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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

1.9 Yellow-billed Loon (1) This species is not expected to occur in the project area and the combined likelihood of its occurrence in the project area and being in the area of elevated noise levels from F-22 overflight is so low as to be discountable. (2) Therefore, this proposal will have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects in regards to the yellow-billed loon. (3) Determination: May affect not likely to adversely affect the yellow-billed loon. 1.10 Kittlitz’s Murrelet (1) This species is not expected to occur in the project area and the combined likelihood of its occurrence in the project area and being in the area of elevated noise levels from F-22 overflight is so low as to be discountable. (2) Therefore, this proposal will have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects in regards to Kittlitz’s murrelet. (3) Determination: May affect but not likely to adversely affect Kittlitz’s murrelet. 1.11 Northern Sea Otter, Southwest Alaska DPS (1) This species is not expected to occur in the project area and the combined likelihood of its occurrence in the project area and being in the area of elevated noise levels from F-22 overflight is so low as to be discountable. (2) Therefore, this proposal will have no direct, indirect, or cumulative effects in regards Southwest Alaska DPS of the Northern Sea Otter. (3) Determination: May affect but not likely to adversely affect the Southwest Alaska DPS of the Northern Sea Otter. 1.12 Conclusion A determination of “may affect not likely to adversely affect” is found for all species analyzed; therefore, no Sec 7 consultation is required for this project. 1.13 Additional Considerations 1.13.1 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) All marine mammals are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Because behavioral reactions by beluga whales are not predicted (< 1 behavioral reaction per year) there would be no harassment of this species under MMPA. Other marine mammal species occasionally documented in the Knik Arm Project Area include Steller’s sea lion (discussed above), harbor seal (Phoca vitulina), harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and killer whale (Orcinus orca). Their occurrences are infrequent and in much lower abundance in the Knik Arm than the Cook Inlet beluga whales. Potential project effects identified above for the beluga F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment Wildlife Analysis Page 1-21
whale are considered to be possible, but even less likely given the very low abundance of these species in the Knik Arm. Adverse effects associated with the proposed Plus-Up, including behavioral reactions to overflight, are not expected to occur for any marine mammal. 1.13.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (amended in 1936 and 1972) prohibits the taking of migratory birds, unless authorized by the Secretary of Interior. Executive Order 13186 (Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds) provides for the conservation of migratory birds and their habitats, and requires the evaluation of the effects of Federal actions on migratory birds, with an emphasis on species of concern. Federal agencies are required to support the intent of the migratory bird conventions by integrating bird conservation principles, measures, and practices into agency activities and by avoiding or minimizing, to the extent practicable, adverse impacts on migratory birds when conducting agency actions. The DoD has an exemption of the MBTA for training for military readiness. Although not directly for this project, a permit for take exists and is maintained in the Bird Exclusion Zone on JBER. 1.13.3 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) This wildlife analysis has been prepared in conjunction with an F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment (EA) being prepared by the United States Air Force (Air Force) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of the proposal to add six primary and one back-up F-22 aircraft to the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) F-22 inventory, an increase in primary aircraft of approximately 17 percent. 1.14 Literature Cited Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. 2010. Construction General Permit for Stormwater. Available at: http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/wnpspc/stormwater/ sw_construction.htm. Amoser, S. and F. Ladich. 2005. Are hearing sensitivities adapted to the ambient noise in their habitats? J. Experimental Biology 208:3533-3542. Blackwell, S. B. and C. R. Greene, Jr. Acoustic Measurements in Cook Inlet, Alaska, During August 2001. Prepared by Greeneridge Sciences for National Marine Fisheries Service, Protected Resources Division, Anchorage AK. 12 August. Eller, A. I. and R. C. Cavanagh. 2000. Subsonic Aircraft Noise At and Beneath the Ocean Surface: Estimation of Risk for Effects on Marine Mammals. Prepared by Science Applications International Corporation for United States Air Force Research Laboratory. Wright-Patterson AFB, OH. AFRL-HE-WP-TR-2000-0156. Funk, D.W., T.M. Markowitz, and R. Rodrigues (eds.) 2005. Baseline studies of beluga whale habitat use in Knik Arm, Upper Cook Inlet, Alaska, July 2004-July 2005. Rep. from LGL Alaska Research Associates, Inc., Anchorage, AK, in association with HDR Alaska, Inc., Wildlife Analysis Page 1-22 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:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Village of Stony River ATTN: Mary W
Page 229 and 230:
Appendix D Aircraft Noise Analysis
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234: F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessme
Page 261 and 262: Appendix E Sec 7 (ESA) Compliance W
Page 263 and 264: SECTION 7 (ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT)
Page 265 and 266: not require additional construction
Page 267 and 268: Other diet items include cod, pollo
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: approached by projected sound level
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 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.
show all

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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?