Alternative Energy Draft EA - NASA Visitor Center at Wallops Flight ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Executive Summary Resource Proposed Action Alternative One Alternative Two impacts on geology immediately around the driven piles. around the driven piles. Land Use No changes to or impacts on existing or planned land use. Surface Waters Potential adverse impacts from spills or leaks of pollutants. NASA would minimize adverse impacts by acquiring Virginia Stormwater Management Program (VSMP) permits as necessary and implementing BMPs and WFF’s Integrated Contingency Plan (ICP). Wetlands Up to 0.36 hectare (0.88 acre) of wetlands would be filled. NASA would obtain necessary permits via the Virginia Marine Resources Commission (VMRC) Joint Permit Application (JPA) process and would implement 0.362 hectare (0.895 acre) of compensatory mitigation at WFF’s Mainland. Floodplains The wind turbines would be located within the 100year and 500-year floodplains. Because Wallops Island is entirely within the floodplain, no practicable alternatives exist. The functionality of the floodplain on Wallops Island would not be adversely impacted. No changes to or impacts on existing or planned land use at Wallops Island. Longterm adverse impacts on land use in areas of Main Base where solar panels would be installed. Potential adverse impacts from spills or leaks of pollutants. NASA would minimize adverse impacts by acquiring VSMP permits as necessary and implementing BMPs and WFF’s ICP. Up to 0.17 hectare (0.41 acre) of wetlands would be filled. NASA would obtain necessary permits via the VMRC JPA process and would implement 0.17 hectare (0.41 acres) of compensatory mitigation at WFF’s Mainland. The wind turbine would be located within the 100-year and 500-year floodplains. Because Wallops Island is entirely within the floodplain, no practicable alternatives exist. The functionality of the floodplain on Wallops Island would not be adversely impacted. Long-term adverse impacts on land use in areas of Main Base where solar panels would be installed. Potential adverse impacts from spills or leaks of pollutants. NASA would minimize adverse impacts by acquiring VSMP permits as necessary and implementing BMPs and WFF’s ICP. No impacts. No impacts—the areas of the Main Base where solar panels would be installed are not within the floodplain. iv
Executive Summary Resource Proposed Action Alternative One Alternative Two Coastal Zone Management Air Quality and Climate Change All activities occur within Virginia’s Coastal Management Area (CMA). NASA has determined that the Proposed Action is consistent with the enforceable policies of the Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program. Long-term beneficial impacts on air quality and climate change with reduction in use of fossilfuel power sources and GHG emissions. Radar The wind turbines would be sited in an area that would not impact radar systems at WFF. Noise Operation of the wind turbines would result in highly localized, long-term, minor impacts on the surrounding environment from noise. Neither the public nor employees and visitors to WFF outside of Wallops Island would be able to hear the wind turbines; therefore, no impacts on either of these two groups would occur. No impacts on the occupational health of construction workers as a result of construction noise with implementation of BMPs. Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste Management Construction, maintenance, and decommissioning activities for the wind turbines would involve hazardous materials and produce hazardous waste. NASA would ensure implementation of WFF’s ICP safety procedures, All activities occur within Virginia’s CMA. Activities under Alternative One would be conducted in a way that was consistent with the enforceable policies of the CZM Program. Long-term beneficial impacts on air quality and climate change with reduction in use of fossilfuel power sources and GHG emissions. The wind turbine would be sited in an area that would not impact radar systems at WFF. No impacts on radar from solar panels. Operation of the wind turbine would result in highly localized, long-term, minor impacts on the surrounding environment from noise. Neither the public nor employees and visitors to WFF outside of Wallops Island would be able to hear the wind turbines; therefore, no impacts on either of these two groups would occur. No impacts on the occupational health of construction workers as a result of construction noise with implementation of BMPs. Construction, maintenance, and decommissioning activities for the wind turbines and solar panels would involve hazardous materials and produce hazardous waste. NASA would ensure implementation of WFF’s All activities occur within Virginia’s CMA. Activities under Alternative Two would be conducted in a way that was consistent with the enforceable policies of the CZM Program. Long-term beneficial impacts on air quality and climate change with reduction in use of fossil-fuel power sources and GHG emissions. No impacts. No impacts on the occupational health of construction workers as a result of installation noise with implementation of BMPs. No noise associated with operation of the solar panels. Installation, maintenance, and decommissioning activities would involve hazardous materials and produce hazardous waste. NASA would ensure implementation of WFF’s ICP safety procedures, training, and mitigation v
Page 1 and 2: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WALL
Page 3 and 4: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ALTE
Page 5 and 6: INTRODUCTION Executive Summary This
Page 7: Executive Summary increase the over
Page 11 and 12: Executive Summary Resource Proposed
Page 13 and 14: Executive Summary Resource Proposed
Page 15 and 16: TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 17 and 18: TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.2.1 Post-Constr
Page 19 and 20: TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 4: Potenti
Page 21 and 22: ACHP Advisory Council on Historic P
Page 23 and 24: NPS National Park Service NRHP Nati
Page 25 and 26: Mission, Purpose and Need, Backgrou
Page 28 and 29: Mission, Purpose and Need, Backgrou
Page 30 and 31: 1.4.2 Need Proposed Action and Alte
Page 32 and 33: Proposed Action and Alternatives Fi
Page 34: Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.
