SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

CHAPTER 2DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTIONAND ALTERNATIVES2.1 INTRODUCTIONThis chapter describes the Proposed Action and several different alternatives for implementing theProposed Action that are evaluated by the Army in this EIS. The Purpose and Need described inChapter 1 sets forth a rational context in which to analyze the viability of alternatives. The Purposeand Need, while setting necessary elements, allows consideration of several sites for home stationingthe 2/25 th SBCT. Based on the stated Purpose and Need, Chapter 2 identifies more detailed selectioncriteria to assess whether a proposed site is a “reasonable” alternative that will be carried forward forfull evaluation in the EIS.After reviewing several potential Army installations, three alternatives for implementing the ProposedAction have been identified by the Army as reasonable alternatives capable of meeting the Army’sneed criteria described in Chapter 1 and screening criteria described in this chapter. These alternativesand the No Action Alternative are carried forward for evaluation throughout the remainder of thedocument. Alternatives for the Proposed Action include: (1) permanently stationing the 2/25 th SBCTat Schofield Barracks Military Reservation (SBMR) while conducting required training at militarytraining sites in Hawaii; (2) permanently stationing the 2/25 th SBCT at Fort Richardson while conductingrequired training at military training sites in Alaska; and (3) permanently stationing the 2/25 thSBCT at Fort Carson while conducting required training at military training sites in Colorado. Thischapter also describes the No Action Alternative to serve as a baseline to assess and consider the impactsof action alternatives.In addition to presenting the Army’s screening process for arriving at the three reasonable action alternativescarried forward, this section provides the rationale for those alternatives that were eliminatedfrom detailed consideration. An element common to selecting either the U.S. Army Alaska(USARAK) or Colorado as an alternative is that the USAG-HI would home-station and train theIBCT that is currently stationed at those places. The need for this BCT exchange is explained in Section2.4. Therefore, the comparative environmental effects associated with stationing and training eitherunit in Hawaii are considered in Chapters 4 and 5.2.2 PROPOSED ACTIONThe Army’s Proposed Action is to home station the 2/25 th permanently in a location that meets nationalsecurity and defense policy guidance, provides for SBCT training and operational requirements,provides a high quality of life for the 2/25 th Soldiers and their Families, and facilitates therapid deployment of the SBCT to uphold U.S. security objectives and interests. 11If the 2/25 th SBCT were permanently stationed in Colorado or Alaska, it is likely that it would be renamed and the unit exchangingback to Hawaii would likely pick up designation as the 2/25 th IBCT. The 25 th Infantry Division headquarters is inHawaii and provides command and control functions of a divisional headquarters to BCTs in the Pacific.February 2008 2–1 2/25th SBCT Final EIS