Attach__No__1B_-_Sample_Level_1_EA.pdf

FINAL

PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL

ASSESSMENT

FOR THE

CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE AND

DEMOLITION

OF

COMMUNICATIONS, WIND, WATER, AND

CAMERA TOWERS

AT THE

45th SPACE WING, FLORIDA

OCTOBER 2005

Final Programmatic EA for Construction, Maintenance and Demolition of

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Table of Contents

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION....................................................1-1

1.1 Background ..........................................................................................1-1

1.1.1 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station..........................................................1-5

1.1.2 Patrick Air Force Base............................................................................1-5

1.1.3 Malabar Transmitter Annex ....................................................................1-6

1.1.4 Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex ..........................................1-6

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ...............................................................1-7

1.3 Scope of Programmatic Environmental Assessment............................1-7

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES.........2-1

2.1 Description of Proposed Action ............................................................2-1

2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration .............................2-1

2.3 No Action Alternative ............................................................................2-2

2.4 Potential Environmental Issues ............................................................2-2

2.4.1 Issues Eliminated from Detailed Analysis...............................................2-3

2.4.1.1 Air Quality ...........................................................................................2-3

2.4.1.2 Cultural Resources .............................................................................2-4

2.4.1.3 Infrastructure and Transportation .......................................................2-4

2.4.1.4 Noise ..................................................................................................2-5

2.4.1.5 Socioeconomics .................................................................................2-5

2.4.2 Regulatory Requirements.......................................................................2-5

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT..................................................................3-1

3.1 Biological Resources ............................................................................3-1

3.1.1 CCAFS ...................................................................................................3-1

3.1.1.1 Invasive Species.................................................................................3-1

3.1.1.2 Native Vegetation Communities and Wildlife......................................3-1

3.1.1.3 Wetlands and Floodplains ..................................................................3-5

3.1.1.4 Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species ...............................3-7

3.1.2 PAFB ......................................................................................................3-9

3.1.2.1 Invasive Species...............................................................................3-10

3.1.2.2 Native Vegetation Communities and Wildlife....................................3-10

3.1.2.3 Wetlands and Floodplains ................................................................3-10

3.1.3 MTA......................................................................................................3-12

3.1.3.1 Invasive Species...............................................................................3-12

3.1.3.2 Native Vegetation and Wildlife..........................................................3-12

3.1.3.3 Wetlands and Floodplains ................................................................3-13

3.1.3.4 Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species .............................3-16

3.1.4 JDTMA..................................................................................................3-16

3.1.4.1 Invasive Species...............................................................................3-16

3.1.4.2 Native Vegetation Communities and Wildlife....................................3-16

3.1.4.3 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Species ............................3-16

3.2 Geology, Soil and Water Resources...................................................3-17

3.2.1 CCAFS .................................................................................................3-17

3.2.1.1 Geology and Soil Resources ............................................................3-17

3.2.1.2 Water Resources..............................................................................3-18

3.2.2 PAFB ....................................................................................................3-18

3.2.2.1 Geology and Soil Resources ............................................................3-18

Page i October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

3.2.2.2 Water Resources..............................................................................3-18

3.2.3 MTA......................................................................................................3-19

3.2.3.1 Geology and Soil Resources ............................................................3-19

3.2.3.2 Water Resources..............................................................................3-19

3.2.4 JDMTA..................................................................................................3-19

3.2.4.1 Geology and Soil Resources ............................................................3-19

3.2.4.2 Water Resources..............................................................................3-20

3.3 Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste ......................................3-20

3.4 Health and Safety ...............................................................................3-20

3.5 Land Use, Zoning, and Air Compatibility ............................................3-20

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES..................................................4-1

4.1 Biological Resources ............................................................................4-2

4.1.1 Proposed Action .....................................................................................4-4

4.1.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................4-10

4.2 Geology, Soil and Water Resources...................................................4-10

4.2.1 Proposed Action ...................................................................................4-11

4.2.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................4-12

4.3 Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste ......................................4-12

