FINAL Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant ...

234 Pages·2016·6.8 MB·English

FINAL

Environmental Assessment for
Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant
and Red River Army Depot, Texas

Prepared by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: Mobile District

With Technical Assistance from:
Marstel-Day, LLC
Fredericksburg, VA, 22401

October 2008

Environmental Assessment
for Disposal and Reuse of Lone Star Army
Ammunition Plant and
Red River Army Depot, Texas
This page intentionally left blank.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
The 2005 Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) Commission made recommendations
for realignment and closure actions for military installations on 8 September 2005, in
conformance with the provisions of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of
1990 (Base Closure Act), Public Law 101-510, as amended. These recommendations
included the closure of the Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant (LSAAP) and the
realignment of the Red River Army Depot (RRAD), Texas. In the absence of
Congressional disapproval, the BRAC Commission’s recommendations became binding
on 9 November 2005. The LSAAP installation property and a portion of the RRAD
installation property (the RRAD western excess property [RRAD-WEP]) were determined
to be surplus to U.S. Department of Army (Army) needs.
This Environmental Assessment (EA), prepared in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), analyzes the environmental and socioeconomic effects
of disposal of the federal property, and considers reasonable foreseeable reuse
alternatives. An initial EA was prepared and circulated in October 2007; however, several
new elements associated with the proposed action were added after the EA was
circulated, and the Army determined that the preparation and circulation of this revised EA
was required.
BACKGROUND
LSAAP and RRAD are located in the northeast corner of Texas, approximately 12 miles
west of Texarkana, Texas. LSAAP and RRAD share a common border, with RRAD to the
west and LSAAP to the east. As of 2005, LSAAP comprised 15,546 acres; taken together,
LSAAP and RRAD cover approximately 34,000 acres. LSAAP is a government-owned,
contractor-operated installation that has produced a variety of munitions to support the
joint war fighter. LSAAP’s operations include loading, assembling, and packing of
ammunition products for the Army. Day & Zimmermann, Inc. has operated on the
installation since 1951.
RRAD comprises approximately 18,000 acres; the RRAD-WEP portion is located in the
western portion of the installation, and totals 3,835 acres. RRAD’s major operational
missions include maintenance and rebuilding of light-tracked vehicles; demilitarization of
out-of-specification ordinance; ammunition storage and renovation; maintenance,
modification or recertification of the HAWK, Chaparrel, and Patriot missiles; and track-
and road-wheel rebuild. Most of RRAD-WEP is used for timber harvesting and
management, and for ammunition storage.
Implementation of the BRAC Commission’s recommendations must be completed by no
later than 15 September 2011.
ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
The proposed action is to dispose of the property made available by the closure of
LSAAP and realignment of RRAD mandated by the BRAC Commission. This action
includes caretaker operations, cleanup of contaminated sites, and possible interim
leasing. Reuse by others is a secondary action that may result from disposal.
Laws and regulations applicable to the proposed action include the Base Closure Act and
the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949. The latter act is
implemented by the Federal Property Management Regulations. Other major legislation
governing the disposal and reuse of LSAAP and RRAD-WEP properties includes: 32
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 174 (Revitalizing Base Closure Communities);
regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to implement BRAC law; the
Pryor Amendment; and the President’s Program to Revitalize Base Closure Communities.
Additional relevant federal statutes include: the Clean Water Act (CWA); Clean Air Act
(CAA); Noise Control Act; Endangered Species Act (ESA); National Historical
Preservation Act (NHPA); Archaeological Resources Protection Act; Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA); Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA); Community Environmental Response
Facilitation Act (CERFA); and Toxic Substances Control Act. The framework of these laws
within the context of the NEPA analysis provides standards that guide environmental
compliance and planning, and their consideration in the NEPA process helps ensure the
preservation and promotion of environmental values in property transfer and reuse
planning. Issues related to implementation actions consistent with several Executive
Orders relevant to this BRAC action are also considered in this EA.
Alternatives for the proposed action are early transfer disposal, traditional disposal,
caretaker status, and no action. The Army’s preferred alternative for disposal of the
LSAAP and RRAD-WEP properties is early transfer. Other actions associated with these
disposal alternatives include execution of a forest harvest plan, transfer of land between
LSAAP and RRAD, and the retention of a length of rail track on LSAAP for use by RRAD.
Encumbrances such as those pertaining to munitions and explosives of concern,
wetlands, cultural resources, threatened and endangered species, access easements,
and remedial activities will be in effect as necessary for any disposal alternative.
The Army considers the Local Redevelopment Authority’s (LRA) reuse plan as the
primary source from which to determine reuse scenarios to be considered. Reuse
alternatives for the LSAAP and RRAD-WEP properties are analyzed in terms of intensity-
based probable reuse scenarios; specifically, this EA evaluates Medium-Low Intensity
(MLIR) and Low Intensity (LIR) reuse scenarios for LSAAP and RRAD-WEP. The MLIR
scenario, as determined for the purposes of this document and as described further in the
EA, could result in a maximum of 5,500 employees at LSAAP and RRAD-WEP and the
establishment of up to 5.5 million square feet of building space. The LIR scenario could
result in a maximum of 2,700 employees at LSAAP and RRAD-WEP and the
establishment of up to 2.7 million square feet of building space on the excessed
properties. Both reuse scenarios encompass the anticipated redevelopment activities at
the site, including the establishment of a regional, multi-modal warehouse/distribution
center, with rail access and foreign trade zone designation; the construction of industrial
ES-2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