Page 37 and 38: Residential-Scale Turbines Proposed
Page 40 and 41: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 42: Proposed Action and Alternatives mo
Page 45 and 46: 2.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVE
Page 48: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 51 and 52: Decommissioning Proposed Action and
Page 53 and 54: turbines because these costs would
Page 55 and 56: SECTION THREE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Page 58 and 59:
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 60:
Affected Environment The Virginia S
Page 63 and 64:
Affected Environment FIRM Community
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
3.1.4 Climate Change Table 8: Calen
Page 70 and 71:
Wind Affected Environment For Wallo
Page 72 and 73:
Affected Environment The Accomack C
Page 74 and 75:
Affected Environment On the souther
Page 76 and 77:
Affected Environment phoeniceus), B
Page 78:
Affected Environment The Saxis Wil
Page 81 and 82:
Affected Environment For the once-p
Page 83 and 84:
Affected Environment less common, w
Page 85 and 86:
Affected Environment were also obse
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Affected Environment Over the entir
Page 92:
3.2.4.1 Birds Henslow’s Sparrow A
Page 95 and 96:
Affected Environment Monitoring was
Page 97 and 98:
Loggerhead Shrike Affected Environm
Page 99 and 100:
Affected Environment known or recor
Page 101 and 102:
Table 17: Occupational Distribution
Page 103 and 104:
Affected Environment Chincoteague I
Page 106:
Page 109 and 110:
3.3.6 Transportation Affected Envir
Page 111 and 112:
Affected Environment Photograph 2:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Proposed Action Environmental Conse
Page 118 and 119:
Environmental Consequences The inst
Page 120 and 121:
Alternative Two Environmental Conse
Page 122:
Environmental Consequences The func
Page 125 and 126:
Environmental Consequences Based on
Page 127 and 128:
Environmental Consequences Table 22
Page 129 and 130:
Environmental Consequences Based on
Page 131 and 132:
Alternative One Environmental Conse
Page 133 and 134:
Environmental Consequences conceiva
Page 135 and 136:
Environmental Consequences wetland
Page 137 and 138:
Environmental Consequences of magni
Page 139 and 140:
Environmental Consequences is the a
Page 141 and 142:
Environmental Consequences (TREC).
Page 143 and 144:
Environmental Consequences why bats
Page 145 and 146:
Environmental Consequences determin
Page 147 and 148:
Environmental Consequences While a
Page 149 and 150:
Gull-Billed Tern Environmental Cons
Page 151 and 152:
Environmental Consequences In addit
Page 153 and 154:
Environmental Consequences staff. T
Page 155 and 156:
Proposed Action Aboveground Resourc
Page 157 and 158:
Alternative One Aboveground Resourc
Page 159 and 160:
4.4.4 Transportation No Action Alte
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Environmental Consequences site tha
Page 166 and 167:
Environmental Consequences 2) Placi
Page 168 and 169:
Environmental Consequences projects
Page 170 and 171:
Environmental Consequences Although
Page 172 and 173:
4.6 PERMITS, LICENSES, AND APPROVAL
Page 174 and 175:
Mitigation and Monitoring 5.2.1 Pos
Page 176 and 177:
Mitigation and Monitoring would be
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Agencies, Organizations, and Person
Page 182 and 183:
NASA WFF Technical Library Building
Page 184 and 185:
Name Organization Other Organizatio
Page 186 and 187:
References Cohen, J.B., S. Karpanty
Page 188 and 189:
References Kunz, T.H., E.B. Arnett,
Page 190 and 191:
References Richardson, D.L. 1992. H
Page 192 and 193:
References USFWS. 2009c. Northeaste
show all

Alternative Energy Draft EA - NASA Visitor Center at Wallops Flight ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?