Integrated Training Area Management EA and Final FNSI

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ITAM ComponentSustainable Range Awareness(SRA)Range and Training LandAnalysis (RTLA)General Project Category-Training Area Cleanup-Vegetation Cutting and Clearing (Mechanical)-Vegetation Cutting and Thinning (Hand)-Vegetation Protection-Water Bar Installation-Wetlands Reclamation-Implementation Plan-Training/Education Materials-Presentations/Briefing/Training-Standard Land Condition Trend Analysis (LCTA)-Alaska Region Land Condition Trend Analysis (AKLCTA)-Small Mammal Monitoring-Avian Monitoring-Military Exercise Monitoring-Soil and Water Quality Monitoring-Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species Monitoring-Wetlands Monitoring-Invasive Species Monitoring-Spatial Data Collection, Input, Storage, Maintenance,Analysis, Distribution, and ProductsGeographic InformationSystem (GIS)1 LRAM projects have been proposed for the next five years and are described in Appendix A.USARAKITAMManagementPlan ChapterChapter 6Chapter 7 andAppendicesE1 - E9Chapter 82.1.3 Alternative 3: Suspend ITAM ProgramUnder Alternative 3, the ITAM program would not be implemented. While ITAM is an Army-wideprogram and USARAK does not have the option to discontinue its use, Alternative 3 considers potentialenvironmental impacts if the program were discontinued. This provides a useful tool in assessing theeffectiveness of the ITAM program’s ability to sustain continued use of Army training lands.2.2 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES2.2.1 Summary of Impacts under Each AlternativeTable 2.2 contains a summary matrix of the alternatives comparing their environmental consequences forthe specific resource categories. The table describes the range of environmental consequences of theproposed action and alternatives discussed in Chapter 3. The qualitative terms used in the matrix aregenerally defined as:• None – No impact is expected to occur.• Minor – Negative impacts are expected to occur; impacts would be measurable and may haveslight impact to resource.• Moderate – Negative impacts are expected to occur; impacts would be noticeable and would havea measurable effect on resource.• Severe – Negative impacts are expected to occur; impacts would be obvious and would haveserious consequences to resource. These impacts would be considered significant.• Beneficial – Beneficial impacts are expected to occur._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan 11
Table 2.2 Summary of Environmental Consequences 1 under Each Alternative.Resource CategoriesAlternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3Short Term Long Term Short Term Long Term Short Term Long TermMinor to Minor to Minor to Minor to Minor to Minor toSoil ResourcesVegetationWetlandsWater ResourcesWildlife andFisheriesBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialBeneficialBeneficialBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialSevereMinor toSevereSevereSevereMinor toSevereSevereBeneficial Severe SevereBeneficialModerate toSevereFire Management Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial ModeratePublic Access andRecreationCultural Resourcesand SubsistenceHuman Health andSafetyModerate toSevereModerate toSevereBeneficial Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial Minor ModerateBeneficial 2 Beneficial 2 Beneficial 2 Beneficial 2 Moderate ModerateMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialMinor toBeneficialSocioeconomics Beneficial Beneficial Beneficial BeneficialNoiseNone toMinorBeneficialNone toMinorModerateNone toMinorModerateNone toMinorBeneficial Beneficial MinorNone toAir Quality Minor None Minor NoneModerate1 Short-term impacts are defined as impacts lasting for the duration of a project (typically about ten days) or up to one year,depending on the resource.2 Impacts would be beneficial only if properly applied. TRI, SRA, and GIS could have adverse impacts if they identifyarchaeological or cultural sites and make them publicly available.2.2.2 Summary of Cumulative ImpactsNone toModerateAnalysis of cumulative impacts is required for NEPA documents. Cumulative impacts result from theincremental impact of an action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable futureactions. Cumulative effects can also result from individually minor but collectively significant actionstaking place locally or regionally over a period of time. Impacts of these cumulative activities arediscussed in Chapter 3 of this EA. Activities resulting in cumulative impacts include cantonment andrange improvement projects, training activities, and non-military activities. The regions of influence forcumulative impacts are similar to those described in Table 3.a.A variety of capital improvement projects are planned or are currently underway on installationcantonment areas. These areas typically contain installation support infrastructure. USARAK’scantonment areas have undergone substantial development over the past 50 years. Current and futureprojects include building upgrades, new training and support facilities, new housing, fencing, and otherinfrastructure._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan 12
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: determine whether additional NEPA a
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 and 100:
Sediment Trap(Permanent) SeedingSil
Page 101 and 102:
APPENDIX C: SAMPLE RECORD OF ENVIRO
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?