environmental assessment us border patrol, tucson sector

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4-112345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTSThis section of the EA addresses the potential cumulative impacts associated with theimplementation of the alternatives and other projects/programs that are planned for the region.The CEQ defines cumulative impacts as “the impact on the environment which results from theincremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeableactions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such otheractions” (40 CFR 1508.7). This section continues, “cumulative impacts can result fromindividually minor but collectively major actions taking place over a period of time.”USBP has been conducting law enforcement actions along the border since its inception in 1924,and has continuously transformed its methods as new missions, modes of operations of crossborderviolators, agent needs and national enforcement strategies have evolved. Developmentand maintenance of training ranges, station and sector facilities, detention facilities, and roadsand fences have impacted thousands of acres, with synergistic and cumulative impacts on soil,wildlife habitats, water quality, and noise. Beneficial effects, too, have resulted from theconstruction and use of these roads and fences, including, but not limited to, increasedemployment and income for border regions and its surrounding communities; protection andenhancement of sensitive resources north of the border; reduction in crime within urban areasnear the border; increased land value in areas where border security has increased; and increasedknowledge of the biological communities and pre-history of the region through numerousbiological and cultural resources surveys and studies.With continued funding and implementation of CBP’s environmental conservation measures,including use of biological and archaeological monitors, wildlife water systems, and restorationactivities, adverse impacts due to future and ongoing projects would be avoided or minimized.However, recent, ongoing, and reasonably foreseeable proposed projects will result incumulative impacts. CBP is currently planning, conducting, or has completed several projects inthe Tucson Sector region.CBP projects include: Replacement of legacy fence in the USBP Douglas Station’s AOR. Modernization of CBP tactical communication towers through the addition of receiversand antennas on existing communication towers and the construction of new towers inthe USBP Tucson Sector. Replacement of the existing border fence in the USBP Naco Station’s AOR. Renovation of the Naco Lease Property Fence and Holding Cells.In addition, projects are currently being planned by state and local entities in the Douglasmetropolitan area, but no known projects are proposed for the San Bernardino Valley.A summary of the anticipated cumulative impacts relative to the Preferred Alternative ispresented below. The discussion is presented for each of the resources described previously.Douglas FOB EADraftAugust 2011
4-212345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474.1 LAND USEA major impact would occur if any action is inconsistent with adopted land use plans or if anaction would substantially alter those resources required for, supporting, or benefiting the currentuse. All three of the alternative sites are currently undeveloped sites located in rural areas. Theconstruction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed FOB would occur in an undevelopedarea, but would not initiate an increase of development in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, theconstruction of the proposed FOB would not be expected to result in a major cumulative adverseeffect.4.2 SOILSA major impact would occur if the action exacerbates or promotes long-term erosion, if the soilsare inappropriate for the proposed construction and would create a risk to life or property, or ifthere would be a substantial reduction in agricultural production or loss of Prime Farmland soils.The proposed action and other CBP actions have not reduced Prime Farmland soils oragricultural production regionally, as much of the land developed by CBP has not been used foragricultural production. Pre- and post-construction SWPPP measures would be implemented tocontrol soil erosion. The impact from the construction of the proposed FOB at any of thealternative sites, when combined with past and proposed projects in the region, would not beconsidered a major cumulative adverse effect.4.3 WATER RESOURCESGroundwater recharge in the San Bernardino Valley Basin is relatively high due to greaterrainfall amounts in the bordering mountains and recharge of the aquifers by mountain-frontrunoff. Withdrawals from the aquifers are below the maximum recharge capacity, and drainagepatterns of