September 2007 - Kirtland Air Force Base
September 2007 - Kirtland Air Force Base
September 2007 - Kirtland Air Force Base
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Final<br />
Environmental Assessment<br />
Realignment of Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Research Laboratory<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong>, New Mexico<br />
BRAC 2005<br />
<strong>September</strong><br />
<strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
DRAFT<br />
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT<br />
REALIGNMENT OF THE<br />
BATTLESPACE ENVIRONMENT LABORATORY<br />
KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE<br />
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO<br />
AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, SPACE VEHICLES DIRECTORATE<br />
BATTLESPACE ENVIRONMENT DIVISION<br />
The <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Research Laboratory, Space Vehicles Directorate, Battlespace Environment<br />
Division plans to relocate the Battlespace Environment Laboratory (BEL) operations from<br />
Hanscom <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> (Hanscom) near Lexington, Massachusetts (MA) to <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong><br />
<strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> (<strong>Kirtland</strong>) in Albuquerque, New Mexico (NM) in accordance with the findings<br />
of the 2005 <strong>Base</strong> Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Commission. The attached<br />
Environmental Assessment, prepared for the <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Research Laboratory (AFRL) and<br />
incorporated by reference, evaluates the proposed relocation of the mission and functions,<br />
including the impacts of construction, of the BEL.<br />
The BEL relocation would involve approximately 44 military,153 civilian, and 75<br />
contractor positions. The relocation includes the construction of a new facility costing<br />
approximately $42.7 million and containing 145,000 square feet of laboratory and<br />
administrative space. Two sites were examined: northwest of the intersection of Aberdeen<br />
Avenue and Maxwell Street (preferred) and northeast of Aberdeen Avenue and Maxwell<br />
Street (alternative). The preferred site for the BEL would displace the AFRL Component<br />
Development Lab (CDL). Therefore, this document also evaluates the potential impacts of<br />
locating the CDL at the alternative site for the BEL. (Impacts of the CDL itself were<br />
evaluated in another Environmental Assessment.) Relocation and consolidation of the CDL<br />
activities from other sites on <strong>Kirtland</strong> would require the construction of a 40,000 square<br />
foot multilevel building.<br />
SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES<br />
The potential consequences associated with this action are all insignificant in nature and<br />
some are beneficial. Potential consequences to air space, climate, geology and soils, and<br />
cultural resources were not evaluated in detail because there would be no impact. The table<br />
below summarizes the potential consequences evaluated:<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 1
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Draft Finding of No Significant Impact<br />
Land Use<br />
Visual Resources<br />
<strong>Air</strong> Quality<br />
Noise<br />
Water Resources<br />
Biological Resources<br />
Transportation<br />
Utilities<br />
The BEL and CDL sites are in a developed area that is slated for further<br />
development, and the Proposed Action is compatible with the<br />
designated land use of the site (administrative/offices). The Proposed<br />
Action has no consequences for land use.<br />
Visual resources would be affected beneficially by the construction of<br />
the BEL and CDL since the sites are currently vacant areas full of<br />
weeds. Construction would have short-term, negative, and insignificant<br />
consequences on visual resources. The proposed facilities would have<br />
permanent, positive, and insignificant consequences on the visual<br />
character of the area.<br />
Construction would cause insignificant impacts to air quality from<br />
construction vehicle emissions and particulates from soil disturbance.<br />
Operations would cause insignificant impacts to air quality from heating<br />
and laboratory emissions.<br />
Construction would have insignificant consequences from construction<br />
vehicles. Building operations have vacuum pumps that would be<br />
shielded, causing insignificant impacts.<br />
The sites are level and runoff would not affect any surface water<br />
feature; construction would be covered by appropriate permits. BEL<br />
operations would place a slight additional water demand on the regional<br />
aquifer; this would be more than offset by overall reductions in water<br />
usage from an aggressive approach to water conservation on <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
Construction and operations would cause insignificant impacts.<br />
No federally or state listed threatened or endangered species inhabit the<br />
area (project site) and no potential habitat is located nearby. Burrowing<br />
owl nests have been located 1/5 mile from the sites; if nests were<br />
encountered during construction, procedures are in place for relocating<br />
nests, and thus impacts would be insignificant. The proposed sites for<br />
the BEL and CDL are in developed areas, which are not suitable for<br />
quality wildlife habitat, and consequences for biological resources from<br />
operations would be insignificant.<br />
Contractor personnel would use the <strong>Kirtland</strong> Gate, and construction<br />
would have insignificant consequences. Operations would cause<br />
insignificant impacts from a seven percent increase in traffic at the<br />
Carlisle Gate, and a five percent increase in traffic at the Truman Gate<br />
from 250 additional people accessing the base.<br />
Utilities are available and sufficient at both sites to meet the needs of<br />
the BEL and CDL. An electrical substation would be built east of the<br />
BEL site. Consequences to utilities from construction and operations<br />
would be insignificant.<br />
Page 2 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Hazardous and Toxic<br />
Substances/Health<br />
and Safety<br />
Socioeconomics<br />
Environmental<br />
Justice & Protection<br />
of Children<br />
Cumulative Effects<br />
Operations could cause insignificant impacts from inert and<br />
combustible gases stored and used at the site. Proper storing and<br />
handling in accordance with the Hazardous Material Management<br />
procedures and the Spill Plan would mitigate potential consequences.<br />
Building design and safety operating instructions and procedures would<br />
mitigate risks.<br />
Socioeconomic consequences overall would be beneficial. Construction<br />
would cause short-term, insignificant, positive benefits from the local<br />
economy benefiting from the purchase of construction materials and<br />
salaries paid to construction workers. Operations would cause<br />
permanent, insignificant, positive impacts from the salaries paid to<br />
military and civilian workers, and the resulting indirect benefit to the<br />
economy.<br />
The BEL relocation would not have any significant adverse<br />
environmental impacts and, therefore, would not disproportionately<br />
affect children, minorities, or low-income populations. Although<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Elementary School is across Carlisle Boulevard from the site,<br />
the children there and in residences north of Gibson Boulevard would<br />
not be affected by the action.<br />
The consequences of this Proposed Action were evaluated with the<br />
incremental impacts of other actions, and no significant cumulative<br />
effects were found.<br />
CONCLUSION<br />
After careful review of the attached Environmental Assessment for this Proposed Action, I<br />
have concluded that the Proposed Action would not have a significant impact on the quality<br />
of the human or natural environment, either by itself or in consideration with the<br />
cumulative impacts of other actions. Therefore, issuance of a Finding of No Significant<br />
Impact (FONSI) is warranted, and an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. This<br />
analysis fulfills the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, the<br />
implementing regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality, and the<br />
USAF Environmental Impact Analysis Process rules.<br />
Accepted By: __________________________ Date:______________________________<br />
D. BRENT WILSON<br />
<strong>Base</strong> Civil Engineer<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong><br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 3
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Draft Finding of No Significant Impact<br />
This Page Intentionally Left Blank<br />
Page 4 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
FINAL<br />
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT<br />
OF THE REALIGNMENT OF THE<br />
BATTLESPACE ENVIRONMENT LABORATORY<br />
KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE<br />
ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO<br />
AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY, SPACE VEHICLES DIRECTORATE<br />
BATTLESPACE ENVIRONMENT DIVISION<br />
TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />
Section<br />
Page<br />
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................1<br />
1.1 WHY THIS ACTION IS OCCURRING ......................................................................1<br />
1.2 BACKGROUND OF KIRTLAND AND AFRL ............................................................2<br />
SECTION 2 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND<br />
ALTERNATIVES..........................................................................................................3<br />
2.1 PREFERRED BEL SITE AND FACILITY INFORMATION ..........................................3<br />
2.1.1 Main Facility ..........................................................................................6<br />
2.1.2 Laboratory Trailers ................................................................................6<br />
2.1.3 Construction of Facility .........................................................................7<br />
2.1.4 Antenna Farm.........................................................................................8<br />
2.2 MISSION AND ACTIVITIES OF THE PROPOSED BEL ..............................................9<br />
2.2.1 The Battlespace Surveillance Innovation Center ...................................9<br />
2.2.2 The Space Weather Center of Excellence ............................................11<br />
2.3 PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR BEL RELOCATION ..................................................14<br />
2.4 CONNECTED ACTION: NEW PROPOSED SITE FOR CDL ......................................15<br />
2.4.1 Why the CDL is Assessed in this EA ..................................................15<br />
2.4.2 CDL Facility and Operations Summary ..............................................15<br />
2.5 ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................................16<br />
2.5.1 Alternative Siting for BEL ...................................................................16<br />
2.5.2 Alternatives Considered but not Carried Forward ...............................16<br />
2.5.3 No Action Alternative ..........................................................................17<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong><br />
Page i
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
SECTION 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL<br />
CONSEQUENCES ......................................................................................................18<br />
3.1 RESOURCES NOT EVALUATED ..........................................................................19<br />
3.2 LAND USE .........................................................................................................20<br />
3.2.1 Existing Conditions of Land Use .........................................................20<br />
3.2.2 Impacts to Land Use ............................................................................21<br />
3.3 VISUAL RESOURCES ..........................................................................................22<br />
3.3.1 Existing Conditions of Visual Resources ............................................22<br />
3.3.2 Impacts to Visual Resources ................................................................23<br />
3.4 AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................................24<br />
3.4.1 Existing Conditions of <strong>Air</strong> Quality ......................................................24<br />
3.4.2 Impacts to <strong>Air</strong> Quality .........................................................................25<br />
3.5 NOISE ................................................................................................................28<br />
3.5.1 Existing Conditions for Noise ..............................................................28<br />
3.5.2 Impacts from Noise ..............................................................................29<br />
3.6 WATER RESOURCES ..........................................................................................30<br />
3.6.1 Existing Conditions of Water Resources .............................................30<br />
3.6.2 Impacts on Water Resources ................................................................30<br />
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES ..................................................................................31<br />
3.7.1 Existing Conditions of Biological Resources ......................................31<br />
3.7.2 Impacts on Biological Resources .........................................................32<br />
3.8 TRANSPORTATION .............................................................................................33<br />
3.8.1 Existing Conditions of Transportation .................................................33<br />
3.8.2 Impacts on Transportation ...................................................................36<br />
3.9 UTILITIES ..........................................................................................................37<br />
3.9.1 Existing Conditions of Utilities ...........................................................37<br />
3.9.2 Impacts on Utilities ..............................................................................37<br />
3.10 HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES/HEALTH AND SAFETY ..........................39<br />
3.10.1 Existing Conditions for Hazardous and Toxic Substances ..................39<br />
3.10.2 Impact of Hazardous and Toxic Substances ........................................41<br />
3.11 SOCIOECONOMICS .............................................................................................43<br />
3.11.1 Existing Conditions of Socioeconomics ..............................................44<br />
3.11.2 Impacts to Socioeconomics ..................................................................45<br />
3.12 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF CHILDREN ..............................47<br />
3.12.1 Existing Conditions ..............................................................................47<br />
3.12.2 Impacts on Children, Minorities, and Low-income<br />
Populations ...........................................................................................47<br />
Page ii <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
SECTION 4 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS .............................................................................49<br />
4.1 APPROACH ........................................................................................................49<br />
4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .....................................................................................52<br />
SECTION 5 LIST OF PEOPLE CONSULTED, REVIEWERS, AND<br />
PREPARERS ...............................................................................................................58<br />
SECTION 6 REFERENCES ................................................................................................61<br />
SECTION 7 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................65<br />
APPENDIX A LETTER TO STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong><br />
Page iii
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
This Page Intentionally Left Blank<br />
Page iv <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Section 1 Introduction<br />
The 2005 amendments to the Defense <strong>Base</strong> Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC)<br />
Act of 1990 recommended realignment actions at <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> (<strong>Kirtland</strong>),<br />
signed into law November 9, 2005. The recommended actions include the relocation of the<br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Research Laboratory (AFRL) Space Vehicles (VS) Battlespace Environment<br />
Laboratory (BEL) from Hanscom <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> (Hanscom) to consolidate all major<br />
AFRL VS activities at <strong>Kirtland</strong> no later than <strong>September</strong> 2011. The <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> does not have<br />
authority to alter these arrangements.<br />
This document is an Environmental Assessment (EA) that evaluates the potential impacts of<br />
the proposed relocation of the mission and functions, including the impacts of construction,<br />
of the BEL to <strong>Kirtland</strong> in Albuquerque, New Mexico. This document also evaluates the<br />
potential impacts of locating the AFRL Component Development Lab (CDL) at the<br />
alternative site for the BEL. Although the construction and operation of the CDL has<br />
already been assessed in a previous EA (<strong>Kirtland</strong> Technology Park, Phase I, <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong><br />
<strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong>, Albuquerque, New Mexico, June 2005), it only evaluated the CDL for the site<br />
that would now house the BEL. Other BRAC actions at <strong>Kirtland</strong> are assessed in separate<br />
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documents, and are considered in this EA in<br />
Section 4, Cumulative Effects.<br />
This document is part of the Environmental Impact Analysis Process set forth in Title 32,<br />
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 989; NEPA; and the regulations implementing<br />
NEPA promulgated by the President’s Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) in Title 40<br />
CFR Parts 1500-1508. NEPA does not apply to BRAC deliberations and decisions, but it<br />
does apply to realigning missions and operations. In other words, this document does not<br />
address whether the BEL will be moved to <strong>Kirtland</strong>, but rather the specifics of where and<br />
how the mission will move.<br />
1.1 WHY THIS ACTION IS OCCURRING<br />
As the United States (U.S.) <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> reduces its force structure to meet traditional military<br />
mission needs and in response to changing global security requirements, there is a resulting<br />
decrease in the number of installations needed for this smaller force. In addition to<br />
