Donnelly <strong>Training</strong> <strong>Area</strong>DTA has few issues relating to human health <strong>and</strong> safety. Due to the lack of a cantonment area, housing,<strong>and</strong> potential waste-generating facilities, Donnelly <strong>Training</strong> <strong>Area</strong> is not considered a USARAK propertyhaving significant human health <strong>and</strong> safety issues.Petroleum, oils, <strong>and</strong> lubricants are used during construction <strong>and</strong> training events. Fuel distribution points<strong>and</strong> refueling operations are constructed <strong>and</strong> operated in accordance with USARAK Regulation 200-4,Hazardous Waste, Used Oil, <strong>and</strong> Hazardous Materials <strong>Management</strong>.3.9.2 Environmental ConsequencesAlternative 1: Continue ITAM Program without a <strong>Management</strong> Plan (No Action)Under the No Action Alternative, ITAM projects would continue to take place without a managementplan or st<strong>and</strong>ard operating procedures. TRI <strong>and</strong> GIS would not have any impacts to human health <strong>and</strong>safety. RTLA may occasionally require monitoring within impact areas. This would pose some risks tomonitoring personnel. LRAM <strong>and</strong> SRA impacts are discussed below.LRAMEquipment operators would wear appropriate hearing protection. If any pesticides or herbicides are used,adherence to all DOD <strong>and</strong> Army guidance for h<strong>and</strong>ling <strong>and</strong> use will be required. Benefits to human health<strong>and</strong> safety include latrine installation, road hardening, <strong>and</strong> berm installation. Installation of latrines willprotect human health by properly disposing of human waste. Road hardening, maneuver trail upgrades,<strong>and</strong> guard rail installation improve safe driving conditions for both soldiers <strong>and</strong> recreationists. Berminstallations behind targets prevent ricochet <strong>and</strong> improve the safety of training ranges.SRASRA would continue to have beneficial impacts to human health <strong>and</strong> safety. Through the SRA program,soldiers are directed to properly dispose of or recycle wastes, properly dispose of human waste, keeprecords up to date, properly label hazardous waste, never mix hazardous products–not even for thepurpose of disposal–<strong>and</strong> turn in hazardous waste to the Department of Public Works. Additionally,soldiers are instructed to immediately report petroleum, oil, <strong>and</strong> lubricants <strong>and</strong> all other hazardousmaterial spills to 911 <strong>and</strong> then to Range Control. Any remnants of hazardous materials found in the field(e.g., fuel-soaked soil, asbestos-contaminated structures, <strong>and</strong> ab<strong>and</strong>oned drums) are to be reported to theEnvironmental Resources Department.Alternative 2: Implement ITAM Program through a <strong>Management</strong> Plan (Proposed Action)Impacts to human health <strong>and</strong> safety from Alternative 2 would be similar to those described underAlternative 1. St<strong>and</strong>ard operating procedures for all ITAM programs identified in the USARAK ITAM<strong>Management</strong> Plan would provide consistent <strong>and</strong> efficient work practices. This may improve human health<strong>and</strong> safety by ensuring that contractors would adhere to st<strong>and</strong>ard procedures, particularly those related toinadvertent petroleum, oil, or lubricant releases during LRAM projects. Overall, impacts underAlternative 2 would be beneficial.Alternative 3: Suspend ITAM ProgramUnder Alternative 3, ITAM activities would not continue on USARAK installations. This action wouldhave adverse impacts to human health <strong>and</strong> safety. Moderate impacts would result from discontinuing the_____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, <strong>Integrated</strong> <strong>Training</strong> <strong>Area</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Program<strong>Management</strong> Plan 61
SRA program, which educates soldiers about proper h<strong>and</strong>ling <strong>and</strong> disposal of hazardous wastes <strong>and</strong>procedures to follow for inadvertent fuel releases.RTLA, TRI <strong>and</strong> GIS would not affect human health <strong>and</strong> safety. Additional regulations, not related toITAM but related to human health <strong>and</strong> safety issues, would continue to take place <strong>and</strong> benefit humanhealth <strong>and</strong> safety. These include, but are not limited to, Army Regulation 55-2, Transportation <strong>and</strong>Travel; Army Regulation 200-1, Environmental Protection <strong>and</strong> Enhancement; <strong>and</strong> Army Regulation 200-5, Pest <strong>Management</strong>.The following table presents a summary of qualitative impacts to human health <strong>and</strong> safety resulting fromeach alternative. Descriptions of the qualitative terms are provided in Chapter 2, Description of ProposedAction <strong>and</strong> Alternatives.Table 3.9 Summary of Impacts 1 to Human Health <strong>and</strong> Safety.ITAM Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3TRI None None NoneLRAM Beneficial Beneficial MinorSRA Beneficial Beneficial ModerateRTLA Minor Minor NoneGIS None None None1 Short-term <strong>and</strong> long-term impacts are expected to be similar.Cumulative ImpactsPast human health <strong>and</strong> safety impacts on USARAK l<strong>and</strong>s involved the use of explosive munitions,convoy use of public roadways, <strong>and</strong> inadvertent releases of hazardous materials (USARAK 2004). Sincehuman health <strong>and</strong> safety issues are so highly regulated, current <strong>and</strong> proposed actions are not likely to addto adverse cumulative impacts. Programs are in place to minimize impacts resulting from current or futureconstruction or training activities <strong>and</strong> from the proposed action. The ITAM program would further benefitexisting programs mainly through educating personnel on human health <strong>and</strong> safety measures.Additionally, best management practices (Appendix B) for managing storm water during constructionwould serve to prevent inadvertent contaminant releases from entering storm sewers or waterways.3.10 SOCIOECONOMICS3.10.1 Affected EnvironmentU.S. Army Alaska continues to play an important role in the regional economies surrounding its threemain installations/training l<strong>and</strong>s: Fort Richardson (Anchorage), Fort Wainwright (Fairbanks), <strong>and</strong>Donnelly <strong>Training</strong> <strong>Area</strong> (Delta Junction). Total payroll for statewide U.S. Army operations at theseinstallations are about $331 million while the non-payroll expenditures account for about $297 million(Department of Defense, Directorate for Information Operations <strong>and</strong> Reports 2004). Together, thesecontribute approximately $1.3 billion in direct <strong>and</strong> indirect economic activity for the state of Alaska.Additional information regarding socioeconomics surrounding USARAK installations can be found in theTransformation of U.S. Army Alaska <strong>Final</strong> Environmental Impact Statement (USARAK 2004)._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, <strong>Integrated</strong> <strong>Training</strong> <strong>Area</strong> <strong>Management</strong> Program<strong>Management</strong> Plan 62
- 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: 3.9.1 Affected EnvironmentFort Rich
- 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