[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 140 (Thursday, July 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43830-43833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-16635]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Finding of No Significant Impact for the Mobile Launch Platform

AGENCY: Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) prepared an Environmental 
Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of 
activities associated with using the Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) as a 
platform for testing sensors, launching target missiles, and launching 
interceptor missiles and the EA is hereby incorporated by reference. 
The MLP is the former USS Tripoli (LPH 10), a converted U.S. Navy Iwo 
Jima class Amphibious Assault Ship (Helicopter). The EA considers the 
impacts of specific tests that propose to use the MLP. After reviewing 
and analyzing currently available data and information on existing 
conditions, project impacts, and measures to mitigate those impacts, 
the MDA has determined that the proposed action is a Federal action 
that would not significantly affect the quality of the human 
environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) of 1969, as amended. Therefore the preparation of an 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required and MDA is issuing 
a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The MDA made this 
determination in accordance with all applicable environmental laws.
    The EA was prepared in accordance with NEPA; the Council on 
Environmental Quality regulations that implement NEPA (Code of Federal 
Regulations [CFR], title 40, parts 1500-1508); Department of Defense 
(DoD) Instruction 4715.9, Environmental Planning and Analysis; the 
applicable service regulations that implement these laws and 
regulations; and Executive Order (E.O.) 12114, Environmental Effects 
Abroad of Major Federal Actions, which direct DoD lead agency officials 
to consider potential environmental impacts and consequences when 
authorizing or approving Federal actions. The Draft EA was released for 
public comment on April 28, 2004. The Notice of Availability was 
published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2004. All comments received 
were considered in the preparation of the EA. An electronic copy of the 
EA is available for download at the following Web site: http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/html/bmdolink.html.

ADDRESSES: Submit request for a copy of the MLP EA to MDA/TER, Attn: 
Mr. Crate Spears, 7100 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-7100.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    A. Description of the Proposed Action: The purpose of the proposed 
action is to provide a mobile sea-based platform from which to more 
realistically test sensors (radars,

[[Page 43831]]

telemetry, and optical systems), ballistic missile targets, and 
defensive missile interceptors in support of MDA's mission. MDA's 
mission is to develop, test, deploy, and plan for decommissioning a 
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) to provide a defensive 
capability for the United States (U.S.), its deployed forces, friends, 
and allies from ballistic missile threats. The proposed action would 
provide the MDA with the capability to conduct launches using multiple 
realistic target and interceptor trajectories in existing test ranges 
and the Broad Ocean Area (BOA). In addition, the proposed action would 
allow MDA the capability to use sensors at test support positions in 
remote areas of the ocean by locating these sensors onboard the MLP.
    The sensors that would be tested from the MLP include radars, 
telemetry, and optical systems. Examples of radars that could be used 
include: TPS-X, Mk-74, and Coherent Signal Processor radars that 
already exist, and the BMDS radar, being developed by the MDA. 
Telemetry systems could include the Transportable Telemetry System and 
mobile range safety systems. Mobile optical systems such as the 
Stabilized High-Accuracy Optical Tracking System could also be placed 
on the MLP. Additional sensor systems may be temporarily based on the 
MLP as required. The targets that would be launched from the MLP 
include pre-fueled and non-pre-fueled liquid and solid propellant 
missiles. The interceptors that would be launched from the MLP include 
solid propellant missiles. The MLP would be designed to operate from 
one or all of the following locations, Western Range, Pacific Missile 
Range Facility (PMRF)/Kauai Test Facility (KTF), U.S. Army Kwajalein 
Atoll (USAKA)/Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site (RTS), 
and the BOA.
    The MLP has no engines for propulsion and would be towed from port 
to the test event location. Either a government-owned contractor-
operated or commercial tug would tow the MLP for test events. The 
sensors would be transported to and loaded on the MLP at the home port 
(Mare Island, California) and target and interceptor missiles would be 
transported to and loaded on the MLP at ordnance loading ports.
    Tests would consist of the launch of a target missile; tracking by 
land, sea-, air-, and space-based sensors; launch of an interceptor 
missile; target intercept; and debris impacting in the ocean. For the 
purpose of this EA, a test event was defined as a target missile 
flight, an interceptor missile flight, an intercept of a target 
missile, or use of a sensor to observe a missile flight test or 
intercept. The EA addresses the impacts of conducting up to four test 
events per year using the MLP as a platform for operating sensors, 
launching target missiles, and launching interceptor missiles for a 
total of up to 20 test events between 2004 and 2009.
    B. Alternatives To the Proposed Action: Two alternatives to the 
proposed action were considered in the EA. The first alternative would 
include using the MLP for the launch of all missile types (pre-fueled 
and non-pre-fueled liquid propellant target missiles, solid propellant 
target missiles, and solid propellant interceptor missiles) but not for 
testing sensors. The second alternative would include using the MLP to 
test sensors and launch pre-fueled liquid propellant missiles and solid 
propellant missiles but not non-pre-fueled liquid propellant missiles. 
Under the no action alternative, existing activities to be conducted 
from the MLP would continue and additional activities using the MLP 
would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Sensor testing and missile 
launches would continue from existing locations and facilities but the 
MDA would not have the flexibility of using the MLP as a platform to 
conduct testing of sensors or launches of missiles from the MLP. The 
potential benefits to the testing program from implementing realistic 
flight-test scenarios and the greater flexibility afforded with a 
mobile platform would not be realized.
    C. Environmental Effects:

