin movement in a westerly 
direction from a starting position in the southern portion of the 
current range complex. All three battalions would maneuver toward a 
single objective in the northwest portion of the current range complex. 
The two battalions that would start in the proposed new areas to the 
east would conduct live-fire from ground- and air-based combat elements 
once aboard the current MCAGCC range complex, and the third battalion 
would be able to conduct live fire from ground- and air-based combat 
elements throughout the training exercise. During non-MEB training 
periods, any newly acquired installation lands to the east would be 
used for live small arms fire and other military training of smaller 
units, and any newly acquired installation lands in the south would be 
used for live-fire, combined arms training and other military training 
of smaller units. In this alternative, it is possible that no 
additional Special Use Airspace would need to be established, or that 
any current Special Use Airspace would need to be modified.
    Alternative 4 would add the same 188,000 acres to the west of the 
current installation and approximately 22,000 acres to the south of the 
installation as are contained in Alternative 1. During a MEB training 
exercise, three battalions would begin movement in an easterly 
direction from different starting positions in what is called ``Johnson 
Valley'' and assault different objectives in the eastern portion of the 
current range complex and in the proposed southern expansion area. 
Live-fire training in the western expansion area would be limited to 
non-dud producing ordnance, with dud-producing ordnance only targeted 
within the current range boundary. Non-MEB training events would be 
subject to the same restrictions. With respect to Special Use Airspace, 
this alternative would establish Restricted Airspace over the Western 
and Southern Areas to accommodate combined arms live-fire from aviation 
and surface units.
    Alternative 5 would add the same 188,000 acres of land to the west 
of the base as in Alternatives 1 and 4. During a MEB training exercise, 
three battalions would begin movement in an easterly direction from 
separate starting positions in ``Johnson Valley.'' Two battalions would 
attack separate objectives in the current range complex, and the third 
battalion would attack the Combined Arms Military Operations in Urban 
Terrain (CA MOUT) facility in the current range complex. Live-fire 
training in the western expansion area would be limited to non-dud 
producing ordnance, with dud-producing ordnance only targeted within 
the current range boundary. Non-MEB training events would be subject to 
the same restrictions. With respect to Special Use Airspace, this 
alternative would establish Restricted Airspace over the Western Area 
to accommodate combined arms live-fire from aviation and surface units.
    The No Action Alternative would seek no additional lands and no 
additional or changes to Special Use Airspace associated with MCAGCC's 
current range complex. During a MEB exercise, the three battalions of 
the ground combat element would commence their operations aboard the 
current MCAGCC range complex in the eastern and central areas of the 
base, moving towards a single objective in the northwest corner of the 
current MCAGCC, undertaking live-fire and combined arms actions 
throughout, except as restrained by on-base administrative controls.
    The Department of the Navy is initiating the scoping process to 
identify community interests and local issues to be addressed in the 
EIS. Federal, state and local agencies, Native American Indian Tribes 
and interested individuals are encouraged to provide oral and/or 
written comments regarding the scope of the EIS to develop reasonable 
alternatives and/or to identify specific issues or topics of 
environmental

[[Page 64606]]

concern that the commenter believes should be considered.
    The EIS will evaluate potential environmental effects associated 
with action alternatives and the No Action Alternative. Potential 
issues include, but are not limited to: Land use, recreation, energy 
development, air quality, airspace/air traffic, biological resources, 
cultural resources, mining/minerals, socioeconomics and noise.
    A mailing list has been assembled to facilitate preparation of the 
EIS. Those on this list will receive notices and documents related to 
EIS preparation. This list includes local, state, and federal agencies 
with jurisdiction or other interests in the alternatives. In addition, 
the mailing list includes adjacent property owners, affected 
municipalities, and other interested parties such as conservation and 
off-highway vehicle organizations. Anyone wishing to be added to the 
mailing list may request to be added by contacting the EIS project 
manager at the address provided above.

    Dated: October 24, 2008.
T.M. Cruz,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate Generals Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal 
Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. E8-25845 Filed 10-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P