SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Chapter 5 – Environmental ConsequencesCumulative impacts to air quality for Alternative B are expected to be less than significant.5.6.2.11 NoiseCumulative noise impacts would result from both non-military and military actions in the area. Noisecontributed by the local community includes transportation, construction, and recreation in theAnchorage vicinity.The noise of existing and planned military training include firing and detonation of munitions, lowflyingaircraft, construction activities and general troop maneuvers (both mechanized and pedestrian).Numerous studies have indicated that the introduction of noise into previously undisturbed areas caninitially cause behavioral changes and stress in some species of wildlife. However, over an extendedperiod of time, these effects wane as wildlife becomes accustomed to the recurring disturbance.Observations of wildlife on FRA support this general statement that noise is of little significance.Impact from noise on wildlife to not appear to cause population level impacts (USARAK 2004 and2007).Construction of mission-essential projects at FRA would result in increased noise levels, but theeffect would be short-term and highly localized. There would be no long-term noise effects fromthese projects.Activities by the U.S. Air Force and the Alaska Air National Guard contribute to adverse noise effectsin the Anchorage area, but the effects are mitigated (U.S. Air Force 1995). Elmendorf Air Force Basedoes receive off-post noise complaints (U.S. Air Force 1995).Cumulative noise effects under Alternative B would be significant but mitigable to less thansignificant.5.6.2.12 Airspace ResourcesThe potential exists for cumulative effects to airspace to occur under this alternative. Reasonablyforeseeable future actions identified near FRA and DTA may cause direct and indirect effects thatcould overlap in time and space with the effects of this alternative. Upgrades and expansion atElmendorf AFB near FRA and at DTA and Eielson AFB may result in impacts that could alsocumulatively contribute to airspace effects. If constructed at DTA as planned, the C-17 landing stripwould increase the number of flights in DTA’s airspace, which could affect the use of UAVs duringmaneuver training. In addition, upgrades and expansions are expected for Elmendorf and EielsonAFBs. Depending upon the specifics of these upgrades and expansions, they could cause cumulativeimpacts when their effects are combined with the airspace impacts of this alternative. Appropriatecoordination and planning among the Air Force, Army, and Federal Aviation Administration isexpected to keep any cumulative effects to a level that is less than significant.5.6.2.13 EnergyAlternative B is expected to result in less than significant impacts to energy consumption. Continuedenergy impacts are expected in the areas surrounding USARAK posts as the result of projectedpopulation growth and development. Ongoing USARAK activities, including training and rangeconstruction and expansion, are expected to continue to impact energy resources. A variety of capitalimprovement projects is planned or currently underway on installation cantonment areas. In addition,future range construction and improvement projects are planned on USARAK lands. CumulativeFebruary 2008 5-266 2/25th SBCT Final EIS