reducing the Armed <strong>Force</strong>s' total size, it is also necessary to realign activities to other<br />
locations to accomplish the mission more economically. This smaller and realigned force<br />
would be stationed and consolidated at the most mission-efficient installations. The goal of<br />
this action is to consolidate all major AFRL VS activities to one location—<strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong><br />
<strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> in Albuquerque, New Mexico (NM).<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 1
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
The relocation of the BEL to <strong>Kirtland</strong> would:<br />
• Provide greater synergy and increased security across technical capabilities and<br />
functions by consolidating geographically separate units of the AFRL;<br />
• Improve jointness, reduce footprint, and update facilities; and<br />
• Create cost savings through greater efficiency.<br />
1.2 BACKGROUND OF KIRTLAND AND AFRL<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> is home to the <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Materiel<br />
Command’s Nuclear Weapons Center and the<br />
377 th <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Base</strong> Wing, <strong>Kirtland</strong>’s host<br />
organization, which provides base operating<br />
support to approximately 76 federal government<br />
and 384 private sector tenants and associate units<br />
including the AFRL. More information is<br />
available on the <strong>Kirtland</strong> web site at<br />
http://www.kirtland.af.mil/.<br />
The AFRL is comprised of ten technology<br />
directorates, including the VS directorate, which<br />
is headquartered at <strong>Kirtland</strong>. The AFRL is<br />
responsible for research and technology<br />
development in support of the <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong>’s future<br />
and existing aerospace and space systems. The<br />
VS directorate’s mission is to develop and<br />
transition innovative high payoff space technologies supporting the warfighter while<br />
leveraging commercial, civil and other government space capabilities to ensure America’s<br />
advantage.<br />
Page 2 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Section 2 Description of Proposed<br />
Action and Alternatives<br />
As a result of the approved BRAC recommendations, the present activities of the<br />
Battlespace Environment Division (VSB) must be relocated to <strong>Kirtland</strong>. The Proposed<br />
Action would result in the following:<br />
• Construction of a 145,000 square foot (sf) building, costing approximately $42.7<br />
million, and containing laboratory space, offices, and secure facilities.<br />
• Relocation of 44 military, 153 civilian, and 75 contractor jobs, and approximately<br />
220 tons of laboratory equipment when the building is complete.<br />
• Operation of laboratories and facilities.<br />
The BEL facility (including construction activities) and site required for the action is first<br />
discussed in Section 2.1. Because the proposed building for the BEL is different from the<br />
current building at Hanscom, the current building is not discussed. Section 2.2 contains a<br />
discussion of the activities that would occur in the facility. The current activities in the<br />
BEL at Hanscom are not expected to change, and form the basis of assessing project<br />
activities for the Proposed Action at <strong>Kirtland</strong>. A proposed schedule for construction and<br />
operation of the BEL is presented in Section 2.3. Information related to the new CDL site<br />
proposed is presented following BEL information in Section 2.4. Section 2.5 presents the<br />
alternatives considered in this EA, and those alternatives that were eliminated from detailed<br />
consideration.<br />
2.1 PREFERRED BEL SITE AND FACILITY INFORMATION<br />
The criteria for selecting the site for the BEL and any alternatives are as follows:<br />
1. A site large enough to accommodate 145,000 sf of laboratories and offices.<br />
2. A site that is physically close to other AFRL activities to allow for efficient and<br />
secure collaboration within the AFRL.<br />
The preferred BEL location is on the parcel northwest of the intersection of Maxwell Street<br />
and Aberdeen Avenue. The site was developed in the past with residential housing. It is<br />
now bare dirt, with weeds and trees. The alternative site, discussed below in Section 2.5, is<br />
the parcel northeast of the intersection of Maxwell Street and Aberdeen Avenue. Figure 2-1<br />
below shows an aerial view of the site, alternative site, and surrounding areas. Figure 2-2,<br />
directly following Figure 2-1, shows a drawing of the sites with proposed location of<br />
buildings. Note that the alternative site shows the CDL on it, as further discussed in Section<br />
2.4. The third building shown north of the BEL is a proposed New Mexico Institute of<br />
Mining and Technology (New Mexico Tech) education and research facility whose<br />
function would complement the BEL.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 3
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Page 4 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Figure 2-2. Schematic showing preferred sites for the BEL and CDL.<br />
The BEL would be housed in one main building, with four research laboratory trailers, one<br />
storage area, and a parking lot adjacent to the building. A supporting electrical substation<br />
would be constructed east of Maxwell Street. An architectural rendering of the proposed<br />
building is shown below in Figure 2-3. Landscaping and sidewalks would be provided for<br />
the building. Details are provided in the following sections.<br />
Figure 2-3. Architectural rendering of proposed BEL building.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 5
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
2.1.1 MAIN FACILITY<br />
Facility Exterior<br />
Properties or components of the exterior of the proposed building would include the<br />
following:<br />
• 145,000 sf total floor space<br />
• Reinforced concrete foundation<br />
• Stucco-finished concrete masonry unit walls<br />
• Structural steel frame<br />
• Insulated flat metal roof<br />
• 350 KW back-up generator<br />
• Electrical substation, about 40’ x 40’, surrounded by an 8’ wall east of Maxwell Street<br />
• Vacuum pumps enclosed on the exterior of the building with insulation for noise<br />
attenuation<br />
• Existing parking lot would increase by approximately 150 new parking spaces<br />
• Xeriscaping, walkways, parking lot lighting, loading dock<br />
• Storage area (approximately 40’ x 125’)<br />
• Research trailers (see next page for additional description)<br />
• Two hemispheric domes on the roof. One is for a fixed Light Detection and Ranging<br />
(LIDAR). The second is for an optical telescope, which is a completely passive<br />
astronomical setup with no emitted pulses. It requires a clear line of sight (that is, no<br />
object in the way including trees, fences, or buildings) to at least 15 degrees elevation.<br />
Facility Interior<br />
Properties or components of the interior of the proposed building include the following:<br />
• Class 1,000 clean rooms<br />
• 700 sf Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility room<br />
• Two computer rooms<br />
• Labs with multiple air and gas supplies<br />
• Administrative office space<br />
• Passenger and freight elevators<br />
• Multi-zone heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems<br />
2.1.2 LABORATORY TRAILERS<br />
There would be four mobile research trailers that are extensions of the permanent labs in<br />
the building. They would be kept near the building and would at times go out to remote<br />
places, including a proposed antenna farm (see Section 2.1.4). The trailers include two<br />
LIDAR, one radar, and one satellite-tracking trailer.<br />
Page 6 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Multiple Wavelength LIDAR Trailer (MWLT)<br />
The MWLT tracks satellites and objects in space orbit using ground sensors including a<br />
telescope. The LIDAR is an instrument that transmits light along a path and measures the<br />
light that is scattered back to the instrument by particles along the path. Sensing the<br />
characteristics of the light scattered back to the instrument tells something of the<br />
characteristics of the particles that are doing the scattering. LIDAR functions similarly to<br />
radar, but uses light waves (shorter wavelength) instead of radio waves (longer<br />
wavelength).<br />
Mobile Atmospheric Pollutant Mapping (MAPM) System Trailer<br />
The MAPM trailer is a transportable long wavelength infrared LIDAR. It houses laser,<br />
optical, and electronic equipment. It emits a pulsed beam at a wavelength of 10.6 microns<br />
from a scanner on the roof of the trailer.<br />
• Potential interference problems are only for highly specialized long wavelength<br />
infrared receivers.<br />
• Use of this laser system, including the lasers used and the safety operating procedures,<br />
would be cleared by <strong>Kirtland</strong> authorities before operation.<br />
It is not anticipated that equipment on the MAPM trailer would encounter interference<br />
problems from other sources, except for line-of-sight blockage by power lines, poles,<br />
building, or topography. Generally, the equipment requires sky coverage unblocked down<br />
to approximately 5 to 10 degrees elevation, with more than 4 kilometer (km) unblocked<br />
near horizon line of sights along some azimuth(s).<br />
Other Trailers<br />
Other equipment that would be located in the two remaining trailers include the following:<br />
• Global Positioning System (GPS) reference stations<br />
• Radar millimeter system with a transmit and receive frequency of 35.5 gigahertz (GHz)<br />
for measuring cloud formations. It requires a clear line of sight for 1 km for its<br />
calibration.<br />
None of the antennae, trailers, telescope, GPS, radar or LIDAR have caused detrimental<br />
effects on nearby electrical supplies, communications, or aircraft at the present Hanscom<br />
BEL that is near an airfield.<br />
2.1.3 CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITY<br />
The facility would be constructed by a medium to large size construction firm with<br />
subcontracting firms. Construction activities would include the following:<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 7
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
• Equipment used would include bulldozers, trenchers, front-end loaders, dump trucks,<br />
graders, cranes, pickup and concrete trucks, water tankers, flatbed trailers, and forklifts.<br />
• During construction, there would be anywhere from approximately 25 to 100 workers<br />
on the site.<br />
• The project would be covered by Fugitive Dust Control and<br />
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)<br />
permits. The contractor would submit a Fugitive Dust<br />
Control Plan application to the City of Albuquerque<br />
Environmental Health Department (AEHD) <strong>Air</strong> Quality<br />
Division, and a NPDES Storm Water Pollution Prevention<br />
Plan and a Notice of Intent to discharge in accordance with<br />
the Construction General Permit. The permitting of these<br />
construction activities would be coordinated through the<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Environmental Management Branch, Compliance<br />
Section.<br />
2.1.4 ANTENNA FARM<br />
A closely related, but separate project (connected action) to the BEL is the construction and<br />
operation of an eight- to ten-acre antenna farm. The antennae would be used for the<br />
ionosphere research program and would include two types of antennae:<br />
• Two ionospheric sounders, called ionosondes. These ionosondes transmit relatively<br />
low power (
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
2.2 MISSION AND ACTIVITIES OF THE PROPOSED BEL<br />
The proposed BEL mission and activities would be a continuation of the current BEL<br />
mission and activities, so this discussion is based on current activities. The BEL would be a<br />
research and development facility which would house the U.S. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong>’s (USAF) experts<br />
on the battlespace environment and its effects on weapon systems, especially space and<br />
command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C3ISR)<br />
systems. The BEL has environmental sensors around the world monitoring ionospheric<br />
conditions. BEL personnel collect worldwide space weather data to evaluate potential<br />
interference to communications capabilities. This information can then be used to alert<br />
warfighters about the communication interference. Specifically, the BEL has the following<br />
functions:<br />
• testing in high vacuum environments;<br />
• environmental calibration;<br />
• chemistry and spectrometry;<br />
• computer modeling;<br />
• data processing;<br />
• space operations;<br />
• remote sensing; and<br />
• quantum computing.<br />
The VSB focuses on the environment’s impact to space and C3ISR systems, with two main<br />
centers, described below. The VSB executes approximately $50 million/year in core <strong>Air</strong><br />
<strong>Force</strong> Research and Development funding, and historically has executed an additional $25<br />
million/year in other Research and Development funding.<br />
There are approximately 153 USAF government civilians, 35 officers, and 9 enlisted<br />
personnel slated to come to <strong>Kirtland</strong>. In addition, there would be approximately 75<br />
contractor personnel who would be housed in the BEL building, bringing the total<br />
minimum to 250 to 265 people. Employees would normally work in staggered shifts<br />
anywhere from approximately 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. There<br />
would be times when work may occur around the clock and on weekends during<br />
experiments and critical research efforts.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 9
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
2.2.1 THE BATTLESPACE SURVEILLANCE INNOVATION CENTER<br />
The mission of the Battlespace Surveillance<br />
Innovation Center is to develop and<br />
demonstrate advanced surveillance<br />
technologies and to predict and mitigate the<br />
effects of the aerospace environment on<br />
surveillance systems. The Center has several<br />
laboratories as part of its mission, described<br />
below in Table 2-1.<br />
<strong>Air</strong>borne Laser Atmospheric Decision Aid<br />
Table 2-1. Battlespace Surveillance Innovation Center Lab Activities<br />
Optical Turbulence<br />
Laboratory<br />
Laboratory<br />
Name<br />
Description of Laboratory Activities<br />
Conducts fabrication and testing of balloon-borne instruments (called<br />
thermosondes) to measure optical turbulence for laser systems, laser<br />
imagers, and laser communications.<br />
Cold Chemical Infrared<br />
Simulation Chamber<br />
LABCEDE Laboratory<br />
(Laboratory Cryogenic<br />
Energy Deposition)<br />
COCHISE Laboratory<br />
(Cold Chemiexcitation<br />
Infrared Stimulation<br />
Experiment)<br />
Conducts experiments to characterize<br />
infrared/optical emissions from typical<br />
thruster constituents under two scenarios:<br />
(1) high-energy collisions with atomic<br />
oxygen, simulating the Low-Earth Orbit<br />
environment, and (2) direct, laser-based<br />
vacuum ultraviolet excitation, simulating<br />
solar irradiance.<br />
Studies the interaction of thruster effluents with upper atmospheric<br />
constituents.<br />
Page 10 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Laboratory<br />
Name<br />
Bose-Einstein condensate<br />
Laboratory<br />
Hypersonic Imaging<br />
Calibration Laboratory<br />
MWLT Laboratory<br />
(Multiple Wavelength<br />
LIDAR Trailer)<br />
Trailer Laboratories<br />
Description of Laboratory Activities<br />
Investigates atom interferometry for use as an autonomous inertial<br />
navigation system.<br />
Calibrates hyperspectral instruments and<br />
investigates new calibration techniques.<br />
Hyperspectral imaging provides<br />
information on hard-to-see targets.<br />
Hyperspectral Imaging<br />
Tracks satellites and objects in space orbit using ground sensors<br />
including a telescope.<br />
These are four mobile laboratory extensions of the permanent labs in<br />
the building, which measure similar data as the permanent labs,<br />
outside of the facility and at various Department of Defense (DoD)<br />
testing facilities.<br />
2.2.2 THE SPACE WEATHER CENTER OF EXCELLENCE<br />
The mission of the Space<br />
Weather Center of Excellence<br />
is to develop technologies for<br />
specifying, forecasting,<br />
mitigating, and exploiting the<br />
effects of the space<br />
environment on DoD systems<br />
and operations. The Center has<br />
several laboratories, described<br />
in Table 2-2.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 11
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Table 2-2. The Space Weather Center of Excellence Lab Activities<br />
Laboratory<br />
Name<br />
Space Chemistry<br />
Laboratory (SCL)<br />
Hyperthermal Ion Beam<br />
Facility for nanopropulsion<br />
experiments<br />
Description of Laboratory Activities<br />
Conducts studies related to the chemical dynamics and reactions in<br />
the unique and extreme environment of Low Earth Orbit. Uses highvacuum<br />
apparatus to create ion beams, to measure the interactions of<br />
those beams with neutral gases or surfaces at variable energy, and to<br />
detect the products of the interactions with mass spectrometers.<br />
There are currently three primary thrusts within the laboratory:<br />
1) Hyperthermal chemistry. Chemical interactions between gases<br />
emitted from spacecraft and the background atmosphere in Low<br />
Earth Orbit occur at orbital velocity or greater and may leave<br />
reaction products in excited states that radiate detectable light.<br />
Researchers in the SCL seek to replicate in the laboratory the<br />
processes associated with Low-Earth orbiting spacecraft, electric<br />
propulsion thrusters, meteors, etc.<br />
2) Electrospray propulsion. Researchers in the SCL are also<br />
developing a novel approach to chemical-electrospray thrusters for<br />
the next generation of <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> nanosatellites. They are measuring<br />
in detail the properties of ions and propellant droplets produced in<br />
such electrosprays and have transitioned the results to industry,<br />
leading to improved thruster systems.<br />
3) Self-assembled monolayers. Researchers in the SCL are<br />
developing methods to convert difficult-to-detect energetic neutral<br />
species such as atomic oxygen into easy-to-detect negative ions. The<br />
eventual application of this work will be sensing of neutral gas fluxes<br />
in the space environment to measure satellite drag and for analysis of<br />
high energy streams of neutral particles produced by charge<br />
exchange in the magnetosphere.<br />
Page 12 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Laboratory<br />
Name<br />
Plasma Chemistry<br />
Laboratory (PCL)<br />
Description of Laboratory Activities<br />
Conducts research related to<br />
charged particle chemical reactions<br />
that occur in plasma environments<br />
under conditions of temperature,<br />
pressure, and gas composition that<br />
mimic the real space environment.<br />
Accurate and complete<br />
understanding of the plasma<br />
High Pressure Plasma Flow<br />
chemistry under real world<br />
Chemistry Flow Tube<br />
conditions is essential for modeling<br />
the behavior of the plasmas and for<br />