surface water sources would not be impacted by the Proposed Action or any otherproposed project in the vicinity of the alternative sites. Water quality in the San BernardinoValley would remain unchanged under the Preferred Alternative. As mentioned previously,specific erosion and sedimentation controls and other BMPs would be in place at the proposedFOB. All horse manure at the FOB would be collected and transported off-site for disposal oruse, and would have no impact on water quality. Therefore, this project, in conjunction withother regionally proposed projects, would not create a major cumulative effect on waterresources in the region.4.4 VEGETATIVE HABITATOver 3 million acres of desertscrub rangeland occur in the region, even with the proposed FOBand other development projects. Therefore, this proposed project, in conjunction with otherregionally proposed projects, would not create a major cumulative effect on vegetative habitat inthe region.4.5 WILDLIFE RESOURCESOver 3 million acres of desertscrub habitat occurs in the region that provides habitat for wildlife,even with the proposed FOB and other development projects. Therefore, this proposed project,Douglas FOB EADraftAugust 2011
Page 3 and 4:
12345678910111213141516171819202122
Page 5 and 6:
12345678910111213141516171819202122
Page 7 and 8:
12345678910111213141516171819202122
Page 9 and 10:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYINTRODUCTION:This
Page 11 and 12:
ES-3environment, but at different l
Page 13 and 14:
ii123456789101112131415161718192021
Page 15:
iv123456789101112131415161718192021
Page 18 and 19:
vii12345678910111213141516LIST OF P
Page 20 and 21:
1-112345678910111213141516171819202
Page 22 and 23:
1-312345678910111213141516171819202
Page 24 and 25:
1-512345678910111213141516171819202
Page 26 and 27:
Douglas FOB EA DraftAugust 2011Tabl
Page 28 and 29:
Table 1-1, continuedDouglas FOB EA
Page 30 and 31:
2-112345678910111213141516171819202
Page 32 and 33:
Perimeter BufferX X X X X X X X X X
Page 34 and 35:
2-512345678910111213141516171819202
Page 36 and 37:
2-7Alternative 2·00 160 320 480 64
Page 38 and 39:
2-9Alternative 3·00 160 320 480 64
Page 40 and 41:
2-111234567891011121314151617181920
Page 42 and 43:
Douglas FOB EA DraftAugust 2011Affe
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
3-112345678910111213141516171819202
Page 50 and 51:
3-312345678910111213141516171819202
Page 52 and 53: 3-5PROJECTLOCATIONAlternative 4Doug
Page 54 and 55: 3-712345678910111213141516171819202
Page 56 and 57: 3-9Alternative 4PreferredAlternativ
Page 58 and 59: 3-111234567891011121314151617181920
Page 60 and 61: 3-131234567891011121314151617181920
Page 62 and 63: 3-151234567891011121314151617181920
Page 64 and 65: 3-171234567891011121314151617181920
Page 66 and 67: Douglas FOB EA DraftAugust 2011Comm
Page 68 and 69: Table 3-1, continuedDouglas FOB EA
Page 70 and 71: 3-231234567891011121314151617181920
Page 72 and 73: 3-251234567891011121314151617181920
Page 74 and 75: 3-271234567891011121314151617181920
Page 76 and 77: 3-291234567891011121314151617181920
Page 78 and 79: 3-311234567891011121314151617181920
Page 80 and 81: 3-331234567891011121314151617181920
Page 82 and 83: 3-351PollutantTable 3-4. National A
Page 84 and 85: 3-371234567891011121314151617181920
Page 86 and 87: 3-391234567891011121314151617181920
Page 88 and 89: 3-411234567891011121314151617181920
Page 90 and 91: 3-431234567891011121314151617181920
Page 92 and 93: 3-451234567891011121314151617181920
Page 94 and 95: 3-471Table 3-8. RaceRaceGeographic
Page 96 and 97: 3-49123456level for the State of Ar
Page 98 and 99: 3-511234567891011121314151617181920
Page 100 and 101: 3-531234567893.18.2.4 Alternative 3
Page 104 and 105: 4-312345678910111213141516171819202
Page 106 and 107: 4-512345678910111213141516171819202
Page 108 and 109: 5-112345678910111213141516171819202
Page 110 and 111: 5-312345678910111213141516171819202
Page 112 and 113: SECTION 6.0REFERENCES
Page 114 and 115: 6-212345678910111213141516171819202
Page 116 and 117: 6-412345678910111213141516171819202
Page 118 and 119: 6-612345678910111213141516171819202
Page 120 and 121: SECTION 7.0ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIO
Page 122 and 123: 7-212345678910111213141516171819202
Page 124 and 125: SECTION 8.0LIST OF PREPARERS
Page 126: APPENDIX ACORRESPONDENCE
Page 155 and 156:
FW: EA Douglas Station's Area of Op
Page 157 and 158:
COUNTYApacheApacheApacheApacheApach
Page 159 and 160:
COUNTYCochiseCochiseCochiseCochiseC
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
CALCULATION SHEET-COMBUSTIBLE EMISS
Page 173 and 174:
CALCULATION SHEET-TRANSPORTATION CO
Page 175 and 176:
CALCULATION SHEET-FUGITIVE DUST-CON
Page 177:
CALCULATION SHEET-SUMMARY OF EMISSI
show all

environmental assessment us border patrol, tucson sector

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?