SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequences5.5.16.1.2 Impacts from Range ConstructionNo ImpactsUnder this alternative, no construction of new ranges would occur. Therefore, range constructionwould have no impacts on access closures or on subsistence resources.5.5.16.1.3 Impacts from Live-fire TrainingLess Than Significant ImpactsRange use would continue at current levels on each range type. Therefore, no changes are expected inthe frequency and intensity of range use, the amounts of ammunition that would be used, or in thegeneration of UXO and lead contamination on training ranges. Continued use of the live-fire trainingareas would have less than significant impacts on access closures or on subsistence resources.5.5.16.1.4 Impacts from Maneuver TrainingLess Than Significant ImpactsUse of maneuver training areas would continue at current levels. Ongoing use of maneuver trainingareas would continue to affect access closures or on subsistence resources. However, with continuedimplementation of regulatory and administrative mitigation such as ITAM, INRMPs, ecosystemmanagement, and the sustainable range management program, species of plants and wildlife that areof interest for subsistence would continue to be available. Consequently, impacts to subsistence areexpected to be less than significant.5.6 CUMULATIVE IMPACTSThe cumulative impact analyses for the various alternatives focus on impacts on the environmentresulting from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonablyforeseeable future actions. The methodology used for determining cumulative impacts is presented insection 4.2.4.Table 5-68 summarizes and compares the cumulative impacts that are anticipated foreach VEC under each alternative.5.6.1 Alternative A — Permanently Station The 2/25 th SBCT at Schofield BarracksMilitary Reservation While Conducting Required Training at MilitaryTraining Sites in HawaiiThe cumulative impact analysis for Alternative A focuses on impacts on the environment resultingfrom the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonablyforeseeable future actions. Past and present actions are accounted for in the description of the affectedenvironment for each resource. Past actions include the cantonment and range projects identified inthe 2004 EIS that have already been completed. Reasonably foreseeable future actions for Hawaiivary by island. About 40 reasonably foreseeable future actions were identified for the island of Oahuand about 11 were identified for the island of Hawaii. Some of these actions are ongoing projects thatwould continue into the future, whereas others would be discrete projects that would be conducted inthe reasonably foreseeable future.February 2008 5-246 2/25th SBCT Final EIS