mitigating their impacts on AF systems. Typically, chemical<br />
reactions in the PCL are studied in one of four flow tube apparatuses<br />
where ions or electrons are injected into a fast flow of a carrier gas<br />
such as helium or nitrogen, and are allowed to react with tiny<br />
amounts of neutral gases of interest downstream in the flow tube.<br />
The products of the reaction are measured with a mass spectrometer<br />
at the downstream end of the flow tube.<br />
Space Instrumentation<br />
Laboratory (SIL)<br />
Also known as the Mass Spectrometer Laboratory, this lab develops<br />
and tests novel instrumentation for making measurements of the<br />
space environment and to fly these instruments on AF and other<br />
satellites. Preliminary designs for instruments are developed by staff<br />
physicists and engineers. Prototype instruments are then built and<br />
tested, and modifications to the design are made as necessary. Flight<br />
instruments are then constructed in clean rooms under carefully<br />
controlled environmental conditions. Testing of the flight<br />
instruments occurs both within the AFRL laboratories and at outside<br />
contract facilities. Activities in the Space Instrumentation<br />
Laboratory include light machining of metal and composite parts,<br />
soldering, electrical and mechanical fabrication, instrument<br />
performance testing, instrument calibration, and environmental<br />
testing such as thermal cycling and thermal vacuum.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 13
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Laboratory<br />
Name<br />
Space Particles Lab (SPL)<br />
Ionospheric Effects<br />
Laboratory<br />
Description of Laboratory Activities<br />
The SPL consists of two instrument-class vacuum chambers with ion<br />
sources and is used to perform pre-space flight instrument calibration<br />
and validation measurements as well as to study spacecraft charge<br />
control technologies in realistic space environments.<br />
Develops ground-based instrumentation for<br />
remotely sensing the properties of the<br />
ionosphere that affect radio communication<br />
and navigation. These facilities include<br />
ionosonde systems that radiate highfrequency<br />
radio waves into the ionosphere<br />
and monitor the reflected signals to<br />
determine the electron content. A number<br />
of receive-only monitors of the GPS are<br />
also used to passively monitor ionospheric<br />
conditions.<br />
2.3 PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR BEL RELOCATION<br />
All personnel and equipment must be in place by <strong>September</strong> 15, 2011. Personnel and<br />
equipment will arrive via transfer from Hanscom and via hiring through the Civilian<br />
Personnel system starting in the spring of 2011 and continuing through <strong>September</strong> 2011.<br />
Personnel will not arrive all at once; the exact surge dates will depend on the completion of<br />
construction. The tentative schedule for relocation of the mission and functions of the BEL<br />
is the following:<br />
Table 2-3. Proposed Schedule for Relocation of the BEL<br />
Action<br />
Tentative<br />
Start Date<br />
Construction February 2008 (award)<br />
Relocation of personnel and<br />
equipment to <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Tentative<br />
Completion Date<br />
January/February 2011<br />
February/March 2011 <strong>September</strong> 2011<br />
Page 14 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
2.4 CONNECTED ACTION: NEW PROPOSED SITE FOR CDL<br />
2.4.1 WHY THE CDL IS ASSESSED IN THIS EA<br />
The AFRL Component Development Lab (CDL) and the National Defense Technology<br />
Center (NDTC; formerly known as the National Defense Technology Auditorium [NDTA])<br />
were assessed in the EA for the Construction of Phase I of the <strong>Kirtland</strong> Technology Park<br />
(KTP) at <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong>, Albuquerque, New Mexico, March 2005. In that EA,<br />
however, the site proposed for the CDL and the NDTC is the site preferred for the BEL. No<br />
alternative sites for the CDL and the NDTC were assessed.<br />
Under the preferred action, the original planned sites for the BEL and for the CDL, which<br />
are one block from each other, would be switched. Because the new proposed site for the<br />
CDL is the alternative site for the BEL in this EA (see Section 2.5), impacts associated with<br />
the use of this alternative site are also being assessed for the CDL. The AFRL has lowered<br />
the priority for construction of the NDTC, and construction of the NDTC is on hold for at<br />
least several years. Therefore, the impacts of the NDTC will not be considered here.<br />
The CDL was originally planned to be located northwest of the intersection of Maxwell<br />
Street and Aberdeen Avenue. The NDTC was originally planned to be located southeast of<br />
the intersection of Ranger Loop and Carlisle Boulevard, adjacent and to the north of the<br />
CDL. The BEL was originally planned to be located northeast of the intersection of<br />
Maxwell Street and Aberdeen Avenue.<br />
The CDL site would be switched with the BEL site for the following reasons:<br />
• The new BEL site is a better site for the BEL because it does not have the <strong>Kirtland</strong><br />
Bioenvironmental Engineering facility (formerly known as the chapel) as a constraint<br />
(the BEL building is larger than the CDL building).<br />
• The NDTC is on hold indefinitely.<br />
• The BEL and CDL would be adjacent, and have similar scientific operations.<br />
2.4.2 CDL FACILITY AND OPERATIONS SUMMARY<br />
Construction for the CDL may begin as early as 2009 (the same year as construction of the<br />
BEL), if funded. This has a high-priority for funding. Because the CDL construction and<br />
operation were already assessed, only the new site will be assessed in this EA; all other<br />
information is incorporated from the KTP Environmental Assessment by reference. The<br />
activities/operations for the CDL are already on <strong>Kirtland</strong>; the CDL building would merely<br />
consolidate those activities. A brief summary of the CDL facility and operations is<br />
discussed below.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 15
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Properties or components of the facility for the CDL include the following:<br />
• Space for ten separate laboratories<br />
• Administrative space used for analysis, engineering, engineering support, and<br />
management<br />
• 40,000 sf multilevel building<br />
• Reinforced concrete foundation<br />
• Concrete masonry unit walls<br />
• Structural steel framing<br />
• Standing-seam, metal-insulated, sloped roof system<br />
• Parking lot adjacent to the new building.<br />
The CDL would provide a state-of-the-art high-tech facility with laboratories and clean<br />
rooms to support space vehicle component development, as well as provide administrative<br />
space. This facility would be used to develop the following:<br />
• Solar arrays and photovoltaic cells<br />
• Space power storage<br />
• Space vehicle mechanisms<br />
• Mechanism controls<br />
• Space protection (including radiation-hardened electronics)<br />
• Environmental sensors (including focal plane arrays and cryo-coolers).<br />
2.5 ALTERNATIVES<br />
2.5.1 ALTERNATIVE SITING FOR BEL<br />
One other site for the BEL was considered and assessed based on the criteria described in<br />
Section 2.1. It is the parcel that is northeast of the intersection of Maxwell Street and<br />
Aberdeen Avenue, one block from the preferred alternative. As noted in Section 2.4, this<br />
site is being proposed as the site for the CDL, and as such is referred to in this EA as the<br />
CDL site, or the BEL alternative site. Under this alternative siting for the BEL, the CDL<br />
would remain northwest of Maxwell Street and Aberdeen Avenue.<br />
2.5.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT NOT CARRIED FORWARD<br />
Other alternatives that were considered, but not carried forward, include the following:<br />
1. Housing the BEL in existing buildings already on <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
2. Remodeling existing structures on <strong>Kirtland</strong> to accommodate the BEL.<br />
3. Building at other sites such as the old West Capehart Housing area.<br />
Page 16 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
The reasons that these alternatives were not considered further are that there are currently<br />
no facilities on <strong>Kirtland</strong> where 145,000 sf could be released from present use and used or<br />
renovated for this mission. The proposed location and the alternative are the only remaining<br />
logical land parcels within the AFRL campus where this structure could be built. All other<br />
land is spoken for with other programmed MILCON projects, and West Capehart Housing<br />
areas will not be available as they are now part of an Enhanced Use Lease area of the KTP.<br />
2.5.3 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE<br />
The CEQ regulations require an inclusion of a No Action Alternative. Under the No Action<br />
Alternative, the BEL would operate at its current location and there would be no relocation<br />
to <strong>Kirtland</strong>. However, since the relocation of the BEL has been mandated by Congress and<br />
the President, the No Action Alternative is not a viable alternative; the BEL must relocate<br />
to <strong>Kirtland</strong>. The NEPA process in this case does not apply to the decision of relocating the<br />
mission—it applies only to the specific siting of the mission, as well as the nature of the<br />
relocation. In other words, the question is not whether the mission relocates to <strong>Kirtland</strong>—it<br />
will, as required by law—but how, when, and where the mission relocates onto <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
Nevertheless, the No Action Alternative serves as a baseline to existing conditions at<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> against which the impacts of the Proposed Action and alternatives can be<br />
evaluated, and is therefore discussed in this EA.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 17
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Section 3 Affected Environment and<br />
Environmental Consequences<br />
This section describes the natural and human environment that exists at the proposed site,<br />
and the potential impacts the Proposed Action could have on that environment. Impacts are<br />
described in three different ways in this EA:<br />
1. Whether the impact is:<br />
• Positive<br />
• Negative<br />
2. Length of the impact, which can be:<br />
• Short-term (less than 3 years)<br />
• Long-term (between 3 and 20 years)<br />
• Permanent (impact will not be reversed in the foreseeable future)<br />
3. Significance of the impact, which can be:<br />
• No impact<br />
• Insignificant<br />
• Significant<br />
In general, where no impact is expected, the resource is not described in detail nor<br />
evaluated. The resources are described and evaluated at a level of detail appropriate to the<br />
potential impacts—in other words, if the impact is expected to be insignificant or very<br />
straightforward, then a qualitative and simple approach is used. Significant impacts should<br />
receive the most attention in the decision-making process.<br />
For simplicity, unless otherwise noted, the description of existing conditions located<br />
throughout this section serves as the description of impacts for the No Action<br />
Alternative.<br />
The preferred site and the alternative site are in adjacent blocks, and have essentially<br />
the same baseline conditions except for visual resources and utilities. For simplicity,<br />
the preferred and alternative sites are assessed together, with reference only<br />
made to the BEL site, except where baseline conditions differ. Because the<br />
alternative site is the site being assessed for the CDL, the discussion of impacts for<br />
the BEL preferred site also refers to the proposed CDL site.<br />
Page 18 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
3.1 RESOURCES NOT EVALUATED<br />
Only resources that could be affected by the Proposed Action are described. The following<br />
resources are not described:<br />
• <strong>Air</strong> space. The Proposed Action does not involve any flights or aircraft and the<br />
buildings would be constructed not to penetrate airspace, so there would be no impacts<br />
to this resource.<br />
• Climate. The Proposed Action would not affect the climate in any way.<br />
• Geology. The project would not affect any geologic resources. Soils have previously<br />
been disturbed at the sites and are not biologically productive. The sites are flat and<br />
soil erosion is not expected.<br />
• Cultural Resources. The closest potentially significant cultural resources (historic<br />
buildings) are approximately 1/4 mile away and would not be impacted by the<br />
Proposed Action. The preferred and alternative locations for the Proposed Action are in<br />
a previously disturbed area, with no cultural resources existing there to our knowledge,<br />
and cultural resources will not be impacted. The State Historic Preservation Office<br />
(SHPO) was consulted, and they concur that there is no adverse effect to historic<br />
properties (see Appendix A for a copy of the approved letter). Further, <strong>Kirtland</strong> has a<br />
policy for the Inadvertent Discoveries of cultural resources, which would be followed<br />
if any cultural resources are discovered during construction:<br />
Inadvertent Discovery of Native American Human Remains and Objects<br />
1) If the human remains or objects were discovered during construction or similar<br />
activity, the activity shall be suspended and reasonable efforts to protect the<br />
remains or objects shall be made. The Commander, as the primary management<br />
authority, and the appropriate Native American organizations shall be notified of<br />
the discovery. All activity in the area of the discovery shall be suspended for 30<br />
days after certification that the appropriate Native American organizations have<br />
been notified.<br />
2) Disposition and control of the remains or objects shall follow the requirements<br />
of Section 3, Subsections (a) and (b), of National American Graves Protections<br />
and Repatriation Act.<br />
Discovery of Buried Cultural Resources<br />
If cultural resources are encountered inadvertently during an undertaking, work in the<br />
immediate vicinity shall be halted, the immediate vicinity of the resources shall be<br />
secured, and the Environmental Management Division shall be notified. The following<br />
procedures shall be adhered to:<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 19
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
1) An in situ evaluation of the resources shall be made by a qualified archaeologist.<br />
<strong>Base</strong>d on recommendations from the archaeologist, decisions regarding the<br />
treatment of the resources shall be made in consultation with the Cultural<br />
Resource Manager (CRM) and the SHPO.<br />
2) If the resources cannot be evaluated without further archeological or historic<br />
work, the CRM shall be notified and a data recovery program or historic<br />
research shall be prepared in consultation with the SHPO.<br />
3) <strong>Base</strong>d on the results of the data recovery program or historic research, the<br />
resources shall be evaluated for eligibility to the National Register in<br />
consultation with the CRM and the New Mexico SHPO.<br />
3.2 LAND USE<br />
3.2.1 EXISTING<br />
CONDITIONS OF LAND USE<br />
Regional Setting and<br />
Installation Land Use<br />
Land to the north and west is urbanized<br />
(the City of Albuquerque). Land to the<br />
south, Isleta Pueblo, is used primarily for<br />
ranching. Land to the east is the Cibola<br />
National Forest. The Albuquerque<br />
International Sunport is adjacent to<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>’s western boundary and shares airspace and runways with <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> is home to the 377 th <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Base</strong> Wing (<strong>Kirtland</strong>’s host organization). It provides<br />
support to approximately 76 federal government and 384 private sector tenants and<br />
associate units, including Sandia National Laboratories. <strong>Kirtland</strong> contains training areas,<br />
helicopter landing zones, ordnance impact areas, logistics, recreation/open areas,<br />
maintenance facilities, classroom and administrative facilities, and housing.<br />
East and south of the BEL sites are various offices and research facilities, primarily AFRL,<br />
and the Albuquerque International Sunport. The Veterans Affairs Medical Center is further<br />
east. Land use north of Gibson Boulevard consists of private residential housing and<br />
businesses.<br />
Current and Planned Development<br />
As a result of BRAC 2005, <strong>Kirtland</strong> will receive three to six aircraft from the 27 th Fighter<br />
Wing from Cannon AFB, New Mexico, which will not involve new construction. Military<br />
confinement functions at <strong>Kirtland</strong> will be realigned to Miramar Marine Corps <strong>Air</strong> Station in<br />
California. The Jenkins Armed <strong>Force</strong>s Reserve Center, approximately one mile north of<br />
Page 20 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>, is also being relocated from Albuquerque to <strong>Kirtland</strong> due to BRAC. The action<br />
involves transfer of fewer than 50 permanent positions (and 800 weekend Reservists) and<br />
construction of 3 buildings (approximately 114,000 sf for classroom, administrative,<br />
library, maintenance and storage facilities). Training on <strong>Kirtland</strong> will not change as a result<br />
of the relocation. The construction and operations associated with this relocation were<br />
assessed in a May <strong>2007</strong> Environmental Assessment, Realignment of Jenkins Armed <strong>Force</strong>s<br />
Reserve Center (AFRC), <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong>, New Mexico, BRAC 2005. The notice to<br />
proceed for construction was given in <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>, with construction to be complete by<br />
<strong>September</strong> 2009.<br />
Major construction projects are planned related to the development of the KTP. The entire<br />
development will take place in a four-phase development over the next 20 years. It will<br />
include the construction of approximately 3,938,000 sf of laboratory, educational, and<br />
administrative building space on approximately 300 acres along the Gibson Boulevard<br />
Corridor. The KTP is not a result of or associated with the BEL.<br />
Other near-term construction projects unrelated to the BEL or CDL planned or in progress<br />
at <strong>Kirtland</strong> include:<br />
• Corrosion control facilities<br />
• Flight simulators<br />
• Parajumper/Combat Rescue Officer (PJ-CRO) campus<br />
• AFRL Fixed Panel Array<br />
• Military Working Dog facility<br />
• Fuel Upload Facility replacement<br />
• Trestle Road extension<br />
The BEL and CDL sites are in a developed area that is available for further development.<br />
The Future Land use for the proposed locations was changed to administration/research by<br />
the 1998 <strong>Base</strong> General Plan.<br />
3.2.2 IMPACTS TO LAND USE<br />
The Proposed Action is compatible with the designated land use of the sites<br />
(administration/research) and would not change the land uses of the area. Therefore, there<br />
are no impacts to land use.<br />
Impacts to Land Use:<br />
