Download for f-35 beddown at eglin air force base, florida PDF

Titlefor f-35 beddown at eglin air force base, florida
LanguageEnglish
File Size19.2 MB
Total Pages580
Table of Contents
                            Document Cover
COVER SHEET
TABLE OF CONTENTS
	LIST OF TABLES
	LIST OF FIGURES
ACRONYMS
1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION
	1.1 INTRODUCTION
	1.2 BACKGROUND
		1.2.1 Summary of BRAC 2005 Relevant to this SEIS
		1.2.2 7SFG(A) Relocation to Eglin AFB Summary
		1.2.3 Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) IJTS Summary
		1.2.4 Record of Decision Signed for 59 F-35 Aircraft and Limitation of Operations
		1.2.5 BRAC SEIS
		1.2.6 Updates Included in the Revised Draft/Final SEIS
	1.3 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION
	1.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS PROCESS
		1.4.1 Requirements
		1.4.2 Summary of Public Scoping Process
		1.4.3 Summary of Concerns Raised in the Public Scoping Process and Public Comment Period
		1.4.4 Summary of Comments Provided During the Draft SEIS Review and Comment Period
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES
	2.1 NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
		2.1.1 Personnel
		2.1.2 Facilities/Infrastructure
		2.1.3 Air Operations
		2.1.4 Ordnance Use
	2.2 PROPOSED ACTION
		2.2.1 Personnel
		2.2.2 Facilities/Infrastructure
		2.2.3 Air Operations
		2.2.4 Ordnance Use
	2.3 ALTERNATIVES
		2.3.1 Initial Alternative Screening Process
		2.3.2 Alternatives Considered But Eliminated From Detailed Analysis
		2.3.3 Alternatives Carried Forward for JSF Beddown
		2.3.4 Alternative 1: Eglin Main Base Alternative
		2.3.5 Alternative 2: Duke Field Alternative
	2.4 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE
		2.4.1 Other Regulations and Permit Requirements
	2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES
	2.6 MITIGATION
		2.6.1 Defining a Mitigation Measure
		2.6.2 Resource-Specific Measures Proposed to Reduce the Potential for Environmental Impacts
		2.6.3 Unavoidable Impacts
3. AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
	3.1 INTRODUCTION
	3.2 AIRSPACE
		3.2.1 Definition
		3.2.2 Background
		3.2.3 Region of Influence
		3.2.4 Analysis Methodology
		3.2.5 Laws and Regulations
		3.2.6 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.3 NOISE
		3.3.1 Definition
		3.3.2 Region of Influence
		3.3.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.3.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.3.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.4 LAND USE
		3.4.1 Definition
		3.4.2 Region of Influence
		3.4.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.4.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.4.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.5 SOCIOECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
		3.5.1 Definition
		3.5.2 Region of Influence
		3.5.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.5.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.5.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.6 TRANSPORTATION
		3.6.1 Definition
		3.6.2 Region of Influence
		3.6.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.6.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.6.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.7 UTILITIES
		3.7.1 Definition
		3.7.2 Region of Influence
		3.7.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.7.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.7.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.8 AIR QUALITY
		3.8.1 Definition
		3.8.2 Region of Influence
		3.8.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.8.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.8.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.9 HEALTH AND SAFETY
		3.9.1 Definition
		3.9.2 Region of Influence
		3.9.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.9.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.9.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.10 SOLID WASTE
		3.10.1 Definition
		3.10.2 Region of Influence
		3.10.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.10.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.10.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.11 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTES
		3.11.1 Definition
		3.11.2 Region of Influence
		3.11.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.11.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.11.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.12 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
		3.12.1 Definition
		3.12.2 Region of Influence
		3.12.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.12.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.12.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.13 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
		3.13.1 Definition
		3.13.2 Region of Influence
		3.13.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.13.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.13.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
	3.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
		3.14.1 Definition
		3.14.2 Region of Influence
		3.14.3 Analysis Methodology
		3.14.4 Laws and Regulations
		3.14.5 No Action Alternative Consequences
4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES
	4.1 INTRODUCTION
	4.2 AIRSPACE
		4.2.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.2.2 Mitigations
	4.3 NOISE
		4.3.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.3.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.3.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.3.4 Mitigations
	4.4 LAND USE
		4.4.1 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.4.2 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.4.3 Mitigations
	4.5 SOCIOECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE
		4.5.1 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.5.2 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.5.3 Mitigations
	4.6 TRANSPORTATION
		4.6.1 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.6.2 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.6.3 Summary of Improvements
		4.6.4 Mitigations
	4.7 UTILITIES
		4.7.1 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.7.2 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.7.3 Mitigations
	4.8 AIR QUALITY
		4.8.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.8.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.8.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.8.4 Mitigations
	4.9 HEALTH AND SAFETY
		4.9.1 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.9.2 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.9.3 Mitigations
	4.10 SOLID WASTE
		4.10.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.10.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.10.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.10.4 Mitigations
	4.11 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTES
		4.11.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.11.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.11.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.11.4 Mitigations
	4.12 PHYSICAL RESOURCES
		4.12.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.12.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.12.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.12.4 Mitigations
	4.13 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
		4.13.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.13.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.13.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.13.4 Mitigations
	4.14 CULTURAL RESOURCES
		4.14.1 Commonalities Across All Alternatives
		4.14.2 Alternative 1 – Eglin Main Base
		4.14.3 Alternative 2 – Duke Field
		4.14.4 Mitigations
5. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS AND OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
	5.1 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
		5.1.1 Introduction
		5.1.2 Relevant Past and Present Actions
		5.1.3 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions
		5.1.4 Cumulative Effects Analysis
	5.2 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
		5.2.1 Relationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity
		5.2.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
6. LIST OF PREPARERS
7. REFERENCES
                        