1. Methodology

    To assess the significance of any impact, a list of activities 
necessary to accomplish the proposed action was developed. The affected 
environment at all applicable locations was then described. Next, those 
activities with the potential for environmental consequences were 
identified. The degree of analysis of proposed activities if 
proportionate to their potential to cause environmental impacts.
    Nine resource areas were considered to provide a context for 
understanding the potential effects of the proposed action and to 
provide a basis for assessing the severity of potential impacts. These 
areas included air quality, airspace, biological resources, geology and 
soils, hazardous materials and waste, health and safety, noise, 
transportation and infrastructure, and water resources. The areas were 
analyzed as applicable for each proposed location or activity. Because 
the proposed action involves the use of the MLP as a mobile sea-based 
platform for testing sensors and launching target and interceptor 
missiles, the majority of potential impacts would occur in the ocean. 
Therefore, other resource areas, including land use, environmental 
justice and socioeconomic resources, visual and aesthetic resources, 
and cultural and historic resources were not considered in the 
analysis. Conclusions of the analyses were made for each of the areas 
of environmental consideration based on the application of the 
described methodology. The amount of detail presented in each resource 
area is proportional to the potential for environmental impacts.

2. Impact From Missile Test Events

    No significant impacts to geology and soils, health and safety, 
transportation and infrastructure, or water resources would occur from 
missile test events in the Western Range, PMRF, USAKA/RTS, or the BOA. 
No significant impacts would result from hazardous materials or 
hazardous waste used or produced as a result of the proposed action. 
Applicable regulations and operating procedures would be followed when 
handling hazardous materials and waste. Fueling procedures for non-pre-
fueled liquid propellant missiles could impact air quality if an 
accidental release were to occur during fueling operations. The low 
likelihood of such a release and the implementation of approved 
emergency response plans would limit the potential for impact to air 
quality. Analyses indicated that launch emissions would not exceed 
Federal annual air quality (de minimis) limits. Launches of missiles 
would not add any new stationary emissions sources to the ranges; 
therefore, new permits or changes to existing air permits would not be 
required. In addition, dispersion in the ocean is considered good due 
to prevailing trade winds and lack of topographic features that inhibit 
dispersion. Launch preparations would follow standard evacuation 
procedures within the active warning area, which would marginally 
reduce the amount of navigable airspace. Missile launch firing areas 
would be selected so that trajectories would be clear of established 
oceanic air routes or areas of known surface or air activity. Missile 
launches would take place in existing restricted airspace or warning 
areas. Airspace would be evacuated within the launch hazard areas and 
commercial flights would be rerouted to avoid the cleared airspace. 
Missile launches occurring in the ocean would be located far enough off 
land that they would not be expected to interfere with existing 
airfield or airport arrival and departure traffic flows. Test

[[Page 43832]]

event sponsors would ensure coordination with the appropriate 
organizations, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization 
through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), to issue 
International Notices to Airmen, locate ships with radar capable of 
monitoring the airspace, contact all commercial airlines and civil and 
private airports, and monitor appropriate radio frequencies to minimize 
potential safety impact.
    Noise resulting from the launch of missiles is most likely to cause 
startle responses in wildlife. Potential non-acoustic effects to 
biological resources include physical impact by falling debris, 
entanglement in debris, and contact with or ingestion of debris or 
hazardous materials. The impact of a missile with the ocean surface 
could impart injuries to marine mammals at close range. However injury 
to marine mammals by direct impact or shock wave would be extremely 
remote (less than 0.0006 marine mammals exposed per year).
    Personnel would be located under the hardened deck of the MLP where 
they would be protected from noise generated during launches. Personnel 
on the tow vessel would be moved to a safe distance and would be 
protected from noise generated during launch. Personnel exposed to loud 
noises would be required to wear hearing protection. Missiles could 
generate a sonic boom however they would not affect the immediate area 
around the launch site.