facilities, such as ethanol plant modules (two corn-processing facilities and one cellulose-
processing facility) which would potentially include a CO processing facility; the
2
development of landfills and waste disposal sites; the construction of a portion of a new
highway that would pass through the excessed properties; the construction of a new
wastewater treatment plant and installation-wide utility upgrades, as well as subsequent
operations at both LSAAP and RRAD-WEP.
The Army expresses no preference with respect to reuse scenarios because reuse
planning decisions are not within its authority.
DISPOSAL PROCESS
Methods available to the Army for property disposal include: transfer to another federal
agency; public benefit disposal conveyance; economic development conveyance;
negotiated sale; competitive sale; and exchanges for military construction. The real estate
screening process for the LSAAP and RRAD-WEP properties first invited expressions of
interest by the DoD and other federal agencies (14 April 2006), then by the LRA (the Red
River Redevelopment Authority [RRRA]) (9 May 2006) and state and local authorities and
homeless providers (7 June 2006). In response to this screening, there were no
declarations of interest in the properties by any other federal agencies. The RRRA reuse
plan calls for multiple-use redevelopment of the area, including industrial, light industrial,
warehouse, office, commercial, and forest management uses. Industrial uses could
include waste disposal (landfills) and biofuel generation (ethanol plants).
In November 2006, the Army prepared Environmental Condition of Property reports for
LSAAP and RRAD-WEP; these reports described the current environmental conditions of
the excess properties (U.S. Army 2006a, U.S. Army 2006b). Remediation or cleanup of
contaminated sites is guided by the Army’s Installation Restoration Program and the
Military Munitions Response Program. Remediation activities that may occur prior to
disposal of surplus property at LSAAP and RRAD-WEP include cleanup of sites
contaminated as a result of previous actions related to the handling and disposal of
hazardous materials/substances. RRAD-WEP is not included on the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency’s (USEPA) National Priorities List (NPL); however, one site at LSAAP,
the Old Demolition Area (ODA), is listed on the NPL. LSAAP and RRAD are regulated
under RCRA permits. The Corrective Action provisions of these permits guide remedial
activities at these installations. A Federal Facilities Agreement pursuant to CERCLA
(involving the Army, USEPA, and state of Texas) guides remediation activities at the
ODA.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
The evaluated resource areas include land use, aesthetics and visual resources, air
quality, noise, geology and soils, water resources, biological resources, cultural
resources, socioeconomics, transportation, utilities, and hazardous and toxic substances.
Direct and indirect impacts of each disposal alternative on the resource areas include a
variety of short- and long-term impacts, both adverse and beneficial.
ES-3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