Document Text Contents
Page 1

Final Supplemental

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR F-35 BEDDOWN AT EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA

JANUARY 2014

Page 290

Environmental Consequences

4-28 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement January 2014
for F-35 Beddown at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
– FINAL –

Table 4-9. Representative Noise-Sensitive Receptors Under Alternative 1I1

Location
ID General Description

No Action Alternative 1I
DNL
(dB)

Max SEL
(dB)

DNL
(dB)

Top 20 SELs
(dB)2

SP01 Eglin Housing (Capehart) 70 108 70 92–108
SP02 Eglin Housing (Ben’s Lake) 70 108 69 96–108
SP03 Chapel 2 - building 2574 70 111 69 94–111
SP04 Cherokee Elementary School 70 110 69 96–110
SP05 Child Development Center 72 112 71 99–111
SP06 Oakhill School (closed in 2009) 77 117 76 104–116
SP07 Eglin Hospital 64 107 63 89–102
SP08 Eglin VAQ and Dorms 69 106 69 91–106
SP09 Eglin Chapel 1 66 102 66 87–102
SP10 Joint Strike Fighter Academic Training Facility 76 115 75 102–115
SP11 Lewis Middle School 62 99 62 84–99
SP12 Okaloosa STEMM Center (Valparaiso)3 65 111 66 83–113
SP13 First Assembly of God (Valparaiso) 68 115 69 89–117
SP14 New Hope Baptist (Valparaiso) 68 115 69 89–117
SP15 Sovereign Grace Church (Valparaiso) 63 107 64 81–109
SP16 First Baptist Church (Valparaiso) 62 105 62 81–106
SP17 Unitarian Church (Valparaiso) 58 100 58 75–100
SP18 #1 Housing (Valparaiso) 68 114 69 87–116
SP19 #2 Housing (Valparaiso) 71 119 72 89–121
SP20 Edge Elementary School 58 105 59 84–105
SP21 Twin Cities Medical Center 60 108 60 81–108
SP22 Niceville Community Church 74 123 74 85–123
SP23 Private School (Niceville) 78 126 78 96–126
SP24 Private School (Fort Walton) 55 99 55 74–99
SP25 Okaloosa Walton College 53 95 53 72–95
SP26 Kenwood Elementary 54 97 54 73–97
SP27 Pryor Middle School 53 95 52 71–95
SP28 Housing (Fort Walton Beach) 55 99 55 74–99
SP29 Residential property south of Hwy 90 in Crestview 49 92 49 72–92
SP30 Shalimar Elementary School 58 103 56 75–103
SP31 Shalimar Residential 60 103 57 75–100
SP32 Residential Poquito Bayou West Side 58 100 56 75–101

