[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 21 (Friday, January 31, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4733-4741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-2349]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy


Notice of Record of Decision To Realign Marine Corps Air Station/ 
Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton, CA

SUMMARY: The Department of the Navy has decided to realign Marine Corps 
Air Station/Marine Corps Base (MCAS/MCB) Camp Pendelton, California. 
This decision is made upon careful consideration of all comments on the 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the realignment 
action. It has been decided to implement the realignment action using 
the alternative B configuration, which was both the preferred 
alternative and also the environmentally preferred alternative.

DATES: This Record Of Decision becomes effective January 27, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information regarding this 
Record Of Decision or the MCAS/MCB Camp Pendleton realignment may be 
obtained from Major Pat D. Pinkston at (714) 726-4047.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The text of the entire Record Of Decision is 
provided as follows:

Table of Contents:

1. Introduction
2. Proposed Action
3. Purpose and Need
4. Background
5. Alternatives
6. Implementation of the Proposed Action
    A. Addition of Aviation Assets
    B. Changes to Aviation Operations
    C. Construction of Facilities
7. Environmental Consequences
    A. Residual Significant Impacts
    B. Impacts Mitigated Below Threshold of Significance
    C. Impacts That Are Not Significant
8. Comments Received on the Final EIS Public Review
9. Conclusions
10. Further Information

1. Introduction

    The Department of the Navy (DoN) has been studying a proposal to 
realign Marine Corps Aviation assets temporarily located at MCAS El 
Toro and permanently assigned to MCAS Tustin to other locations in 
Southern California. The realignment would include Marine Corps 
aircraft, their dedicated personnel, equipment and support. The 
realignment would be undertaken in accordance with the Defense Base 
Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (BRAC) (Public Law 101-510). The 
DoN has conducted extensive analysis of the proposal under Section 
102(2) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and the 
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA 
(40 CFR 1500-1508). The process used for the analysis sought the views 
of the public and those Federal, State and local agencies with special 
expertise. Public comments have been carefully considered. Having 
reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Statement, the public comments, 
and pertinent parts of the administrative record, the Department of the 
Navy announces its decision to proceed with the realignment of Marine 
Corps Air Station (MCAS)/Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton, 
California.

2. Proposed Action

    In compliance with the approved recommendations of the 1991, 1993, 
and 1995 Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commissions, the proposed 
action involves the relocation of selected aviation assets (along with 
their dedicated personnel and equipment) that are temporarily located 
at MCAS El Toro and permanently assigned to MCAS Tustin to MCAS Camp 
Pendleton, changes in aviation operations, and the construction of 
facilities. The relocating assets include approximately 800 personnel, 
four CH-46E (medium-lift) helicopter squadrons (48 aircraft) and one 
detachment of CH-53E (heavy-lift) helicopters (four aircraft). Upon 
full implementation of the proposed action, MCAS Camp Pendleton would 
support ten helicopter squadrons and one detachment totaling 212 
aircraft. Because one existing UH-1/AH-1 (light attack/utility) 
helicopter squadron (27 aircraft) and one CH-46 helicopter squadron (12 
aircraft) will normally be deployed, normal base loading will consist 
of approximately 3,900 personnel and 173 rotary-wing aircraft.

3. Purpose and Need

    The purpose and need of the proposed action is to comply with the 
1991, 1993, and 1995 BRAC Commissions' recommendations for the closure 
and realignment of MCAS Tustin and relocation of MCAS Tustin aircraft, 
along with their dedicated personnel and equipment, in a manner that is 
consistent with Marine Corps operational requirements.

4. Background

    This action was initiated following the effective date of the 1993 
recommendations of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission 
established under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990, 
Public Law 101-510.
    Pursuant to that law, recommendations of the Commission become 
final if the President sends them to Congress and Congress does not 
reject them within 45 legislative days. Once recommendations become 
final, 10 U.S.C. sec. 2904 requires that the closures and relocations 
must be implemented within six years. The 1993 recommendations included 
a change to the 1991 BRAC Commission's recommendations for MCAS Tustin, 
which had named Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) 
Twentynine Palms as one of the receiving sites for helicopter assets 
being realigned from MCAS Tustin. The BRAC 93 Commission deleted MCAGCC 
as a receiving site and directed relocation to ``NAS North Island, NAS 
Miramar, or MCAS Camp Pendleton, California.'' In BRAC 95, the 
Commission again altered the receiving site for assets realigned from 
MCAS Tustin by striking the three potential sites listed in BRAC 93 and 
substituting ``other air stations consistent with operational 
requirements.'' As a result, aviation assets from MCAS Tustin are being 
realigned to: MCAS New River, North Carolina; MCB Hawaii; MCAS Camp 
Pendleton, California; and MCAS Miramar, California.
    When the proposed action is completed, four CH-46E helicopter 
squadrons (48 aircraft) and one detachment of CH-53E helicopters (four 
aircraft) will be added to the existing MCAS Camp Pendleton loading 
(consisting of six squadrons totaling 160 aircraft. Because one 
existing UH-1/AH-1 (light attack/utility) helicopter squadron (27 
aircraft) and one CH-43 helicopter squadron (12 aircraft) will normally 
be deployed, normal base loading will consist of approximately 3,900 
personnel and 173 rotary-wing aircraft. In an interim move after the 
BRAC 1995 decision and unrelated to selection of permanent relocation 
sites, all of MCAS Tustin's CH-46Es have been relocated to MCAS El 
Toro, in order to facilitate placing a significant portion of MCAS 
Tustin in caretaker status.
    As independent actions implementing the recommendations of the 1995 
BRAC Commission, two MCAS Tustin

[[Page 4734]]

squadrons have already been permanently relocated: One to MCAS New 
River and one to MCB Hawaii. Separate NEPA documentation was completed 
for the relocation of these assets. Separate NEPA documentation has 
been completed for the realignment of NAS Miramar to MCAS Miramar, 
California, which includes the permanent relocation of the remainder of 
the MCAS Tustin assets.

