Record of Decision for the Disposal and Reuse of the Department of Defense Housing Facility Novato, California

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy

Record of Decision for the Disposal and Reuse of the Department

of Defense Housing Facility Novato, 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. Sec. 4332(2)(C), 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 the Department

of Defense Housing Facility (DoDHF) at Novato, California.

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

consistent with the Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan dated October

1995, as revised in November 1996 (Revised Reuse Plan). These plans

address reuse of both DoDHF and the Department of the Army's adjacent

Hamilton Army Airfield (HAA). The Hamilton Reuse Planning Authority

(HRPA), the Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) for the DoDHF property,

prepared both the October 1995 Reuse Plan and the November 1996 Revised

Reuse Plan. The City of Novato approved the Revised Reuse Plan in

February 1996 and published it in November 1996.

The Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, identified in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) as the Preferred Alternative,

would implement the Revised Reuse Plan. The Preferred Alternative

proposes an adaptive reuse of certain DoDHF buildings and the retention

of existing land uses, i.e., residential areas, community facilities,

commercial activities, parkland, and open space.

In deciding to dispose of DoDHF Novato in a manner consistent with

the Preferred Alternative, navy has determined that a mixed land use

will meet the local economic redevelopment goals of providing housing

and recreational resources while also limiting adverse environmental

impacts and ensuring land uses that are compatible with adjacent

property. This Record Of Decision does not mandate a specific mix of

land uses. Rather, it leaves selection of the particular means to

achieve the proposed redevelopment to the acquiring entity and the

local zoning authority.

Background

The Department of Defense Housing Facility at Novato is located in

the southeastern part of the City of Novato in Marin County,

California, about 20 miles north of the City of San Francisco. The

property covers an area of about 411 acres on two sites that are

separated by United States Highway 101.

The 304-acre Main Site is located on the east side of U.S. Highway

101 and contains military family housing, a Commissary, a Navy

Exchange, an Officers Club, community service areas, a bowling alley,

and recreational fields. The 107-acre Rafael Village military family

housing site is located on the west side of U.S. Highway 101, about one

mile northwest of the Main Site. The 142-acre Spanish Housing area lies

adjacent to the Main Site and was formerly part of the Main Site. Navy

will transfer this property to the United States Coast Guard (Coast

Guard).

The Hamilton Reuse Planning Authority developed a reuse plan for

DoDHF Novato in October 1995. This plan, designated the Hamilton Army

Airfield Reuse Plan, addressed reuse of both DoDHF and the adjacent

Army Airfield. The Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan proposed adaptive

reuse of most of the existing housing and other buildings and retention

of the existing land uses.

The Reuse Planning Authority revised the original HAA Reuse Plan to

take account of changes in the Coast Guard's request for an interagency

transfer of base closure property at DoDHF. The Revised Reuse Plan

developed by HRPA incorporated the Coast Guard's revised request. It

was approved by the City of Novato in February 1996 and published in

November 1996. The Revised Reuse Plan, described in the FEIS as the

Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, is the Preferred Alternative. The

Department of the Army issued the Record Of Decision for the disposal

and reuse of Hamilton Army Airfield on February 24, 1997.

Under the authority of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act

of 1990, Public Law 101-510, 10 U.S.C. 2687 note, the 1993 Defense Base

Closure and Realignment Commission recommended disestablishment of the

Navy Public Works Center, San Francisco Bay, which included DoDHF

Novato. The recommendation was approved by President Clinton and

accepted by the One Hundred Third Congress in 1993. Navy closed the

housing facilities at Novato on September 30, 1996.

During the Federal screening process for the Novato housing

facilities, two Federal agencies, the Department of Veterans Affairs

and the United States Coast Guard, expressed interest in property at

DoDHF. The Department of Veterans Affairs initially requested an

interagency transfer of 54 housing units at the Main Site but later

withdrew its request. The Coast Guard, in its revised request, sought

282 housing units at the Spanish Housing area of the Main Site, and

Navy will transfer the 142-acre property that contains these units to

the Coast Guard. The remaining property is surplus to the needs of the

Federal Government.

