Final FONSI and EA for hot cargo pad on Kirtland AFB - Kirtland Air ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

<strong>Final</strong> <strong>EA</strong> Addressing Construction, Operation, <strong>and</strong> Maintenance of a Hot Cargo Pad Project Name 21st Explosive Ordinance Division Expansion Spacecraft Component Integration Lab Description The 21st Explosive Ordinance Division proposes to construct a facility expansion <strong>and</strong> site improvements <strong>for</strong> the 21st Explosive Ordinance Division Weapons of Mass Destruction Company Complex at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB. The 21st Explosive Ordinance Division currently operates from a 90-acre property leased by the Army within Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB. The current site has seven structures, six of which are subst<strong>and</strong>ard <strong>and</strong> do not have adequate fire protection. The 21st Explosive Ordinance Division proposes to exp<strong>and</strong> this site to a total of 280 acres, add three permanent structures, demolish five of the six subst<strong>and</strong>ard structures, add two temporary storage containers, tie into nearby utilities, construct water tanks <strong>for</strong> fire suppression, <strong>and</strong> construct several concrete <strong>pad</strong>s <strong>for</strong> training tasks. Proposed lease action to convert underutilized space, including a <strong>for</strong>mer military family housing area <strong>and</strong> a recreational use area, to use <strong>for</strong> office, commercial, <strong>and</strong> senior continuum care space at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB. 4.14.2 Cumulative Impact Analysis by Resource Area 4.14.2.1 L<strong>and</strong> Use A significant impact on l<strong>and</strong> use would occur if any action is inconsistent with adopted l<strong>and</strong> use plans or would substantially alter those resources required <strong>for</strong> supporting or benefiting the current use of the site <strong>and</strong> adjacent property. The Proposed Action is consistent with the 2002 Kirtl<strong>and</strong> Air Force Base, New Mexico General Plan, <strong>and</strong> would not impact municipal plans or policies. The Proposed Action would result in less-than-significant impacts on l<strong>and</strong> use compatibility related to noise production <strong>and</strong> safety issues. However, the Proposed Action, when considered with other potential alterations of l<strong>and</strong> use, would not be expected to result in a significant cumulative adverse effect on l<strong>and</strong> use compatibility. All reasonable past, present, <strong>and</strong> <strong>for</strong>eseeable actions on Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB are consistent with the 2002 Kirtl<strong>and</strong> Air Force Base, New Mexico General Plan. 4.14.2.2 Noise The noise generated by the Proposed Action, when considered with other existing <strong>and</strong> proposed projects on Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, would not be considered a significant cumulative impact. The cumulative effect of the proposed <strong>and</strong> future project would result in only temporary increases in ambient noise levels during demolition <strong>and</strong> construction activities. 4.14.2.3 Visual Resources Although the collective implementation of various projects at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB could result in cumulative impacts on visual resources at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, the impacts would not be significant. The exiting visual conditions at the installation consist of military <strong>and</strong> community infrastructure, <strong>and</strong> there<strong>for</strong>e, most projects would be consistent with these existing conditions. Impacts on visual resources from reasonably <strong>for</strong>eseeable projects, <strong>and</strong> thus cumulative impacts, would be controlled by following the Kirtl<strong>and</strong> Air Force Base Architectural Compatibility Plan, which attempts to ensure that future development is per<strong>for</strong>med in a way that limits effects on visual resources <strong>and</strong> is consistent with existing architectural <strong>and</strong> visual st<strong>and</strong>ards (AAFES 2008). Adherence to the architectural compatibility plan would prevent significant visual cumulative impacts from occurring in the future. Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, NM January 2011 4-28