From Construction:<br />
No Impact<br />
From Operations:<br />
No Impact<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 21
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
3.3 VISUAL RESOURCES<br />
3.3.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF VISUAL RESOURCES<br />
Both the preferred site and the alternative site are currently unimproved areas consisting of<br />
bare dirt, weeds, and trees. The BEL site and the northern section of the CDL site are<br />
located on an old housing area from which all structures have been removed.<br />
The sites are located within or adjacent to the KTP area, which consists of old demolished<br />
housing areas, offices, and fitness facilities. The area outside of the KTP includes existing<br />
AFRL and other buildings, off-base and on-base older residential housing areas, and small<br />
shops and apartment buildings.<br />
Photographs were taken on March 19, <strong>2007</strong> at the preferred BEL site, from the middle of<br />
the southern edge of the site. A panoramic view, looking first north, then east, then south,<br />
then west is presented below. There are no on-base residential areas remaining in the<br />
project area or within view.<br />
Looking north from southern edge of BEL preferred site.<br />
Looking east from southern edge of BEL preferred site,<br />
towards alternative (CDL) site.<br />
Looking south from southern edge of BEL preferred site.<br />
Looking west from southern edge of BEL preferred site.<br />
Page 22 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
The visual resources for the CDL site (alternative site for the BEL) are similar to the<br />
preferred BEL site. There are no residential areas within view. The CDL site is closer to the<br />
Bioenvironmental Engineering building than the preferred BEL site. There are also office<br />
buildings to the west of the CDL site. The entire area is developed.<br />
3.3.2 IMPACTS TO VISUAL RESOURCES<br />
The BEL and CDL sites are in an area where the visual resources and aesthetic quality have<br />
already been degraded. The immediate area for the BEL and CDL sites has been previously<br />
developed, thus losing some of the original natural appearance. With the removal of earlier<br />
structures, the sites are now covered in weeds, further degrading the visual resources.<br />
Construction: Construction equipment and materials would be visible from nearby<br />
offices/facilities to the south, east, and west during construction for both sites. The<br />
construction equipment is separated from these southern facilities by a parking lot for the<br />
BEL site and a water tower for the CDL site. The Bioenvironmental Engineering building<br />
between the sites would be more visually impacted. However, the impacts are temporary<br />
and minimal as there are few windows facing the construction area. The main impact would<br />
be to persons approaching and leaving the Bioenvironmental Engineering building, but<br />
most activity is from people walking from parking lots to and from the building, which is<br />
short in duration. Construction is expected to take 28 months, which means that the impacts<br />
are considered short-term.<br />
Operations: Once construction is completed, visual resources would be permanently<br />
altered by the addition of the BEL and CDL. The current vacant lots would be occupied by<br />
modern administration/office and laboratory facilities surrounded by hardscaping and<br />
landscaping. The proposed BEL and CDL would have a minor beneficial impact on visual<br />
resources when compared to the current visual resources of the vacant lots. The BEL and<br />
CDL would be designed to blend in with existing adjacent facilities, and construction would<br />
follow the <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB Architectural Compatibility Plan and landscaping guidelines.<br />
The optical telescope on the roof dome of the BEL would be enclosed in a clam shell dome<br />
that extends to a maximum height of 20 feet, and requires line of sight to 15 degrees<br />
elevation. The telescope, in its size and appearance, will blend with other buildings in the<br />
area and would not impact visual resources.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 23
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Impacts to Visual Resources:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Positive<br />
3.4 AIR QUALITY<br />
3.4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF AIR QUALITY<br />
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set National Ambient <strong>Air</strong> Quality<br />
Standards (NAAQS) for six commonly generated air pollutants because they are considered<br />
harmful to public health and the environment when they reach specified concentrations.<br />
These pollutants, known as criteria pollutants, are carbon monoxide (CO), lead, nitrogen<br />
oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM), ozone, and sulfur oxides (SOx).<br />
In the Albuquerque/Bernalillo county area the pollutants that are routinely monitored are<br />
nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, particles under 10 microns in diameter (PM 10 ),<br />
and particles under 2.5 microns in diameter (PM 2.5 ). The pollutants of highest concern are<br />
those that come closest to exceeding the NAAQS, namely ground level ozone and<br />
particulate matter. It should also be noted carbon monoxide has been a pollutant of<br />
historical concern because the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County area could not initially meet<br />
the NAAQS as set forth in the Clean <strong>Air</strong> Act (CAA) Amendments of 1990. Prior to 1992,<br />
the area was in non-attainment for CO. In 1996 the EPA re-designated Bernalillo County to<br />
attainment for CO based on significant improvements in air quality. However, the county is<br />
still subject to an EPA-approved Limited Maintenance Plan. Under that plan all federal<br />
actions are considered to have met the general conformity provisions of the CAA.<br />
Therefore, a conformity determination is not needed.<br />
Activities at <strong>Kirtland</strong> contribute to the release of all of the criteria pollutants as well as<br />
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The products of<br />
combustion (CO, VOCs, NOx, PM, SOx) and small amounts of HAPs are released through<br />
the running of motor vehicles, aircraft engines, and generators. Small amounts of VOCs<br />
and HAPs are also released through painting, vehicle refueling, and other general chemical<br />
Page 24 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
use. Sources of particulate matter at <strong>Kirtland</strong> include explosive ordnance disposal,<br />
combustion activities, painting, mulching, driving on dirt roads, and natural wind blown<br />
dust. Actual and allowable emissions from stationary sources of these air pollutants at<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> during 2005 are displayed in Table 3-1.<br />
Table 3-1. Summary of 2005 <strong>Air</strong> Emissions from Permitted Sources at<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong><br />
Pollutant<br />
Stationary Source Emissions<br />
Actual<br />
(tons per year)<br />
Allowable<br />
(tons per year)<br />
Criteria Pollutants and Precursors<br />
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 17.3 125.0<br />
Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) 37.7 200.2<br />
Particulate Matter (PM) 17.0 42.8<br />
Particulate Matter ≤ 10 μm (PM 10 ) a 16.8 40.4<br />
Particulate Matter ≤ 2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) a 16.8 40.4<br />
Sulfur Oxides (SO x ) 1.8 20.2<br />
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 57.5 206.0<br />
Total Hazardous <strong>Air</strong> Pollutants (HAPs) 3.9 13.5<br />
Source: <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB <strong>2007</strong>. Final <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> 2005 Emissions Inventory. <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong><br />
<strong>Base</strong> Environmental Management Branch, Albuquerque, New Mexico<br />
Note: a Particulate Matter ≤ 10 μm and Particulate Matter ≤ 2.5 μm are subsets of Particulate Matter.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> is currently permitted as a major source under the Title V program. A major source<br />
is one with the potential to emit 100 tons per year of any of the following: CO, VOCs,<br />
NOx, SOx, PM, or Lead; 10 tons per year or more of any single HAP; or 25 tons per year or<br />
more of all HAPs combined. Actual stationary source emissions from activities at <strong>Kirtland</strong><br />
are much lower than current permitted values as shown in Table 3-1, but Title V major<br />
status threshold is determined based on potential, that is, all sources running all 8,760 hours<br />
in a year.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 25
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
3.4.2 IMPACTS TO AIR QUALITY<br />
<strong>Air</strong> emissions resulting from the BEL facility relocating to <strong>Kirtland</strong> would be minimal in<br />
comparison to the base as a whole, and to the Albuquerque/Bernalillo County area. The<br />
BEL facility emissions can be categorized into three types:<br />
1. Emissions resulting from general construction activities including, but not limited<br />
to, heavy equipment operation, dust, and parking lot construction. These emissions<br />
are non-recurring because they would only take place for a short period while the<br />
BEL Facility is being constructed. Best management practices would be utilized and<br />
the contractor in charge of the construction would obtain any necessary fugitive dust<br />
control permits.<br />
U.S. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Air</strong> Conformity Applicability Model 4.3.3 was used to calculate air<br />
emissions anticipated to result from construction of the 145,000 sf BEL facility.<br />
Estimated maximum emissions temporarily generated by these construction<br />
activities are presented in Table 3-2. Because construction would be intermittent,<br />
actual emissions would be expected to be even lower than those presented.<br />
2. Emissions resulting from the general building operations such as heating through<br />
natural gas, and the use of a standby generator during any power outages. These<br />
emissions are considered recurring and minimal. A natural gas boiler used to heat a<br />
building the size of the BEL is expected to have a design rate of less than five<br />
million Btu per hour and is classified as an insignificant air emissions source by the<br />
Albuquerque Environmental Health Department <strong>Air</strong> Pollution Control Division<br />
(List of Insignificant Activities, 1996).<br />
The standby generator located at the BEL facility would provide emergency<br />
electrical power in the event of a power outage. Typically, standby generators run<br />
on diesel fuel and operate between 10 and 20 hours annually with the majority of<br />
those operating hours used for generator maintenance and testing. Total combined<br />
air emissions from a 350 KW generator operating for 20 hours would be less than<br />
0.2 tons per year.<br />
3. Emissions resulting from ongoing laboratory operations including a carpentry shop,<br />
a metalworking shop, and some chemical use. Laboratory chemicals purchased are<br />
primarily inert gases and acids. Because these chemicals are consumed in process<br />
very few actual air emissions result. Total emissions of criteria and hazardous air<br />
pollutants associated with laboratory operations are expected to be on the order of<br />
Page 26 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
0.05 tons per year based on 2005 air emissions data collected for the BEL laboratory<br />
operations at Hanscom.<br />
Table 3-2. Estimated Maximum Construction Emissions from Proposed<br />
Action<br />
Pollutant<br />
Emissions<br />
(tons per year)<br />
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 34<br />
Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) 11<br />
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) 2<br />
Sulfur Oxides (SO x ) 1<br />
Particulate Matter ≤ 10 μm (PM 10 ) 1<br />
Particulate Matter ≤ 2.5 μm (PM 2.5 ) 0<br />
Source: USAF <strong>2007</strong>. USAF <strong>Air</strong> Conformity Applicability Model 4.3.3. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Center for Environmental<br />
Excellence. Brooks AFB, Texas.<br />
Prior to the startup of these facilities, all activities would be carefully evaluated to<br />
determine whether any air permits are needed for operations. <strong>Air</strong> pollutants produced by<br />
heavy equipment during construction activities would be short-term and those emissions<br />
would not exceed any allowable limits. Finally, because long-term air emissions resulting<br />
from general building and laboratory operations would be minimal, addition of the BEL is<br />
not anticipated to adversely affect the surrounding environment.<br />
Impacts to <strong>Air</strong> Quality:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 27
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
3.5 NOISE<br />
3.5.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR NOISE<br />
The main noise source at <strong>Kirtland</strong> is<br />
from military and commercial aircraft at<br />
Albuquerque International Sunport. The<br />
airport has implemented noise abatement<br />
strategies, including restrictions in<br />
runway use and timing. The BEL and<br />
CDL sites are outside of the 65 Day-<br />
Night Average Sound Level noise<br />
contour from aircraft. Noise contours are<br />
shown in Figure 3-1 below.<br />
A secondary source of noise in the<br />
immediate area is traffic, which peaks at<br />
before 8:00 am and between 4:00 pm and<br />
5:30 pm.<br />
Noise Terms:<br />
Decibel (dB): A unit to measure noise, on a<br />
logarithmic scale. dBA is a unit that adjusts for the<br />
loudness as perceived by the human ear.<br />
Day-Night Average: Sound levels are calculated<br />
over a 24-hour period, with adjustments for<br />
nighttime noises to produce a day-night sound<br />
level. It has been adopted by most federal agencies<br />
for measuring community noise.<br />
65 dBA Day-Night Average: The most commonly<br />
used number for noise planning; it represents a<br />
compromise between activity needs and comfort.<br />
65 dBA is about as loud as a gas powered<br />
generator.<br />
Page 28 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Figure 3-1. <strong>Air</strong>craft noise contours for 65 dB (light blue contour), 70 dB (dark blue contour),<br />
and 75 dB (pink contour); the proposed site and alternative site are outside the 65 dB noise<br />
contour.<br />
3.5.2 IMPACTS FROM NOISE<br />
Construction of the BEL would result in a temporary increase in noise in the area. Noise<br />
levels for construction equipment, including bulldozers, backhoes, and front loaders range<br />
from 70 dBA to 90 dBA at 15 meters distance. The closest people are to the east for the<br />
preferred BEL site, and to the west for the CDL/alternative BEL site in the<br />
Bioenvironmental Engineering building, which is located on the parcel between the two<br />
sites. This building is used by Bioenvironmental Engineering as office space. This<br />
organization is the occupational health organization. The next closest buildings are office<br />
buildings, located to the south. Although the Bioenvironmental Engineering building is<br />
close to the sites, personnel working in the Bioenvironmental Engineering and other office<br />
buildings work inside the buildings, which would provide buffering from noise. Personnel<br />
walking to and from the Bioenvironmental Engineering building would have only<br />
occasional exposure to these noise levels, which would not be significant.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 29
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Long-term operations include the use of vacuum pumps for the laboratories in the building.<br />
The vacuum pumps would be outside the building, and would be enclosed by walls to<br />
provide noise attenuation for both inside and outside the building. Impacts from traffic<br />
would be attenuated by set-back from the street and landscaping. Because the sites would<br />
be located beyond the 65 Day-Night Average Sound Level contour for aircraft, noise<br />
impacts to and from aircraft and the BEL and CDL are not considered significant.<br />
Impacts from Noise:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
3.6 WATER RESOURCES<br />
3.6.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF WATER RESOURCES<br />
The Rio Grande is located approximately 5 miles west of <strong>Kirtland</strong> and is the major surface<br />
water body in the area. The Tijeras Arroyo and Arroyo del Coyote are surface drainages on<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> and are ephemeral streams. Tijeras Arroyo is the closest surface water feature, and<br />
is almost two miles away from the BEL and CDL sites.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> has five potable water wells installed in the regional aquifer at depths from 450<br />
feet to 1,000 feet. This aquifer is the regional drinking water source. <strong>Kirtland</strong> currently<br />
uses approximately 80% of its water allocation and has been reducing water usage on the<br />
installation through xeriscaping, use of non-potable water for irrigation, and other water<br />
conservation measures.<br />
Neither the preferred BEL site nor the CDL site are within a 100-year floodplain or located<br />
on or near wetlands.<br />
3.6.2 IMPACTS ON WATER RESOURCES<br />
Construction: The project construction would be covered by an NPDES Storm Water<br />
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Notice of Intent to discharge in accordance with<br />
the Construction General Permit. The SWPPP would identify best management practices to<br />
Page 30 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
reduce runoff from the site due to construction. The sites are level and runoff from the sites<br />
would not affect any surface water feature. The permitting of these construction activities<br />
would be coordinated through the <strong>Kirtland</strong> Environmental Management Branch,<br />
Compliance Section.<br />
Operations: The BEL and CDL sites are located on already disturbed land. There would be<br />
approximately 6.5 to 7 acres of permanent impervious surfaces proposed for the project<br />
site. This would have an insignificant effect on groundwater recharge rates of aquifers<br />
underlying the 52,000-acre base.<br />
There would be some additional water demand on the regional aquifer from the BEL<br />
operations, primarily for drinking and bathrooms for personnel in the building. This would<br />
be more than offset by overall reductions in water usage on <strong>Kirtland</strong> from an aggressive<br />
approach to water conservation. <strong>Kirtland</strong> signed a ten-year agreement in 1994 with local<br />
agencies to reduce water use by 30%, and by the end of the decade had reduced its use by<br />
31.8% (annual savings of 51,036,400 gallons over the established base year; DOE, <strong>2007</strong>).<br />
Further, in 2006, leak detection and repair work reduced water use another 15.9%<br />
(174,762,000 gallons/year reduction). Thus, the impacts to the regional aquifer would be<br />
insignificant.<br />
Impacts to Water Resources:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
3.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES<br />
3.7.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES<br />