Navy published a Notice Of Intent in the Federal Register on

October 31, 1995, announcing that Navy would prepare an Environmental

Impact Statement (EIS) to analyze the impacts of disposal and reuse of

the land, buildings, and infrastructure at DoDHF Novato. A public

scoping meeting was held at San Marin High School in Novato on November

16, 1995, and the scoping process ended on December 1, 1995.

On January 31, 1997, Navy distributed a Draft Environmental Impact

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

parties, and the general public. Navy held a public hearing concerning

the DEIS on February 27, 1997, at San Marin High School. During the

forty-five day review period after publication of the DEIS, Federal,

State, and local agencies, community groups and associations, and the

general public submitted oral and written comments concerning the DEIS.

These comments and Navy's responses were incorporated in the Final

Environmental Impact Statement and was distributed to the public on

November 21, 1997, for a thirty-day review period that concluded on

December 22, 1997. navy received five letters concerning 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

[[Page 37867]]

two ``action'' alternatives that could result from disposal of the

DoDHF Novato 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. For its

analysis, Navy relied upon the Revised Reuse Plan developed by HRPA and

approved by the City of Novato.

In March 1994, the City of Novato and the County of Marin entered

into the Hamilton Reuse Planning Agreement to establish the HRPA and

procedures for ensuring public participation in the reuse planning

process. The HRPA is composed of representatives from the City of

Novato, the County of Marin, and several advisory groups. The HRPA

prepared the Reuse Plan after extensive public involvement and comment.

This process also resulted in the establishment of the Hamilton

Advisory Commission (HAC), a citizens committee composed of 25

representatives from various stakeholder groups; the Technical Advisory

Committee, a technical guidance committee composed of 33 members from

local service districts (i.e., water districts and fire districts) and

Federal and state agencies; and the Multi-Agency Board (MAB), composed

of two members from the Novato City Council, one member selected by the

City Council, two members from the County Board of Supervisors, and one

member selected by the Board. The MAB reviewed HAC's recommendations

and made recommendations to the Novato City Council regarding adoption

of the reuse plan. The goal of this planning process was to develop a

reuse plan for HAA, DoDHF and the adjacent private lands and reflected

a consensus gained through public participation by the community.

After the City adopted the Reuse Plan, the Department of Veterans

Affairs withdrew its request for property at DoDHF and the Coast Guard

revised its request for DoDHF property. As a result, the HRPA changed

the Reuse Plan. The City of Novato approved the Revised Reuse Plan in

February 1996 and published it as the Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse

Plan, ``Revised November 1996''.

The Revised Reuse Plan Alternative, designated in the FEIS as the

Preferred Alternative, would implement the Revised Reuse Plan. It

proposed a mix of residential, open space, parkland, community, and

commercial uses.

The Revised Reuse Plan identifies 10 planning areas and a runway

area. Planning Area 1 is the Rafael Village site, a 107-acre suburban

residential development located on the west side of U.S. Highway 101.

Under the Revised Reuse Plan, the 503 existing Rafael Village

structures would be demolished and 500 dwelling units would be built on

86 of the 107 acres. The remaining property would be used for parkland

(seven acres), open space (seven acres), and roadway (seven acres). The

other planning areas are located at the Main Site, on the east side of

U.S. Highway 101 and southeast of Rafael Village.

Planning Area 2 is located in the southwest section of the Main

Site. Known as Capehart Housing, it is a 216-acre suburban residential

development. Under the Revised Reuse Plan, the existing 100 acres of

housing, nine acres of parkland, and 107 acres of open space would be

used for the same purposes as their current uses.

Planning Area 3, the Spanish Housing area, is located east of the

Capehart Housing and will be transferred to the Coast Guard. It is not

available for reuse by the community.

Planning Area 4, the Commissary Triangle, is a 13-acre site located

at the northwest corner of the Main Site. Under the Revised Reuse Plan,

this property would be used for community and civic purposes and would

provide an 80-bed shelter for the homeless.

Planning Area 5, the Navy Exchange Triangle, is located on the west

side of the Main Site and covers 28 acres. About 26 acres would be

dedicated to community and civic uses, i.e., a public transit center

consisting of a park and ride lot and bus stop, a library, a charter

school, a homeless shelter, a child care facility, and senior housing.