<strong>Final</strong> <strong>EA</strong> Addressing Construction, Operation, <strong>and</strong> Maintenance of a Hot Cargo Pad 4.14.2.4 Air Quality The Proposed Action would result in low levels of air emissions below de minimis thresholds that would not be regionally significant. The Proposed Action would generate short-term emissions below 10 percent of the emissions inventory <strong>for</strong> the AMRGI AQCR <strong>and</strong> negligibly contribute towards the New Mexico statewide GHG inventory. However, the Proposed Action would not contribute significantly to adverse cumulative impacts on air quality at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB or regionally. 4.14.2.5 Geology <strong>and</strong> Soils The Proposed Action, when combined with other reasonably <strong>for</strong>eseeable projects, would not result in significant cumulative impacts on geology <strong>and</strong> soils. The Proposed Action would result in cumulative impacts on soil erosion <strong>and</strong> sedimentation, but would not reduce prime farml<strong>and</strong> soils or agricultural production. SWPPP measures <strong>and</strong> BMPs would be implemented to control erosion <strong>and</strong> sedimentation during demolition <strong>and</strong> construction activities, which would minimize impacts. 4.14.2.6 Water Resources The cumulative effects of the Proposed Action would result primarily from soil erosion <strong>and</strong> sedimentation that could impact water quality <strong>and</strong> surface waters. When considered with potential disturbances on water resources from future actions, it would not be expected to have a significant cumulative impact on water resources. Implementation of BMPs would minimize potential <strong>for</strong> adverse effects on water resources associated with the Proposed Action <strong>and</strong> future actions. 4.14.2.7 Biological Resources Implementation of the Proposed Action <strong>and</strong> other reasonably <strong>for</strong>eseeable projects would not result in a significant cumulative impact on biological resources. Because the Proposed Action would occur in a previously disturbed area that does not contain much vegetation or important biological habitats, it would not be expected to impact vegetation or wildlife habitats. The Proposed Action could have less than significant adverse impacts on burrowing owls <strong>and</strong> migratory birds, which when combined with other projects could result in cumulative impacts. Although growth <strong>and</strong> development can be expected to continue outside of Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB <strong>and</strong> within the surrounding natural areas, significant cumulative adverse effects on these resources would not be expected when added to the effects of activities associated with the Proposed Action. 4.14.2.8 Cultural Resources The Proposed Action would not result in a cumulative impact on cultural resources. There are no known cultural resources within the footprint of the proposed <strong>hot</strong> <strong>cargo</strong> <strong>pad</strong>, thus, no impacts are anticipated. 4.14.2.9 Infrastructure The Proposed Action has the potential to result in adverse cumulative impacts on electrical, water supply, wastewater, storm water, <strong>and</strong> solid waste management services. The 2002 Kirtl<strong>and</strong> Air Force Base, New Mexico General Plan addresses the capacity <strong>and</strong> the need to upgrade all elements of infrastructure to support additional projects at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB. An upgrade of any infrastructure component to support future construction at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB would largely result in beneficial effects <strong>for</strong> the installation. Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, NM January 2011 4-29
Page 1:
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FO
Page 10 and 11:
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS µg/L mi
Page 13:
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDR
Page 17 and 18:
Final EA</
Page 19 and 20:
Final EA</
Page 21 and 22:
Final EA</
Page 23 and 24:
Final EA</
Page 25 and 26:
Final EA</
Page 27 and 28:
Final EA</
Page 29 and 30:
Final EA</
Page 31 and 32:
Final EA</
Page 33 and 34:
Final EA</
Page 35 and 36:
Final EA</
Page 37 and 38:
Final EA</
Page 39 and 40:
Final EA</
Page 41 and 42:
Final EA</
Page 43 and 44:
Final EA</
Page 45 and 46:
Final EA</
Page 47 and 48:
Final EA</
Page 49 and 50:
Final EA</
Page 51 and 52:
Final EA</
Page 53 and 54:
Final EA</
Page 55 and 56:
Final EA</
Page 57 and 58: Final EA</
Page 107: Final EA</
Page 121: APPENDIX A APPLICABLE LAWS, REGULAT
Page 124 and 125: Land Use L
Page 126 and 127: typically calls for</strong
Page 128 and 129: species. All Federal agencies must
Page 130 and 131: comment on the alteration, demoliti
Page 132 and 133: monitoring, detection, and<
Page 135 and 136: Appendix B Interagency and<
Page 137 and 138: Native American Tribes Isleta Puebl
Page 139 and 140: Example IICEP Letter to Native Amer
Page 141 and 142: B-7
Page 143 and 144: Comments Received on the Draft Envi
Page 145 and 146: B-11
Page 147 and 148: Table B-1. Responses to Comments Re
Page 149: APPENDIX C AIR QUALITY SUPPORTING D
Page 152 and 153: Air Quality Emissions from Proposed
Page 154 and 155: Combustion Emissions Combustion Emi
Page 156 and 157: Architectural Coatings No. Reqd. a
Page 158 and 159:
Construction Fugitive Dust Emission
Page 160 and 161:
Grading Schedule Estimate of time r
Page 162 and 163:
Construction Commuter Emissions Emi
Page 164:
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
show all

Final FONSI and EA for hot cargo pad on Kirtland AFB - Kirtland Air ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?