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 Expose sensitive receptors to substantially increased pollutant concentrations Represent an increase of 10 percent or more in an affected AQCR emissions inventory Exceed any Evaluation Criteria established by a SIP. Effects on air quality in NAAQS “nonattainment” areas are considered significant if the net changes in project-related pollutant emissions result in any of the following scenarios: Cause or contribute to a violation of any national or state ambient air quality st<strong>and</strong>ard Increase the frequency or severity of a violation of any ambient air quality st<strong>and</strong>ard Delay the attainment of any st<strong>and</strong>ard or other milestone contained in the SIP. With respect to the General Con<strong>for</strong>mity Rule, effects on air quality would be considered significant if the proposed Federal action would result in an increase of a nonattainment or maintenance area’s emissions inventory by 10 percent or more <strong>for</strong> one or more nonattainment pollutants, or if such emissions exceed de minimis threshold levels established in 40 CFR 93.153(b) <strong>for</strong> individual nonattainment pollutants or <strong>for</strong> pollutants <strong>for</strong> which the area has been redesignated as a maintenance area. In addition to the de minimis emissions thresholds, Federal PSD regulations define air pollutant emissions to be significant if the source is within 10 kilometers of any Class I area, <strong>and</strong> emissions would cause an increase in the concentration of any regulated pollutant in the Class I area of 1 μg/m 3 or more (40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(iii)). 4.4.2 Environmental Consequences 4.4.2.1 Proposed Action Demolition <strong>and</strong> construction activities at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB under the Proposed Action would result in impacts on air quality resources; however these impacts are expected to be less than significant. Air quality impacts during construction <strong>and</strong> demolition activities would result primarily from site-disturbing activities <strong>and</strong> operation of construction equipment. All emissions associated with demolition <strong>and</strong> construction operations would be temporary in nature. The proposed project includes the construction <strong>and</strong> operation of a 4.2-acre <strong>hot</strong> <strong>cargo</strong> <strong>pad</strong> <strong>and</strong> elements to tie the existing <strong>pad</strong> <strong>and</strong> the proposed <strong>pad</strong> together. The project also involves demolishing <strong>and</strong> removing existing aboveground infrastructure elements such as light poles, a personnel shelter, a storage shed, <strong>and</strong> various utility <strong>and</strong> lagoon infrastructures. It is not expected that emissions from the Proposed Action would contribute to or affect local or regional attainment status with the NAAQS. Emissions from the Proposed Action are summarized in Table 4-3. Emissions estimation spreadsheets <strong>and</strong> methodology are included in Appendix C. The Proposed Action would generate particulate matter emissions as fugitive dust from ground-disturbing activities (e.g., road surface demolition, paving, <strong>and</strong> construction). A fugitive dust-control construction permit from AEHD-AQD prescribing fugitive dust minimization procedures would be required <strong>for</strong> the Proposed Action because the action would result in ground disturbance of greater than 0.75 acres. Appropriate fugitive dust-control measures would be employed during demolition activities to suppress emissions. Combustion emissions of all criteria pollutants would result from the operation of construction equipment <strong>and</strong> portable generators during demolition activities, hauling demolition wastes from the project site, <strong>and</strong> construction workers commuting to the project site. Fugitive dust <strong>and</strong> combustion emissions associated with construction equipment would produce slightly elevated air pollutant concentrations. However, the effects would be temporary, fall off rapidly with distance from the Proposed Action site, <strong>and</strong> would not result in any long-term impacts. Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, NM January 2011 4-6
<strong>Final</strong> <strong>EA</strong> Addressing Construction, Operation, <strong>and</strong> Maintenance of a Hot Cargo Pad Table 4-3. Estimated Air Emissions Resulting from the Proposed Action Activity NO x tpy VOC tpy CO tpy SO 2 tpy PM 10 tpy PM 2.5 tpy CO 2 tpy Construction Combustion 10.513 0.743 4.389 0.491 0.691 0.670 1,216.674 Construction Fugitive Dust -- -- -- -- 34.436 2.858 -- Haul Truck On-Road 0.092 0.067 0.271 0.007 0.109 0.028 23.307 Construction Commuter 1.412 1.878 20.191 0.060 0.762 0.208 293.250 Total Proposed Action Emissions 12.02 2.69 24.85 0.56 36.00 3.76 1,533.23 Percent of AMRGI Inventory 0.0327% 0.0085% 0.0101% 0.0213% 0.0262% 0.0226% NA Fugitive dust emissions would vary from day to day depending on the level of activity <strong>and</strong> prevailing weather conditions. The quantity of uncontrolled fugitive dust emissions from a construction site is proportional to the area of l<strong>and</strong> being worked <strong>and</strong> the level of construction activity. Fugitive dust emissions <strong>for</strong> various construction activities were calculated using emissions factors <strong>and</strong> methodology published by the USEPA. Fugitive dust emission estimations <strong>and</strong> methodology are included in Appendix C. Specific in<strong>for</strong>mation describing the types of construction equipment required <strong>for</strong> a specific task, the hours the equipment is operated, <strong>and</strong> the operating conditions vary widely from project to project. For purposes of analysis, these parameters were estimated using established methodologies <strong>for</strong> construction <strong>and</strong> experience with similar types of construction projects. For the purpose of this analysis the duration of this project would occur over a one-year period. The estimated emissions <strong>for</strong> this project are presented in Table 4-3. Detailed assumptions used <strong>for</strong> estimating emissions are included in Appendix C. Since Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB is in attainment <strong>for</strong> all criteria pollutants, General Con<strong>for</strong>mity Rule requirements are not applicable. In addition, the Proposed Action would generate emissions below 10 percent of the emissions inventory <strong>for</strong> the AMRGI AQCR <strong>and</strong> the emissions would be short-term. There<strong>for</strong>e, the construction <strong>and</strong> demolition activities associated with the Proposed Action would not have significant effects on air quality at Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB or on regional or local air quality. Appendix C includes the air emission estimation spreadsheets. Greenhouse Gases GHGs are gases that trap heat in the atmosphere. These emissions occur from natural processes <strong>and</strong> human activities. The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth's temperature. Scientific evidence indicates a trend of increasing global temperature over the past century due to an increase in GHG emissions from human activities. The climate change associated with this global warming is predicted to produce negative environmental, economic, <strong>and</strong> social consequences across the globe. Recent observed changes due to global warming include shrinking glaciers, thawing permafrost, a lengthened growing season, <strong>and</strong> shifts in plant <strong>and</strong> animal ranges. Predictions of long-term negative Kirtl<strong>and</strong> AFB, NM January 2011 4-7
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 85: 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?