The remaining two acres would be used for private commercial activities

that would serve the local residents.

Planning Area 6, the Town Center, is located at the northeast

corner of the Main Site and covers eight acres. The Revised Reuse Plan

proposes to use four of these acres as a neighborhood commercial area

that could accommodate a theater, offices, cafes, specialty shops,

personal service shops, and artists workplaces. Two acres would be used

for community facilities, e.g., the former chapel, and two acres would

serve as a central plaza.

Planning Area 7, known as Hospital Hill, is located southeast of

the Town Center area and is part of the Hamilton Army Airfield

property. Navy is not responsible for this Army property and did not

consider alternative reuses for it.

Planning Area 8, known as the Bowling Alley, is located on the east

side of the Main Site and covers 3 acres. The Preferred Alternative

would use the existing bowling alley an gymnasium for recreational

purposes.

Planning Area 9, the Officers Club, is located on a five-acre

landscaped hill south of the Bowling Alley and contains two buildings.

The Revised Reuse Plan would use three acres for community and civic

purposes with a cultural center, community center and library. Two

acres would be used commercially to provide lodging for visitors.

Planning Area 10, the Ballfields, is situated in the southeast

corner of the Main Site and covers 31 acres. It contains open space,

baseball fields, a swimming pool and poolhouse, and parking lots. The

Preferred Alternative would use this entire area as a park and retain

the swimming pool complex for recreational activity.

The runway area east of the Main Site is part of the Hamilton Army

Airfield property. Navy is not responsible for this Army property and

did not consider alternative reuses for it.

In the NEPA process, Navy considered a second ``action''

alternative, described in the FEIS as the Open Space Alternative. This

alternative also proposed a mix of residential, open space, parkland,

community and commercial facilities.

Under the Open Space Alternative, all 503 existing structures at

Rafael Village would be demolished. This property would then be used

for open space and parkland, and no new houses would be built on the

site. Reuse of the Main Site would be similar to the Preferred

Alternative but would also allow the development of certain facilities

that were designated in the Open Space Alternative as corporation

yards. These corporation yards would provide areas for the maintenance

and storage of up to 50 buses and 40 pieces of heavy equipment. The

yards would also contain warehouses, office space and parking lots.

The Capehart Housing area at the Main Site would be used in the

Open Space Alternative to provide housing, open space, and parkland.

The Commissary Triangle area would provide community and civic

facilities. The Navy Exchange Triangle area would be used for community

and civic purposes as well as neighborhood commercial activities and

would also provide a homeless shelter. A corporation yard would be

located in either the Commissary or Exchange Triangles. The Town Center

area would be used for community activities. The Bowling Alley area

would be used for recreational activities. The Officers Club would be

used for commercial and community activities. The Ballfields

[[Page 37868]]

area would be used for parkland and open space.

Environmental Impacts

Navy analyzed the potential impacts of the Preferred Alternative,

the Open Space Alternative, and the ``No action'' Alternative for each

alternative's effects on land use, aesthetics and scenic resources,

socioeconomics (including employment, income, population, housing,

schools, recreation, and environmental justice), public services,

utilities, cultural resources, biological resources, geology and soils,

water resources, traffic and circulation, air quality, noise, and

hazardous materials and waste. This Record of Decision focuses on the

impacts that would likely result from implementing the Preferred

Alternative.

The Preferred Alternative would not cause any significant impacts

on land use, because the proposed uses of each planning area are

similar or identical to Navy's historical uses. Although demolition of

existing structures and construction of new facilities would cause

short term disruption, these temporary activities would not have a

significant impact on land use.

The Preferred Alternative would not have significant impacts on

aesthetic and scenic resources. The visual impacts arising out of

demolition and construction would be minimal and insignificant as a

result of their short duration.

The Preferred Alternative would not result in any significant

adverse socioeconomic impacts. Indeed, it would enhance affordable

housing opportunities, generate additional jobs, and provide more

recreational facilities for the City.

The Preferred Alternative would result in a 2.9 percent increase in

enrollment in the Novato Unified School District compared with 1995

levels. However, since most schools in this District are operating

below their enrollment capacities, implementation of the Preferred

Alternative would not exceed school capacity.

