Record of Decision for the Realignment of the Naval Sea Systems Command

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