Integrated Training Area Management EA and Final FNSI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Wind Fences and SandFencesSand fences are barriers of small, evenly spaced wooden slats or fabric erected toreduce wind velocity and to trap blowing sand. They can be used effectively asperimeter controls around open construction sites to reduce the off-site movement offine sediments transported by wind. They also prevent off-site damage to roads,streams, and adjacent properties._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan B-4
APPENDIX C: SAMPLE RECORD OF ENVIRONMENTALCONSIDERATION (REC)RECORD OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONTITLE: Prescribed Fire at the Stuart Creek Impact Area, Yukon Training Area, Fort Wainwright, AlaskaDESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION: The Bureau of Land Management’s Alaska Fire Service(AFS) proposes to conduct a prescribed burn on lands within the Stuart Creek Impact Area on the FortWainwright Army Installation (FWA), Yukon Training Area (YTA). The prescribed burn is intended tominimize the risk of wildfire starts by reducing grass and fine fuel loading in the impact area. Theproposed burning activity also provides for firefighter and public safety and offers training on prescribedburning techniques for AFS personnel.The Stuart Creek Impact Area is located 15 miles east of the Eielson Air Force Base airfield, with itscenter of mass located at the approximate Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates of WS522537, WS 7176153. The Stuart Creek Impact Area burn would cover approximately 2,900 acres. Theburn area is bounded to the south by the Brigadier Road, to the west by Skyline Road and to the north andeast by a number of access trails into the impact area. The area will be sectioned into 3 units. Improvedroads and two track trails intersect and bound the three units to the north, east and south. Vegetationwithin the burn units consist of areas dominated by grass, forbs, willow, aspen, spruce and birch. Smokeimpacts on off-site values are expected to be low due to the desired wind transport of a south, west ornorthwest-dominated wind. Risk of fire escaping the area will be low due to the prescribedenvironmental conditions of the burn (which are based on set weather parameters that allow for optimumburning), and pre-treating adjacent fuels with water prior to ignition. Since this burn will be conductedwithin a dedicated impact area, a helicopter will be used for ignition and will be available for suppression,if necessary.ANTICIPATED DATE AND/OR DURATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION: Burning activitiesare anticipated to begin in early to mid-May of 2005, depending on green-up conditions. Vegetation mustnot have too much fuel moisture (green-up), as it does not allow for optimum burning. This project maybe postponed until the fall of 2005 or spring of 2006, due to unfavorable weather conditions and/or AFSscheduling conflicts. The duration of the prescribed burn is anticipated to be no longer than one week.This prescribed burn is scheduled for maintenance burning at two to five year intervals.MITIGATION AND/OR SPECIAL CONDITIONS: U.S. Army Alaska Range Control must becontacted at (907) 353-1265 prior to any burning activities. If poor air mixing heights or air qualityconditions exist, all burning activities must be postponed until conditions improve. All AFS personnelwill be briefed on the potential and hazards of unexploded ordnance within the immediate area. Existingroads and trails should be used for site access if needed. The AFS has prepared a Prescribed Fire BurnPlan for this action and should be consulted prior to burning activities. Public notification procedures areoutlined in the Prescribed Fire Burn Plan, which typically involves placing notices in local newspapers.This project will not create any sub-surface ground disturbance. In the event that sub-surface disturbanceis required, the Environmental Resources Department archeologist will be notified prior to any digging orearthwork. In the event that cultural resources are disturbed or discovered without digging or earthworkduring this project, the Environmental Resources Department archeologist shall be notified. Both the U.S.Air Force and U.S. Army Alaska Range Controls have been notified, and actions have been taken to avoidscheduling conflicts._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan C-1
Page 1:
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYUNITED STATES
Page 5 and 6:
TABLE OF CONTENTSCHAPTER 1: PURPOSE
Page 7 and 8:
Table 3.9 Summary of Impacts to Hum
Page 9 and 10:
and Training Land Program, the rang
Page 11 and 12:
• Establish a defined land condit
Page 13:
Donnelly Training AreaDonnelly Trai
Page 17 and 18:
determine whether additional NEPA a
Page 19 and 20:
Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental
Page 21 and 22:
CHAPTER 3: DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFEC
Page 23 and 24:
Maneuver Trail Maintenance and Upgr
Page 25 and 26:
Mungoven 2001). Engineering soil ty
Page 27 and 28:
projects and would result in wide,
Page 29 and 30:
growth. Wind and sand fences would
Page 31 and 32:
iological impacts of military train
Page 33 and 34:
willow scrub communities are common
Page 35 and 36:
disturbed. Further, hardening low w
Page 37 and 38:
disturbance or removal, best manage
Page 39 and 40:
SRAThrough the SRA program, soldier
Page 41 and 42:
Ship Creek (from the Glenn Highway
Page 43 and 44:
effective site drainage. Required p
Page 45 and 46:
Game 1998). More information on wil
Page 47 and 48:
Fort Wainwright and associated land
Page 49 and 50: Long-term beneficial impacts to wil
Page 51 and 52: 1998).The Alaska Interagency Wildla
Page 53 and 54: Prescribed burns, mechanical thinni
Page 55 and 56: unplanned fires, soldiers are direc
Page 57 and 58: USARAK also implemented the USARTRA
Page 59 and 60: LRAM projects beneficial to public
Page 61 and 62: Cumulative ImpactsPast military act
Page 63 and 64: Two surveys conducted on Yukon Trai
Page 65 and 66: LRAM activities under Alternative 1
Page 67 and 68: 3.9.1 Affected EnvironmentFort Rich
Page 69 and 70: SRA program, which educates soldier
Page 71 and 72: 3.10.2 Environmental ConsequencesAl
Page 73 and 74: Fort Richardson receives few compla
Page 75 and 76: Table 3.11 Summary of Impacts 1 to
Page 77 and 78: oads and hauling fill and rock mate
Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 4: PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTO
Page 81 and 82: Benson, A.M. 1999. Distribution of
Page 83 and 84: Neely, R. J. 2001. Early Mining His
Page 85 and 86: CHAPTER 6: AGENCIES AND INDIVIDUALS
Page 87 and 88: Project NameBulldog TrailWidening P
Page 89 and 90: Project NameYukon TrainingArea Demo
Page 91 and 92: Project NameYukon TrainingArea Firi
Page 93 and 94: Project NameEddy Drop ZoneVegetatio
Page 95 and 96: Project Name33 Mile LoopRoad Shortc
Page 97 and 98: APPENDIX B: BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTIC
Page 99: Sediment Trap(Permanent) SeedingSil
Page 103 and 104: APPENDIX D: ITAM PROJECT ASSESSMENT
Page 105 and 106: Fire ManagementYes No□ □ Could
Page 107 and 108: APPENDIX E: AGENCY COMMENTSThe foll
Page 109 and 110: ___________________________________
Page 111 and 112: ___________________________________
Page 113 and 114: Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 5:00 PM
Page 115 and 116: Second paragraph - I do not underst
Page 117 and 118: sentence could read, "The trees are
Page 119 and 120: The third paragraph seems too speci
Page 121: USARAK does not have a current five
show all

Integrated Training Area Management EA and Final FNSI

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?