The Preferred Alternative would not result in significant impacts

on police and fire protection or on emergency medical services in the

Novato area. However, the number of requests for these public services

will likely increase as the population increases.

The Preferred Alternative would not result in significant impacts

on utility systems, i.e., electricity, natural gas, telephone, water

supply, storm drainage and sanitary sewer systems. The acquiring entity

will upgrade the existing utility systems to meet current utility

standards.

While demolition of the Rafael Village houses would not

significantly affect the County's landfill capacity, the additional

demolition waste would contribute to Marin County's solid waste stream.

Thus, a significant impact could result if demolition of the Rafael

Village structures prevented Marin County from meeting the State's

requirement, set forth in Cal. Pub. Res. Code, Sec. 41780, et seq., to

reduce solid waste by 50 percent by the year 2000.

The Preferred Alternative would not have a significant impact on

cultural resources. There are four historic properties within an area

designated as the Hamilton Army Airfield Discontiguous Historic

District. These are the War Department Theater (Building 507) and the

Amphitheater in the Town Center planning area; the Bachelor Officers

Quarters in the Officers Club planning area (Building 201); and the

Swimming Pool (Building 205) in the Ballfields planning area. The

Preferred Alternative would use these buildings and structures for

purposes similar to Navy's uses.

Navy may convey the War Department Theater and the Bachelor

Officers Quarters to the City of Novato through the National Park

Service's Historic Monuments Program. 40 U.S.C. Sec. 484(k)(3). Navy

may convey the Amphitheater and Swimming Pool to the City of Novato

through the National Park Service's Surplus Federal Lands to Public

Parks Program. 40 U.S.C. Sec. 484(k)(2). The National Park Service

would review and approve plans for the adaptive reuse of these four

properties to ensure their preservation after disposal by the Federal

Government.

Navy has completed consultation pursuant to Section 106 of the

National Historic Preservation Act, 16 U.S.C. Sec. 470 (f), and its

implementing regulations, Protection of Historic Properties, 36 CFR

Part 800, with the California State Historic Preservation Officer

(SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). The

SHPO and the ACHP concurred on October 16, 1997 and October 30, 1997,

respectively, with Navy's conclusion that there would be no adverse

effect on these four properties or on the HAA Discontiguous Historic

District if they were conveyed to the City under the National Park

Service programs.

Although Navy did not discover any surface archeological resources

at DoDHF Novato, archeological resources could be present in

undisturbed areas under the surface. If there are any such discoveries,

work will cease in the vicinity of the discovery until professional

archeologists have had an opportunity to evaluate the discovery and

implement an appropriate treatment plan in accordance with the Novato

General Plan and Cal. Pub. Res. Code Sec. 5097, et seq.

Increased erosion resulting from demolition and new construction

could have a significant impact on biological resources such as

sensitive wetland and riparian habitats and on the species that inhabit

these areas. The acquiring entity will reduce these impacts to an

insignificant level by introducing standard erosion control measures

such as silt fences, sedimentation basins, and other structural methods

that minimize sedimentation runoff into creeks and wetlands during new

construction. Additionally, in accordance with Executive Order 11990,

Protection of Wetlands, dated May 24, 1977, Navy will place a Notice in

the conveyance document that describes those uses that are restricted

under Federal, State, and local wetland regulations.

Navy has completed consultation with the National Marine Fisheries

Service and the United States Fish And Wildlife Service pursuant to

Section 7 of the Federal Endangered Species Act, 16, U.S.C. Sec. 1531,

et seq. The National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish And

Wildlife Service concurred on March 24, 1997 and March 27, 1997,

respectively, with Navy's conclusion that disposal and reuse of the

DoDHF Novato property is not likely to adversely affect any species on

the Federal list of endangered or threatened species.

The Preferred Alternative would allow redevelopment in areas at

DoDHF Novato that contain potential geologic hazards. Thus, potentially

significant impacts could result from demolition and construction in

the Rafael Village area if these actions undermine or weaken unstable

slopes. The City of Novato's General Plan requires developers to

conduct geotechnical investigations in areas that have landslide

potential. The acquiring entity will reduce the potential for

landslides to an insignificant level by implementing protective

measures during construction.