5. Alternatives

    NEPA and the CEQ regulations require the Department of the Navy to 
study and evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives for accomplishing 
the purpose and need underlying the proposed action. The underlying 
purpose of BRAC, including the recommendation to close MCAS Tustin and 
realign its assets, is to reduce infrastructure, costs, and personnel 
requirements, while maintaining operational capabilities. Because of 
this overriding purpose, alternative sites that did not contribute to 
such reductions did not fall within the range of reasonable 
alternatives and did not warrant detailed, comparative analysis.
    The EIS process initially identified three alternatives: no action, 
the use of other military installations, and alternative site 
configurations at MCAS Camp Pendleton. The alternative site 
configurations primarily involve the location of refueling facilities 
and are described as Alternative A, Alternative B, and Alternative C. 
The environmentally preferred alternative is Alternative B.
    The no-action alternative (i.e., not realigning MCAS Tustin 
aircraft) was not evaluated in the EIS because the Defense Base Closure 
and Realignment Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-510) exempts from 
consideration under NEPA, among other things, the need for closing a 
military installation and the need for transferring functions to 
selected receiving installations as recommended by the Commission.
    Five possible locations that fit the final BRAC 95 recommendations 
were identified within the West Coast region: MCAS Camp Pendleton, NAS 
North Island, NAS Miramar, Naval Air Facility (NAF) El Centro, and 
March Air Reserve Base (ARB). In compliance with the decision of the 
1995 BRAC, the ability of these sites to meet Marine Corps operational 
requirements efficiently was a prime consideration.
    The primary mission of CH-46 and CH-53 helicopters is to provide 
tactical lift of Marine Corps ground combat and combat support 
elements. Camp Pendleton is the center of the West Coast training 
complex for the Marine Corps, including ground combat elements. 
Integrated air-ground training is critical to the tactical proficiency 
and readiness of Marine Corps units. Therefore, regardless of where the 
CH-46 and CH-53 assets are assigned, significant helicopter operations 
and training will occur at Camp Pendleton.
    The review of alternative receiving sites for helicopters revealed 
that operational efficiencies arising from collocating helicopters with 
ground elements resulted in clear and overwhelming military advantages. 
Consequently, this allowed detailed analysis to focus on alternative 
site configurations at Camp Pendleton.
    The overwhelming operational advantages of the MCAS Camp Pendleton 
alternative over the other possible four alternatives are:

     It lies completely within the boundaries of MCB Camp 
Pendleton, and allows for collocation of Marine ground forces and a 
significant portion of the counterpart rotary-wing aviation support. 
This provides an optimal transit time to primary training areas and 
efficient use of limited manpower, equipment and fiscal resources. 
The collocation of ground and aviation units provides a synergistic 
effect on training and support, allowing more realistic and 
efficient training of the Marine Corps air-ground team in a ``train 
as we will fight'' environment.
     It provides immediate access to: Adequate areas for 
both helicopter and over-the-beach amphibious assault training; 
remote areas, suitable beaches, and undeveloped airfield sites for 
advance deployment training of air-ground teams; helicopter landing 
sites to support air-ground training and operations; and high 
elevation confined area landing sites for training.
     It provides ready access to: established logistics 
support; division training areas for combined arms and assault 
helicopter joint vertical training; restricted air space and 
ordnance target complexes within 50 air route miles of home base to 
train pilots and gunners; helicopter-capable amphibious shipping for 
ship-based training and operations; and outlying landing sites 
within 50 air route miles of home base for conducting syllabus 
training including field carrier landing practice.

    These advantages demonstrate that relocation to MCAS Camp Pendleton 
provides the best overall mission capability for the concerned Marine 
Corps assets and best supports operational requirements. In fact, 
absent other constraints, MCAS Camp Pendleton would be the 
operationally preferred site for the remaining USMC rotary-wing 
squadrons subject to the BRAC recommendations. Unfortunately, MCAS Camp 
Pendleton is not a reasonable alternative for those additional 
squadrons because of severe geographic limitations on the size of the 
airfield. It cannot physically accommodate the additional facilities 
that would be required for basing all of the west coast rotary-wing 
squadrons. The Santa Margarita River bounds MCAS to the east, north and 
west. Any additions to the runways would entail moving the Santa 
Margarita River. Riparian areas associated with the Santa Margarita 
River support nine federally-listed endangered species, including the 
least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher. Any substantial 
modifications to the Santa Margarita River in order to extend the 
runways would eliminate their habitat and significantly impact these 
endangered species. An ancient Indian village is present on the south 
bank of the Santa Margarita River. Preliminary archeological 
information obtained from this site suggests the site had been 
continuously inhabited for over 2,500 years, making it one of the most 
important archeological resources in southern California. Any runway 
extensions would traverse this archeological site.
    The alternative site configurations aboard MCAS Camp Pendleton 
included Alternative A, Alternative B, and Alternative C. Alternative B 
locates the fuel pits to the northwestern end of the air facility 
infrastructure and creates mitigable impacts to biological resources. 
Both Alternatives A and C would locate the fuel pits at the 
southeastern end of the air facility infrastructure and would create 
significant impacts to the historical/cultural site located east of the 
air facility infrastructure. After a systematic and multi-disciplinary 
evaluation, Alternative B was chosen to be the Preferred Alternative, 
providing for more efficient air operations with no impacts to 
sensitive and unique cultural (historical and archeological) resources.
    For alternatives that were initially identified but subsequently 
eliminated from detailed study based on operational requirements, 
Council on Environmental Quality regulations require the Department of 
the Navy only to discuss briefly the reasons for their having been 
eliminated.
    For the reasons summarized below, all of the potential sites except 
Camp Pendleton were found to be unreasonable alternatives and 
consequently were eliminated in the EIS process from detailed study and 
analysis. Eliminating unreasonable alternative sites allowed the 
Department of the Navy to focus rigorously upon reasonable alternatives 
at the Camp Pendleton site.
    Potential receiving sites for the assets to be realigned from MCAS 
El Toro and MCAS Tustin were initially screened on