The BEL and CDL sites would be in an area that has been heavily disturbed by grading and<br />
demolition activities in the past, and very little vegetation or wildlife is in the area. The<br />
general area contains a variety of human activities including office buildings. The<br />
vegetation at the sites is primarily packed dirt with minimal grass and weeds, and trees.<br />
Section 3.3, Visual Resources, displays pictures of the current site that also show<br />
vegetation.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 31
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Likewise, because of the heavily disturbed nature of the sites, there is little wildlife<br />
currently inhabiting the sites. No federally or state-listed threatened or endangered species<br />
inhabit the sites or developed area surround them, and no potential habitat is located nearby.<br />
The gray vireo (Vireo vicinior), the only state-listed species that has been observed on<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>, has been observed in the juniper woodlands along the eastern installation<br />
boundary, more than ten miles from the proposed sites. No similar habitat occurs in or near<br />
the proposed sites.<br />
The burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia) is the only species of concern listed by the U.S.<br />
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in the vicinity. The nearest burrowing owl nesting<br />
location is off of Doris Rd., approximately 1/5 of a mile northeast of the BEL site. Figure 3-<br />
2 below shows locations of burrowing owls on <strong>Kirtland</strong> in <strong>2007</strong>, as provided by Carol<br />
Finley, Natural Resource Manager for <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
Figure 3-2. Burrowing owl locations identified on <strong>Kirtland</strong>, <strong>2007</strong>.<br />
3.7.2 IMPACTS TO BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES<br />
Construction: Although there are no burrowing owl nests currently located on the sites, the<br />
owls do vary their nesting sites from year to year. During construction, there is the<br />
Page 32 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
possibility that a nest could be disturbed. The category of species of concern, which applies<br />
to the burrowing owl, carries no legal requirement, but identifies those species that deserve<br />
special consideration in management and planning. <strong>Kirtland</strong> has standard mitigation<br />
procedures in conformance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, should it be necessary to<br />
relocate an owl during any construction project. Thus any impacts to burrowing owls, or<br />
other wildlife or vegetation would be insignificant during construction.<br />
Operations: The proposed sites for the BEL and CDL are in developed areas, which are<br />
not suitable for quality wildlife habitat. In addition, the current state of the sites is not<br />
conducive to either vegetation or wildlife. Although construction of the BEL and CDL will<br />
permanently replace the dirt with hard structures and pavement, the area will also be<br />
landscaped, which will be an improvement over the present sites. Overall, due to the current<br />
status of the site and its location in a developed area, impacts to the biological resources of<br />
the area would be insignificant.<br />
Impacts to Biological Resources:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
3.8 TRANSPORTATION<br />
3.8.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF TRANSPORTATION<br />
Albuquerque is served by air, rail, and federal, state and local roads. Since all<br />
transportation to and from the project area would occur by vehicle, the resource examined<br />
in this document is limited to the roadway system.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> is located in the southeastern portion of the city of Albuquerque, adjacent to the<br />
Albuquerque International Sunport. Major transportation arteries in the vicinity of the base<br />
are Interstate 40, which is approximately 1.5 miles to the north, and Interstate 25, located<br />
approximately four miles to the west. Gibson Boulevard lies along the northern border of<br />
the western portion of the base, where the proposed project would be located, and many<br />
other local roads are used to access the base entrances.<br />
Seven gates provide entrance to the base, though the Carlisle and Truman gates would<br />
likely be the most used to access the proposed project area (Figure 3-3 below).<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 33
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Page 34 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
The Carlisle Gate is located at the intersection of Carlisle Boulevard and Gibson Boulevard,<br />
while the Truman Gate is located on Truman Street near Aberdeen Avenue. Construction<br />
vehicle access is allowed only through the <strong>Kirtland</strong> Gate, located on Gibson Boulevard,<br />
west of the Carlisle Gate.<br />
Circulation in Project Area<br />
On the western side of the base, traffic flows relatively smoothly due to light traffic<br />
volumes and favorable intersection operations. At some entrance gates however,<br />
congestion occurs on the local (off-base) roads during peak traffic periods (6:30 to 8:00<br />
a.m.) as lines of vehicles wait for clearance to enter the secure area of the base. Delays are<br />
usually worse at the gates on the eastern side of the base than on the western side, where the<br />
Truman and Carlisle Gates are located. The Truman Gate has recently been enlarged and<br />
relocated closer to Aberdeen Avenue.<br />
Traffic Volumes<br />
Table 3-3 below shows the most recent (1999) traffic data for the roads and intersections<br />
within the project area. Because the base is the largest employer in the Albuquerque area, it<br />
is the principal commuting destination on the southeastern side of the city.<br />
Table 3-3. 1999 <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Base</strong> Traffic Analysis Data<br />
Street/Arterial and<br />
Location<br />
Carlisle Boulevard (south<br />
of Carlisle Gate)<br />
Maxwell Street (north of<br />
Aberdeen)<br />
Truman Street (south of<br />
Truman Gate)<br />
Lanes<br />
Speed<br />
A.M. Peak<br />
Hour<br />
Volume<br />
P.M. Peak<br />
Hour<br />
Volume<br />
4 25 699 579<br />
2 15 38 55<br />
2 25 980 859<br />
Intersection ADT a Peak Hour Peak<br />
Car/hour<br />
Carlisle Boulevard and<br />
Aberdeen Avenue<br />
Truman and Aberdeen<br />
Avenue<br />
Average<br />
Car/hour<br />
4,512 6:45 a.m. 903 188<br />
8,904 6:45 a.m. 1,083 371<br />
Source: <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB 1999.<br />
a<br />
Notes: ADT is Average Daily Traffic or the number of vehicles in a 24-hour period.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 35
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
3.8.2 IMPACTS ON TRANSPORTATION<br />
Impacts to transportation and circulation are assessed by determining an action’s potential<br />
to change current transportation patterns, systems, service, and safety. Impacts may arise<br />
from physical changes to circulation (e.g. closing, rerouting, or creating roads), construction<br />
activity temporarily disrupting existing local-area traffic patterns, or changes in daily or<br />
peak-hour traffic volumes created by workforce and population changes related to<br />
installation activities.<br />
Potential impacts to transportation and circulation from the Proposed Action were analyzed<br />
by: (1) identifying and describing transportation and circulation that could affect or be<br />
affected by the project; and (2) examining the effects the action may have on the resource.<br />
Roadways, intersections, and gates are in the area are shown in Figure 3-3.<br />
Construction: Construction of the proposed BEL would have a minor short-term impact on<br />
transportation as a result of increased traffic from construction vehicles and heavy-duty<br />
equipment. All construction traffic would enter the base via the <strong>Kirtland</strong> Gate, where<br />
complete inspections of trucks and commercial vehicles occur. Heavy construction<br />
equipment would likely be left on base for the duration of construction. Once on the base,<br />
construction vehicles and contractor’s vehicles would access the site via Aberdeen Avenue.<br />
There would be a minor increase in both off-base and on-base traffic during the<br />
construction period, particularly during the morning peak hours. The overall impact would<br />
be insignificant.<br />
Operations: Operation of the BEL would require approximately 250 to 265 additional<br />
personnel at the base; most of these workers would live off-base and travel via local roads<br />
to the Carlisle or Truman Gates to the base to either the preferred site or the alternative site.<br />
The work schedule at the BEL would be staggered by two and one-half hours, so that<br />
workers would not arrive or leave all at once. Therefore, approximately 100 cars per hour<br />
would be added to the morning and evening peak numbers at the Carlisle and Truman<br />
Gates. An additional 50 cars at each gate would result in a minor traffic increase of seven<br />
percent at the Carlisle Gate and five percent at the Truman Gate, based on the peak<br />
numbers of 699 and 980 cars as shown in Table 3-3, which is not considered to be<br />
significant.<br />
Page 36 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Impacts to Transportation:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
3.9 UTILITIES<br />
3.9.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF UTILITIES<br />
The following is a summary of basic utility information for <strong>Kirtland</strong>, which applies to the<br />
BEL and CDL sites:<br />
• Water is obtained from five wells at depths of 450 to 1,000 feet in the Albuquerque<br />
Regional Water Basin. The supply and quality of water is considered adequate for<br />
present and future needs on the installation.<br />
• Wastewater is discharged into the City of Albuquerque wastewater treatment system<br />
via the base sanitary sewer system. Solid municipal waste is removed offsite to the<br />
Waste Management New Mexico’s Rio Rancho landfill facility. Construction debris is<br />
disposed of at a landfill on <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
• Electric power is supplied by Public Service of New Mexico (PNM).<br />
• <strong>Kirtland</strong> operates its own telephone switching system.<br />
Water and sewer lines, fire hydrants, and communications lines are available adjacent to<br />
both sites, within 300 meters. Some abandoned sewer lines are on the site from previous<br />
housing, which would be removed during construction. Electric power is available nearby,<br />
but would require construction of a substation.<br />
3.9.2 IMPACTS ON UTILITIES<br />
Construction: Construction of the BEL and CDL would result in a short-term increase in<br />
construction solid waste, which would be disposed of by the contractor at a Class D landfill.<br />
Water and portable latrines would be supplied by the contractor.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 37
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Substation 25 on <strong>Kirtland</strong> Drive; the substation for the<br />
BEL will be similar in appearance, although it may be<br />
somewhat smaller.<br />
Operations: There would be a 12/15/20<br />
MVA electrical substation for the BEL<br />
building that would be sited east of the<br />
BEL, on the east side of Maxwell St.,<br />
northwest of the Bioenvironmental<br />
Engineering building (this is the former<br />
chapel, now used by Bioenvironmental<br />
Engineering, the 377 ABW occupational<br />
health and safety organization). The<br />
substation would be about 40’ x 40’,<br />
surrounded by an 8’ wall, and 46 KV<br />
overhead lines would come into the<br />
substation from the power line on<br />
Aberdeen, along Maxwell St. All other<br />
utilities for the BEL are sufficient and do<br />
not require additional capacity to meet the<br />
needs of the Proposed Action.<br />
Utilities are available and sufficient for the CDL at the alternative site. The CDL would use<br />
the BEL substation. The utility capabilities are somewhat greater at the BEL site, but the<br />
difference is insignificant, and both sites have adequate utility capabilities.<br />
Operations at the BEL are not expected to have a detrimental effect on nearby electrical<br />
supplies, communications, or aircraft. No interference problems have occurred at Hanscom.<br />
The impact to utilities by the BEL and CDL would be insignificant.<br />
Impacts to Utilities:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
Page 38 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
3.10 HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES/HEALTH AND<br />
SAFETY<br />
3.10.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC<br />
SUBSTANCES<br />
Hazardous materials (HAZMAT) and chemicals are used across <strong>Kirtland</strong> as part of vehicle<br />
and aircraft maintenance, research laboratories, and other industrial uses. The purchase,<br />
storage, and tracking of HAZMAT, and the disposal of hazardous waste (HW) are<br />
specifically addressed by separate management plans.<br />
Hazardous Material Management, AFI 32-7086 and KAFBI 32-7001, establish procedures<br />
and standards that govern management of HAZMAT throughout the <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong>. The<br />
Hazardous Materials Management Process (HMMP) portion of this document specifies the<br />
activities and infrastructure required to identify, manage, track, and minimize HAZMAT on<br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> installations. According to this process, HAZMAT for the BEL cannot be<br />
purchased until approved by three <strong>Kirtland</strong> authorizing offices, which include Civil<br />
Engineering, Safety, and Bioenvironmental Engineering. Any HAZMAT procured for the<br />
BEL would be tracked from cradle to grave by the standardized <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> HAZMAT<br />
tracking system.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>’s Hazardous Materials Spill Plan is designed to prevent spills and minimize<br />
hazards to human health and the environment in the event that an unplanned release of<br />
HAZMAT does take place. This plan includes a description of actions to be taken, and a list<br />
of emergency coordinators that must be contacted should a spill occur.<br />
In addition to these <strong>Kirtland</strong>-wide requirements, plans, and processes, a Safety Permit,<br />
Safety Operating Instructions, and Test Hazardous Analysis will be developed specifically<br />
for hazards associated with the BEL once personnel arrive on site and before the materials<br />
are ordered and received.<br />
Chemical Purchases<br />
Purchases of chemicals for the BEL at Hanscom from the past several years were reviewed.<br />
The great majority of chemical purchases are less than 1 kilogram (kg). A summary of<br />
chemicals that were purchased in quantities greater than 10 kg over the past several years is<br />
presented below in Table 3-4. Although this list is from past purchases at Hanscom, it is<br />
expected that purchase and use of chemicals would be similar in the future, unless<br />
otherwise noted. However, these quantities represent purchases over several years, and the<br />
amounts on hand at any given time would generally be much smaller than the totals<br />
purchased.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 39
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Table 3-4. Major Chemical Purchases at the Current BEL<br />
Amounts<br />
of<br />
Chemical<br />
Purchased<br />
Chemical<br />
Labs Purchasing<br />
Chemical<br />
Chemical’s<br />
Use<br />
10 to 100 kg Freon 13 refrigerant Space Particles Experiments<br />
Carbon monoxide<br />
Space Chemistry, Plasma<br />
Chemistry, IV Surveillance<br />
Experiments<br />
Neon<br />
Space Chemistry, IV<br />
Surveillance<br />
Experiments<br />
Diffoil-20<br />
Plasma Chemistry<br />
Instrument<br />
maintenance<br />
Pump oil<br />
Plasma Chemistry<br />
Instrument<br />
maintenance<br />
Hydrogen cyanide Plasma Chemistry Experiments<br />
Hydrogen gas Plasma Chemistry Experiments<br />
Hydrochloric acid Plasma Chemistry Experiments<br />
Krypton Plasma Chemistry Experiments<br />
Methanol Plasma Chemistry Experiments<br />
100 to 1,000<br />
kg<br />
1,000 to<br />
10,000 kg<br />
Nitrous oxide LABCEDE Experiments<br />
d-limonene dipentenes<br />
(citrus extract)<br />
Argon<br />
Helium gas<br />
Space Particles<br />
Space Chemistry, Plasma<br />
Chemistry, IV Surveillance<br />
Mass Spec<br />
Experiments<br />
Experiments<br />
Fill balloons for<br />
flights<br />
Liquid nitrogen Space Particles Experiments<br />
Xenon gas<br />
Space Chemistry, Plasma<br />
Chemistry<br />
Experiments<br />
Nitrogen gas<br />
Space Chemistry, Plasma<br />
Chemistry<br />
Experiments<br />
Carbon dioxide gas Mass Spec. Experiments<br />
>10,000 kg Liquid carbon dioxide Space Particles Experiments<br />
Helium gas Plasma Chemistry, Mass Spec. Experiments<br />
Oxygen gas Mass Spec. Experiments<br />
Page 40 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
3.10.2 IMPACT OF HAZARDOUS AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES<br />
Construction: Construction would temporarily cause a very small increase in hazardous<br />
materials used and wastes generated, mainly petroleum, oils, and lubricants used by<br />
construction equipment and disposed of as hazardous waste by the contractor. Fueling of<br />
construction vehicles would occur off-site. Most of the wastes would be non-hazardous<br />
construction debris, disposed of in a Class D landfill, as discussed in Section 3.9, or<br />
recycled.<br />
Operations: Most of the chemicals used by the BEL at Hanscom AFB have been<br />
purchased and used in quantities less than 1 kg. Inert and combustible gases have been<br />
purchased and used in quantities of up to 10,000 kg. A list of chemicals purchased in<br />
amounts greater than 10 kg is presented in Table 3-4 of Section 3.10.1. Additional<br />
information about the potential hazards for any of these chemicals can be found on Material<br />
Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs). Sources of more information about MSDSs and databases of<br />
MSDSs may be found at: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/chem/internet.html or<br />
https://www.denix.osd.mil/denix/Public/Library/MSDS/msds.html. The chemicals<br />
purchased in amounts larger than 100 kg, or otherwise of concern, are the following:<br />
• Hydrogen cyanide (HCN). There was one purchase of HCN just over 22 kg. This is<br />
listed as an extremely hazardous substance under EPCRA, with a threshold planning<br />
quantity of 100 lbs (45.4 kg) and a reportable quantity of 10 lbs (4.5 kg). It is highly<br />
toxic; breathing in a small amount of the gas or swallowing a very small amount can be<br />
fatal. At high concentrations it is readily absorbed through the skin. The HCN<br />
purchased was a dilute mixture of gaseous, anhydrous HCN in an inert buffer gas. The<br />
chemical is not currently being used at the BEL, and any unused amounts will be<br />
disposed of as hazardous waste before relocation to <strong>Kirtland</strong>. It is not anticipated that it<br />
will be used in the future. However, even if it were required in the future, it would not<br />
be a BEL off-site threat because it is used in small quantities and appropriate<br />
HAZMAT and safety procedures will be developed and approved before purchasing<br />
the chemical. These procedures will ensure proper handling and storage of hydrogen<br />