3. Impacts From Sensor Test Events

    Impacts to air quality would be limited to exhaust emissions 
produced by generators on the MLP and would not be significant. No 
significant impacts to airspace, geology and soils, hazardous materials 
and hazardous waste, noise, transportation and infrastructure, or water 
resources would occur from sensor test events in the Western Range, 
PMRF, USAKA/RTS, or the BOA.
    Potential impacts to wildlife in the near shore environment of the 
ranges would include seabirds and shorebirds, including migratory 
species, striking the antennas, telescopes and shelters or becoming 
disoriented due to high intensity lighting at night. Action would be 
taken to increase visibility of antennas, telescopes, and other 
structures to birds. High intensity lighting would be used only during 
test events and low intensity lighting would be used whenever possible 
to reduce the likelihood that birds would become disoriented. Use of 
sensors onboard the MLP would not impact marine mammals and pelagic 
fish. Operational actitivies taking place in the open ocean would occur 
several hundred kilometers from any landmass, therefore there would be 
no impacts on near shore vegetation due to use of sensors on the MLP. 
No electromagnetic radiation (EMR) impacts to wildlife would be 
expected. The main beam produced by the sensor would be in motion, 
making it extremely unlikely that a bird would remain within the most 
intense area of the beam for any considerable length of time.
    Operation of mobile sensor systems on board the MLP would not 
present a significant health and safety hazard. EMR hazard zones would 
be established within radar tracking space and near emitter equipment. 
A visual survey of the area would be conducted to verify that all 
personnel are outside the hazard zone prior to setup. There would be no 
exposure hazard expected from the operation of telemetry and optical 
systems equipment.

4. Mare Island

    There would be no changes required to Mare Island to support 
docking, servicing, or maintaining the MLP. In addition, any impacts 
resulting from generator use onboard the MLP would not be different 
than vessels currently using the port, thus no significant impacts are 
expected from the use of the MLP at Mare Island. Radars on the MLP 
would radiate at the home port for system testing, calibration, and 
tracking of satellites. With the implementation of software controls 
and other operating parameters, there would be no radiation hazard area 
on the shore at the home port. Thus, no impacts are expected to the 
home port from using radars on the MLP.

5. Cumulative Impacts

    Because the proposed activities would take place in the ocean, no 
major differences are expected to the cumulative impacts between 
ranges. There are no other known activities in the near shore 
environment or BOA that would contribute to cumulative impacts in the 
ocean, therefore this cumulative impact analysis focuses on the 
cumulative impacts of up to four test events per year. Proposed test 
events from the MLP in conjunction with other existing or planned 
activities would not be expected to produce cumulative impacts.

a. Cumulative Impacts From Missile Test Events

    Missile launches are short-term, discrete events, allowing time 
between launches for emissions to be dispersed. Thus, no cumulative 
impacts would be expected for air quality. Because the volume of air 
traffic using the ocean environment is within structured airspace with 
scheduling procedures in place for jet routes and warning and control 
areas, there would be no cumulative impacts to airspace. Use of spill 
prevention, containment, and control measures would prevent or minimize 
impacts to biological resources from spills of propellants. Noise 
impacts may elicit behavioral disturbance responses in wildlife; 
however, the addition of at most four missile launches per year would 
have no cumulative effects on biological resources. No cumulative 
impacts to geology and soils, hazardous materials and hazardous waste, 
health and safety, transportation and infrastructure, or water 
resources would result from the proposed action.

b. Cumulative Impacts From Sensor Test Events

    In instances where two radars are used together, for example if the 
Mk-74 is given a vector to track a target by another radar, such as the 
TPS-X, no additional impacts would be expected since Mk-74 support 
equipment would be powered by the generators on the MLP and would not 
require the addition of supplemental generators. The EA considered the 
impacts of operating sensors singularly or in groups from the MLP. 
Power requirements for each sensor are discussed in the EA and may be 
modified by the test event sponsor based on the specific mission 
proposed. Therefore, the impacts from using two sensors on the MLP 
would be similar to those outlined below.
    Sensor operating areas would be restricted to minimize impacts to 
aircraft operations. Standards developed by the FAA and DoD, which 
limit EMR interference to aircraft, would preclude the potential for 
cumulative impacts to airspace. EMR hazard zones and safety procedures 
would be established to provide safety to personnel aboard the MLP, and 
therefore there would be no cumulative impacts to health and safety.
    No cumulative impacts to air quality, biological resources, geology 
and soils, noise, transportation and infrastructure or water resources 
would result from the proposed action. No cumulative impacts would 
result from hazardous materials or hazardous waste used or produced as 
a result of the proposed action. Operational noises would be limited to 
the generator used on the MLP and would not be different from current 
marine vessels; no cumulative noise impacts would be expected.
    D. Conclusion: After analyzing the proposed action, the MDA has

[[Page 43833]]

concluded that there are no significant short-term or long-term effects 
to the environment or surrounding populations. After careful and 
thorough consideration of the facts herein, the MDA finds that the 
proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national 
environmental policies and objectives set forth in section 101(a) of 
NEPA and that it will not significantly affect the quality of the human 
environment or otherwise include any condition requiring consultation 
pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of NEPA. Therefore, an EIS for the 
proposed action is not required.

    Dated: July 15, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-16635 Filed 7-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M