SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental Consequencesreasonably foreseeable future actions in time or space. Without any overlap of impacts, cumulativeeffects are expected to be less than significant.5.6.1.13 EnergyIndividually, Alternative A is expected to result in less than significant impacts to the energy. Anumber of other projects would contribute cumulative impacts in or near the range and cantonmentprojects, as well as live-fire and maneuver training, would proceed as needed at the Armyinstallations. Impacts to energy use and costs could be significant but continued implementation ofenergy conservation measures would reduce these impacts to less than significant. Cumulativeimpacts to energy for Alternative A would also be less than significant.5.6.1.14 FacilitiesIndividually, Alternative A is expected to result in less than significant impacts to the facilities inHawaii. A number of other projects would contribute cumulative impacts in or near the range andcantonment projects, as well as live-fire and maneuver training, and would proceed as needed at theArmy installations. Cumulative impacts to facilities for Alternative A would be less than significant.5.6.2 Alternative B − Permanently Station The 2/25 th SBCT at Fort RichardsonWhile Conducting Required Training at Military Training Sites in AlaskaThe cumulative impact analysis for Alternative B 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. Reasonably foreseeable future actions for Alaska vary between theAnchorage area in south-central Alaska (FRA) and interior Alaska (DTA).The Army is preparing an environmental impact statement to assess the potential impacts associatedwith the resumption of year-round live-fire weapons training at Fort Richardson’s Eagle River Flatsimpact area (ERF). The successful cleanup of white-phosphorus-contaminated sediment over the lastten years has resulted in an opportunity for the Army to resume year-round use of the impact area.This area is currently available only during the winter when ice is of sufficient thickness to preventsediment disturbance due to use of high explosive mortar or artillery munitions. Increased use ofERF due either to this expanded training year or the stationing of the 2/25 th SBCT will likely result inadditional impacts that are expected to be less than significant.In south-central Alaska, about 10 past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions wereidentified for the FRA area. They include management of Nike Site Summit, USARAK Mission-Essential Projects, other military projects:• Cantonment Area Projects at Fort Richardson• Rapid Deployment Facility (completed)• Ammunition Supply Point Upgrade (completed)• Whole Barracks Renewal (completed)• Range Upgrade and Expansion Projects at Fort Richardson (completed)• Mission Operations on Urbanized Terrain (MOUT)• Sniper Range (completed)February 2008 5-256 2/25th SBCT Final EIS