cyanide to avoid threats to occupants and workers.<br />
• Inert gases, including argon, xenon, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and helium. Although<br />
these gases are not directly toxic, they can be an asphyxiant by replacing oxygen. They<br />
are not a BEL off-site threat because natural dispersion would reduce concentrations to<br />
below asphyxiant concentrations; inert gases are generally only a concern in confined<br />
spaces. Appropriate HAZMAT and safety procedures will be developed and approved<br />
before purchasing the chemical. These procedures will ensure proper handling and<br />
storage of inert gases to avoid threats to occupants and workers. Helium gas could be<br />
subject to reporting under EPCRA if it were stored in quantities greater than 10,000 lbs<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 41
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
(4,536 kg), although the quantities shown in<br />
Table 3-4 represent purchases over several<br />
years. These gases have been stored in small<br />
cylinders in locked laboratory rooms.<br />
• D-limonene. This chemical is a citrus extract<br />
and is non-toxic, but is combustible with a flash<br />
point of approximately 123˚F. However, d-<br />
limonene is no longer used at the BEL, and it is<br />
not anticipated that it will be purchased or used<br />
in the future.<br />
• Liquid carbon dioxide. When exposed to the<br />
atmosphere, liquid carbon dioxide becomes a<br />
solid and can cause frostbite from direct<br />
exposure to skin. It is also an asphyxiant. Liquid<br />
carbon dioxide would be stored securely in the<br />
laboratories, and would not be an off-site threat.<br />
Appropriate HAZMAT and safety procedures<br />
will be developed and approved before<br />
purchasing the chemical. These procedures will<br />
ensure proper handling and storage of liquid<br />
carbon dioxide to avoid threats to occupants and<br />
workers. It could be subject to reporting under<br />
EPCRA if it were stored in quantities greater<br />
than 10,000 lbs (4,536 kg), although the<br />
quantities shown in Table 3-4 represent<br />
purchases over several years.<br />
• Oxygen. Oxygen vigorously supports the<br />
combustion of other materials. It would be<br />
stored securely in the laboratories. It could be<br />
subject to reporting under EPCRA reporting if it<br />
were stored in quantities greater than 10,000 lbs<br />
EPCRA<br />
The Emergency Planning and<br />
Community Right-to-Know Act<br />
(EPCRA) was passed by<br />
Congress in 1986. EPCRA was<br />
included as Title III of the<br />
Superfund Amendments and<br />
Reauthorization Act (SARA) and<br />
is sometimes referred to as SARA<br />
Title III. EPCRA provides for the<br />
collection of information<br />
regarding the use, storage,<br />
production, and release of<br />
hazardous chemicals, thereby<br />
helping to increase emergency<br />
planners /responders and the<br />
public’s knowledge and access to<br />
this information. States and<br />
communities, working with<br />
facilities, can use the information<br />
to improve emergency planning,<br />
chemical safety and protect public<br />
health and the environment.<br />
EPCRA requires facilities that<br />
have chemicals that require<br />
Material Safety Data Sheets<br />
(MSDSs), and that store more<br />
than the EPCRA threshold<br />
quantity for any of these<br />
chemicals, to submit a list of these<br />
chemicals, or copies of their<br />
(4,536 kg), although quantities shown in Table 3-4 represent purchases over several<br />
years. Appropriate HAZMAT and safety procedures will be developed and approved<br />
before purchasing the chemical. These procedures will ensure proper handling and<br />
storage of oxygen to avoid threats to occupants and workers.<br />
• Liquid nitrogen. Liquid nitrogen could be subject to reporting under EPCRA reporting<br />
if it were stored in quantities greater than 10,000 lbs (4,536 kg), although quantities<br />
Page 42 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
listed in Table 3-4 represent purchases over several years. It is an extremely cold<br />
(-321°F) liquefied gas, commonly used as a coolant. It can cause frostbite. Liquid<br />
nitrogen requires proper storage containers; currently it is stored in 1200 gallon dewars<br />
outside the building at Hanscom, and would have a similar storage arrangement at<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>. It is not a BEL off-site threat because of limited access to the site, and the<br />
nature of the hazard. Appropriate HAZMAT and safety procedures will be developed<br />
and approved before purchasing the chemical. These procedures will ensure proper<br />
handling and storage of liquid nitrogen to avoid threats to occupants and workers.<br />
Hazardous wastes generated at the BEL would be similar to others at the AFRL and Initial<br />
Accumulation Points (IAPs) would be established at the points of generation to collect and<br />
temporarily store hazardous wastes. Because most of the hazardous materials identified in<br />
Table 3-4 would be consumed in experiments, only small quantities of hazardous wastes<br />
would result. All hazardous waste generated would be managed in accordance with<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>’s Hazardous Waste Management Plan.<br />
All of the chemicals are expected to have a minimal impact. All hazardous materials would<br />
be managed in accordance with <strong>Kirtland</strong>’s Hazardous Material Management directives<br />
including purchase, storage and handling procedures and policies. Because the BEL is in<br />
operation at Hanscom, any AFRL specific safety procedures have been identified and are<br />
currently in place to ensure that all chemicals used in the laboratory are stored and handled<br />
properly.<br />
Impacts from Hazardous and Toxic Substances:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Negative<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 43
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
3.11 SOCIOECONOMICS<br />
3.11.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS OF SOCIOECONOMICS<br />
A socioeconomic analysis includes<br />
an assessment of impacts that an<br />
action has on such things as<br />
demographics (population, ethnicity),<br />
economy and employment, income<br />
levels, housing, health and social<br />
services, educational resources, and<br />
other related features. Basic facts<br />
related to the Region of Influence<br />
(ROI) and <strong>Kirtland</strong> are presented<br />
below in Table 3-5.<br />
Region of Influence (ROI)<br />
The area affected by the relocation, sometimes<br />
called the Region of Influence or Economic<br />
Impact Region, is considered for this EA to be<br />
Bernalillo County. This area includes the City of<br />
Albuquerque. Figures from the <strong>Kirtland</strong> website’s<br />
Economic Impact Statement are for a slightly<br />
larger area including Sandoval, Bernalillo, and<br />
Valencia Counties.<br />
Table 3-5. Socioeconomic Facts about the Region of Influence<br />
(Bernalillo County) and <strong>Kirtland</strong><br />
Size 1200 square miles in area (Bernalillo County, <strong>2007</strong>)<br />
Economic Center of ROI<br />
Main Economic Sectors<br />
Population of ROI<br />
Ethnicity and Age of<br />
Population<br />
Income<br />
City of Albuquerque<br />
Service industry, retail trade, and government. (Mid Region<br />
Council of Governments, <strong>2007</strong>).<br />
603,652 in 2006, an increase of 10.6 percent from April 2000<br />
when the last census was taken. The population in the City of<br />
Albuquerque was estimated to be 471,856 in 2003, an increase<br />
of 5.1 percent from April 2000. (US Census Bureau, <strong>2007</strong>).<br />
Although 87.6% of the population claims to be white, about<br />
44% claim to have Hispanic or Latino origin. About 4.9% claim<br />
American Indian origin, and about 3.3% claim to be black.<br />
24% of population is under 18 years of age.<br />
7% of population is under 5 years of age.<br />
Personal per capita income in Bernalillo County in 2005 was<br />
$32,556 (Bureau of Economic Analysis, <strong>2007</strong>). Median<br />
household income in 2003 was $41,062 (US Census Bureau,<br />
<strong>2007</strong>). Annual average unemployment rates in 2000 and 2001<br />
within the ROI were at 3 and 3.4 percent, respectively.<br />
Page 44 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
The Albuquerque Public Schools operate a total of 131 schools:<br />
84 elementary schools, 26 middle schools, 11 high schools and<br />
Schools<br />
10 alternative schools. The closest school to the BEL location is<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Elementary School, located within one mile of the<br />
Carlisle Gate. There are also numerous schools in the ROI.<br />
In 2005, there were 266,266 single family housing units in<br />
Housing<br />
Bernalillo County, with an average value of $128,300 (US<br />
Census, <strong>2007</strong>).<br />
Both the county and the city operate extensive parks<br />
departments, with parks, open space, community centers,<br />
Parks and Recreation fitness centers, golf courses, tennis courts, and organized sports<br />
programs (City of Albuquerque, <strong>2007</strong>, Bernalillo County,<br />
<strong>2007</strong>).<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Employment <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB had 21,789 employees in FY 2005 (USAF 2005).<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB expenditures in FY 2005, including payroll,<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Expenditures<br />
totaled nearly $3.5 billion.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong>’s Economic<br />
Importance<br />
The goods and services purchased by base employees in the<br />
local area create secondary jobs and wages, further adding to<br />
the base’s total economic importance to the local area. The<br />
economic contribution (dollar impact) of <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB to the<br />
local economy in FY 2002 was estimated at nearly $4.4 billion<br />
(USAF 2005).<br />
3.11.2 IMPACTS TO SOCIOECONOMICS<br />
Construction: Construction of the BEL would result in minor, beneficial short-term<br />
socioeconomic impacts. The estimated cost of the project is $42,700,000, including labor<br />
and supplies for all buildings and supporting facilities. The local economy would benefit<br />
from purchase of construction materials and payment of salaries to construction workers.<br />
Contracts for construction equipment leasing or purchase would also have a temporary,<br />
beneficial economic impact.<br />
Operations: Long-term socioeconomic impacts would result from the relocation of<br />
personnel for the BEL which would add approximately the following numbers of personnel<br />
and their families to the ROI:<br />
• 153 USAF government civilians (average government pay scale of GS-13 to GS-15,<br />
with annual salary ranges from $66,951 to $120,981 (US Office of Personnel<br />
Management, <strong>2007</strong>)<br />
• 35 military (26 officers, mid-level captains; mid-range of $58,500)<br />
• 9 enlisted (mid-level staff sergeants; E-5 mid-range of $28,824)<br />
• 75 contractors (similar to government pay scale for GS-13 to GS-15)<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 45
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
With the exception of enlisted pay, which does not include allowances over $10,000, these<br />
pay scales are significantly higher than the median household income in Bernalillo County.<br />
The relocated families will in turn spend this money on taxes, housing, food, entertainment,<br />
which will all benefit the local economy. When jobs are created at the base, there is an<br />
indirect creation of jobs off the base to service the new residents. Using a multiplier of 1.4<br />
for civilian and contractor personnel, and a multiplier of 0.41 for active duty military<br />
(USAF 2005), the local economy would likely see the need for an additional 337 jobs. This<br />
translates to an additional $10,970,000 dollars in wages per year, as determined by<br />
multiplying jobs created times the average per capita income of $32,556 for Bernalillo<br />
County. Operation of the BEL would result in beneficial impacts to the local economy.<br />
Most employees of the BEL will be housed off-base, which will result in economic benefits<br />
due to purchasing of houses or renting of living quarters. Some employees may choose to<br />
live in privatized on-base housing. The employees and their families living off-base will<br />
find housing throughout the ROI, therefore additional residents will be spread throughout<br />
the area and will not constitute a significant new population that would place stress on<br />
public services or amenities in any one location. Although the public school system in<br />
Albuquerque is extensive, the region is growing rapidly, some schools are overcrowded and<br />
portable classrooms are used in some locations (Albuquerque Public Schools, 2004).<br />
Bernalillo County is also designated as a medically underserved area (US Department<br />
Health and Human Services, <strong>2007</strong>). Addition of new families associated with the BEL<br />
project will place some additional demands on these sectors, although since the families<br />
will likely settle throughout the ROI, demand for new services in any area will be minor.<br />
Near <strong>Kirtland</strong>, existing housing is available for sale or rent, and the area is fairly well<br />
developed. Although new housing is limited by the Sandia Indian Reservation to the north<br />
of Albuquerque, Isleta Indian Reservation to the south, and the Sandia Mountains/Cibola<br />
National Forest to the east, there are several areas, including the West Mesa area across the<br />
Rio Grande and the area east of the Sandia Mountains, where new housing developments<br />
are planned. Municipal services are available in all areas. There will therefore be some<br />
minor long-term socioeconomic impacts.<br />
Page 46 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Impacts to Socioeconomics:<br />
From Construction:<br />
Short-term<br />
Insignificant<br />
Positive<br />
From Operations:<br />
Permanent<br />
Insignificant<br />
Positive<br />
3.12 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND PROTECTION OF<br />
CHILDREN<br />
3.12.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS<br />
Environmental Justice: All federal agencies must identify and address disproportionately<br />
high and adverse effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minority and lowincome<br />
populations. As shown in Table 3-5 in Section 3.11.1, although over 87% of the<br />
population claims to be white, 44% of the population claims Hispanic origin. Over 14% of<br />
the population is living below the poverty level. Although the site is completely within the<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> boundaries with limited access, there are residential areas and businesses off-base<br />
along Gibson Boulevard near the preferred or alternative site.<br />
Protection of Children: All federal agencies must also identify and address environmental<br />
health risks and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. As shown in Table<br />
3-5 in Section 3.11.1, 24% of the population is under 18 years of age, and 7% of the<br />
population is under 5 years old. The nearest school is <strong>Kirtland</strong> Elementary School located<br />
southwest of Carlisle and Gibson, across Carlisle from the site. Residential areas are offbase,<br />
approximately 1/4 mile north of the site. Access to the base is limited.<br />
3.12.2 IMPACTS ON CHILDREN, MINORITIES, AND LOW-INCOME<br />
POPULATIONS<br />
Although the Albuquerque ROI has relatively high percentages of children, minority, and<br />
low-income populations, the BEL relocation would not have any significant adverse<br />
environmental impacts and, therefore, would not disproportionately affect these<br />
communities. The site of the new construction is 1/4 mile from the nearest residential area;<br />
therefore noise and air emissions are not expected to impact any residents or workers, and<br />
any effects would be short-term and temporary. There would be no displacement of<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 47
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
commercial enterprises, housing, parks, schools, churches, or other recreational or cultural<br />
activities.<br />
Potential hazards from chemicals and materials are limited to safety hazards for workers<br />
from inert and combustible materials. Any increased noise is minor and would be<br />
attenuated by distance. <strong>Air</strong> emissions from construction and operations would be negligible.<br />
Therefore there are no disproportionate impacts to populations identified in Executive<br />
Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations<br />
and Low-Income Populations and an Environmental Justice analysis is not required.<br />
Although <strong>Kirtland</strong> Elementary School is across Carlisle from the site, the children there and<br />
in residences north of Gibson Boulevard would not be affected by the action. The proposed<br />
construction sites are on a controlled-entry installation and children are not likely to come<br />
in contact with or ingest any substances associated with the construction or operation of the<br />
BEL or CDL. There are no substances associated with this action which are expected to<br />
create an environmental health risk or safety risk believed to disproportionately affect<br />
children as identified in Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children.<br />
Disproportionate Impacts to Children, Minorities, and Low-income<br />
Populations:<br />
From Construction:<br />
No disproportionate Impacts<br />
From Operations:<br />
No Disproportionate Impacts<br />
Page 48 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Section 4 Cumulative Effects<br />
4.1 APPROACH<br />
CEQ regulations stipulate that the cumulative effects analysis in an EA should consider the<br />
potential environmental impacts resulting from “the incremental impacts of the action when<br />
added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what<br />
agency or person undertakes such other actions” (40 CFR 1508.7). Recent CEQ guidance<br />
in considering cumulative effects affirms this requirement, stating that the first steps in<br />
assessing cumulative effects involves defining the scope of the other actions and their<br />
interrelationship with a Proposed Action. The scope must consider other projects that<br />
coincide with the location and timetable of a Proposed Action and other actions.<br />
Cumulative effects analyses must also evaluate the nature of interactions among these<br />
actions (CEQ 1997).<br />
The following factors were used to determine which resources might have cumulative<br />
effects from this Proposed Action and other projects:<br />
• Projects that have occurred or will occur in a similar geographic location – in general,<br />
this includes projects that will occur on the developed west side of the base.<br />
• Projects that would be likely to have a similar effect on a resource.<br />
• A resource that is particularly vulnerable in the past, present, or in the future.<br />
• Assessments that have identified a cumulative effects concern in the area.<br />
A cumulative effects assessment looks at a combination of the resources affected and other<br />
projects that have occurred, are occurring, or will occur, to determine if there are problems<br />
with the combination of incremental effects from multiple projects.<br />