Parts of the Main Site were built on fill over the San Francisco

Basin's Bay Mud formation and are particularly susceptible to damage

during earthquakes. The acquiring entity can reduce this potential for

earthquake damage to existing structures and new construction to an

insignificant level by upgrading the existing structures to comply with

current seismic safety standards and by designing new structures that

meet current building codes governing seismic safety.

[[Page 37869]]

The Preferred Alternative could degrade surface water quality,

because the demolition and construction of buildings may disturb the

soil and increase erosion and sedimentation into San Jose Creek at the

Rafael Village site and Pacheco Creek at the Main Site. The acquiring

entity will reduce this impact on surface water quality to an

insignificant level by implementing storm water pollution prevention

plans and standard erosion control measures before clearing and grading

particular sites.

Parts of the property at DoDHF Novato could be subject to flooding.

Certain parts of the Rafael Village, Capehart Housing, Commissary

Triangle, Navy Exchange Triangle, Town Center, Bowling Alley, and

Ballfields areas are located in the 100-year floodplain. In accordance

with Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, dated May 24, 1977,

Navy will place a Notice in the conveyance document that describes

those uses that are restricted under Federal, State, and local

floodplain regulations.

Navy's evaluation of the impacts on traffic and circulation

considered freeway operations, local roadway and intersection

operations, public transit facilities and service, and pedestrian and

bicycle circulation. The Preferred Alternative would not have

significant impacts on freeway and intersection operations. It would

generate about 12,095 average daily trips, slightly more than the

11,340 average daily trips that were associated with Navy's use of the

DoDHF Novato property, and it would result in a significant increase in

the demand for public transit services. There would not be any

significant impacts on pedestrian and bicycle traffic.

The Preferred Alternative would have a significant but mitigable

impact on air quality. Local dust would be generated during building

demolition, renovation, and new construction activities. The acquiring

entity will reduce these potential impacts to an insignificant level by

implementing standard dust control measures during demolition,

renovation and construction.

Section 176 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7506, as amended,

requires Federal agencies to review their activities to ensure that

they do not hamper local efforts to control air pollution. This statute

prevents Federal agencies from conducting activities that do not

conform to an approved implementation plan but recognizes certain

categorically exempt activities. The conveyance of real property,

regardless of the method, is a categorically exempt activity.

Accordingly, disposal of the DoDHF Novato property does not require

Navy to conduct a conformity analysis.

The Preferred Alternative would have significant but mitigable

temporary noise impacts on adjacent land arising out of demolition,

renovation, and construction activities at the Rafael Village, Navy

Exchange Triangle and Commissary Triangle areas. The acquiring entity

will reduce these potential noise impacts to an insignificant level by

limiting demolition and construction activities to normal daytime

hours.

The Preferred Alternative would have a significant noise impact on

some residents of the Rafael Village and Capehart Housing areas arising

out of the high noise levels generated by existing traffic adjacent to

these areas on U.S. Highway 101 and Ignacio Boulevard. Under the

Preferred Alternative, residents of these areas would be exposed to 24-

hour average noise levels that would exceed the 60 decibel average for

residential areas prescribed in the Novato General Plan as the upper

limit of acceptability. This is a significant impact that cannot be

mitigated to an insignificant level.

Although DoDHF Novato generated a small amount of hazardous waste,

Navy's survey identified several areas of contamination. In response,

Navy's remediation actions include removal and remediation of

underground storage tank areas; abatement of damaged, friable and

accessible asbestos; and inspection for and notification of lead-based

paint (LBP) for housing units in accordance with the Residential Lead-

Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, 42 U.S.C. 4822.

Residential surveys for LBP showed that LBP is present in the

Rafael Village and Capehart Housing units. Since all of the Rafael

Village structures will be demolished, no LBP abatement will be

performed there. The Capehart Housing units were completed after 1960

and are therefore subject only to the inspection and disclosure

requirements of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act.

No significant adverse impacts would be caused by the hazardous

materials and hazardous waste that may be used and generated by the

Preferred Alternative. The quantity of hazardous materials used,

stored, and disposed of, and the quantity of hazardous waste generated

on the property would decrease under the Preferred Alternative.

