Record of Decision for the Disposal and Reuse of Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy, DoD

Record of Decision for the Disposal and Reuse of Naval Civil

Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy (Navy), pursuant to Section

102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42

U.S.C. 4321 et seq., and the regulations of the Council on

Environmental Quality that implement NEPA procedures, 40 CFR Parts

1500-1508, hereby announces its decision to dispose of Naval Civil

Engineering Laboratory, Port Hueneme, California (NCEL).

Navy intends to dispose of the property in a manner that is

consistent with the NCEL Community Reuse Plan (Reuse Plan) submitted by

the Port Hueneme Surplus Property Authority (SPA), the Local

Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for NCEL. The City of Port Hueneme

established SPA to plan future uses of the closing facilities. The

Reuse Plan is general in nature and proposes maritime and related uses

rather than particular reuse projects.

In its Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), Navy evaluated

a ``No action'' alternative and three ``action'' alternatives: port and

coastal activities (``Port/Coastal''), described in the FEIS as the

preferred alternative; port and related industrial activities (``Port/

Industrial''); and port, aquaculture, retail and commercial activities

(``Mixed Use''). In a Resolution dated August 7, 1996, SPA determined

that the Port/Industrial alternative's emphasis on port activities

would be consistent with the Reuse Plan and endorsed the land uses

proposed in that alternative.

In deciding to dispose of NCEL Port Hueneme, Navy has determined

that both the Port/Coastal alternative and the Port/Industrial

alternative will meet the goals of achieving local economic

redevelopment of the closing facility and creating new jobs, while

limiting adverse environmental impacts and ensuring land uses that are

compatible with adjacent property. This Record Of Decision leaves

selection of the particular means to achieve the proposed redevelopment

to the acquiring entity and the local zoning authority.

Background

The 1993 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission

recommended closure of NCEL Port Hueneme. This recommendation was

approved by President Clinton and accepted by the One Hundred Third

Congress in 1993. NCEL Port Hueneme closed in April 1996, and the

property has been in caretaker status since that date.

The NCEL property occupies 33.1 acres along the Pacific Ocean in

the City of Port Hueneme, which is located in Ventura County,

California. NCEL lies adjacent to the Oxnard Harbor District's Port of

Hueneme, about 60 miles northwest of Los Angeles and 40 miles southeast

of Santa Barbara, California. The property contains 53 structures that

were used for Naval research and development.

Navy published a Notice of Intent in the Federal Register on March

8, 1995, announcing that Navy would prepare an Environmental Impact

Statement that would analyze the impacts of disposal and reuse of the

land, buildings, and infrastructure at NCEL Port Hueneme. A 30-day

public scoping period was established, and Navy held a public scoping

meeting on March 23, 1995, at the Port Hueneme City Hall.

On February 13, 1996, Navy distributed a Draft Environmental Impact

Statement (DEIS) to Federal, State, and local agencies, elected

officials, special interest groups, and interested persons. Navy held a

public hearing in the Port Hueneme City Council chambers on March 12,

1996, to discuss the DEIS. During the forty-five day review period

after publication of the DEIS, Federal, State, and local agencies

submitted written comments concerning the DEIS. These comments and

Navy's responses were incorporated in the Final Environmental Impact

Statement (FEIS), which was distributed to the public on July 19, 1996,

for a 30-day review period that concluded on August 18, 1996. Navy

received three letters commenting on and supportive of the FEIS.

Alternatives

NEPA requires Navy to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives

for the disposal and reuse of this Federal property. In the NEPA

process, Navy analyzed the environmental impacts of various proposed

land uses that could result from disposal of the NCEL property. Navy

also evaluated a ``No action'' alternative that would leave the

property in a caretaker status with Navy maintaining the physical

condition of the property, providing a security force, and making

repairs essential to safety.

As the basis for its analysis of the ``action'' alternatives, Navy

relied upon SPA's proposals for maritime and related uses that were set

forth in the Reuse Plan. SPA considered various activities that the

NCEL property could support, prepared the Reuse Plan, and submitted it

to Navy in August 1995.

The first ``action'' alternative, the Port/Coastal alternative,

proposed a moderate expansion of the Oxnard Harbor District's port

facilities by using 5.5 acres on the NCEL property as additional area

for wharfside activities such as the handling and storage of cargo.

Another part of the property, 6.1 acres, would be dedicated to

recreation and public access, and the remainder, 21.5 acres, would be

set aside for coastal activities such as fish processing, aquaculture,

and maritime training and other educational uses.