Early Transfer Disposal Alternative. As stated above, the preferred alternative is early
transfer disposal, which would result in minor or moderate adverse effects for all resource
areas. In particular, there would be short-term and long-term moderate adverse impacts
to biological resources as a result of timbering practices that would occur as part of
actions associated with disposal, as well as long-term potential moderate adverse impacts
to land use, air quality, and cultural resources. Minor beneficial effects would occur for
land use, aesthetics and visual resources, noise, geology and soils, water resources,
transportation, utilities, and hazardous and toxic substances. Significant beneficial effects
would occur for socioeconomics. Significant beneficial and minor adverse cumulative
effects would also occur in the context of socioeconomics. Minor adverse and beneficial
cumulative effects would occur in the context of land use, aesthetics and visual resources,
noise, water resources, socioeconomics, and transportation. Moderate cumulative effects
would be expected to occur in the context of air quality and biological resources.
Traditional Disposal Alternative. For traditional disposal, minor or moderate adverse
effects would occur for all resource areas. These effects would occur over a longer period
as compared to early transfer disposal alternative. Moderate adverse impacts would occur
in the areas of air quality, biological resources, and cultural resources. Minor beneficial
effects would occur for land use, aesthetics and visual resources, noise, geology and
soils, water resources, transportation, utilities, and hazardous and toxic substances.
Significant beneficial effects would occur for socioeconomics. Significant beneficial and
minor adverse cumulative effects would also occur in the context of socioeconomics.
Minor adverse or beneficial cumulative effects would occur in the context of land use,
aesthetics and visual resources, noise, water resources, socioeconomics, and
transportation. Moderate cumulative effects would be expected to occur in the context of
air quality and biological resources.
Caretaker Status Alternative. For the caretaker status alternative, minor adverse
impacts would occur for land use, aesthetics and visual resources, geology and soils,
water resources, biological resources, cultural resources, socioeconomics, transportation,
utilities, and hazardous and toxic substances. Minor beneficial effects would also occur for
land use, air quality, noise, geology and soils, water resources, biological resources,
transportation, and hazardous and toxic substances. Minor beneficial cumulative effects
would occur in the context of land use, aesthetics and visual resources, air quality, noise,
water resources, biological resources, socioeconomics, and transportation and utilities;
minor adverse cumulative impacts would also occur for socioeconomics.
No Action Alternative. The no action alternative would result in no adverse or cumulative
impacts.
Reuse. The two evaluated reuse scenarios could result in a variety of adverse and
beneficial short- and long-term direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. To bound potential
effects under reuse, the MLIR scenario for LSAAP and RRAD-WEP represents a
development intensity higher (approximately double) than that proposed in the RRRA
reuse plan. The MLIR scenario for LSAAP and RRAD-WEP would result in short-term
minor adverse effects for all resource areas except cultural resources, for which the
scenario would result in moderate adverse effects. Minor beneficial effects would occur
ES-4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

for land use, aesthetics and visual resources, noise, geology and soils, socioeconomics,
transportation, utilities, and hazardous and toxic substances. In addition, moderate
adverse effects to land use, air quality, biological resources, and cultural resources
(principally as a result of increased timbering practices on LSAAP and RRAD-WEP)
would occur. Significant beneficial effects would also occur for socioeconomics (economic
development). Reuse of LSAAP and RRAD-WEP at such an intensity level, representing
greater amounts of built space and higher levels of employment, would add jobs and
increase population in the ROI.
Reuse of the installation at low intensity, similar to the level of intensity presented in the
RRRA’s reuse plan, would result in effects identical to those under the MLIR scenario on
all resource areas, but the LIR scenario would result in a lower level of effects overall than
the MLIR scenario.
Cumulative effects related to reuse would be most noticeable with respect to achievement
of the MLIR scenario. Minor adverse cumulative effects would occur to land use,
aesthetics and visual resources, noise, water resources, socioeconomics, and
transportation. Moderate adverse cumulative effects would be expected to occur relative
to air quality and biological resources. Net increases in air emissions from both stationary
and mobile sources would occur at LSAAP, RRAD-WEP, and throughout the region.
Minor beneficial cumulative effects could occur for land use. Significant cumulative
beneficial changes in economic development, the sociological environment, and quality of
life would occur as more jobs were created and the tax base increased. Cumulative
effects under the LIR scenario would be similar to those under the MLIR scenario.
Table ES-1.1 presents an overview of the environmental and socioeconomic effects
associated with each of the alternatives evaluated in this EA (with the exception of the no
action alternative, for which no effects were identified).
MITIGATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT
Beyond the placement of encumbrances on the land and adherence to sustainable timber
practices to ensure the protection of natural and cultural resources as described in this
document, no specific mitigation is required of the Army with the exception of possible
wetlands mitigation. Wetlands mitigation may be required as part of planned timbering
actions (e.g., road construction). Relative to property redevelopment, federal, state, and
local regulations and policies will govern to a large extent the proper use and
conservation of the environment including air quality, wetlands resources, water quality,
cultural resources, and other resources. Certain other management measures beyond
these may also be implemented by the Army or the RRRA to successfully manage the
disposal and redevelopment of LSAAP and RRAD-WEP according to the principles of
sound and sustainable planning. Unlike wetlands mitigation which may be required, these
other additional management measures would not be required to reduce potential effects
to a level that is less than significant, and would therefore not constitute mitigation
measures, but could be applied by the Army or RRRA as management measures to
reduce or avoid adverse effects.
ES-5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment for Disposal and Reuse of
Lone Star Army Ammunition Plant and Red River Army Depot, Texas

Table ES-1.1 No Action, Disposal, and Reuse Effects Summary
EARLY TRANSFER TRADITIONAL
CARETAKER STATUS REUSE SCENARIOS
DISPOSAL DISPOSAL
RESOURCE AREAS Direct Indirect Cumulative Direct Indirect Cumulative Direct Indirect Cumulative Medium-Low ntensity Direct Medium-Low Intensity Indirect Low -Intensity Direct Low-Intensity Indirect Cumulative
I
Land Use ● ■● ● ■(cid:96)● ■● ■● ■● ■● ■● ■● ■(cid:96)● ■● ■(cid:96)● ■●
Aesthetic/Visual Resources ■ ● ■● ■ ■● ■ ■● ■ ■● ■ ■
Air Quality ● ● (cid:96) ■(cid:96) (cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) (cid:96) (cid:96) ■ (cid:96) ■ (cid:96)
Noise ● ● ● ■● ■ ■ ■● ■ ■ ■● ■ ■● ■ ■
Geology and Soils ■ ● ■ ■● ■ ■● ■ ● ■ ●
Water Resources ■● ● ● ■ ■● ■ ■ ■● ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
Biological Resources ■ ● ● ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) (cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) (cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) (cid:96)
Cultural Resources ■ ■(cid:96) ■ ■(cid:96) ■ (cid:96) (cid:96)
Socioeconomics ■(cid:96) ■(cid:96) ■● ■●○ ■● ■○ ■●○ ■● ■○ ■●(cid:92)○ ■●(cid:92)○ ■●(cid:92)○ ■●(cid:92)○ ■○
Transportation ■● ● ■● ■ ■ ■● ■ ■ ■● ■ ■● ■ ■
Utilities ■ ● ■● ■ ■● ■● ■●
Hazardous/Toxic Substances ● ■ ■ ■● ■● ■● ● ■ ●
● Beneficial Effect (Minor) ■ Adverse Effects (Minor)
(cid:92) Beneficial Effect (Moderate) (cid:96) Adverse Effects (Moderate)
○ Beneficial Effect (Significant) ◘ Adverse Effects (Significant) NOTE: No significant adverse
[BLANK] No Effects Expected effects have been identified.
ES-6