Additionally, hazardous materials used and hazardous waste generated

under the Preferred Alternative would be controlled by existing

regulations under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976,

42 U.S.C. Sec. 6901, et seq., codified at 40 CFR parts 260-266.

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. Sec. 4321 note. There would be no

disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental

effects on minority and low-income populations. Indeed, the Preferred

Alternative would increase the amount of housing in the City and County

and provide emergency shelter and transitional housing that would

benefit the homeless and low-income residents in the area.

Mitigation

Implementation of the decision to dispose of DoDHF Novato does not

require Navy to perform any mitigation measures. However, the National

Park Service must review and approve all plans for adaptive reuse of

the four historic properties if they are conveyed under the Historic

Monuments and Surplus Federal Lands to Public Parks programs. As

required by Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands, and

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, Navy will incorporate

Notices in the conveyance document describing wetland and floodplain

uses that are restricted under Federal, State, and local regulations.

Navy's FEIS identified and discussed those actions that would be

necessary to mitigate the impacts associated with the disposal and

reuse of DoDHF Novato. The acquiring entity, under the direction of

Federal, State, and local agencies with regulatory authority over

protected resources, will be responsible for implementing all necessary

mitigation measures.

Comments Received on the FEIS

Navy received comments on the FEIS from the United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway,

and Transportation District, the Novato Fire Protection District, the

Lanham Village Homeowners' Association, Inc., and Marvelous Marin, Inc.

The EPA commented that navy should compare the projected

environmental impacts of the two ``action'' alternatives against two

standards: historical environmental conditions (the standard that Navy

applied) and those conditions that would exist under the ``No action''

alternative, i.e., with the facility in a

[[Page 37870]]

caretaker status. Navy believes that its use of historical or

previously established environmental conditions is appropriate, because

it evaluates the impacts of the proposed reuse in light of the

conditions that existed when the facility was open and actively

operating.

The Golden Gate Bride, Highway, and Transportation District asked

Navy to include additional information in the FEIS concerning existing

public transit routes, park and ride lots, bus stops, previous land

acquisition by the Transportation District, projected hourly transit

trips, and the mission of the Transportation District. The District did

not provide comments during the public scoping period or during the

DEIS public review period.

As discussed in the FEIS, the anticipated increase in the demand

for public transit services under the Preferred Alternative can be

reduced to an insignificant level by providing internal collector

roadways within the project area that would accommodate public transit

vehicles and by providing shuttle services to existing public transit

routes. The inclusion of the additional information requested by the

Transportation District would not change the results of Navy's

environmental analysis in the FEIS.

The Novato Fire Protection District (NFPD) commented that ti is

currently providing emergency services to DoDHF Novato through a

contract with Navy and the DoDHF Novato is presently located outside

the boundaries of the NFPD. The NFPD stated that it would not be able

to provide emergency services to the DoDHF site if Navy terminated the

contract before other arrangements were made with the NFPD or unless

the DoDHF property was annexed into the district.

The Coast Guard challenged NFPD's claim that it requires a contract

to provide emergency services to DoDHF Novato. On January 7, 1998, the

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

decided that NFPD's exclusion of Federal property from the fire

district was invalid. This decision has the effect of including DoDHF

Novato in the fire district. Novato Fire Protection District v. United

States, No. C 96-3893 FMS (N.D. Cal., Jan. 7, 1998), reh. den. (N.D.

Cal., Jan. 27, 1998).

Navy also received comments from the Lanham Village Homeowners'

Association, Inc. (LVHA) that reflect the views of a neighborhood

adjacent to the Main Site on the DoDHF Novato property. The Homeowners'

Association requested additional analysis of the Preferred Alternative

with respect to the Novato Unified School District's (NUSD) request for

a public benefit conveyance of the former Navy Vehicle Maintenance

Building. The School District proposes to use the building as a vehicle

repair training facility.

The Association also requested additional analysis of a corporation

yard that was proposed under the Open Space Alternative. The

Association disagrees with Navy's conclusions regarding the

environmental impacts of these components of the Preferred Alternative

and the Open Space Alternative.

