Integrated Training Area Management EA and Final FNSI

3.10.2 Environmental ConsequencesAlternative 1: Continue ITAM Program without a Management Plan (No Action)Under the No Action Alternative, the ITAM program would continue without a management plan. TheTRI, LRAM, SRA, RTLA, and GIS components of the ITAM program would continue to have a minorbeneficial impact on local economies through employment of approximately two or three full-timecivilian positions (and some part-time and seasonal employment) and their associated payrollexpenditures at each installation. Additionally, LRAM projects would utilize private contractors tocomplete 98% of their projects. Projected projects for the next five years include approximately 1,000acres of vegetation management projects and 500 acres of trail upgrades and road and pad hardening.Contracting with local companies would contribute approximately $1 million annually to the Anchorageeconomy and $2,000,000 annually to the Fairbanks economy. Projects conducted at Donnelly TrainingArea typically utilize contractors from Fairbanks.Alternative 2: Implement ITAM Program through a Management Plan (Proposed Action)Under this alternative, the ITAM program would be implemented through a management plan that wouldinclude standard operating procedures for LRAM and RTLA projects. Employment numbers would beunaffected by this alternative. Implementing standardized operating procedures for the LRAM programwould have the possibility of causing some projects to cost slightly more or less (and/or take a little moreor less time to complete), depending on the project. However, these impacts would not be noticeable atthe regional level. Impacts to socioeconomics due to TRI, LRAM, SRA, RTLA, and GIS activities wouldbe similar to those described under the No Action Alternative.Alternative 3: Suspend ITAM ProgramUnder Alternative 3, all components of the ITAM program would discontinue operation. This wouldremove all employment positions required for implementing the ITAM program. The absence of LRAMwould also discontinue use of local contractors for completion of LRAM projects. Due to the relative sizeof the Anchorage and Fairbanks economies, impacts would be minor and adverse but would not beexpected to have a noticeable impact at the regional level.Suspending the ITAM program would severely hamper USARAK’s ability to meet mission trainingrequirements. USARAK lands would degrade and become less able to sustain training activities withoutthe ITAM program. As a result, the need to acquire new lands in order to fulfill mission requirementsbecomes a possibility. Acquisition of new lands could take place through land transfer or outrightpurchase and would likely come at taxpayer expense.The following table presents a summary of qualitative impacts to socioeconomics resulting from eachalternative. Descriptions of the qualitative terms are provided in Chapter 2, Description of ProposedAction and Alternatives.Table 3.10 Summary of Impacts 1 to Socioeconomics.ITAM Activity Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3TRI None None NoneLRAM Beneficial Beneficial None-MinorSRA None None NoneRTLA None None NoneGIS None None None1 Short-term and long-term impacts are expected to be similar._____________________________________________________________________________________________Environmental AssessmentUnited States Army Alaska, Integrated Training Area Management ProgramManagement Plan 64