F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment - Joint Base Elmendorf ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species Identified by USFWS (2010a) or NOAA-NMFS (2010) Suspected or Recorded in Upper Cook Inlet Project Area Common Name Scientific Name ESA Status Location Description Upper Willamette River Steelhead*: Lower Columbia River Middle Columbia River Snake River Basin Upper Columbia River Upper Willamette River Onchorhynchus mykiss Threatened Threatened Threatened Endangered Threatened These stock range throughout the North Pacific. However, the specific occurrence of listed salmonids within close proximity to Elmendorf AFB is highly unlikely (NMFS 2010). Note: * May potentially move on or within close proximity to base, but occur so infrequently that projects are expected to have no effect on them (USFWS 2010a, NMFS 2010). 1.5 Threatened, Endangered, and Candidate Species Recorded in Anchorage/Upper Cook Inlet Area 1.5.1 Beluga Whale, Cook Inlet Distinct Population Segment (DPS) Biology: See “National Marine Fisheries Service. 2008a. Conservation Plan for the Cook Inlet beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas). National Marine Fisheries Service, Juneau, Alaska. 122 pages.” Status: Endangered (Dec 2008) (73 FR 62919) Critical Habitat: Proposed (74 FR 63080) December 2, 2009 but no final rule as of December 20, 2010. Area 1 of the proposed CH includes Knik Arm. The primary constituent elements identified in the Proposed Critical Habitat Rule as “essential to the conservation of Cook Inlet beluga whales” are: • Intertidal and subtidal waters of Cook Inlet with depths
Other diet items include cod, pollock, and sole. In Knik Arm, belugas transit between locations such as stream mouths (NMFS 2010c) where behaviors including milling, feeding, and socializing by belugas have been identified (Stewart 2010). In the project area these areas include Six Mile Creek, North Eagle Bay, Eagle River, and near Point McKenzie, with transit of belugas primarily along the east side of the Lower Knik Arm (Stewart 2010). Most beluga activity in Knik Arm is noted during August, September, and October, coinciding with the Coho salmon run (NMFS 2010b). Within Knik Arm, beluga abundance is highly variable. Fourteen years of aerial surveys conducted during the first weeks of June by NMFS show beluga abundance in Knik Arm ranging from 224 (in 1997) to 0 whales (in 1994 and 2004) (NMFS 2008a). Beluga abundance in the Knik Arm is highest during the months of August through November, which account for 90 percent of observations of whales in the Knik Arm made by land and boat-based observations between July 2004 and July 2005 (NMFS 2010b). Surveys conducted by boat during August through October 2004 reported variable abundance counts in Knik Arm with 5-130 whales in August, 0-70 whales in September, and 0-105 whales in October (Funk et al. 2005). (Single observation totals of up to 71 whales during daily visits were recorded during summer 2009 in Eagle Bay at the mouth of Eagle River on JBER- Richardson (C. McKee, personal communication, USARG-DPW). Average daily visits to Eagle Bay were 9 whales (McKee and Garner 2010). These animals are expected to pass by JBER shorelines. Public observations suggest occasional feeding activity near mouth of Six Mile Creek, which is supported by studies conducted by Funk et al. (2005) and Stewart (2010.) The waters of Knik Arm are extremely turbid and subject to wide tidal fluctuations, with a mean diurnal range of 30 feet in Anchorage resulting in currents ranging from about 3 knots to 12 knots locally (Blackwell and Greene 2002). Belugas ascend to upper Knik Arm on the flooding tide and often retreat to lower portions of the Arm during low tides. In the narrows of the lower reaches of Knik Arm they tend to follow the tide within 1 km of either shoreline. Above the narrows, they may travel up the east side of the Knik Arm following the channel along Eagle Bay on incoming tides and belugas are observed to hug the western shoreline when moving out of the Knik Arm (NMFS 2010b); however, from vantage points on the east side of the Arm above the narrows, many of the same individuals observed swimming up on the east side are also observed to swim down on the same side (Garner, personal communication 2011). 