Navy analyzed the proposed reuse of the former Navy Vehicle

Maintenance Building under the Preferred Alternative and concluded that

it was similar to Navy's historical use of this facility. The proposed

NUSD vehicle repair training facility would be required to meet all

health and safety regulations concerning noise and air emissions, and

reuse of the Vehicle Maintenance Facility would not have significant

impacts on land use, noise, and air quality. Navy considers this

analysis adequate. Additionally, the land use policies in the Revised

Reuse Plan require the acquiring entity to establish landscaping and

buffer zones and to consider the compatibility of new uses with

existing residential uses such as Lanham Village before approving new

uses.

The LVHA commented that the proposed NUSD facility could eventually

become a regional bus repair facility. However, the School District is

not proposing such an action in its public benefit conveyance request,

and HRPA did not propose such a facility in the Revised Reuse Plan.

In response to LVHA's comments on the DEIS concerning the Open

Space Alternative, Navy considered the possible uses of the corporation

yard in the FEIS. Navy concluded that the establishment of a

corporation yard under the Open Space Alternative would not have

significant impacts on land use and noise. Additionally, the Preferred

Alternative, i.e., the Revised Reuse Plan, does not propose to

establish an corporation yards.

The LVHA also stated that the siting of the bus repair training

facility or the corporation yard may raise environmental justice

concerns. As stated in the FEIS, however, there are no significant and

adverse environmental impacts that would disproportionately affect

minority and low-income populations.

Marvelous Marin, Inc. did not comment directly on the FEIS, but

provided copies of correspondence to the Secretary of the Navy dated

November 20, 1997. Marvelous Marin also filed suit in the United States

District Court for the Northern District of California on September 30,

1997, alleging that private entities and/or Marin County may have

reversionary rights to DoDHF Novato property. Marvelous Marin, Inc. v.

United States, No. C 97-3584 CW (N.D. Cal., filed Sept. 30, 1997). Navy

considered these claims and concluded that no such reversionary rights

exist. On May 6, 1998, the District Court dismissed the lawsuit with

prejudice on the merits. Marvelous Marin, Inc. v. United States, id.

(Order and Judgment filed May 6, 1998).

In any entity were to establish reversionary property rights in the

future, the City of Novato's zoning and other ordinances would still

govern redevelopment of this property. Thus, the FEIS adequately

addressed the potential environmental impacts of disposal and reuse of

this property under the Preferred Alternative.

Regulations Governing the Disposal Decision

Since the proposed action contemplates disposal under the Defense

Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (DBCRA), Public Law 101-510,

10 U.S.C. Sec. 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 Revitalizing

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

Parts 174 and 175.

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 considerations.

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

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

and

[[Page 37871]]

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 174.4 of

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

economic recovery through expeditious 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 175.7(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. Sec. 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. 101-47.304-9); 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 HRPA's proposed reuse of the DoDHF Novato property, reflected

in the 1996 Hamilton Army Airfield Reuse Plan and embodied in the

Preferred Alternative, is consistent with the prescriptions of the FPMR

and Section 174.4 of the DoD Rule. The LRA has determined in its

Revised Reuse Plan that the property should be used for several

purposes including residential, community, civic, commercial, parkland

and open space. The property's location, physical characteristics and

existing infrastructure as well as the current uses of adjacent

property make it appropriate for the proposed uses.

The Revised Reuse Plan responds to local economic conditions,

promotes rapid economic recovery from the impact of the facility's

closure, and is 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 174 and 175,

59 Fed. Reg. 16123 (1994). The acquiring entity, under the direction of

Federal, State, and local agencies with regulatory authority over

protected resources, will be responsible for adopting practicable means

to avoid or minimize environmental harm that may result from

implementation of the reuse plan.

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

causing adverse environmental impacts, this alternative would not take

advantage of the property's location, physical characteristics and

infrastructure or the current uses of adjacent property. Additionally,

it would not foster local economic redevelopment of the DoDHF NOvato

property.

Accordingly, Navy will dispose of the Department of Defense Housing

Facility at Novato in a manner that is consistent with the Hamilton

Reuse Planning Authority's Revised Reuse Plan for the property.

Dated: July 1, 1998.

William J. Cassidy, Jr.,

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

[FR Doc. 98-18741 Filed 7-13-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-M