[[Page 4735]]

the basis of several criteria: (1) Realignment recommendations approved 
by the President and accepted by Congress in BRAC 91, 93, and 95; (2) 
operational requirements; (3) infrastructure required to support the 
realigned assets; (4) personnel requirements; and (5) military value. 
Because of the mission of the squadrons involved, considerable weight 
was placed on the ability of a site to provide aviation support of 
ground elements while maximizing operational efficiency.
    To achieve the economies that were basic to BRAC, Marine Corps 
force structure relies on the location of installations to form 
interdependent, mutually supporting complexes on the East Coast, West 
Coast, and in the Pacific. In order to meet operational and mission 
requirements, the selected receiving site(s) should be in close 
proximity to the established regional complex. MCAS Tustin is located 
within the West Coast regional complex. Receiving sites for the 
realigned assets therefore need to lie within the West Coast region. 
The Marine Corps regional complex on the West Coast is centered around 
MCB Camp Pendleton, CA. Since collocation of helicopters with the 
ground elements that the helicopters support maximizes operational and 
training efficiencies, locating as many helicopter squadrons at the 
center of the regional complex (Camp Pendleton) is optimum.

NAS Miramar

    After careful consideration, the Department of the Navy has decided 
to realign/convert NAS Miramar, located approximately 35 air route 
miles south of MCAS/MCB Camp Pendleton, to MCAS Miramar. Pursuant to 
this decision, MCAS Miramar will support a mix of fixed-wing and 
rotary-wing aircraft. Medium and heavy lift helicopters based at 
Miramar can not train with the troops, equipment, and attack 
helicopters already at Camp Pendleton as effectively as they could if 
located at Camp Pendleton. Moreover, the Department of the Navy has 
responded to community concerns at Miramar by committing to implement a 
series of measures to mitigate the noise impacts that will occur from 
rotary-wing aircraft that will be based at MCAS Miramar. Adding 52 more 
helicopters to MCAS Miramar, when there are other, operationally 
preferable sites, would frustrate these mitigation measures and is not 
reasonable.

NAF El Centro

    The purpose of NAF El Centro is to support transient Department of 
the Navy aircraft that come to the region to use the unique and varied 
training ranges in Southern California and Western Arizona. The high 
tempo of existing operations, and the condition, availability, and 
quantity of its infrastructure make it an unreasonable alternative. 
Medium and heavy lift helicopters based at El Centro cannot train with 
troops, equipment, and attack helicopter already at Camp Pendleton as 
effectively as they could if located at Camp Pendleton. The distance to 
MCB Camp Pendleton is 108 air route miles, which is over twice the 
normal combat/training range for CH-46 helicopters. The extended 
transits between El Centro and Camp Pendleton would provide 
significantly less opportunity for training as part of an air-ground 
team, and would increase operation and maintenance associated with 
these aircraft. The base was constructed in 1943, and over half of its 
buildings (by square foot of footprint) are temporary or semi-permanent 
in character, many of which are deteriorated. There are a limited 
number of hangars and even many of those are currently categorized as 
being in a substandard facilities condition. The maintenance facilities 
are also insufficient for Marine Corps requirements.

NAS North Island

    NAS North Island, located approximately 40 air route miles from 
Camp Pendleton, is not a feasible alternative because it does not 
maximize operational efficiencies or meet operational requirements. 
Medium and heavy lift helicopters based at NAS North Island cannot 
train with the troops, equipment, and attack helicopters already at 
Camp Pendleton as effectively as they could if located at Camp 
Pendleton. Also, NAS North Island cannot accommodate Marine Corps 
rotary-wing operational requirements due to its location, existing 
tempo of operations, and nature of the surrounding property. NAS North 
Island is located approximately one mile from Lindbergh Field (the 
major commercial airport in San Diego) and is adjacent to downtown San 
Diego and the City of Coronado. Repetitive training events such as 
Touch and Go, and Ground Control Approach (GCA) could not be 
efficiently conducted due to proximity of the civilian development. 
Computer vehicle traffic, which is already congested in the City of 
Coronado, would be further impacted by the addition of personnel 
assigned to off-base housing.

March ARB

    Relocating Marine Corps rotary-wing assets from MCAS Tustin to 
March ARB, an Air Force reserve facility approximately 35 air route 
miles from Camp Pendleton, would not maximize operational efficiency. 
Medium and heavy lift helicopters based at March cannot train with the 
troops, equipment, and attack helicopters already at Camp Pendleton as 
effectively as they could if located at Camp Pendleton. Also, as the 
active duty component at March ARB, the Marine Corps would become the 
host activity, a status which would require additional USMC personnel 
to perform base functions.

6. Implementation of the Proposed Action

    Implementation of the proposed action at Camp Pendleton includes 
the addition of selected aviation assets, changes to aviation 
operations, and the construction of necessary facilities to support 
Marine Corps operations.

A. Addition of Aviation Assets

    When the proposed action is complete, four CH-46E helicopter 
squadrons (48 aircraft) and one detachment of CH-53E helicopters (four 
aircraft) will be added to the existing MCAS Camp Pendleton loading 
(consisting of six squadrons totaling 160 aircraft). Since one of the 
existing UH-1/AH-1 (27 light attack/utility aircraft) squadrons and one 
CH-46 (12 medium lift helicopters) squadron are normally deployed, the 
loading supported by MCAS Camp Pendleton upon completion of this action 
is projected to be approximately 173 rotary-wing aircraft and 
approximately 3,900 personnel.

B. Changes to Aviation Operations

    Implementation of the proposed action will involve changes in the 
aviation operations at Camp Pendleton. These changes will include: 
increased use of the primary runway, decreased use of the ``right 
grass'' for skid-configured helicopters, increased use (within 
established restrictions) of Temporary Alternate Landing Area (TALA), 
and increased use of Red Beach VSTOL and LHA pads.

