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

F-22 Plus-Up Environmental Assessment
2.0 Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
2.3 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward
On July 31, 2010, the Air Force Secretariat, after review of the basing of the Air Force’s F-22
aircraft, determined the most effective basing for the F-22. This requires relocating one
Holloman F-22 Squadron to an existing F-22 base, Tyndall AFB, Florida, and redistributing the
second Holloman AFB F-22 squadron aircraft to units at three existing F-22 bases. The F-22s
would be redistributed as follows: JBER-Elmendorf, Alaska, would receive six additional
primary aircraft; Langley AFB, Virginia, would receive six additional primary aircraft; and
Nellis AFB, Nevada, would receive two additional primary aircraft.
2.3.1 Alternative Locations
The Air Force Secretariat reviewed F-22 aircraft bases and operational requirements and
determined that the proposed redistribution of existing squadrons and aircraft would maximize
combat aircraft and squadrons available for operational contingencies. Consolidating aircraft at
existing F-22 bases, including JBER, enhances F-22 operational flexibility.
Redistributing the six primary and one back-up F-22 aircraft designated for JBER to other
locations would not be consistent with achieving combat readiness. Different distributions or
locations of aircraft represent alternatives considered but not carried forward for analysis in this
EA.
2.3.2 Alternative Flight Operations at JBER
Alternative percentage distributions of flight operations for the JBER-Elmendorf main runway
(06/24) and the cross-wind runway (16/34) were evaluated for F-22 and C-17 aircraft
operations. A range of F-22 flight operations from 45 percent to 100 percent on the main
runway were evaluated to determine operational and noise effects. C-17 flight operations were
also evaluated for short-field cross-wind runway operations during the day and night.
Potential alternatives which exceeded approximately 25 percent of F-22 launches or some C-17
closed pattern operations on the cross-wind runway were estimated to produce off-base noise
impacts south of the base. Operations on the cross-wind runway above the approximate 25
percent use described in the proposed action were determined to be alternatives considered but
not carried forward.
2.4 No Action Alternative
No Action for this EA means no beddown of an additional six F-22 primary aircraft would
occur at JBER at this time. Analysis of the No Action Alternative provides a benchmark for
environmental analysis. Section 1502.14(d) of NEPA requires an EA to analyze the No Action
Alternative. The No Action Alternative would result in no additional F-22 aircraft being
assigned to JBER, no F-22 related personnel changes, and no additional F-22 flight activities near
the base or in training airspace.
For this EA, No Action is the baseline condition, with two squadrons of F-22 aircraft based at
JBER. Table 2.2-3 presents the airspace training associated with existing F-22 squadrons. This
airspace training would be expected to continue under No Action. Taking no action would
Page 2-16