SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement163. What is the cumulative effect of the smoke the Army generates plus the emissions from Kahepower plant, Chevron, and AES, and the other things that are at Campbell Industrial Park?D.3.6 NOISEResponse: As discussed in Section 5.6.1.10, the cumulative air quality effects from primaryair pollutants, such as PM 10 , would be significant under Alternative A.The assessment of impacts to air quality includes the smoke and obscurantsthat would be used by the SBCT in Hawaii, though the primary contributor toair quality degradation from the Proposed Action would be wind-blown dustfrom maneuver training areas.164. A certain level of noise is expected with Army operations. However, the Army should coordinatemore effectively with the Hawaiian public about locations and times (such as after 10pm) to help the public handle the noise.Response: As discussed in Section 5.2.12.3, the EIS indicates that noise from ordnanceuse at SBMR would increase slightly and affect undeveloped areas, but wouldnot significantly affect off-post residential areas. To mitigate the slight increasenoise, the Army proposes to evaluate training techniques, schedulingand location to reduce overall noise impact. The Army routinely participatesin Neighborhood Board meetings and is receptive to hearing from the publicon ways to resolve noise issues.165. The DEIS makes no effort to quantify the effects of increased noise levels on wildlife or livestockwithin or outside of the PCMS boundaries. The increase in noise associated with trainingthe 2/25th SBCT may disturb area residents and discourage residential development onadjoining lands. The Army must fully analyze and disclose the noise effect of the training ofthe 2/25th SBCT.Response: The stationing of the 2/25 th SBCT would not involve activities that would beexpected to significantly increase noise levels at PCMS for human or wildlifereceptor population. Live-fire activities of large weapon systems would beconducted at Fort Carson. As discussed in the response to comment 135,Stryker vehicles would produce noise levels similar to that of bus or truck.Wildlife within PCMS normally moves out of the way during training, anddoes not appear to be disturbed by the noise. The effects on wildlife and livestockoutside PCMS would be even less. Cattle and pronghorns often grazeright up to the boundary fence during training rotations.166. There is no justification for the DEIS’ narrow focus on page 5–214 on only “noise levels inoff-post residential areas.” The 2004 FEIS concluded that noise from ordnance use wouldsubject “[a] large portion of the family and troop housing and two elementary schools on the[Schofield Barracks] Main Post…to undesirable noise levels,” resulting in “a significant andunavoidable impact under No Action.” (FEIS at page 4–43). There is no basis for the DEIS’contrary conclusion that noise impacts would be less than significant.Response: Section 5.5.12 has been revised to reflect the significant level of impact. Thisdocument supplements the 2004 EIS and includes its analysis.February 2008 D–55 2/25th SBCT Final EIS