C. Construction of Facilities

    Implementation of the proposed action will result in MCAS Camp 
Pendleton being configured to accommodate three of the four assigned 
CH-46 (medium lift) squadrons at any time, with the fourth on 
deployment. Implementation of the proposed action will involve a 
reconfiguration and expansion of existing aircraft aprons

[[Page 4736]]

and pavements, flightline facilities, and associated support facilities 
to meet USMC requirements. The potential for expansion to 
simultaneously accommodate all four CH-46 squadrons on a long-term 
basis has been identified as a possibility in the future. Any proposal 
to routinely house and operate four CH-46 squadrons simultaneously will 
be subjected to further NEPA analysis.
    The action now under consideration would include the following 
construction and reconfiguration of assets at the MCAS:
     Expansion of aircraft parking apron to within 500 feet of 
the runway centerline.
     Relocation and consolidation of aircraft fueling 
operations northwest of the runway with eight refueling points and one 
stacking lane to accommodate waiting aircraft.
     Construction of a compass calibration pad, water well, 
crash crew ``hot spot'' facility, and connecting taxiways to replace 
the facilities displaced by runway apron expansion.
     Partial elimination of the existing ``right grass'' area, 
currently being utilized for helicopter training, due to construction 
of new facilities in that area.
     Construction of a concrete pad for siting of Marine Air 
Control Squadron (MACS-1, Det A) expeditionary radar gear.
     Construction of maintenance hangars and centralized 
hazardous material support facilities along the southeast side of the 
flightline to support the relocating squadrons.
     Expansion of the existing Marine Aviation Logistics 
Squadron (MALS) aircraft maintenance complex in order to accommodate 
CH-46E helicopters.
     Expansion of supply functions, including construction of a 
warehouse and concrete pads with supporting utilities for 35 
maintenance vans.
     Relocation and expansion of the aircraft bulk fuel storage 
facility as well as the fuel truck parking/loading area and fill stand 
southwest of the runway.
     Expansion of administration and training-related 
facilities to accommodate the additional personnel.
     Modification to the engine test cell and expansion of the 
armory.
     Construction and modification of roads, parking lots, 
utilities and support buildings.
    In addition to the facilities proposed at the MCAS, the proposed 
action would require new construction in Area 24 on MCB Camp Pendleton, 
including Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQ's) with administrative 
spaces, and a physical fitness building in order to accommodate 
additional on-base enlisted personnel. The proposed action would also 
require the construction of a Tactical Air Navigation (TACAN) facility 
in Area 32 on MCB Camp Pendleton, adjacent to Building 32942. A TACAN 
is primarily a military short-range (200 mile) navigational aid, which 
would house ultra high frequency (UHF) transmitting equipment. A TACAN 
provides omni-directional azimuth and distance information to aircraft 
in flight.

7. Environmental Consequences

    Environmental impacts on the following resources were analyzed in 
the EIS: Geology and soils, air quality, hydrology and water quality, 
biological resources, cultural resources, visual resources, land use, 
public health and safety, hazardous materials and wastes, aircraft 
operations, noise, transportation and circulation, socio-economics, and 
community services and utilities. The impacts analyzed in the EIS are 
grouped according to their degree of significance: residual significant 
impacts (those which cannot be mitigated below the threshold of 
significance); impacts mitigated below the threshold of significance; 
and impacts that are not significant. As discussed below, the Marine 
Corps will implement a number of mitigative measures to avoid or 
minimize environmental harm from the proposed action.

A. Residual Significant Impacts

    There will be no significant environmental impacts after the 
mitigation measures described in the FEIS are implemented.

B. Impacts Mitigated Below Threshold of Significance

Geology and Soils
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will include 
incorporating appropriate erosion control measures and proper 
excavation techniques to ensure protection of soil resources. The 
proposed action will not affect geologic resources as the facilities 
will be designed to reduce the potential for land slides and other 
adverse geologic activities. No significant impacts to soil will occur 
as a result of implementing the proposed action.
Hydrology
    The MCAS facilities associated with the proposed action would be 
situated within the 100-year flood plain of the Santa Margarita River 
with the exception of the Area 24 and 32 construction. Although a 
temporary levee exists along the northern boundary of the MCAS, the air 
station is inadequately protected from flood hazards and impacts due to 
flooding would be significant. To reduce the potential for flooding at 
the Air Station, a construction project has been proposed for fiscal 
year 1998. The project will construct a levee along the northern 
boundary of the MCAS to protect facilities from a 100-year flood. 
Separate NEPA documentation is being prepared for this project. The 
proposed levee project is needed regardless of the proposed realignment 
action, and is functionally independent of the proposed realignment 
action. Under the proposed realignment action, the bulk fuel farm and 
the hazardous material facility will be elevated by constructing them 
on fill material to reduce their susceptibility to impacts from 
flooding. The proposed realignment of helicopter squadrons has been 
reviewed in accordance with Executive Order 11988 and has been found to 
be the only practicable alternative for meeting mission requirements. 
The proposed action and other planned construction have incorporated 
accepted flood protection measures to the extent practicable.
Water Quality
    Surface waters with in the Santa Margarita River and its coastal 
estuary have been designated by the San Diego Regional Water Quality 
Control Board (SDRWQCB [1995]) as having beneficial uses, which include 
municipal and domestic supply, agricultural and industrial supply, 
contact and non-contact recreation, warm and cold fresh water habitats, 
wildlife habitat and preservation of rare and endangered species. The 
proposed action would result in increased pavement and storm water 
runoff. Construction-related activities such as clearing, grading, and 
excavation often result in the potential for fuels, oil, grease, and 
sediment to be carried in storm water runoff to nearby surface waters. 
In addition, operation of aircraft and other equipment, as well as 
fueling procedures such as those associated with the proposed 
facilities, typically result in the release of fuels, oils and 
solvents, and other compounds onto paved surfaces.
    The potential release of these materials into the adjacent Santa 
Margarita River, either directly during a large spill, or indirectly 
from small releases via storm water runoff, represents a potentially 
significant impact on water quality. Discharge of contaminated surface 
water to the Santa Margarita River can potentially impact groundwater 
quality via recharge of groundwater through the highly permeable river 
alluvium. To reduce impacts on surface water quality from

