SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact StatementThe SBCT might use MMR if the range were available following completion ofthe Makua FEIS and ROD for use of that range.8. How can the Army justify basing the 2/25 th SBCT in Hawaii when the DEIS shows that Hawaiihas more significant effects than either the Alaska or Colorado alternatives?Response: The Army must balance environmental impacts and other considerations in determiningits stationing decision. These other factors include training and operationalrequirements, training ranges, maneuver lands, deployment operationfacilities, maintenance and garrison operations facilities, Soldier andFamily quality of life, and strategic location and deployment capability. Theseconsiderations are described in Section 1.2.1 of the FEIS and will be discussedin detail in the ROD.9. Will you supply more compete data, especially in Chapter 5. Data on the effects of soils erosion,effects of Stryker movements on the roads, cost analyses of all alternatives, contaminationof streams, cumulative effects seem incomplete.Response: The information provided in Chapter 5 of this EIS is adequate for the Armydecision makers to decide on the permanent home station of the 2/25 th . ThisEIS supplements a detailed site-specific analysis was conducted for Hawaiiand completed in 2004 that has been updated to reflect current conditions andprojected impacts.10. The analysis of the effects for the IBCT that would come to Hawaii under alternatives B andC is insufficient. Effects of stationing the 4/25 th IBCT or the 4/4 th IBCT in Hawaii should befully evaluated in this EIS to provide a complete picture of the effects at all locations. Thisincludes the additional facilities and commensurate increase in training days, ammunition expended,and maneuver impact miles that would be required in Hawaii to accommodate theIBCT. The DEIS ignores the potential effects of the addition of 400 soldiers and their familieswould have on housing, schools, traffic, and so forth. The DEIS states that the exchangewould involve implementing 11 training range and training support infrastructure constructionprojects but fails to provide any meaningful discussion of the effects of these projects.Also, the DEIS does not consider or evaluate the additional facilities that the 4/25 th IBCTwould require because it is an airborne unit (rigging facilities, airborne deployment facilities,and parachute training areas and drop zones).Response: The discussion of the effects for the IBCT that would come to Hawaii under AlternativesB and C has been updated.11. The EIS should disclose a backup plan in case no permanent station is ready to receive the2/25 th SBCT upon its return from tour in 2008.Response: The three alternatives evaluated in this EIS are the only reasonable alternativesthat the Army could implement to meet the purpose and need for the permanentstationing of the 2/25 th SBCT. Currently, the Army anticipates the returnof the 2/25 th SBCT from deployment in early 2009.12. The DEIS states that decisions regarding transformation, national security strategy, and otherdecisions made in the NSS, NDS, and QDR are not revisited in the document. Were EISsdone for these?February 2008 D–6 2/25th SBCT Final EIS