T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program - FEIS Chapters - PVD

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluation• Rigorously explore and objectively evaluate these alternatives, and provide reasons why the federal entity(FAA) eliminated certain alternatives from further study.There are a set of terms used during the NEPA process including the Preferred Alternative, EnvironmentallyPreferable Alternative, and Proposed Action. These terms are defined below and used throughout this FEIS.• Preferred Alternative - CEQ regulations require the lead agency to identify its preferred alternative in theDEIS or FEIS (40 CFR section 1502.14(e)). The FAA is responsible for identifying the alternative that itbelieves would fulfill the agency’s mission and responsibilities and would meet the Purpose and Need,giving consideration to economic, environmental, technical, and other factors. 91• Environmentally Preferable Alternative - CEQ guidance encourages the lead agency to identify theenvironmentally preferable alternative in the EIS. CEQ regulations require the lead agency to identify it atthe time of its decision (40 CFR section 1505.2(b)). 92 In the ROD, the FAA will identify all alternativesconsidered by the agency in reaching its decision, and will specify the alternative which is considered toenvironmentally preferable. Preferences among alternatives based on relevant factors including economicand technical consideration and agency statutory mission will also be discussed. The EnvironmentallyPreferable Alternative may not meet the Purpose and Need.• Proposed Action - The lead agency is required to identify in the EIS the solution that airport sponsor andthe lead agency are proposing to solve the problem(s) they are facing.The initial evaluation of the T.F. Green Airport Improvement Program alternatives determined their ability to meetthe Project’s Purpose and Need, and determined if they are reasonable and feasible to implement. The safetycomponent of the Purpose and Need is focused strictly on physical enhancements to T.F. Green Airport itself, andcannot be met by off-Airport solutions. The off-Airport and non-construction alternatives considered in this analysisfocus on efficiency enhancement aspects of the Purpose and Need. See DEIS Appendix E, Alternatives Analysis, for thedetailed evaluation of the alternatives screening process summarized in Section 3.2, Alternatives Screening Process. Aniterative process was used to identify, screen, and refine the alternatives that were advanced into subsequentscreening analysis centering on the environmental consequences analysis (see Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences).This methodology progressively applied detailed evaluation factors to identify the ability of each alternative to meetthe following general performance measures:• Meets the Purpose and Need – the alternative enhances the safety and efficiency of the Airport and theNew England Regional Airport system.• Reasonable and Feasible – the alternative is practical and feasible from the technical and economicstandpoint and using common sense, rather than simply desirable from the standpoint of the applicant, orsponsor.91 CEQ Memorandum: Questions and Answers About the NEPA Regulations, 48 Fed Reg. 18026, March 23, 1981, as amended, 51 Fed Reg 15618 (Apr. 25, 1986).Question 4a.92 Ibid. Question 8b, FAA Order 1050.1E, Par. 506e.Chapter 3 – Alternatives Analysis 3-2 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH03_Alternatives_JUL_2011.doc