[[Page 4737]]

construction-related and operational activities to an acceptable level, 
the Marine Corps will: (1) Obtain coverage under the State of 
California General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit to identify 
the sources of sediment and other pollutants that affect the quality of 
storm water discharges and to identify the measures to reduce sediment 
and other pollutants in storm water discharges; (2) implement standard 
construction best management practices including use of silt barriers 
and vegetative cover to provide erosion control; (3) locate all 
hazardous material and waste storage areas within containment 
structures; (4) design pavement areas to prevent fuel spills or runoff 
from directly entering natural drainage features; (5) direct storm 
water discharge to concrete channels or swales that provide a single 
point of discharge for non-point source storm water runoff from the 
developed portions of the air station. Oil/water separators will be 
constructed to remove the ``first flush'' (approximately the first 20 
minutes of a storm event) of petroleum, oil and lubricant residue from 
the storm water prior to release into the Santa Margarita River 
watershed; (6) connect hangar trench drains to four 30,000 gallon 
holding tanks for containment of the emergency Aqueous Film Forming 
Foam (AFFF) fire suppression system discharges; (7) ensure all 
discharges to natural drainages will comply with Section 402 of the 
Clean Water Act, requirements for storm water discharges; and (8) 
update the MCAS/MCB Camp Pendleton Oil and Hazardous Substances Spill 
Contingency Plan, as well as the Spill Prevention Control and Counter-
measures (SPCC) and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) 
as required under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and 
the Clean Water Act, to provide for specific measures in the event of a 
spill.
    The EPA, in a comment on the FEIS, requested corroboration from the 
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) that proposed mitigation 
measures were adequate to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act. 
While the RWQCB did not provide comments on the FEIS, the RWQCB has 
reviewed the mitigation measures as part of the state water quality 
certification process under section 401 of Clean Water Act. (The 
certification process under Section 401 is part of the permit process 
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.) Conditions identified in the 
water quality certificate will be included in the 404 permit issued 
under the Clean Water Act. The Marine Corps will comply with those 
conditions.
    As discussed in the FEIS, appropriate measures will be implemented 
to ensure that the potential for release of fuels is minimized. The 
installation spill response plan will be updated to cover the new 
facilities. No significant impacts to water quality will occur as a 
result of implementing the proposed action with the proposed mitigation 
measures in place.
    The proposed action will result in additional withdrawals of 
groundwater from the San Margarita groundwater basin because of an 
increase in military personnel and operational facilities. The 
historical and current pumping rate of this groundwater basin totals 
approximately 6,065 acre-feet per year (AFY). Safe yield for the Santa 
Margarita groundwater basin is estimated to be 7,650 AFY. 
Implementation of the proposed action could result in an overdraft of 
the aquifer, which would be a significant impact. To reduce significant 
impacts on groundwater supply to an acceptable level, the Marine Corps 
will: (1) Limit groundwater withdrawals from the aquifer contained 
within the Santa Margarita River watershed to established safe yield 
(7,650 AFY); (2) continue to implement water conservation measures; and 
(3) continue groundwater monitoring in all drainages where groundwater 
is extracted.
Biology
    The Department of the Navy has carefully studied the potential 
impacts of the proposed action on endangered species and wetlands and 
in consultation with the requisite agencies, has developed and will 
implement appropriate measures to protect these sensitive resources. 
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has been formally consulted 
during the preparation of the EIS. Based upon consultation with the 
USFWS, three federally-listed endangered/threatened species were 
identified as present on MCAS Camp Pendleton. The endangered species 
that are included are the California gnatcatcher (gnatcatcher), the 
least Bell's vireo, and the southwestern willow flycatcher. The 
Department of the Navy prepared a Biological Assessment on these three 
species and other biological resources. Information provided to USFWS 
in the Biological Assessment is summarized in the DEIS and the FEIS. 
Specifically, the DEIS and the FEIS discussed the existing condition of 
these threatened and endangered species as well as other sensitive 
species and their habitat in considerable detail. The DEIS and FEIS 
identified the impacts associated with the proposed action and 
discussed mitigation measures that would reduce the potential for 
adverse impacts on the threatened and endangered species and their 
habitat.
    The results of this consultation are provided in the USFWS 
Biological Opinion 1-6-95-F-02, Programmatic Activities and 
conservation Plans in Riparian and Estuarine/Beach Ecosystems on Marine 
Corps Base Camp Pendleton, dated October 30, 1995. The Biological 
Opinion states that the proposed action will not jeopardize the 
existence of listed species. The Marine Corps will comply with all 
terms and conditions of the Biological Opinion. The Biological Opinion 
includes an Incidental Take Statement with reasonable and prudent 
measures to minimize impacts on the species of concern. The Marine 
Corps will comply with these measures.
    As a result of the environmental review conducted in conjunction 
with the Marine Corps' application for a permit under section 404 of 
the Clean Water Act, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) has said 
that it will place conditions on dredge and fill aspects of the 
proposed action. Those conditions resulted in a slight decrease in the 
amount of wetlands that would be impacted. Under the conditions imposed 
in the Clean Water Act permit, the proposed action will result in 
permanent loss of approximately 9.5 acres of wetlands. Additionally, 
approximately 5.0 acres of wetlands and waters would be temporarily 
impacted by implementation of a 100 foot wide edge effect around the 
fuel points. The Marine Corps has determined that the proposed project 
would indirectly impact approximately 15 acres of endangered species 
habitat through development, construction, and habitat fragmentation. 
An undetermined amount of additional wetlands and waters adjacent to 
the proposed project site would be indirectly impacted by noise, 
helicopter downwash, and human activity at the fueling point. These 
direct and indirect impacts may be significant if unmitigated.
    Consistent with the Department of the Navy's policy for ``no net 
loss'' of wetlands functions and values, as part of the Clean Water Act 
Section 404 Permit process, the Marine Corps will mitigate direct 
impacts to wetlands and waters of the U.S. by carrying-out restoration. 
Also, the Marine Corps will conduct exotic weed control as part of its 
mitigation for indirect impacts. This mitigation measure was subject to 
public review, and approval by the ACOE as part of the Clean Water Act

