SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact StatementResponse: No EISs were prepared for these documents. The NSS, NDS, and QDR arehigh-level national security policy documents applicable across all militarydepartments and are not major federal actions with the potential to result insignificant impacts on the human environment. In addition, these strategiesand policies do not result in direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts capable ofmeaningful evaluation of value to a decision maker. Their implementationthrough Army Transformation, Army Growth and Restructuring, and installation-specificrealignment and closures under the Base Realignment and Closure2005 law have all been supported by NEPA analyses. Thus, we made nochanges to the EIS in response to this comment.13. Please provide a table that compares the projected increases for all elements of the SBCT andIBCTs under consideration in all locations. The elements include numbers of officers, soldiers,vehicles (by types), weapons, ranges, support facilities, and areal extent of new land.Response: Tables that provide the information requested in this comment are includedthroughout the alternatives discussions in Chapter 2. Please refer to Chapter 2to review the tables.14. On page 1–10, the DEIS states that [Force] requirements must be taken into account when thedecision on where to station the 2/25 th permanently is made…many of these force requirementsare classified. As far as possible, indicate the points at which classified information isinfluencing the decisions.Response: There is no classified information in this EIS that has been used to support thestationing decision for the 2/25 th SBCT.15. On page 2–18, the DEIS states that this EIS does not analyze the training impacts of SBCT atMMR. On page 2–23, it states that all required uses of MMR are being addressed in a separateNEPA document. Is this segmentation? The March 2005 Draft EIS for Military TrainingActivities at MMR indicates training requirements for MMR would increase with the stationingof an SBCT at Schofield Barracks. This DEIS needs to address the direct, indirect, andcumulative effects to MMR that would result from stationing an SBCT or IBCT at SchofieldBarracks and the resumption of military training at MMR.Response: Section 2.5 explains that attainment of operational readiness by the 2/25 th isnot dependent on the use of MMR. While the MMR is an integral part ofUSAG-HI training capabilities and historically used by other services, theunits of the 2/25 th could perform dismounted live-fire training at other ranges.The SBCT might use MMR if the range were available following completion ofthe Makua FEIS and ROD for use of that range. Any potential usage wouldremain within the levels and frequencies described within the MMR EIS whenit is completed. Please note the Makua EIS process is ongoing. The Army believesthis EIS adequately addresses appropriate impacts.16. The DEIS states on page 2–22 that ranges include potentially brigade level live-fire capabilityat PTA. Where are the impacts of this analyzed in the document?Response: The DEIS indicated that the SBCT could potentially conduct live-fire exercisesat the brigade level. However, there is no training requirement to do so andthe Army does not project that the SBCT would ever conduct a live-fire exer-February 2008 D–7 2/25th SBCT Final EIS