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

T.F. Green Airport Improvement ProgramEnvironmental Impact Statement and Final Section 4(f) Evaluation3.3 Level 1 Screening – Candidate AlternativesThe Level 1 Screening analyzed a series of potential on-Airport construction program element alternatives,off-Airport construction, and non-construction alternatives. The screening criteria consisted of the performancefactors, design standards, service levels, and administrative issues that were used to qualitatively assesswhether an alternative may meet the Purpose and Need. The screening criteria were derived from the CEQregulations and are in two groups. 95 The first set of criteria is related directly to the Purpose and Need andfocuses on the safety, efficiency, operational, and technical aspects and meeting demands of theT.F. Green Airport service area. The second set addressed whether an alternative is reasonable and feasible. Thegeographic area analyzed in the Level 1 Screening is the T.F. Green Airport service area (Figure 3-1). The servicearea is based on the demographic and economic characteristics of the area and associated demand for air travel.3.3.1 Candidate Alternative: Greater Use of Other AirportsThis alternative considered the use of the following nine airports located throughout southeastern New England(Figure 3-2) and the ability of each to adequately meet the Purpose and Need of the T.F. Green AirportImprovement Program:• Logan International Airport, Boston, MA• Bradley International Airport, Windsor Locks, CT• Worcester Regional Airport, Worcester, MA• New Bedford Regional Airport, New Bedford, MA• Groton-New London Airport, Groton, CT• Laurence G. Hanscom Field, Bedford, MA• Quonset Airport, North Kingstown, RI• North Central Airport, Smithfield, RI• Otis Air National Guard Base, Falmouth, MAThe analysis evaluated the current and anticipated role of each airport, airport facilities, planned expansionprojects, and the expansion potential of each airport. Based on the deficiencies and constraints associated witheach of these airports, the Greater Use of Other Airports alternative would not adequately fulfill the Purposeand Need because none of these airports would be able to provide the appropriate facilities. This alternativewould not support the goals and objectives of the NERASP in addressing regional aviation needs. Therefore,this alternative and each of the individual airports examined were eliminated from further consideration.3.3.2 Candidate Alternative: Develop a New AirportThis alternative examined the potential for the identification of a suitable site within the T.F. Green Airportservice area for a replacement airport capable of accommodating the Purpose and Need of the T.F. GreenAirport Improvement Program. The FAA’s 2000 Aviation Capacity Enhancement Plan views construction ofnew airports primarily as a means of increasing aviation system capacity, and not for meeting the facility95 40 CFR section1502.14.Chapter 3 – Alternatives Analysis 3-6 July 2011\\mawatr\ev\09228.00\reports\FEIS_Final_July_2011\PVD_CH03_Alternatives_JUL_2011.doc