[[Page 4738]]

permitting process. No construction activities will occur in wetland 
areas until the permit from the ACOE is received. The Marine Corps will 
comply with all the terms and conditions of the permit.
    As set forth in the Biological Opinion, the Marine Corps will 
minimize impacts to existing wetlands during construction by 
implementing the following measures: (1) Delineating wetland boundaries 
on contractor drawings and flagging the site to prevent impacts to 
habitat outside project boundaries; (2) taking erosion and sediment 
transport control measures (e.g. sediments basins, hay bales, silt 
fences, etc.); (3) staging construction equipment at least 100 feet 
from wetlands; (4) minimization of dust from construction activities; 
(5) revegetation of temporarily impacted areas; and (6) education of 
construction workers with regard to wetland habitats and their 
sensitivity. Biological monitoring during construction shall occur in 
areas adjacent to the Santa Margarita River Basin.
    The federally endangered least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow 
flycatcher occupy the wetland habitats of the Santa Margarita River 
that surround the Air Station on two sides. The federally threatened 
California gnatcatcher occupy coastal sage scrub habitat in the 
vicinity of the Santa Margarita River. Annual surveys at the MCAS 
indicate that the presence of helicopter activity has not precluded a 
substantial increase in the least Bell's vireo population within the 
Santa Margarita River drainage since 1981 (USFWS 1995 Biological 
Opinion 1-6-95-F-02). Nesting has occurred in habitat adjacent to the 
Air Station every year since survey data has been collected. Annual 
survey maps indicate that the heaviest concentration of the nesting 
least Bell's vireo appear to be influenced by the quality of riparian 
habitat rather than distance to the MCAS. The proposed action may 
result in indirect noise impacts on these species. The Marine Corps is 
conducting on-going monitoring of the effects of helicopter flights 
between 300 and 500 ft AGL in the adjacent habitat. Mitigation measures 
described in the Terms & Conditions of the Biological Opinion are 
designed to reduce impacts to an acceptable level.
    No mitigation for biological impacts are required in Areas 24 and 
32. Area 24 is a ``disturbed'' area, and Area 32, an Upland Area, was 
surveyed for the Pocket Mouse and the California gnatcatcher, and found 
to be devoid of those species.
Cultural Resources
    In accordance with 36 CFR Part 800, regulations implementing 
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, three cultural 
sites were evaluated for eligibility for inclusion in the National 
Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Only one site, CA-SDi-10156/12599/
H, was determined to be eligible. The State Historic Preservation 
Officer agrees with this determination. Similarly, the State Historic 
Preservation Officer has concurred in the determination that the 
proposed action will not affect this or any other historic properties. 
Therefore, due to avoidance, the proposed realignment of MCAS Camp 
Pendleton will not significantly impact cultural resources listed or 
determined eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic 
Places.
    As there are no cultural resources recorded within the limits of 
construction for the proposed action, no direct impacts to known 
cultural resources will occur. However, one extensive archaeological 
site, CA-SDi-10156/12599/H, is located near the limits of the proposed 
action and is associated with the Santa Margarita Ranch House complex, 
a site listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Therefore, 
significant indirect impacts form the proposed action could occur if 
measures to protect the site during construction are not implemented. 
To reduce potentially significant indirect impacts on cultural 
resources to below the threshold of significance, the Marine Corps 
will: (1) Prior to commencement of construction activities, protect (by 
fencing or other means) portions of site CA-SDi-10156/12599/H outside 
of the project area from potential incidental construction-related 
impacts; and (2) pursuant to 36 CFR 800.11, if any archaeological 
resources are discovered during project grading or construction, halt 
all activities in that particular location until an archaeologist is 
notified and the resources assessed. The archaeologist will establish 
procedures for redirecting or halting work to permit the sampling, 
identification and evaluation of previously unidentified archaeological 
resources.
Aircraft Operations
    Aircraft operations for the proposed action would result in a 
significant increase in the use of runways, established military 
airspace, and military flight tracks. The Marine Corps will mitigate 
these impacts to an acceptable level by using as necessary the 
following measures: (1) Scheduling training other than during morning 
peak times, (2) scheduling block training times, (3) utilizing the Red 
Beach area, and (4) utilizing the Temporary Alternate Landing Area 
(TALA).

C. Impacts That Are Not Significant

Air Quality
    The San Diego Air Basin is federally classified as a serious ozone 
non-attainment area and a moderate carbon monoxide (CO) non-attainment 
area. Pursuant to Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, US EPA 
promulgated a final rule ``Determining Conformity of General Federal 
Actions to State or Federal Implementation Plans'' (General Conformity 
rule), 58 Fed. Reg. 63214 (Nov 30, 1993) (40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 93). A 
conformity applicability analysis of the air emissions associated with 
the proposed action was conducted. The conformity applicability 
analysis determined that air emissions associated with the proposed 
action (reduced by the amount of emissions associated with the 
departing Marine Corps aircraft) are: (1) Below de minimis levels 
(i.e., the net changes in emissions of criteria pollutants do not 
exceed threshold levels established in the General Conformity Rule); 
and, (2) not regionally significant (they do not exceed 10% of the San 
Diego Air Basin's total emissions inventory for any applicable criteria 
pollutant). Consequently, the proposed action is not subject to the 
General Conformity Rule. (FEIS, Sec. 4.2 and FEIS Appendix B)
    In conducting a conformity applicability analysis for the proposed 
action, the Department of the Navy selected 1990 as the most 
appropriate year to reflect Marine Corps aircraft operations and 
activities at MCAS Camp Pendleton as a fully operational Air Station in 
normal circumstances. As such, 1990 was used as a basis to calculate 
emissions increases and decreases caused by the proposed action; i.e., 
the ``net'' emissions considering all incoming and outgoing direct and 
indirect emissions. The ``netting'' of emissions in this manner 
appropriately accounts for the total direct and indirect emissions 
associated with the proposed action and is in accordance with 
provisions of the General Conformity Rule. The Department of the Navy's 
use of 1990 to analyze net emissions is also consistent with the San 
Diego Air Pollution Control District's (APCD) use of 1990 for 
determining emissions inventories. Even though total operations dropped 
in 1990 from previous years' totals due to deployments for Operation 
Desert Shield and Storm, a comparison of yearly level of operations for 
years when the OV-10 aircraft was still operational