Resources that have no impact from the BEL project are not considered. Resources that<br />
have an insignificant, temporary, or positive impact from the BEL are considered, but not<br />
given as much weight as those with significant, long-term or permanent, and negative<br />
impacts.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> is a large, active military installation that undergoes changes in mission and in<br />
training requirements. This process of change is consistent with the DoD policy that<br />
military installations must be ready to respond to constantly changing threats to American<br />
interests throughout the world. Projects that were examined for potential cumulative<br />
impacts include the following:<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 49
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Table 4-1. List of Past, Present, and Future Projects with Potential<br />
Cumulative Effects<br />
Project<br />
Name/Status<br />
Starbase<br />
Completed in 2003<br />
Demolition and<br />
replacement of aging<br />
housing<br />
In areas near sites<br />
(Maxwell housing),<br />
demolition should be<br />
finished by 2019.<br />
58 th Special<br />
Operations Wing<br />
(SOW) beddown of<br />
the CV-22 and<br />
CSAR-X<br />
Four helicopters<br />
have arrived in 2006<br />
CSAR-X arrive in<br />
FY10<br />
Construction of the<br />
Corrosion Control<br />
Facility and HC-<br />
130P Flight<br />
Simulator Facility<br />
Currently being<br />
built; to be finished<br />
in 2008<br />
Description<br />
2,940 square-foot facility built at the<br />
southern intersection of Argus Loop and<br />
Project Drive for skill development of atrisk<br />
youth.<br />
Vacant old military housing that is<br />
currently being demolished on an<br />
occasional basis as new housing is made<br />
available on and off base. Demolition and<br />
construction have occurred in areas that<br />
have been previously disturbed, including<br />
the preferred BEL site and parts of the<br />
CDL (alternative BEL) site. The area<br />
closest to the sites are the Maxwell<br />
housing, across Gibson to the north.<br />
Project replaces 11 aging MH-53<br />
helicopters with seven CV-22 tilt-rotor<br />
aircraft. Four other helicopters and three<br />
HC-130P fixed wing aircraft are also<br />
planned, with renovation of existing<br />
facilities. CSAR-X helicopters will replace<br />
Pave Hawks (HH-60G).<br />
Corrosion Control Facility and Flight<br />
Simulator Facility in 58 SOW campus on<br />
west side. The Corrosion Control Facility<br />
on Doris Avenue is an aircraft spot<br />
painting facility and will employ<br />
approximately 10 personnel.<br />
Potential to Coincide in<br />
Time and Space<br />
(Projects with potential<br />
cumulative effects are bold)<br />
Construction already completed;<br />
operations impacts, such as<br />
traffic, were already considered<br />
as part of existing conditions in<br />
determining BEL impacts.<br />
Demolition and construction of<br />
Maxwell housing does not<br />
coincide in timing with BEL.<br />
New housing replaces old<br />
housing and does not add<br />
cumulative effects.<br />
Potential for cumulative<br />
impacts with BEL from<br />
operations in noise and<br />
emissions.<br />
Construction to be completed<br />
before BEL construction.<br />
Operations will be concurrent<br />
with BEL, and is on the west<br />
side; potential for cumulative<br />
effects in air emissions.<br />
Page 50 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Project<br />
Name/Status<br />
Development of the<br />
PJ/CRO campus<br />
Will occur one<br />
building at a time; if<br />
Congressional insert<br />
fails this year, it will<br />
be several years<br />
away.<br />
Development of<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Technology<br />
Park<br />
Area 2; no schedule<br />
at this time<br />
Bulk fuels storage<br />
tanks construction<br />
and off-loading<br />
facility<br />
New offload facility<br />
to be completed<br />
FY09; new tanks to<br />
be completed 2010<br />
Component<br />
Development Lab,<br />
part of Phase 1 of<br />
the KTP<br />
Construction to<br />
begin as early as<br />
2009<br />
Description<br />
Construction of a pararescue and<br />
parajumper (PJ/CRO) training facility in a<br />
previously disturbed area in the central part<br />
of the installation.<br />
Construction and operation of Area 2 of<br />
the KTP, consisting of 92 acres under an<br />
Enhanced Use Lease (from Maxwell east<br />
to the VA property, north of Aberdeen).<br />
Although the KTP may include<br />
development of the present Maxwell<br />
housing Area in the future, this would not<br />
occur for ten to fifteen years. For that<br />
reason only the potential for cumulative<br />
impacts with Area 2 is addressed in this<br />
analysis. The exact nature of the<br />
development is not yet determined,<br />
because the company that gets the lease<br />
will determine development. The<br />
development will be compatible with<br />
surrounding uses. The development could<br />
have its own direct entrance onto <strong>Kirtland</strong>.<br />
Aging bulk fuels storage facility adjacent<br />
to the <strong>Air</strong> National Guard property north of<br />
runway 08-26 (east-west runway) to be<br />
renovated or replaced. This project<br />
replaces tanks already in place, and cleans<br />
up past contamination.<br />
The CDL would provide a state-of-the-art<br />
high-tech industrial facility with<br />
laboratories and clean rooms to support<br />
space vehicles component development, as<br />
well as provide administrative space. CDL<br />
has not been funded for 2008, but it<br />
remains a potential Congressional insert.<br />
Potential to Coincide in<br />
Time and Space<br />
(Projects with potential<br />
cumulative effects are bold)<br />
Construction will likely be much<br />
later than BEL construction.<br />
Operations could have<br />
cumulative effects with BEL.<br />
Construction is not yet scheduled,<br />
so this project is not yet ripe for<br />
consideration of cumulative<br />
effects. The exact nature of the<br />
development is also<br />
undetermined, and thus the<br />
operations are not yet ripe for<br />
analysis of cumulative effects.<br />
Construction would have some<br />
overlap with the BEL, and<br />
could have cumulative effects<br />
for air emissions and noise.<br />
Because the project is replacing<br />
older tanks, there will be no<br />
additional cumulative effects<br />
from operations.<br />
Construction could be<br />
concurrent with the BEL if<br />
funding is approved in the next<br />
year. Operations would be<br />
concurrent and nearby and<br />
have potential cumulative<br />
effects.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 51
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Project<br />
Name/Status<br />
Jenkins Armed<br />
<strong>Force</strong>s Reserve<br />
Center (BRAC)<br />
Construction to be<br />
completed in 2009.<br />
National Defense<br />
Technology Center<br />
(NDTC)<br />
On hold.<br />
Description<br />
The closure of the Jenkins Armed <strong>Force</strong>s<br />
Reserve Center in Albuquerque, and the<br />
transfer of between 24 and 36 permanent<br />
positions to <strong>Kirtland</strong> and a 114,000 square<br />
foot construction project on east side<br />
approximately 10 miles from BEL and<br />
CDL sites, near Pennsylvania & Wyoming.<br />
Majority of personnel movements are on<br />
weekends.<br />
The AFRL has lowered the priority for<br />
construction of the NDTC, and will not<br />
begin construction for the foreseeable<br />
future.<br />
Potential to Coincide in<br />
Time and Space<br />
(Projects with potential<br />
cumulative effects are bold)<br />
Construction may have a brief<br />
overlap with the BEL. Although<br />
this project is on the east side of<br />
the base, it is a sizeable<br />
construction project and could<br />
have cumulative effects with the<br />
BEL on socioeconomics and air<br />
quality.<br />
Since this project is on indefinite<br />
hold, cumulative impacts cannot<br />
be assessed. Construction would<br />
be after completion of the BEL.<br />
Antenna Farm<br />
After construction of<br />
the BEL<br />
Relocation of<br />
correctional<br />
functions to Marine<br />
Corps <strong>Air</strong> Station<br />
(MCAS) Miramar<br />
(BRAC)<br />
Scheduled for FY10<br />
<strong>Air</strong>craft from<br />
Cannon AFB<br />
(BRAC)<br />
To be completed by<br />
2011<br />
Antenna farm to support activities of the<br />
BEL, expected to be located in the<br />
southern part of <strong>Kirtland</strong>, several miles<br />
from the BEL.<br />
This BRAC action will relocate the<br />
correctional functions from <strong>Kirtland</strong> to<br />
MCAS-Miramar, consolidating various<br />
functions. Approximately 13 positions will<br />
relocate. There is no construction or<br />
demolition associated with this relocation.<br />
The 150 th Fighter Wing will gain three to<br />
six Block 30 F-16 aircraft from Cannon<br />
AFB, NM. No new facilities or personnel.<br />
There will probably be no new sorties<br />
flown, though there could be a small<br />
increase.<br />
Construction would be after BEL<br />
construction. Operations are too<br />
distant from BEL to have<br />
cumulative impacts.<br />
No construction or demolition is<br />
part of this project. Operations<br />
could have cumulative effects<br />
with BEL on socioeconomics.<br />
No construction is part of this<br />
project. Operations of aircraft<br />
could have potential cumulative<br />
effects with BEL on noise and<br />
emissions.<br />
4.2 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS<br />
In general, actions that are occurring on the west side are more likely to have cumulative<br />
impacts with the BEL. The minor impacts found from the construction and operations of<br />
the BEL are ones that are not affected by, and do not affect, projects at a distance. The<br />
Jenkins Armed <strong>Force</strong>s Reserve Center (east side project) was considered because it is a<br />
Page 52 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
larger project. Projects that do not occur at the same time as the BEL would not have<br />
cumulative impacts where the impacts are from construction.<br />
A summary of the potential cumulative impacts associated with the construction and<br />
operation of the BEL and other projects is presented below.<br />
4.2.1 LAND USE<br />
The BEL would have no impacts on land use, so there are no potential cumulative effects<br />
with other actions.<br />
4.2.2 VISUAL RESOURCES<br />
The construction of the BEL would cause short-term, minor, negative impacts. There could<br />
be a time overlap with the construction of the CDL if funding is approved in the next year.<br />
Any other construction projects are not close enough to be visible at the same time as the<br />
BEL, and would not affect visual resources. The cumulative effects with the CDL from<br />
construction are nevertheless expected to be insignificant. As noted in Section 3.3.2, the<br />
construction equipment is separated from facilities to the south by a parking lot for the BEL<br />
site and a water tower for the CDL site. The Bioenvironmental Engineering building<br />
between the sites would be more visually impacted. However, the impacts are temporary<br />
and minimal as there are few windows facing the construction area. Persons walking in the<br />
area are primarily walking to and from the Bioenvironmental Engineering building, and<br />
impacts to visual resources would be for only sort periods of time.<br />
These effects would also be offset by the permanent, positive benefits to the visual<br />
resources of the area. The area is currently bare earth, weeds, and trees that have reached<br />
the end of their lives, which would be improved by the BEL and CDL buildings and<br />
landscaping.<br />
4.2.3 AIR QUALITY<br />
Construction is expected to generate short-term, insignificant, negative impacts from<br />
equipment operation. Other projects that will coincide in time and space for construction<br />
include the bulk fuel storage tanks, the construction of the CDL, and the construction of the<br />
Jenkins AFRC. The offload facility for the bulk fuel storage tanks will be completed before<br />
construction for the BEL. Tank construction work is ongoing, but intermittent. Construction<br />
of the CDL would probably occur after BEL construction, but there could be some overlap.<br />
Construction of the Jenkins AFRC could have an overlap with the BEL of several months,<br />
but the Jenkins AFRC will be finished before CDL construction begins, and is<br />
approximately 10 miles from the BEL. The potential emissions and fugitive dust from<br />
construction equipment are minimal when compared to permitted levels for <strong>Kirtland</strong>, and<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 53
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
even when considered with emissions from the CDL, Jenkins AFRC, and bulk fuel tank<br />
project, are still considered insignificant.<br />
Operations would cause permanent, negative impacts from heating and laboratory<br />
operations, expected to be about 100 pounds per year in emissions, plus possibly 400<br />
pounds per year in emissions from the standby generator, if needed. Other actions with<br />
potential ongoing air emissions include beddown of the CV-22 and CSAR-X aircraft, the<br />
CDL, Corrosion Control Facility, and aircraft from Cannon AFB. Emissions from CV-22,<br />
CSAR-X, and Cannon AFB aircraft are expected to be negligible because there are no new<br />
sorties expected from these actions. Even if sorties do increase, BEL emissions will occur at<br />
ground level and emissions from sorties will occur at higher altitudes, so the emissions will<br />
occur at different locations and have different air dispersal patterns. Emissions from the<br />
CDL are expected to be minimal. The Corrosion Control Facility will have a good emission<br />
control system on the facility, and emissions were dispersion modeled to sensitive and<br />
offsite receptors as part of the permit application to make sure ambient air quality standards<br />
would not be exceeded.<br />
Moreover, actual emissions from activities at <strong>Kirtland</strong> are much lower than current<br />
permitted values, and the air quality has improved in Bernalillo County in recent years. The<br />
emissions from the Proposed Action are negligible, so that when considered with these<br />
other projects, are not expected to have significant cumulative impacts on air quality.<br />
4.2.4 NOISE<br />
The construction and operation of the BEL is in a developed area, outside of the 65 dBA<br />
day-night level. The closest residences are separated from the site by streets with associated<br />
traffic and noise.<br />
Construction is expected to generate short-term, insignificant, negative noise impacts from<br />
equipment operation. Other projects that could coincide in time and space for construction<br />
include the bulk fuel storage tanks and the construction of the CDL. The construction<br />
related to the bulk fuels project is too far away to have cumulative effects with the BEL.<br />
Construction of the CDL would probably occur after BEL construction, but there could be<br />
some overlap. Although the Bioenvironmental Engineering building is between the BEL<br />
and CDL sites, personnel working in the Bioenvironmental Engineering and other office<br />
buildings work inside the buildings, which would provide buffering from noise. Personnel<br />
walking to and from the Bioenvironmental Engineering building would have only<br />
occasional exposure to these noise levels, which would not be significant.<br />
Other actions with potential ongoing noise impacts include beddown of the CV-22 and<br />
CSAR-X aircraft, the CDL, and aircraft from Cannon AFB. No new sorties are expected<br />
Page 54 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
from the CV-22, CSAR-X, and Cannon AFB actions, although the Cannon AFB aircraft (F-<br />
16s) have a loud noise signature. There are no noise-sensitive activities, such as schools,<br />
daycare, or hospitals that are close enough to the site to be affected by BEL operations in<br />
combination with aircraft.<br />
Noise impacts from the construction and operation of the CDL are expected to be minimal.<br />
The vacuum pumps at the BEL would be outside the building, and would be enclosed by<br />
walls to provide noise attenuation for both inside and outside the building. Thus, the<br />
cumulative impacts of the BEL and other actions are not considered significant.<br />
4.2.5 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES<br />
The BEL and CDL sites are in an area that is developed and has been heavily disturbed by<br />
grading and demolition activities, and very little vegetation or wildlife is in the area.<br />
Other projects that could coincide in time and space for construction include the<br />
construction of the CDL. Construction of the CDL would probably occur after BEL<br />
construction, but there could be some overlap. Although there are no burrowing owl nests<br />
currently located on either the BEL or the CDL sites, the owls do vary their nesting sites<br />
from year to year. During construction, there is the possibility that a nest could be<br />
disturbed. <strong>Kirtland</strong> has standard mitigation procedures in conformance with the Migratory<br />
Bird Treaty Act, should it be necessary to relocate an owl during any construction project.<br />
Because of the lack of owl presence, and mitigation procedures in place, the Proposed<br />
Action would not result in cumulative impacts when combined with other projects.<br />
Other projects that could coincide in time and space for potential impacts on biological<br />
resources from operations include the operation of the CDL. The proposed sites for the<br />
BEL and CDL are in developed areas, which are not suitable for quality wildlife habitat. In<br />
addition, the current state of the sites is not conducive to either vegetation or wildlife.<br />
Although construction of the BEL and CDL will permanently replace the dirt with hard<br />
structures and pavement, the area will also be landscaped, which will be an improvement<br />
over both of the present sites. Overall, due to the current status of both sites and their<br />
locations in a developed area, cumulative impacts to the biological resources of the area<br />
would be insignificant.<br />
4.2.6 WATER RESOURCES<br />
The impacts from both construction and operations on water resources are insignificant.<br />
The site is level, and in a previously disturbed, and developed area. Any erosion during<br />
construction would be mitigated by SWPPP measures, so that runoff would not impact<br />
other sites, projects, or waterways. Therefore, there are no cumulative impacts expected on<br />
water resources from construction.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 55
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Overall water use on <strong>Kirtland</strong> has been decreasing in recent years. Any minimal increases<br />
in water usage from the BEL and other actions would be more than offset by the aggressive<br />
water conservation efforts in place, which has resulted in reductions of over 30% in the last<br />
ten years (see Section 3.62 above). As a result, there would be no significant cumulative<br />
impacts on water resources.<br />
There is the potential for cumulative effects from diminished groundwater recharged from<br />
multiple construction projects throughout <strong>Kirtland</strong>. In some cases, such as the Jenkins<br />
AFRC (occupying approximately 14 acres), retention basins are required to allow water to<br />
