environmental assessment us border patrol, tucson sector

3-4512345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546473.13.2.4 Alternative 3Alternative 3 would result in aesthetic impacts similar to those described for the PreferredAlternative.3.13.2.5 Alternative 4The visual resources at the Alternative 4 site, including several potentially NHRP-eligiblebuildings, would be modified. Thus, these modifications would distract from the aesthetics ofthe ranch site; but the ranch is not visible to the casual traveler, and the resulting impact onaesthetics and visual resources would be minor.3.14 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS3.14.1 Affected EnvironmentHazardous materials and substances are regulated in Arizona by a combination of mandated lawspromulgated by the USEPA and the AZDEQ. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment wasconducted for the Preferred Alternative site in accordance with the American Society for Testingand Materials International standard E1527-05. This assessment included a search of Federaland state records for known hazardous waste sites, potential hazardous waste sites, and remedialactivities, including sites that are on the National Priorities List or being considered for the list.No evidence of hazardous materials or recognized environmental conditions was detected on-siteor near the site during the field surveys conducted on May 5, 2011, or during the EnvironmentalSite Assessment.The Alternative 4 site does contain ASTs for fuel and abandoned underground storage tanks(USTs) for fuel, as well as numerous pieces of heavy equipment, used oil containers, aircraft,and other hazardous materials in small containers. No immediate concerns for hazardousmaterials were observed during the May 2011 site inspection.3.14.2 Environmental Consequences3.14.2.1 No Action AlternativeUnder the No Action Alternative no impacts would be expected. Indirect impacts from illegalactivity would continue. More agents would be required to patrol the remote eastern zones of theUSBP Douglas Station’s AOR to account for the necessary drive time to their patrol areas.Indirect impacts from CBV activities and subsequent USBP interdiction activities would begreater under the No Action Alternative than any of the other alternatives.3.14.2.2 Preferred AlternativeAll hazardous and regulated wastes and substances generated by the Preferred Alternative wouldbe collected, characterized, labeled, stored, transported, and disposed of in accordance with allFederal, state, and local regulations, including proper waste manifesting procedures. All otherhazardous and regulated materials or substances would be handled according to materials safetydata sheet instructions and would not affect water, soils, vegetation, wildlife, or the safety ofUSBP agents and staff. The fuel ASTs installed at the proposed FOB would be contained withinprotective berms to prevent the release of any tank spills, and fuel trucks would likely be used toresupply the ASTs at the proposed FOB. Likewise, generator fuel would also be containedwithin a secondary enclosure. Therefore, hazardous and regulated materials and substanceswould not impact the public, groundwater, or the general environment.Douglas FOB EADraftAugust 2011