Table Of Content(cid:27)(cid:27)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:20)(cid:20)
(cid:22)(cid:22)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:24)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:25)(cid:25)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:26)(cid:26)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:8)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:27)(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:8)(cid:8)(cid:16)(cid:16)(cid:3)(cid:3)
(cid:27)(cid:27)(cid:29)(cid:29)(cid:13)(cid:13)(cid:30)(cid:30)(cid:26)(cid:26)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:31)(cid:31)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:8)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:20)(cid:20) (cid:9)(cid:9)!!(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:25)(cid:25)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:23)(cid:23)""
(cid:14)(cid:14)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:18)(cid:18)(cid:8)(cid:8)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:20)(cid:20) (cid:9)(cid:9)##(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:16)(cid:16)(cid:5)(cid:5)
(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:20)(cid:20)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:5)(cid:5)
$$(cid:28)(cid:28) (cid:17)(cid:17)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:9)(cid:9)##
(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:7)(cid:3)(cid:3)(cid:8)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:13)
How to Use This Document
Our goal is to give you a reader-friendly document that provides an in-depth, accurate analysis of the proposed action,
the alternative basing locations, the no-action alternative, and the potential environmental consequences for each base.
The organization of this Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, is shown below.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Synopsis of Purpose and Need and Proposed Action and Alternatives
Comparison of Impacts
PREFACE
Detailed Guide for Reading the Final EIS
L
A
S
O CHAPTER 1
P I Purpose and Need for the Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown
O E
R M
P U
CHAPTER 2
L L
L O Overview of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
RA V Alternative Identification Process
E Summary Comparison of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
V
O
CHAPTER 3
Resource Definition and Methodology
CHAPTER 4
Six Base-Specific Sections
E
S
A Burlington AGS Hill AFB Jacksonville AGS McEntire JNGB Mountain Home AFB Shaw AFB
B
Section BR1.0 Section HL1.0 Section JX1.0 Section Mc1.0 Section MH1.0 Section SH1.0
H
Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action
C
A Overview Overview Overview Overview Overview Overview
E
O Section BR2.0 Section HL2.0 Section JX2.0 Section Mc2.0 Section MH2.0 Section SH2.0
T Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific
I
C E Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details
FI M
CI U Section BR3.0 Section HL3.0 Section JX3.0 Section Mc3.0 Section MH3.0 Section SH3.0
E L Affected Affected Affected Affected Affected Affected
P O
S Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment
N V and and and and and and
O Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental
TI Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences
A
M
Section BR4.0 Section HL4.0 Section JX4.0 Section Mc4.0 Section MH4.0 Section SH4.0
R Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative
O
Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects,
F
N Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and
I Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable
Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of
Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources
L CHAPTER 5 CHAPTER 6 CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 8 CHAPTER 9
A
S I References List of Preparers Index Glossary, Mailing Lists
O & I and Contributors Acronyms, and
OP I Abbreviations
R S
P E Ap pendices: Volume II
M
LL U Appendix A – Public Involvement
A L Appendix B – Consultation
R O
Appendix C – Noise Modeling and Airspace Operations
E V
V Appendix D – Air Quality
O
Appendix E – Revised Draft EIS Public Comments and Responses
Final
United States Air Force
F-35A Operational Basing
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Volume I
Chapters 1-9
September 2013
Cover Sheet
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE F-35A OPERATIONAL BASING
a. Responsible Agency: United States (U.S.) Air Force
b. Proposed Action: The Air Force proposes to beddown new F-35A aircraft at one or more locations
throughout the contiguous U.S. from 2015 through 2020. Alternative locations for beddowns
consist of Burlington Air Guard Station (AGS), Vermont; Hill Air Force Base (AFB), Utah; Jacksonville
AGS, Florida; McEntire Joint National Guard Base (JNGB), South Carolina; Mountain Home AFB,
Idaho; and Shaw AFB, South Carolina. The proposal includes three beddown scenarios at the Air
National Guard/Air Force Reserve locations, with 18 or 24 F-35A aircraft replacing the existing
complement of aging fighter attack aircraft. Three beddown scenarios (24, 48, or 72 F-35As) apply
to the active duty bases. At Burlington AGS, Hill AFB, Jacksonville AGS, McEntire JNGB, and Shaw
AFB, the F-35As would replace current fighter attack aircraft, irrespective of the scenario. No
aircraft would be replaced at Mountain Home AFB; the existing based aircraft would remain. The Air
Force identified Hill AFB and Burlington AGS as the preferred alternatives for the initial operational
beddown. The no-action alternative would result in no F-35A beddown at any of these locations at
this time.
c. Inquiries: For further information on this EIS, contact Mr. Nicholas Germanos, F-35A Operational
Basing Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Project Manager, HQ ACC/A7PS, 129 Andrews Street,
Suite 332, Langley AFB, VA 23665-2769. Telephone inquiries may be made to HQ ACC Public Affairs
at (757) 764-5007.
