10.07.2015 Views

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 5 – Environmental ConsequencesContinuation of the Operational Range Assessment Program (ORAP) will monitor surface andgroundwater for explosive residues.Wildfire Management. New ranges would be operated, some of which would support live-firetraining. Nonlive-fire activities can still ignite wildfires, and transportation of personnel and ordnancein areas not currently <strong>us</strong>ed all contribute to the potential to start wildfires. A wildfire could damageanimal and plant communities, damage cultural resources and places of traditional importance,facilitate the spread of invasive plant species, and exacerbate soil erosion by removing vegetation. Byimplementing the IWFMP, the USFWS feels that the Army greatly reduces the chance that listedspecies will be harmed by military training related fires. Even with the implementation of theIWFMP, there remains a risk that a wildfire could result in an irretrievable loss of individuals ofsensitive species or known or unknown cultural resources. The Army has made a conservativedetermination that although the mitigation will considerably reduce wildfire risk, the impacts may notbe reduced to a less than significant level.Cultural Resources. Activities relating to the construction of the necessary ranges and facilities couldresult in destruction, damage, or restricted access to previo<strong>us</strong>ly unknown cultural resources. Impactsto archaeological sites can be avoided or mitigated through compliance with the PA. In accordancewith the PA, if sites cannot be avoided, appropriate mitigation measures that may include datarecovery would be implemented. Mitigation measures would minimize impacts to cultural resources;however, the potential loss of cultural resources is considered a significant impact.Land Use and Recreation. Construction and training activities related to the 4/4th IBCT wouldprimarily be located on land owned by the federal government and within existing Army installations.Both nonlive-fire and live-fire training <strong>us</strong>ing SRTA would increase at KTA. Unauthorized access atKTA may be adversely affected by additional fencing and signs restricting access, which arenecessary due to the proposed live-fire <strong>us</strong>e of the area. Strict adherence to applicable safetyregulations and procedures would continue to protect human health and safety. Access controls wouldbe developed and implemented to ensure the safety of all personnel; and warning signs would beposted on the boundary to prevent unauthorized <strong>us</strong>e/trespass. Mitigation measures listed in the 2004F<strong>EIS</strong> would be implemented. These measures and programs would avoid significant impacts to land<strong>us</strong>e and recreation. Impacts would be less than significant.Traffic and Transportation. Impacts would include increased traffic on public roads as a result oftransporting Soldiers and equipment to training ranges and from construction traffic. As part of thisalternative, 434 additional Soldiers would be stationed at SBMR in addition to several hundredadditional Family members. The 2004 F<strong>EIS</strong> analyzed impacts of a larger population increase andtraffic impacts were determined to be less than significant. The increase in impacts to traffic andtransport resultant from the stationing of the 4/4th is therefore also determined to be less thansignificant. Military vehicle convoys would <strong>us</strong>e existing Army protocols to maintain less thansignificant impacts to public transportation.Socioeconomics. No minority or low-income residences would be displaced by range construction ortraining activities; however, noise and fugitive d<strong>us</strong>t generated from project-related construction ortraining areas could have minor adverse indirect impacts on nearby schools or private residences. Nodisproportionate endangerment of children would occur on or near the installations. Beneficial effectson population, employment, and income, would result from new construction and the resultantincreased expenditures that would stimulate the economy. These beneficial impacts would be lessthan significant beca<strong>us</strong>e the changes would be within the capacity of the ROI to absorb.February 2008 5-188 2/25th <strong>SBCT</strong> <strong>Final</strong> <strong>EIS</strong>

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!