The second ``action'' alternative, the Port/Industrial alternative,

proposed greater expansion of the Oxnard Harbor District's port

facilities on to the NCEL property, with 27 of NCEL's 33 acres

dedicated to cargo handling, storage, and distribution. As in the Port/

Coastal alternative, 6.1 acres at NCEL would be dedicated to recreation

and public access.

The third ``action'' alternative, the Mixed Use alternative,

proposed the use of 5.5 acres at NCEL for expansion of the Oxnard

Harbor District's port facilities, 9.2 acres for use in aquaculture and

commercial activities, and 12.3 acres for retail stores, offices and

maritime education. As in the Fort/Coastal and Port/Industrial

alternatives, 6.1 acres would be dedicated to recreation and public

access.

Environmental Impacts

Navy analyzed the potential impacts of the ``No action'' and three

``action'' alternatives for their effects on land use, socioeconomics,

public services, cultural resources, biological resources, water

resources, geology and soils, traffic and circulation, air quality,

noise, utilities, hazardous materials and hazardous waste. In light of

SPA's endorsement of the Port/Industrial alternative, this Record Of

Decision will focus on the impacts that could result from implementing

that proposal.

No significant adverse impacts on land use would arise out of the

Port/Industrial alternative. This proposal is compatible with the

existing and projected uses of adjacent property and is consistent with

the existing land use

[[Page 4742]]

and environmental plans of the city of Port Hueneme and Ventura County.

The Port/Industrial alternative would not result in any significant

adverse socioeconomic impacts. Indeed, this alternative would create

from 86 to 309 net new jobs. While the proposal may increase enrollment

in the three local public school districts by 157 students, that

increase would occur over a 25-year period.

This alternative would not cause any significant adverse impacts on

public services. Police and fire protection and emergency medical

services would be provided by the City of Port Hueneme's Police

Department and the Ventura County Fire District. The proposal would not

require any increase in current staffing or equipment nor would it

adversely affect the established response time for emergency calls.

The International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union's (ILWU)

Hiring and dispatching Hall is eligible for listing on the National

Register of Historic Places. While located on NCEL property, this

building is owned by ILWU. On March 12, 1996, Navy and the California

State Historic Preservation Officer concluded a Memorandum of Agreement

(MOA) concerning the building pursuant to the regulations that

implement Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 36 CFR

Part 800. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation accepted this

MOA on May 8, 1996, and Navy has completed the prescribed recordation

of the ILWU Hall in accordance with Historic American Buildings Survey

standards.

The United States Coast guard owns the Point Hueneme Lighthouse,

which is composed of the lighthouse structure, the light works and

supporting facilities and is located at the southwest corner of the

NCEL property. The light works, while not eligible for listing on the

National Register of Historic Places, is a listed Ventura County

landmark. Its preservation status from the County will not change with

disposal of the NCEL property.

No significant adverse impacts on biological resources would result

from the Port/Industrial alternative. There are no sensitive habitats

on the NCEL property, and no endangered or threatened species are

likely to inhabit, nest or forage on the property.

The seawall on the southern boundary of the NCEL property will be

conveyed with the property. The entity that acquires the NCEL property

will be responsible for maintaining the seawall, and failure to

maintain it may expose the property to shoreline erosion and damage

from storm surge and tidal waves.

There would be no significant adverse impacts on the property's

geological characteristics. The NCEL property is located in an area of

high seismic hazards, i.e., Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 4. Thus,

the City of Port Hueneme's Building and Safety Agency would likely

require inspection of all structures on the site to determine whether

modifications are necessary to permit reuse. The acquiring entity can

minimize the potential for soil erosion during construction by

implementing erosion control plans as required by the Stormwater

Pollution Prevention Program of the National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System.

The Port/Industrial alternative would generate 4,319 average daily

vehicle trips that would be distributed primarily along Ventura Road

and Hueneme Road. This level of traffic would not have a significant

adverse impact on the critical roadways identified in the Ventura

County Congestion Management Program.

Ventura County has been classified as a severe nonattainment area

under Federal and State ozone standards. In the Port/Industrial

alternative, the projected emissions of reactive organic compounds and

nitrogen oxides from vehicles and construction equipment would not

exceed the Federal threshold of 25 tons per year that triggers the

requirement for a conformity analysis under Section 176(c) of the Clean

Air Act.