d. Designation: Final EIS
e. Abstract: This Final EIS was prepared in accordance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
of 1969, 42 United States Code §§ 4321-4374, as implemented by the Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) regulations, 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §§ 1500-1508, and Air Force
implementing regulation 32 CFR 989. As presented in the Final EIS, analysis established that no
substantial adverse impacts to most resource categories would result from implementing any of the
alternatives and associated scenarios. Beddown of the F-35A would change noise conditions and
the type of land uses affected by aircraft noise at all alternative locations. At Burlington AGS and
Mountain Home AFB, noise levels of 65 dB DNL or greater would affect a larger area than currently
found under baseline conditions under any alternative scenario. At Hill AFB, the area affected by
noise levels of 65 dB DNL or greater would decrease under ACC Scenarios 1 and 2, but increase
slightly under ACC Scenario 3. For Jacksonville AGS and McEntire JNGB, the affected areas would
decrease substantially in both scenarios. For Shaw AFB, the affected area for 65 dB DNL and greater
noise levels would decrease in ACC Scenario 1, but increase in the other two scenarios. Effects on
land uses in the vicinity of the bases vary depending upon location and scenario; with the exception
of Burlington AGS and ACC Scenario 3 at Hill AFB, effects on residential lands would decrease or
remain the same. Construction costs at the alternative locations under all scenarios would range
from $0.4M to $51.9M. Changes to personnel would vary by base and scenario, with Shaw AFB
subject to the greatest decrease in personnel and Mountain Home AFB receiving the greatest
increase. Air emissions would remain consistent with federal and state standards; no conformity
issues would arise from implementing any scenario at any of the bases. The F-35As would fly and
train in existing airspace, but at higher altitudes than the current fighter attack aircraft. While
subsonic and supersonic noise levels in the airspace would change under the different scenarios at
the six alternative locations, no substantial adverse impacts to land uses, populations, or natural
resources would result. Use of ordnance and defensive countermeasures, such as flares, would
remain consistent with baseline conditions and all restrictions on use would continue.
TTTaaabbbllleee ooofff CCCooonnnttteeennntttsss
How to Use This Document
Our goal is to give you a reader-friendly document that provides an in-depth, accurate analysis of the proposed action,
the alternative basing locations, the no-action alternative, and the potential environmental consequences for each base.
The organization of this Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, is shown below.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Synopsis of Purpose and Need and Proposed Action and Alternatives
Comparison of Impacts
PREFACE
Detailed Guide for Reading the Final EIS
L
A
S
O CHAPTER 1
P I Purpose and Need for the Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown
O E
R M
P U
CHAPTER 2
L L
L O Overview of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
RA V Alternative Identification Process
E Summary Comparison of the Proposed Action and Alternatives
V
O
CHAPTER 3
Resource Definition and Methodology
CHAPTER 4
Six Base-Specific Sections
E
S
A Burlington AGS Hill AFB Jacksonville AGS McEntire JNGB Mountain Home AFB Shaw AFB
B
Section BR1.0 Section HL1.0 Section JX1.0 Section Mc1.0 Section MH1.0 Section SH1.0
H
Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action Proposed Action
C
A Overview Overview Overview Overview Overview Overview
E
O Section BR2.0 Section HL2.0 Section JX2.0 Section Mc2.0 Section MH2.0 Section SH2.0
T Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific Base-Specific
I
C E Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details Project Details
FI M
CI U Section BR3.0 Section HL3.0 Section JX3.0 Section Mc3.0 Section MH3.0 Section SH3.0
E L Affected Affected Affected Affected Affected Affected
P O
S Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment Environment
N V and and and and and and
O Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental Environmental
TI Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences Consequences
A
M
Section BR4.0 Section HL4.0 Section JX4.0 Section Mc4.0 Section MH4.0 Section SH4.0
R Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative
O
Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects, Effects,
F
N Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and Irreversible and
I Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable Irretrievable
Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of Commitment of
Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources
L CHAPTER 5 CHAPTER 6 CHAPTER 7 CHAPTER 8 CHAPTER 9
A
S I References List of Preparers Index Glossary, Mailing Lists
O & I and Contributors Acronyms, and
OP I Abbreviations
R S
P E Ap pendices: Volume II
M
LL U Appendix A – Public Involvement
A L Appendix B – Consultation
R O
Appendix C – Noise Modeling and Airspace Operations
E V
V Appendix D – Air Quality
O
Appendix E – Revised Draft EIS Public Comments and Responses
Table of Contents
VOLUME I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER SHEET
PREFACE ............................................................................................................................................. i
Chapter Page
1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION ................................................................1-1
1.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.2.1 F-35A Development and Deployment Program ................................................ 1-3
1.2.2 Aircraft Characteristics of the F-35A ................................................................. 1-4
1.3 Purpose of F-35A Operational Beddown ......................................................................... 1-6
1.4 Need for F-35A Operational Beddown ............................................................................ 1-6
1.5 Public Involvement .......................................................................................................... 1-7
1.5.1 Scoping Process ................................................................................................. 1-8
1.5.2 Draft EIS Public Comment Period ...................................................................... 1-9
1.5.3 Revised Draft EIS Public Comment Period ...................................................... 1-10
1.5.4 Government-to-Government Consultation .................................................... 1-11
1.6 Lead and Cooperating Agencies ..................................................................................... 1-11
1.7 Organization of the EIS .................................................................................................. 1-11
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES .....................................................2-1
2.1 Elements of the Proposed Action Common to All Beddown Alternatives ...................... 2-2
2.1.1 Action Elements Affecting the Base .................................................................. 2-2