[[Page 4739]]

reveals that 1990 is a representative year for calculating pre-BRAC 
operations and emissions.
    I took a hard look at the Department of the Navy's method for 
estimating air emissions and the supporting data. The Department of the 
Navy's method for calculating aircraft emissions applies the following 
elements: number of aircraft operations; type or mode of operation 
(power setting); number and type of aircraft engines per aircraft; time 
in mode; and, corresponding emission factors. The emission factors were 
obtained from studies conducted by the Navy Aircraft Environmental 
Support Office (AESO) that are referenced in the EPA ``Compilation of 
Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42).''
    In summary, the Department of the Navy has conducted a thorough 
review of the data and methods used to analyze whether the requirement 
for a conformity determination applies to this proposed action. My 
review of the record indicates that the proposed realignment of MCAS 
Camp Pendleton represents a net decrease in the total emissions of 
those air pollutants for which the San Diego area is in nonattainment. 
During the most recent review done in preparation for making this 
Record of Decision, however, the Department of the Navy has accounted 
for a number of changed circumstances. Some of these changes, such as 
shifts in projected construction schedules and delays in the migration 
of the realigning aircraft, resulted from delays in the EIS process. As 
a result, some of the data and dates in the conformity applicability 
analysis as summarized in the FEIS have changed. The Marine Corps 
carefully recalculated its emission estimates for the proposed action's 
conformity applicability analysis to reflect these changes and other 
refinements of data. These recalculations demonstrate that the net 
emissions from the proposed action remain below de minimis levels. Some 
of the changes of note in the applicability analysis include using an 
on-site batch concrete plant at MCAS Camp Pendleton during construction 
and defering the construction of the hot refueling pits from 1997 to 
1998. Data refinements included correcting some emission factors and 
hours of operations for equipment and aircraft. These changes and 
refinements indicate that emissions from the proposed action will 
remain below de minimis levels, as shown in the table below.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Emission rates (tons per year)   
                Annual net emissions (as compared to 1990)                --------------------------------------
                                                                               NOX           CO         ROG/HC  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 Net Emissions.......................................................           38         -619          -18
1998 Net Emissions.......................................................          -27         -695          -28
1999 Net Emissions.......................................................           13         -243           20
2000 Net Emissions.......................................................           10         -287           17
De minimis threshold level...............................................           50          100           50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Visual Resources
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will not have any 
significant impacts on the visual resources.
Land Use
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will not result in 
the change of any off-base land use designation, and therefore will not 
have any significant impacts on the land use of developed areas.
Public Health and Safety
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will not have any 
significant impacts on the local or regional public health and safety.
Hazardous Material and Wastes
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will not have any 
significant impacts on the life cycle (procurement, storage, use, 
through disposal) of hazardous materials or wastes.
Socioeconomics
    As discussed in the FEIS, the proposed action will not have any 
significant impacts on the local or regional socio-economics. In 
compliance with Executive Order 12898, an analysis was conducted to 
determine if minority or low-income populations would suffer 
disproportionate environmental impacts as a result of the proposed 
action. It was determined that these populations would not suffer 
disproportionate impacts.
Noise
    The FEIS carefully analyzed the issue of noise, recognizing that 
some members of the public are concerned about noise that would be 
generated by additional helicopter operations at MCAS Camp Pendleton.
    Noise impacts were assessed using the State of California's 
standard, the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), expressed in 
units of decibel (dB). The State of California's Title 21, Subchapter 
6, Section 5006 states: ``The level of noise acceptable to a reasonable 
person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a 
community noise equivalent level (CNEL) value of 65 dB for purposes of 
these regulations. This criterion level has been chosen for reasonable 
persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical 
California construction and may have windows partially open. It has 
been selected with reference to speech, sleep and community reaction.'' 
Section 5014 describes the land use that are incompatible within the 
noise impact boundaries. It provides that noise exposure levels less 
than 65 dB are generally compatible for noise sensitive land uses, 
including residential areas and schools. The aircraft operations-
related noise analysis is based on data presented in the ``Aircraft 
Noise Study for Marine Corps Air Station, Camp Pendleton, CA'' 
(NAVFACENGCOM 1995). The aircraft noise study utilized aircraft 
operations data from the Naval Aviation Simulation Model (NASMOD) 
report. Noise contours defining the areas of impact in 5 dB increment 
were developed using the NOISEMAP model and projected operational tempo 
data. The analysis considered the existing six squadrons, with one 
deployed, and the addition of four squadrons and the detachment of four 
helicopters.
    Although the standard for significance is 65 dB, the noise contours 
as low as 60 dB CNEL associated with the proposed action will remain 
entirely contained within the base boundaries of MCB Camp Pendleton. 
The average annual day 60-65 dB CNEL noise contour would increase by 
approximately 564 acres, while the total acreage increase within the 
65-70 dB CNEL noise contour would be 141 acres. No additional on-base 
sensitive noise receptors will be contained within the new 65-70 dB 
noise contour. Most notable is the increase in area of the 60-65 dB 
CNEL noise contour by about 42