The projected emissions from traffic in the Port/Industrial

alternative would exceed the Ventura County Air Pollution Control

District's impact significance threshold of 25 pounds per day.

Emissions from this traffic, however, have already been considered in

the emissions forecast of the Ventura County Air Quality Management

Plan and would not likely interfere with California's schedule for

compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Ventura County is in attainment with Federal standards governing

suspended particulate matter. Under California's stricter standards,

however, Ventura County is classified as a nonattainment area. While

demolition, renovation, and new construction may generate local dust

conditions, the acquiring entity can mitigate this impact by following

routine dust control practices.

There would not be any significant adverse impacts from noise. The

existing noise levels on the property are dominated by industrial

activities associated with Hueneme Harbor and the Oxnard Harbor

District. An increase in use of the existing railroad spur that serves

the Oxnard Harbor District would not likely cause off-site noise

impacts. The existing Coast Guard foghorn causes local intermittent

noise at the southwestern edge of the NCEL property, but the acquiring

entity can mitigate this circumstance by moving the foghorn.

Reuse of the NCEL property could cause the City of Port Hueneme to

exceed the amount of water it has been allocated by the United Water

Conservation District, and shortages could result. To mitigate this

potential impact, the acquiring entity could obtain an additional

allocation of water from the Oxnard or United Water Conservation

Districts.

If future wastewater discharges exceed the current allocation for

the NCEL property, the acquiring entity could seek an increased

allocation from the City of Port Hueneme. Should such an increased

allocation cause the City of Port Hueneme to exceed its share of

regional wastewater treatment capacity, it may be necessary for the

City of Port Hueneme to acquire additional regional treatment capacity

from other municipal users.

No significant adverse impacts would be caused by the hazardous

materials and hazardous waste that may be generated by the Port/

Industrial alternative. Hazardous materials and hazardous waste

management would be the responsibility of the property's owners and

users under the governance of Federal, State, and local regulations.

Navy also analyzed the impacts on low-income and minority

populations pursuant to Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to

Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income

Populations, reprinted in 42 U.S.C. 4321 note. There would be no

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental

effects on minority and low income populations. All groups would

experience equally any impact related to reuse of the NCEL property

within the regional population.

Mitigation

Implementation of Navy's decision of dispose of the NCEL property

does not require Navy to perform any mitigation measures. The FEIS

identified and discussed the actions that would be necessary to

mitigate any impacts associated with reuse and redevelopment. The

acquiring entity, under the direction of Federal, State, and local

agencies with regulatory authority over protected resources, will

[[Page 4743]]

be responsible for implementing necessary mitigation measures.

Regulations Governing the Disposal Decision

Since the proposed action contemplates a disposal action under the

Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (DBCRA), Public Law

101-510, 10 U.S.C. 2687 note, Navy's decision was based upon the

environmental analysis in the FEIS and application of the standards set

forth in DBCRA, the Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR), 41

CFR Part 101-47, and the Department of Defense Rule on Revitalization

Base Closure Communities and Community Assistance (DoD Rule), 32 CFR

Parts 90 and 91.

Section 101-47.303-1 of the FPMR requires that the disposal of

Federal property benefit the Federal government and constitute the

highest and best use of the property. Section 101-47.4909 of the FPMR

defines the ``highest and best use'' as that use to which a property

can be put that produces the highest monetary return from the property,

promotes its maximum value, or serves a public or institutional

purpose. The ``highest and best use'' determination must be based upon

the property's economic potential, qualitative values inherent in the

property, and utilization factors affecting land use such as zoning,

physical characteristics, other private and public uses in the

vicinity, neighboring improvements, utility services, access, roads,

location, and environmental and historical consideration.

After Federal property has been conveyed to non-Federal entities,

the property is subject to local land use regulations, including zoning

and subdivision regulations, and building codes. Unless expressly

authorized by statute, the disposing Federal agency cannot restrict the

future use of surplus Government property. As a result, the local

community exercises substantial control over future use of the

property. For this reason, local land use plans and zoning affect

determination of the highest and best use of surplus Government

property.

The DBCRA directed the Administrator of the General Services

Administration (GSA) to delegate to the Secretary of Defense authority

to transfer and dispose of base closure property. Section 2905(b) of

DBCRA directs the Secretary of Defense to exercise this authority in

accordance with GSA's property disposal regulations, set forth at

Sections 101-47.1 through 101-47.8 of the FPMR. By letter dated

December 20, 1991, the Secretary of Defense delegated the authority to

transfer and dispose of base closure property closed under DBCRA to the

Secretaries of the Military Departments. Under this delegation of

authority, the Secretary of the Navy must follow FPMR procedures for

screening and disposing of real property when implementing base

closures. Only where Congress has expressly provided additional

authority for disposing of base closure property, e.g., the economic

development conveyance authority established in 1993 by Section

2905(b)(4) of DBCRA, may Navy apply disposal procedures other than the

FPMR's prescriptions.

In Section 2901 of the National Defense Authorization Act for

Fiscal Year 1994, Public Law 103-160, Congress recognized the economic

hardship occasioned by base closures, the Federal interest in

facilitating economic recovery of base closure communities, and the

need to identify and implement reuse and redevelopment of property at

closing installations. In Section 2903(c) of Public Law 103-160,

Congress directed the Military Departments to consider each base

closure community's economic needs and priorities in the property

disposal process. Under Section 2905(b)(2)(E) of DBCRA, Navy must

consult with local communities before it disposes of base closure

property and must consider local plans developed for reuse and

redevelopment of the surplus Federal property.

The Department of Defense's goal, as set forth in Section 90.4 of

the DoD Rule, is to help base closure communities achieve rapid

economic recovery through expeditions reuse and redevelopment of the

assets at closing bases, taking into consideration local market

conditions and locally developed reuse plans. Thus, the Department has

adopted a consultative approach with each community to ensure that

property disposal decisions consider the Local Redevelopment

Authority's reuse plan and encourage job creation. As a part of this

cooperative approach, the base closure community's interests, e.g.,

reflected in its zoning for the area, play a significant role in

determining the range of alternatives considered in the environmental

analysis for property disposal. Furthermore, Section 91.7(d)(3) of the

DoD Rule provides that the Local Redevelopment Authority's plan

generally will be used as the basis for the proposed disposal action.

The Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, 40

U.S.C. 484, as implemented by the FPMR, identifies several mechanisms

for disposing of surplus base closure property: By public benefit

conveyance (FPMR Sec. 101-47.303-2); by negotiated sale (FPMR Sec. 101-

47.304-8); and by competitive sale (FPMR 101-47.304-7). Additionally,

in Section 2905(b)(4), the DBCRA established economic development

conveyances as a means of disposing of surplus base closure property.

The selection of any particular method of conveyance merely implements

the Federal agency's decision to dispose of the property. Decisions

concerning whether to undertake a public benefit conveyance or an

economic development conveyance, or to sell property by negotiation or

by competitive bid are committed by law to agency discretion. Selecting

a method of disposal implicates a broad range of factors and rests

solely within the Secretary of the Navy's discretion.

Conclusion

The LRA has proposed that the NCEL property should be redeveloped

for use as a port facility with maritime industrial, commercial,

educational and recreational activities. The property's location and

physical characteristics as well as the current uses of adjacent

property make it appropriate for the proposed uses. The combinations of

port and maritime activities embodied in the Port/Coastal and Port/

Industrial alternatives present the highest and best use of NCEL Port

Hueneme.

Both the Port/Coastal and Port/Industrial alternatives evaluated in

the FEIS respond to local economic conditions, promote rapid economic

recovery from the impacts of the NCEL Port Hueneme closure, and are

consistent with President Clinton's Five-Part Plan for revitalizing

base closure communities, which emphasizes local economic redevelopment

of the closing military facility and creation of new jobs as the means

to revitalize these communities. 32 CFR Parts 90 and 91, 59 FR 16,123

(1994). Any resultant environmental impacts can be mitigated by the

acquiring entity under the direction of Federal, State, and local

regulatory requirements.

Although the ``No action'' alternative has less potential for

causing adverse environmental impacts, that alternative would not

constitute the highest and best use of the NCEL property. It would not

take advantage of the property's location and physical characteristics

and the current uses of adjacent property. It is not compatible with

the NCEL Community Reuse Plan. It would not foster local economic

redevelopment of the NCEL property and would not create new jobs.

[[Page 4744]]

Accordingly, Navy will dispose of NCEL Port Hueneme in a manner

that is consistent with the NCEL Community Reuse Plan's proposal for

port and maritime activities.

Dated: January 22, 1997.

William J. Cassidy, Jr.,

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Conversion and Redevelopment).

[FR Doc. 97-2469 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-M