2.1.2 Action Elements Affecting Training Airspace .................................................. 2-10
2.2 Alternative Identification Process .................................................................................. 2-24
2.2.1 Alternative Identification Process Methodology ............................................ 2-24
2.2.2 Results of the Alternative Identification Process ............................................ 2-26
2.2.3 Alternatives Considered But Not Carried Forward ......................................... 2-27
2.2.4 Proposed Action and Alternatives Carried Forward for Detailed Analysis ..... 2-28
2.2.5 No-Action Alternative ..................................................................................... 2-29
2.2.6 Preferred and Environmentally Preferable Alternatives ................................. 2-30
2.3 Comparison of Environmental Consequences Among Alternatives .............................. 2-30
2.4 Differences Between the Draft EIS and the Updated Draft EIS ..................................... 2-45
2.5 Documents Incorporated by Reference ......................................................................... 2-45
2.5.1 Burlington AGS ................................................................................................ 2-45
2.5.2 Hill AFB ............................................................................................................ 2-46
2.5.3 Jacksonville AGS, McEntire JNGB, and Shaw AFB ........................................... 2-47
2.5.4 Mountain Home AFB ....................................................................................... 2-48
2.6 Mitigation Measures ...................................................................................................... 2-49
2.6.1 Measures to Reduce the Potential for Environmental Impacts ...................... 2-49
2.6.2 Unavoidable Impacts ....................................................................................... 2-51
3.0 RESOURCE DEFINITION AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................................3-1
3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.1 Analytical Approach .......................................................................................... 3-1
Initial F-35A Operational Basing EIS i
Final, September 2013
Table of Contents
3.1.2 Definition of No-Action Conditions ................................................................... 3-1
3.1.3 Scope of Analysis ............................................................................................... 3-2
3.1.4 Organization of this Chapter ............................................................................. 3-3
3.2 Airspace Management and Use ....................................................................................... 3-4
3.2.1 Definition of Resource ....................................................................................... 3-4
3.2.2 Analysis Methodology ....................................................................................... 3-5
3.3 Noise ........................................................................................................................... 3-6
3.3.1 Definition of Resource ....................................................................................... 3-6
3.3.2 Noise Metrics .................................................................................................... 3-7
3.3.3 Supplemental Noise Analyses ........................................................................... 3-9
3.3.4 Types of Military Aircraft Noise ...................................................................... 3-11
3.3.5 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-12
3.4 Air Quality ...................................................................................................................... 3-14
3.4.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-14
3.4.1.1 Criteria Pollutants ............................................................................. 3-14
3.4.1.2 Conformity Rule ................................................................................ 3-16
3.4.1.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ............................................................... 3-19
3.4.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-21
3.4.3 Hazardous Air Pollutants ................................................................................. 3-23
3.5 Safety ......................................................................................................................... 3-25
3.5.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-25
3.5.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-29
3.6 Geology, Soils, and Water .............................................................................................. 3-30
3.6.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-30
3.6.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-31
3.7 Terrestrial Communities (Wildlife and Vegetation) ....................................................... 3-32
3.7.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-32
3.7.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-33
3.8 Wetlands and Freshwater Aquatic Communities .......................................................... 3-33
3.8.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-33
3.8.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-34
3.9 Threatened, Endangered, and Special Status Species/Communities ............................ 3-34
3.9.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-34
3.9.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-34
3.10 Cultural and Traditional Resources ................................................................................ 3-35
3.10.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-35
3.10.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-36
3.11 Land Use ......................................................................................................................... 3-37
3.11.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-37
3.11.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-38
3.12 Socioeconomics ............................................................................................................. 3-39
3.12.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-39
3.12.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-40
3.13 Environmental Justice/Protection of Children ............................................................... 3-40
3.13.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-40
3.13.2 Analysis Methodology ..................................................................................... 3-41
3.14 Community Facilities and Public Services ...................................................................... 3-41
3.14.1 Definition of Resource ..................................................................................... 3-41
ii Initial F-35A Operational Basing EIS
Final, September 2013
Description:No aircraft would be replaced at Mountain Home AFB; the existing based aircraft would remain. The Air. Force identified Hill AFB and Burlington AGS as the preferred alternatives for the initial operational beddown. The no-action alternative would result in no F-35A beddown at any of these locations