[[Page 4740]]

percent (or from 1,339 to 1,903 acres). This increase is attributed to 
the large increase in Ground Control Approach (GCA) pattern operations, 
the use of the pattern during evening and nighttime hours (when larger 
weighting factors are used to compensate for quieter background noise, 
resulting in larger noise contours than would be created by daytime 
flights), and a significant increase in arrivals using the North 
initial approach route. Similarly, there is a major projected increase 
in aircraft departures and arrivals, causing the 60-65 dB CNEL noise 
contour to extend farther southwest. The remaining increase in the 60-
65 noise contour is consistent with increased operations for most 
departures, arrivals, and pattern operations.
    In addition, two off-base locations, located in the town of 
Fallbrook, were identified as potential noise sensitive receptors (the 
intersection of Mission Road and Industrial Way, and the Fallbrook 
Union High School). Under the proposed action, the intersection of 
Mission Road and Industrial Way (currently 46 dB CNEL), and the 
Fallbrook Union High School (currently 38 dB CNEL) will be exposed to 
sound level increases of 5 dB at the intersection, and 6 dB at the High 
School, during an average annual day. These increases and resulting 
noise levels are compatible with the established noise impact standards 
contained within the State of California Regulations (Title 21) for 
these land uses.
    The Marine Corps will continue to examine operations for ways to 
further reduce noise impacts on communities subject to routine 
overflight of MCAS Camp Pendleton aircraft. The MCB Camp Pendleton 
Community Plans and Liaison (CP&L) Office will continue to coordinate 
efforts with the local community by working with community leaders, 
local elected officials and professional staffs through established 
community relations and local government processes, e.g., the Fallbrook 
Ad Hoc Committee, to ensure that the concerns of local communities 
regarding Marine Corps operations will be taken into consideration.
    Construction noise associated with the proposed action would raise 
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of individual construction sites. 
Noise levels produced by typical construction equipment (e.g. heavy 
trucks, loaders, backhoes, cranes, and assorted pneumatic and diesel 
equipment) are of the same intensity as the 75-80 db CNEL noise contour 
created by aircraft operations. Impacts due to noise produced by 
construction equipment will be temporary, and although audible in the 
immediate vicinity, will not occur outside of the MCAS/MCB area of 
construction and will not increase noise levels beyond the MCAS/MCB 
boundaries. Traffic generated by construction activity is estimated to 
be approximately 30 to 50 construction-type vehicles per day. The 
increase in traffic noise would be approximately 0.5 dB and is not 
significant.
Transportation and Circulation
    Traffic-related impacts to either the on- or off-base circulation 
system, due to both construction and operation of the proposed action, 
would not be significant. Construction volumes would represent a small 
and temporary portion of daily traffic volumes on area roadways, 
carrying materials and heavy equipment to the site. Heavy construction 
equipment and vehicles would comprise a small portion of off-base 
traffic, since the vehicles would be driven to the site, and then kept 
on-site for the duration of the construction. It is estimated that 
construction traffic would range from 150 to 200 vehicles per day 
(including personal vehicles of construction employees), depending on 
the timing of construction of each facility. It is also assumed that 
traffic would approach the project sites equally from the Main Gate 
near 1-5, and the San Luis Rey Gate, near Oceanside, with the 
concentration of heavy construction vehicles using the Main Gate. 
Service contractors (equipment suppliers, maintenance, fuel trucks, 
etc) would comprise approximately 50 trips to and from the facilities 
each day.
    The proposed action is expected to generate a total of 
approximately 1,485 vehicles on off-base roadways during the weekdays. 
The Level of Service (LOS) and capacity on primary off-base roadways in 
the vicinity of MCB Camp Pendelton would not be lowered. Project-
related traffic would represent a negligible increase to off-base major 
intersections, which would not result in lowering the LOS with the 
addition of project-related traffic.
Community Services and Utilities
    Of the projected approximately 800 personnel associated with the 
proposed action, approximately 43 would be civilians who would be 
housed off-base, independent of the military personnel. School-aged 
dependents of civilian personnel would be absorbed into the local 
community. It is estimated that 363 school-aged military dependents 
will be introduced into the Oceanside, Fallbrook and Capistrano School 
Districts upon implementation of the proposed action. The additional 
families and their school-aged children would be disbursed throughout 
the existing housing stocks on base and in adjacent communities in San 
Diego and Orange Counties, and would not significantly impact school 
districts.

8. Comments Received on the Final EIS Public Review

    Twelve comment letters were received following publication of the 
FEIS. With the exception of an issue with cumulative impacts addressed 
below, the comments received were addressed in the sections 
corresponding to the issues of concern.
    The EPA expressed a concern that the FEIS should contain an 
explanation as to why several projects identified in the Draft EIS 
cumulative impacts analysis appear to be in support of the proposed 
action, but are analyzed under separate NEPA documentation. The 
projects identified in the cumulative impacts portion of the FEIS, both 
at MCB and MCAS Camp Pendleton (e.g., sewage treatment upgrades and 
construction of an outlying landing field) do not directly support the 
proposed BRAC action, and would be undertaken irrespective of the 
realignment of MCAS Tustin assets to Camp Pendleton. Many of the 
actions identified in the cumulative impacts section are only in the 
conceptual planning stage. The FEIS Cumulative Impacts section was 
expanded to address potential impacts for each project to the extent 
known; however, the available information was limited since many of 
these projects are only in the early stage of planning. The impacts 
associated with each of these projects would be mitigated at the 
project-specific level to ensure the continued protection of the 
natural and cultural resources, including the Santa Margarita River 
Basin.

9. Conclusion

    On behalf of the Department of the Navy, I have decided to realign 
selected aviation assets (four twelve-aircraft squadrons of mediun-lift 
CH-46E helicopters and one four-aircraft detachment of heavy-lift CH-
53E helicopters), along with their dedicated personnel, equipment, and 
support, from MCAS El Toro and MCAS Tustin to MCAS Camp Pendleton, 
which is located within MCB Camp Pendleton. After reviewing the FEIS, 
supporting documents, and comments and information received during the 
environmental review process, I have decided to implement this action 
using Camp Pendleton Site Alternative B (fuel pits to Northwest of 
existing airfield infrastructure), which was both the

[[Page 4741]]

Preferred Alternative and also the Environmentally Preferred 
Alternative.

10. Where to Obtain Further Information

    For further information, contact Major Pat D. Pinkston at (714) 
726-4047.

    Dated: January 27, 1997.
Duncan Holaday,
Deputy Assistant Secretary, Installations and Facilities.
[FR Doc. 97-2349 Filed 1-30-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-M