SP33
University of Florida Research and Engineering
Education Facility

63 110 65 95–115

SP34 Eglin AFB, building 1 (Air Armament Center HQ) 70 107 69 91–107
SP35 Eglin AFB, building 6 (Air Base Wing HQ) 74 112 74 96–112
SP36 Eglin Law Center (building 2) 75 113 75 97–113
SP37 Saint Sylvester Catholic Church, Gulf Breeze <45 75 <45 51–75
SP38 Residential, north of Choctaw <45 77 <45 54–77
SP39 Residential, south of Choctaw 48 84 48 62–84
SP40 Okaloosa County Prison 60 109 60 85–109

dB = decibels; DNL = day-night average sound level; HQ = Headquarters; SEL = sound exposure level; ID = identification
code; STEMM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medical
1. Schools, hospitals, and churches presented in this table are provided to help understand the noise environment. As such,

this table may not include all such facilities that are affected by noise contours
2. Top 20 SEL refers to the range of SEL decibel noise levels generated by the 20 profiles that contribute most to overall DNL

noise level at that location. Refer to Appendix E, Noise, for tables that describe the top 20 profiles.
3. Previously Valparaiso Elementary School.
Note: Calculated military noise below the DNL ambient sound level of 45 dB is listed as <45 dB.

Page 291

Environmental Consequences

January 2014 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 4-29
for F-35 Beddown at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
– FINAL –

Table 4-10. Hourly Leq Noise Levels During the School Day at Representative Schools Near
Eglin Main Under Alternative 1I1

Location ID General Description Minimum Indoor Hourly Leq2
Maximum Indoor

Hourly Leq2
SP04 Cherokee Elementary School <=40 48
SP05 Child Development Center 41 50
SP06 Oakhill School (closed in 2009) 46 54
SP11 Lewis Middle School <=40 <=40
SP12 Okaloosa STEMM Center (Valparaiso)3 <=40 45
SP20 Edge Elementary School <=40 <=40
SP23 Private School (Niceville) 47 56
SP24 Private School (Fort Walton) <=40 <=40
SP26 Kenwood Elementary <=40 <=40
SP27 Pryor Middle School <=40 <=40
SP30 Shalimar Elementary School <=40 <=40

ANSI = American National Standards Institute; ID = identification code; Leq = equivalent sound level; STEMM =
Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medical
1. Schools presented in this table are provided to help understand the noise environment. As such, this table may not

include all schools that are affected by noise contours.
2. Indoor Leq is assumed to be 25 decibels less than outdoor Leq due to the noise level reduction provided by the

structure with windows closed. Actual outdoor-to-indoor noise level reduction varies from school to school and
between locations within individual schools.

3. Previously Valparaiso Elementary School.
Note: Schools that meet the 2009 ANSI standard of less than 40 dB Leq are listed as having an Leq of <=40 dB

Number of Noise Events Analysis

Table 4-11 provides a list of locations and the number of times during a day that one
might experience disruption of communications or activities based on the possible
number of noise events exceeding an Lmax of 50 dB from all flight operations (including
non-JSF operations) under the No Action Alternative and under Alternative 1I. For
example, an individual living in Eglin’s Capehart housing (SP01) would typically
experience as many as 159 disruptive events per day under the No Action Alternative,
while under Alternative 1I the resident could experience as many as 134 disruptive
events each day.

Page 579

References

January 2014 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 7-9
for F-35 Beddown at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
– FINAL –

West Florida Regional Planning Council (WFRPC), 2008. Knight Family Trust Property Plan Washington-
Bay County, Town of Ebro, Optional Sector Plan Report and Recommendations. Pensacola, Florida.
December 2008.

West Florida Regional Planning Council (WFRPC), 2010. Focusing on our Community West Florida Regional
Planning Council Annual Report 2010. Pensacola, Florida. 2010.

Wilson, D. S., H. R. Mushinsky, and R. A. Fischer, 1997. Species profile: Gopher Tortoise (Gopherus
polyphemus) on military installations in the southeastern United States. Technical Report SERDP-97-
10, U. S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.

Wyle Laboratories, 2005. Guidelines for Sound Insulation of Residences Exposed to Aircraft Operations.
April 2005.

Wyle Laboratories, 2010. Mitigation Scenarios 1F and 1G Results. Memorandum from Royce Bassarab
and Gerald Long, Wyle Laboratories, to Henry McLaurine and Amy Sands, SAIC, on 15 June 2010.

Page 580

References

7-10 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement January 2014
for F-35 Beddown at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida
– FINAL –

This page is intentionally blank.

Similer Documents