SBCT Final EIS - Govsupport.us

Appendix D ⎯ Responses to Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact StatementD.3.9 CUMULATIVE EFFECTSseveral reasons that this is true. First, the fragments from the spotting roundsare well inside controlled areas (impact ranges) of garrison property wherecontact with the material would be unlikely because access to impact areas isrestricted. Second, DU is only slightly radioactive, producing mostly alpha radiationthat cannot penetrate skin or clothing. Third, even if there were a riskof inhalation of DU, most inhaled DU is rapidly cleared from the body. DU’sproperties have been studied for decades, and are well understood by scientistsand health experts. Many non-military agencies, to include the WorldHealth Organization (WHO) and RAND Corporation, have found that possibleimpacts to health from DU at impact sites are extremely unlikely.The potential for DU to move or migrate from the impact areas is very unlikelybecause of the heavy density of DU. Results of sampling (e.g., soil, air, water)at the PTA and SBMR impact areas where DU has been found indicate that itis extremely unlikely to cause possible adverse impacts to the surrounding environment.For further information on the location of the SBMR and PTA impactareas, survey methods, or other questions, please contact 808-439-0650or e-mail imcom-pacific-du@hawaii.army.mil. Also see Appendix E of thisEIS, which has been added to provide more information.We thank you for your comment and participation in this public process. Yourcomment has been considered and included in the administrative record forthis process.193. The Army has failed to analyze the cumulative impacts of military activities in Hawaii. At aminimum, cumulative impacts may be underestimated. The cumulative analysis shouldevaluate the effects of numerous local projects, military and non-military. It should estimatecosts of cleanup when military lands are eventually decommissioned. The DEIS also shouldquantify cumulative effects or justify why the Army cannot quantify the effects. The discussionof cumulative effects of the No Action Alternative is essentially nonexistent.Response: The Army believes it has adequately analyzed the cumulative impacts of thisaction in Section 5.6. In regards to cleanup of decommissioned lands see responseto comment 194.194. The cumulative effects analysis also must include the future costs for restoring military landsafter they are decommissioned.Response: The Army believes it has adequately analyzed the cumulative impacts of thisaction in Section 5.6. There are no military installations that will be “decommissioned”in the reasonably foreseeable future at any of the alternative sitesconsidered. Therefore, the costs of such “decommissioning” are not includedin the EIS as an aspect of cumulative impacts.195. The cumulative effects analysis needs to include all of the following past, present, and futureactions:National2002 ROD for transformation Programmatic Army-wide EISFebruary 2008 D–66 2/25th SBCT Final EIS