be retained on site and percolate back to the groundwater. The BEL site would be evaluated<br />
to see if a water retention basin would be appropriate, although it occupies a relatively<br />
small site (six acres).<br />
4.2.7 TRANSPORTATION<br />
The construction and operations of the BEL would cause minor, permanent, negative<br />
effects to the traffic flow in the area. Other actions with potential construction impacts to<br />
transportation include construction of the CDL. Construction vehicles for both of these<br />
projects would use a separate gate, <strong>Kirtland</strong> Gate. Further, the contractor for both projects<br />
would likely leave most equipment onsite during the project duration.<br />
The CDL operations are already on the west side; the operations are merely being<br />
consolidated into one building, so the CDL action would not affect the current traffic influx<br />
at the gates. Therefore, the increases in traffic from the BEL are not expected to have<br />
significant cumulative effects when combined with other actions.<br />
4.2.8 UTILITIES<br />
Current water resource systems including water supply and sanitary sewer are currently<br />
sufficient to accommodate growth and new facilities on base. <strong>Kirtland</strong> periodically<br />
upgrades utilities, including water storage and sanitary sewer systems.<br />
Other actions with potential ongoing impacts to utilities for both construction and<br />
operations include the CDL and Jenkins AFRC. The BEL project would include installation<br />
of a substation, which would meet the electrical needs of both the BEL and CDL projects.<br />
All other utilities are sufficient for all projects, so cumulative effects would not be<br />
significant.<br />
Page 56 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
4.2.9 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OR TOXIC SUBSTANCES/HEALTH<br />
AND SAFETY<br />
The BEL could cause permanent, negative impacts from the hazardous and toxic substances<br />
used in the laboratories. Nearly all of the chemicals used are purchased and used in<br />
quantities less than 1 kg. Inert and combustible gases have been purchased and used in<br />
quantities of 10,000 kg spread out over several years. All of the chemicals are expected to<br />
have a minimal impact.<br />
Other actions with potential ongoing impacts to health and safety for both construction and<br />
operations include the CDL. For both actions, all hazardous materials would be managed in<br />
accordance with <strong>Kirtland</strong>’s Hazardous Materials Management directives for both<br />
construction and operations, including purchase, storage, and handling procedures and<br />
policies. Moreover, any potential health and safety hazards from the BEL are limited to the<br />
site itself. Therefore, the activities of the Proposed Action, when combined with other<br />
projects, would not create a public hazard or pose health risks or otherwise create<br />
significant cumulative impacts.<br />
4.2.10 SOCIOECONOMICS<br />
The construction and operations of the BEL would have minor, short-term and permanent,<br />
positive impacts on the economy of the region of interest, Bernalillo County.<br />
Other actions with potential ongoing impacts to socioeconomics for both construction and<br />
operations include the CDL, Jenkins AFRC, and the relocation of correctional personnel to<br />
MCAS Miramar. The relocation of personnel to MCAS Miramar is expected to only affect<br />
13 positions, and would have the opposite effect of the Proposed Action. The Jenkins<br />
AFRC action would also have a positive impact on the economy from construction.<br />
Because the action involves relocation of the activity within greater Albuquerque, it does<br />
not affect the socioeconomics on an ongoing basis. Therefore, any cumulative impacts from<br />
the Proposed Action and other actions would either offset negative impacts from other<br />
projects, or create more positive impacts.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 57
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Section 5 List of People Consulted,<br />
Reviewers, and Preparers<br />
This Environmental Assessment was prepared for and under the direction of the AFRL at<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB by Clover Leaf Environmental Solutions, Inc. The people consulted and<br />
technical reviewers are listed below in Table 5-1, followed by the list of people primarily<br />
responsible for preparing this report in Table 5-2.<br />
Table 5-1. List of People Consulted and Reviewers<br />
Evelyn Watkins, Ph.D.<br />
NEPA Program Manager<br />
377 MSG/CEVQ<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Valerie Renner<br />
Cultural Resources Management<br />
377 MSG/CEVQ<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Kent M. Friedrichsen<br />
Safety, Environmental, and Facilities Engineer<br />
Civ AFRL/VSOI<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Peter A. Broussard<br />
Real Property Business Developer<br />
Contr AFRL/VSOI<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Jennifer L. Dann<br />
Chief, Compliance Section<br />
Civ 377 MSG/CEVC<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Joel B. Mozer<br />
Civ. AFRL/VSBX<br />
Hanscom AFB<br />
Edward J. Lee<br />
BRAC Coordinator<br />
Civ, AFRL/VSOSF<br />
Hanscom AFB<br />
Donna K. Dunn<br />
<strong>Base</strong> Community Planner<br />
Contr 377 MSG/CECE<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Michael D. Gallegos, R.A.<br />
Chief, Infrastructure Management Branch<br />
AFRL/VSOI<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Brian D. Griffith, Maj. USAF<br />
AFRL/VSBY<br />
Hanscom AFB<br />
Michael W. Howell<br />
Senior Facility Engineer<br />
AFRL/VSOI<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
William V. Sayner<br />
377 MSG/CECE<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Page 58 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Carol A. Finley<br />
Civ 377 MSG/CEVQ<br />
Natural Resources Program Manager<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
John S. Pike<br />
Civ 377 MSG/CEVC<br />
Chief, Environmental Compliance Section<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Charles D. Crutchfield<br />
377 ABW/SEW<br />
Safety Officer<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Ron Lamb<br />
Conservation and Planning<br />
engineering-environmental Management, Inc.<br />
(e 2 M)<br />
Cassie D. Ringham-Chavez<br />
Civ AFRL/VSOI<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Deana DiGesu<br />
Contr 377 MSG/CECE<br />
Program Specialist<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Victoria Martinez<br />
Industrial Hygienist<br />
377 AMDS/SGPB<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Michael Moran<br />
Conservation and Planning<br />
engineering-environmental Management, Inc.<br />
(e 2 M)<br />
Table 5-2. List of Preparers<br />
Name Education/Experience Role in Preparing Document<br />
Mattie Allen<br />
Cynthia Brown<br />
Elaine Cappucci<br />
M.S. Environment Sciences<br />
B.S. Biology<br />
10 years Natural and Cultural<br />
Resources<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
M.S. Earth and Planetary Science<br />
B.A. Geology<br />
18 years Regulatory Compliance<br />
and Pollution Prevention<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
M.S. Environmental Management<br />
B.A. Biology<br />
11 years NEPA EIS and EA<br />
development<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
Project Manager, Cultural<br />
Resources, Technical Review<br />
EA Preparation<br />
Socioeconomics and<br />
Transportation; Technical<br />
Review<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 59
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Name Education/Experience Role in Preparing Document<br />
Susan Gregory<br />
Angela Kirkman<br />
Robert Frei<br />
Dennis Peek<br />
Gina von Damm<br />
B.S. Environmental Engineering<br />
10 years Environmental consulting,<br />
air analysis, NEPA<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Consulting, Inc.<br />
B.S. Chemical Engineering<br />
12 years air analysis<br />
Present Energies, LLC<br />
B.S. Biology<br />
9 years biological surveys, plans<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
M.A. Political Science<br />
B.S. Mechanical Engineering<br />
18 years environmental consulting,<br />
GIS<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
M.S Geology<br />
B.S. Geology<br />
8 years environmental consulting,<br />
GIS<br />
Clover Leaf Environmental<br />
Solutions, Inc.<br />
<strong>Air</strong> Analysis and Hazardous and<br />
Toxic Substances<br />
<strong>Air</strong> Analysis<br />
Biological Assessment<br />
Site surveys, photo development<br />
Map development<br />
Page 60 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Section 6 References<br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Center for Environmental Excellence 2004. ProAct FactSheet – Title V<br />
Operating Permit Program. August 2000-TI#21902.<br />
Albuquerque Public Schools, Fall, 2004. Public Presentation, Albuquerque Public Schools<br />
Capital Master Plan. 2006-2011 Capital Strategy. Available online:<br />
.<br />
AEHD 2000. Albuquerque 2000 Progress Report, <strong>Air</strong> Quality. Albuquerque/Bernalillo<br />
County, New Mexico.<br />
Bernalillo County, <strong>2007</strong>. Bernalillo County New Mexico website. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Department of Commerce, <strong>2007</strong>. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Canter, L.W. 1996. Environmental Impact Assessment 2d ed. McGraw-Hill Inc.<br />
CEQ 1997. Considering Cumulative Effects Under the NEPA. CEQ. January 1997.<br />
City of Albuquerqe, Official City Website, <strong>2007</strong>. Parks Department. Available online:<br />
.<br />
CFRs. National Archives and Records Administration Electronic CFR 2003. Retrieved<br />
<strong>September</strong> 24, 2006. Available online: .<br />
DOE, <strong>2007</strong>. Presidential Awards for Leadership in Federal Energy Management for Water<br />
Conservation for a Small Group. [Note: water conservation data was taken from the<br />
award package; presentation of the award will be by DOE November 1, <strong>2007</strong>.]<br />
EPA 1996. Federal Register Environmental Documents: Approval and Promulgation of<br />
Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for <strong>Air</strong> Quality Planning Purposes;<br />
State of New Mexico; Approval of the Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance<br />
Program, Emissions Inventory, and Maintenance Plan; Redesignation to<br />
Attainment; Albuquerque/Bernalillo County, New Mexico; CO. Accessed 5/2004.<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 61
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
Available online: .<br />
EPA 2006. <strong>Air</strong>Data. 2001 Tier Emissions Report for Criteria <strong>Air</strong> Pollutants, Bernalillo<br />
County. NM Emission Inventory. Accessed June 2006. Available online:<br />
.<br />
EPA 2003. EPA Publications. “Good Up High Bad Nearby” Office of <strong>Air</strong> and Radiation.<br />
EPA-451/K-03-001 June 2003. .<br />
EPA 2004. <strong>Air</strong> and Radiation. National Ambient <strong>Air</strong> Quality Standards. Accessed 7/04.<br />
.<br />
Executive Orders. US National Archives and Records Administration Federal Register<br />
2003. Executive Orders Disposition Tables. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Federal Register 2003. EPA. Final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System<br />
General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities. Vol. 68,<br />
No. 126, p. 39087-39091.<br />
Finley, C. <strong>2007</strong>. <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB Natural Resources Manager. Personal communication with<br />
Rob Frei of Clover Leaf about the current locations of burrowing owls at <strong>Kirtland</strong><br />
AFB. June.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB <strong>2007</strong>. Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan for <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong><br />
<strong>Base</strong>, Albuquerque, NM, April <strong>2007</strong>.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB 2006. <strong>Base</strong> Information. <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB <strong>Base</strong> Information. Available online:<br />
. Last accessed 9/29/2005.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB 2002. <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB Comprehensive General Plan. <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB, New<br />
Mexico.<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB 1999. CAA Transportation Intermodel Study. Phase I Traffic Analysis<br />
Report. April 30, 1999.<br />
Mid-Region Council of Governments, New Mexico. <strong>2007</strong>. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Page 62 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Mid-Region Council of Governments 2003. 2025 Metropolitan Transportation Plan for the<br />
Albuquerque Metropolitan Planning Area.<br />
New Mexico Department of Game and Fish 2004. Biota Information system of New<br />
Mexico (BISON-M) database. http://fwie.fw.vt.edu/states/nm.htm.<br />
New Mexico Department of Labor 2005. New Mexico Employment Statistics. Quarterly<br />
Census of Employment and Wages. Bernalillo County. First Quarter and Second<br />
Quarter 2004. Available online: .<br />
New Mexico Natural Heritage Program (NMNHP) 2003. NMNHP Species Information for<br />
Bernalillo County. Updated 7 November 2003. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Accessed 26 April 2004<br />
The official site of the NMAC, The Commission of Public Records Administrative Law<br />
Division. Available online: .<br />
Transportation Research Board 2000. Highway Capacity Manual. National Research<br />
Council, Washington, D.C.<br />
US Department of Health and Human Services, <strong>2007</strong>. Health Resources and Services<br />
Information. Available online: .<br />
USAF <strong>2007</strong>. USAF <strong>Air</strong> Conformity Applicability Model 4.3.3. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Center for<br />
Environmental Excellence Brooks AFB, Texas.<br />
USAF <strong>2007</strong>. Final 2005 <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB Emissions Inventory. <strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB Environmental<br />
Management Division, 377 ABW, Albuquerque, New Mexico.<br />
USAF 2006. USAF <strong>Air</strong> Conformity Applicability Model 4.3.0. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Center for<br />
Environmental Excellence. Brooks AFB, Texas.<br />
USAF, 2005b. <strong>Kirtland</strong> <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong> Economic Impact Statement FY 2005. Available<br />
online: .<br />
US Census Bureau, State and County Quick Facts, City of Albuquerque and Bernalillo<br />
County. <strong>2007</strong>. Available online: .<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 63
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
US Office of Personnel Management. <strong>2007</strong>. Salary and Wage Tables <strong>2007</strong>. Available<br />
online: .<br />
United States Fish and Wildlife Service 2006. Species Information Threatened and<br />
Endangered Animals and Plants. Available online:<br />
.<br />
Page 64 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Section 7 Acronyms and<br />
Abbreviations<br />
ADT<br />
AEHD<br />
AFB<br />
AFRL<br />
BEL<br />
BRAC<br />
Btu<br />
C3ISR<br />
CAA<br />
CDL<br />
CEQ<br />
CFR<br />
CO<br />
COCHISE<br />
CRM<br />
dB<br />
dBA<br />
DNL<br />
DoD<br />
DOE<br />
DRMO<br />
EA<br />
EPA<br />
EPCRA<br />
FY<br />
GHz<br />
GPS<br />
Average Daily Traffic<br />
Albuquerque Environmental Health Department<br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> <strong>Base</strong><br />
<strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong> Research Laboratory<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
<strong>Base</strong> Realignment and Closure<br />
British thermal unit<br />
Command, Control, Communications, Intelligence,<br />
Surveillance and Reconnaissance<br />
Clean <strong>Air</strong> Act<br />
Component Development Laboratory<br />
Council on Environmental Quality<br />
Code of Federal Regulations<br />
carbon monoxide<br />
Cold Chemiexcitation Infrared Stimulation Experiment<br />
Cultural Resource Manager<br />
decibel<br />
A-weighted decibel<br />
Day-night level<br />
Department of Defense<br />
Department of Energy<br />
Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office<br />
Environmental Assessment<br />
Environmental Protection Agency<br />
Emergency Planning & Community Right to Know Act<br />
Fiscal Year<br />
gigahertz<br />
Global Positioning System<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 65
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
HAPs<br />
HAZMAT<br />
HMMP<br />
HW<br />
IAP<br />
kg<br />
km<br />
KTP<br />
kv<br />
kW<br />
LABCEDE<br />
LIDAR<br />
MAPM<br />
MCAS<br />
MHz<br />
MSA<br />
MSDS<br />
MVA<br />
MWLT<br />
NAAQS<br />
NDTA<br />
NDTC<br />
NEPA<br />
NM<br />
NMAC<br />
NO X<br />
O 3<br />
NPDES<br />
PCL<br />
PJ/CRO<br />
PM<br />
PM 2.5<br />
Hazardous <strong>Air</strong> Pollutants<br />
hazardous materials<br />
Hazardous Materials Management Plan<br />
hazardous waste<br />
Initial Accumulation Point<br />
kilogram<br />
kilometer<br />
<strong>Kirtland</strong> Technology Park<br />
kilovolt<br />
kilowatt<br />
Laboratory Cryogenic Energy Division<br />
Light Detection and Ranging<br />
Mobile Atmospheric Pollutant Mapping<br />
Marine Corps <strong>Air</strong> Station<br />
megahertz<br />
Metropolitan Statistical Area<br />
Material Safety Data Sheet<br />
Megavolt-ampere<br />
Multiple Wavelength LIDAR Trailer<br />
National Ambient <strong>Air</strong> Quality Standards<br />
National Defense Technology Auditorium<br />
National Defense Technology Center<br />
National Environmental Policy Act<br />
New Mexico<br />
New Mexico Administrative Code<br />
oxides of nitrogen<br />
ozone<br />
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System<br />
Plasma Chemistry Laboratory<br />
Parajumper/Combat Rescue Office<br />
Particulate Matter<br />
Particulate matter ≤2.5 microns in diameter<br />
Page 66 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
PM 10<br />
PNM<br />
ROI<br />
SARA<br />
sf<br />
SCIF<br />
SCL<br />
SHPO<br />
SOW<br />
SOx<br />
SPL<br />
SWPPP<br />
tpy<br />
U.S.<br />
VOC<br />
VS<br />
VSB<br />
USAF<br />
USFWS<br />
USGS<br />
Particulate matter ≤10 microns in diameter<br />
Public Service Company of New Mexico<br />
Region of Influence<br />
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act<br />
square feet<br />
Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility<br />
Space Chemistry Laboratory<br />
State Historic Preservation Office<br />
Special Operations Wing<br />
oxides of sulfur<br />
Space Particles Lab<br />
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan<br />
tons per year<br />
United States<br />
volatile organic compound<br />
Space Vehicles Directorate<br />
Battlespace Environment Division<br />
U.S. <strong>Air</strong> <strong>Force</strong><br />
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service<br />
U.S. Geological Survey<br />
<strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong> Page 67
<strong>Kirtland</strong> AFB<br />
Final Environmental Assessment<br />
This Page Intentionally Left Blank<br />
Page 68 <strong>September</strong> <strong>2007</strong>
AFRL<br />
Battlespace Environment Laboratory<br />
Appendix A<br />
Letter to State Historic Preservation Office