SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact StatementResponse: The transformation and BRAC realignment of forces at Fort Carson is a completelyseparate issue from PCMS expansion, as is the Stryker proposal. Theseare not three parts of one improperly segmented action. The actions are notconnected in either time or space in that the transformation and realignmentchanges are occurring now or have already occurred, the decision on the2/25 th SBCT will occur in the near future, and the expansion of PCMS has notbeen proposed and would occur at some point in the distant future only if it isproposed and funded. The actions are also not connected because one does notautomatically trigger the other. The transformation and BRAC realignment activitiesand the 2/25 th SBCT stationing can occur without any expansion ofPCMS. The two projects are not interdependent. As is discussed in the scope ofthe FEIS in Section 1.5, this analysis examines installations in accordancewith their current land holdings. It does not consider the possible expansion ofland holdings at installations.This is not meant to deny that Fort Carson’s Soldiers are experiencing a deficitin training lands as is discussed in the Fort Carson Transformation FEISand displayed in Table 2–10 of this FEIS. To proceed with PCMS expansion,the Army would need to complete a separate NEPA process. No Notice of Intenthas been published for such an EIS.61. The training projections for Fort Carson and PCMS are unrealistic. The 2007 TransformationEIS sets the total training load at PCMS at 77.5 weeks of training per year. How does that fitinto a 52-week year? On page 2–35, the Stryker DEIS says another 5.5 weeks of training loadwould be added brining the total to 83 weeks per year. How can 83 weeks per year of trainingload fit into a 52-week year?Response: According to Army training doctrine, there is a shortfall of training land atPCMS. It is important to note that under this scenario, the SBCT would replacean IBCT, and the net number of Brigades at Fort Carson would notchange. The stationing of the 2/25 th SBCT at Fort Carson would involve aslight increase in the overall amount of required maneuver training that isscheduled to take place at Fort Carson and PCMS, however. This is becausethe SBCT has one more battalion and more companies and platoons than the4/4 th IBCT. This slight increase in training could be managed as discussed inSection 2.7. Locations with manageable shortfall of maneuver land and acceptablerisk are presented in Section 2.4 in Table 2–10.62. In referencing Chapter 6, I want to see references to experience in Hawaii.Response: Chapter 6 has been revised to more accurately reflect the people who workedon the DEIS and FEIS.63. Why is the DEIS not available in languages other than English? Hawaii has a large immigrantcommunity. Also, the Hawaiian language is an official language.Response: The public comment meetings included opportunities to make statements in theHawaiian language. The FEIS will be published in English. To translate it intoother languages would be prohibitively expensive. It would also be timeconsumingand would run the risk of important details being mistranslated.February 2008 D–23 2/25th SBCT Final EIS