1.5.2 Steller Sea Lion, Western DPS Biology: See “National Marine Fisheries Service. 2008. Recovery Plan for the Steller Sea Lion (Eumetopias jubatus). Revision. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD. 325 pages.” Status: Endangered (1997) (62 FR 24345, 62 FR 30772). Critical Habitat: Designated August 27, 1993 (58 FR 45269) – none in Upper Cook Inlet. Local Records: Steller sea lions have been observed in Knik Arm on rare occasions – most recently a single male was observed during summer of 2009 near the mouth of Eagle River, adjacent to Eagle River Flats (C. McKee, personal communication, JBER USARG-DPW). NMFS (2010b) indicates that there is little likelihood that the species would enter the Knik Arm in the vicinity of JBER in the future. Wildlife Analysis Page 1-4 F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment
Page 1 and 2:
F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 3 and 4:
Cover Sheet ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMEN
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 2-13 Table 2.2-3. Baseline and
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 3-51 Table 3.8-1. Special Use
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Table 5.1-1. Past, Present, and Rea
Page 141 and 142:
Table 5.1-2. Past, Present, and Rea
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Appendix A Characteristics of Chaff
Page 159 and 160:
APPENDIX A CHARACTERISTICS OF CHAFF
Page 161 and 162:
Table 2. Characteristics of RR-188
Page 163 and 164:
they demonstrate ejection of 98 per
Page 165 and 166:
Appendix B Characteristics and Anal
Page 167 and 168:
APPENDIX B CHARACTERISTICS AND ANAL
Page 169 and 170:
Figure 1. MJU-10/B Flare F-22 Plus-
Page 171 and 172:
Flare failure would occur if the fl
Page 173 and 174:
4.2 Flare Strike Risk Residual flar
Page 175 and 176:
and velocity. A slug is defined as
Page 177 and 178:
The S&I device maximum momentum wou
Page 179 and 180:
Appendix C Public and Agency Outrea
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184:
Senator Lisa Murkowski ATTN: Karen
Page 187:
New Koliganek Village Council ATTN:
Page 211 and 212:
Alaska Department of Natural Resour
Page 213 and 214:
Eklutna Native Village ATTN: Doroth
Page 216 and 217: F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 218 and 219: Senator Lisa Murkowski ATTN: Karen
Page 220 and 221: Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 225 and 226: Senator Lisa Murkowski ATTN: Karen
Page 227 and 228: Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 229 and 230: Appendix D Aircraft Noise Analysis
Page 261 and 262: Appendix E Sec 7 (ESA) Compliance W
Page 263 and 264: SECTION 7 (ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT)
Page 265: not require additional construction
Page 269 and 270: 1.5.6 Northern Sea Otter—Southwes
Page 271 and 272: Most sound is actually transmitted
Page 273 and 274: The visual experience of an F-22 ov
Page 275 and 276: Figure 2. Water Surface Area Below
Page 283 and 284: approached by projected sound level
Page 285 and 286: whale are considered to be possible
Page 287 and 288: _____. 2010c. Proposed Critical Hab
Page 289 and 290: APPENDIX 1. NOISE IMPACTS ASSESSMEN
Page 291 and 292: important in determining whether an
Page 293 and 294: SPL (dB) Frequency (Hz) Figure 2. U
Page 295 and 296: e 1 µPa, 125-130 dB re 1 µPa, and
Page 297 and 298: 1.18 Appendix 1 References Blackwel
Page 299 and 300: APPENDIX 2. INFORMATION ON BELUGA W
Page 301 and 302: Delphinapterus leucas, after exposu
Page 310 and 311: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 312 and 313: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 314 and 315: F2.1 Ungulates Wild ungulates appea
Page 316 and 317:
F2.2 Waterfowl and Other Waterbirds
Page 318 and 319:
leaving an aircraft during training
Page 320 and 321:
Cavedo, A. M., K. S. Latimer, H. L.
Page 322 and 323:
Perry, E. A., D. J. Boness, and S.
Page 324 and 325:
This page intentionally left blank.
show all

F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment - Joint Base Elmendorf ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?