SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesproductivity or physical condition at the PCMS (Gerlach and Vaughan 1990). Direct impacts to swiftfox (Vulpes velox) caused by military training are minimal. Overall degradation of shortgrass prairiehabitat on a large enough scale would likely result in a localized decline in swift fox populations(USFWS 1991).Many raptors are intolerant of high levels of human activity, especially during the nesting season(April through June). Some species of raptors can habituate to high levels of human activity. Shorttermimpacts to raptors from military training on the PCMS have been documented, including nestingfailures, lowered nesting success, displacement, and changes in wintering distribution and behavior(Andersen et al. 1990 and Fyfe and Olendorff 1976).Impacts to wildlife and most wildlife habitat loss would be less than significant and temporary;therefore, no specific mitigation is necessary. BMPs for species could be implemented to minimizeimpacts to wildlife.No ImpactsImpacts to Wetlands. No direct impacts to wetlands from maneuver training are anticipated at FTC orPCMS. If future training or construction activities have the potential to affect wetlands, the Armywould coordinate with USACE to assess impacts and mitigation for disturbance of wetland areas.Most direct impacts to wetlands would be avoided, and those that cannot be avoided would bemitigated through the Section 404 process (through complying either with the FTC/PCMS regionalpermit or by applying for coverage under a nationwide permit). Increased maneuver training couldresult in indirect impacts to wetlands from erosion and sedimentation processes in drainages upstreamof the man-made erosion control dams at the PCMS. Sediments could silt in these small wetlands,changing their nature or converting them to upland habitats.5.4.11 Air QualityGeneral Conformity Analysis and visibility assessment apply to all activity groups. GeneralConformity analysis is a process that compares projected emissions with the regulatory threshold andthen, if necessary, demonstrates how an action would conform to the SIP in areas designated as “nonattainment”or “maintenance” for the NAAQS. The analysis is based on the most recent estimates ofemissions, which were developed using the current population, employment, travel, and congestionestimates.If the net increase in emissions for the peak year exceeds the General Conformity de minimis levelsor any milestone year for attainment of standards, additional conformity determination is required.The de minimis level for a CO maintenance area is 100 tpy for each federal action [40 CFR 51.853and 93.153(b)(1)].Alternative C would conform if the net increase in emissions from facility construction and stationarysource operation for the peak year would not exceed the emission limits specified in the SIP inventory[93.158(a)(5)(i)(A)]. The most recent version of the Colorado Springs Area CO Maintenance Planwas adopted by the PPACG in September 2003 and the AQCC in December 2003. This plan extendsthe maintenance year through 2015 and revises the CO emission budget from 270 to 531 tons per dayfor the period 2010 and beyond (APCD 2003).The home stationing of an SBCT at FTC would not generate CO emissions in excess of the GeneralConformity de minimis level of 100 tpy. Visibility is measured by determining the change in lightextinction. As light extinction becomes greater, visibility decreases. If a project contributes greaterFebruary 2008 5-173 2/25th SBCT Final EIS