Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 104
Book Description
Due to the changing international political scene and the resultant shift toward a reduction in defense spending, the Department of Defense must realign and reduce its military forces pursuant to the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101 -510, Title XXIX). As a requirement of this law, the 940th ARG with its 1 0 KC-1 35E aircraft must realign from Mather AFB, California, which is scheduled to close in 1993, to McClellan AFB, California. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts from the realignment. As part of the realignment the Air Force is planning construction of 5 new buildings, 13 housing duplexes, an addition to 1 existing building, a hydrant fueling system, renovation to 14 existing facilities for interim and permanent use, and the demolition of 13 Wherry Housing units. Alternatives include the use of fuel trucks to fuel and defuel the aircraft instead of the hydrant fueling system (Fuel Truck Alternative), and siting the Squadron Operations Facility at three possible locations (Squadron Operations/Group Headquarters Alternatives A, 8, and C). The No-Action Alternative would conflict with the Defense Bass Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 and, therefore, cannot be implemented without a change in the law. Construction activities for the Proposed Action and alternatives would take place on a concrete aircraft parking apron, or on areas previously disturbed by past grading activities, except for less than 10 acres of undisturbed land required for new facilities.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 76
Book Description
This environmental assessment (EA) has been provided to analyze the environmental consequences associated with realignment of ten maintenance workloads (electronic maintenance and testing) from the Sacramento Army Depot, California, to McClellan Air Force Base (AFB), California. This document has been prepared in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the regulations of the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) for NEPA compliance, and Air Force Regulation 19-2, which implements these laws and regulations. Section 1.0, Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action, presents the purpose and need, scoping process for the EA, and applicable regulatory compliance and coordination. Section 2.0, Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives, describes the project in detail, addresses alternatives, and summarizes project impacts and mitigation measures. Section 3.0, Affected Environment, provides a description of the potentially affected physical and human environments. Section 4.0, Environmental Consequences, describes the potential impacts of implementing the Proposed Action and No-Action Alternative and any mitigation measures required.
Author: MILITARY AIRLIFT COMMAND SCOTT AFB IL. Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 101
Book Description
The action for this Environmental Assessment (EA) consists of the realignment of various aircraft and manpower authorization assets from Norton AFB to McChord AFB. The relocation actions will include transfers of personnel authorizations, aircraft, and various other equipment and material. Additional basing changes at McChord AFB also are assessed in order to identify possible cumulative impacts. The EA assesses the environmental impacts associated with the action. The areas of potential impact analyzed are air quality, noise, hazardous materials, wastes and stored fuels, water resources, vegetation and wildlife resources, threatened and endangered species, cultural resources, land use, and socioeconomics. The EA describes the baseline conditions, potential environmental impacts (beneficial and adverse), and possible mitigations of adverse impacts. The Base Closure and Realignment Act specifically exempts this EA from considering the need, purpose, or reason for the realignment from Norton AFB to McChord AFB.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 57
Book Description
This environmental assessment (EA) examines the environmental impacts relocating AIR WARRIOR from George Air Force Base (AFB), located in the Mojave Desert of Southern California. The document was prepared pursuant to Section 102 of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Public Law (PL) 92-190, as implemented by regulations promulgated by the President's Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and Air Force Regulation (AFR) 19-2. The EA was also prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Since the alternatives to proposed action, including the no action and delay action alternatives, are not considered feasible, this document only examines the potential environmental impacts near George AFB of relocating AIR WARRIOR from George AFB. This action will involve the loss of 4,000 sorties per year and 38 personnel authorizations.
Author: DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC. Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 82
Book Description
It is proposed that the Air Force Inspection and Safety Center (AFSIC) be transferred from Norton Air Force Base (AFB) in California to Kirtland AFB in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Within the same time frame, seven H-53 helicopters would be replaced with four MH-53J and four CH-53A helicopters, four H-3 helicopters would be replaced with five MH-60G helicopters, and three MC- 130H aircraft would bed down at Kirtland AFB. Some facility construction and modification projects would be associated with these changes. This environmental assessment evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the proposed action. Noise modeling indicates that the changes in helicopters and the beddown of the MC-130H would cause only minor changes in the noise contours in the vicinity of Kirtland AFB. Aircraft emissions of all five criteria air pollutants would increase, but increases in the ambient pollutant levels at the base boundary are projected to be small, and concentrations would be well within air quality standards. No deterioration in the quality of the land, groundwater, or surface water resources would result from the proposed action. Small areas of vegetation would be removed by activities associated with the construction projects, but this removal would not jeopardize the ecological resources of the area, including any threatened or endangered species. No effects are expected on known archeological sites or historical resources.
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: United States. Air Force
Author: 
Author: 
Author: MILITARY AIRLIFT COMMAND SCOTT AFB IL.
Author: 
Author: 
Author: DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC.