[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