4.3.1 Proposed Action ...................................................................................4-12

4.3.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................4-13

4.4 Health and Safety ...............................................................................4-13

4.4.1 Proposed Action ...................................................................................4-13

4.4.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................4-14

4.5 Land Use, Zoning, and Air Compatibility ............................................4-14

4.5.1 Proposed Action ...................................................................................4-14

4.5.2 No Action Alternative ............................................................................4-15

4.6 Conflicts with Federal, State, or Local Land Use Plans, Policies, and Controls ..............................................................................................4-15

4.7 Energy Requirements and Conservation Potential .............................4-15

4.8 Natural or Depletable Resource Requirements and Conservation

Potential .............................................................................................4-16

4.9 Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided ....................4-16

4.10 Relationship Between Short-Term Uses of the Human Environment & the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity .........4-16

4.11 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority

Populations and Low-Income Populations..........................................4-16

4.12 Cumulative Impacts Summary............................................................4-16

5.0 CONCLUSION........................................................................................5-1

6.0 DOCUMENTATION CITED.....................................................................6-1

7.0 LIST OF PREPARERS ...........................................................................7-1

Page ii October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: 45 SW Mainland Assets...............................................................1-2 Figure 1-2: Example Water Tower .................................................................1-3 Figure 1-3: Example Camera Tower ..............................................................1-3 Figure 1-4: Example Communication Tower ................................................1-4 Figure 1-5: Example Wind Tower...................................................................1-4 Figure 3-1: National Wetland Inventory for Cape Canaveral Air Force Station.........................................................................3-6 Figure 3-2: National Wetland Inventory for Patrick Air Force Base..........3-11 Figure 3-3: National Wetlands Inventory for

Malabar Transmitter Annex .....................................................3-15

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1: Status of Endangered and Threatened Plants on CCAFS .........3-8 Table 3-2: Status of Threatened and Endangered, and Sensitive Animals

Found on CCAFS ..........................................................................3-9

APPENDIX

Appendix A: Request for Environmental Impact Analysis Form 813

Appendix B: Agency Consultation Letters

Page iii October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AEI Air Emissions Inventory

AFI Air Force Instruction

BMPs Best Management Practices

BO Biological Opinion

CAA Clean Air Act

CCAFS Cape Canaveral Air Force Station

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

45CES/CEVP 45 Civil Engineering Squadron, Environmental Flight, Conservation, and Planning Element

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Carbon Monoxide

CWA Clean Water Act

CZMA Coastal Zone Management Act dB decibel dBA “A-weighted” logarithmic scale

DoD Department of Defense

EA Environmental Assessment

EIAP Environmental Impact Analysis Process

EO Executive Order

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

ER Eastern Range

ERP Environmental Resource Permit

ESA Endangered Species Act

FAAQS Florida Ambient Air Quality Standards

FAA Federal Aviation Administration

FAC Florida Administrative Code

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FCREPA Florida Committee on Rare and Endangered Plants and Animals

FETSA Florida Endangered and Threatened Species Act

FDACS Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection

FNAI Florida Natural Areas Inventory

FONPA Finding of No Practicable Alternative

Page iv October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact

FWCC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

HRT Hurricane Recovery Team

HQ AFSPC/CEVP Headquarters Air Force Space Command/Civil Engineering

HQ USAF/CEV Headquarters United States Air Force/Civil Engineering

INRMP Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan

IRP Installation Restoration Program

J-BOSC Joint-Base Operations Support Contract

JDMTA Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex

JDSP Jonathan Dickinson State Park

KSC Kennedy Space Center

LC Launch Complex

LDN Day-Night Average Sound Level

LOCC Launch Operations Control Center

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act

MINWR Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge

MSL mean sea level

MTA Malabar Transmitter Annex

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NFA No Further Action

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NRHP National Register of Historic Places

NOx Nitrogen Oxides

NOTU Naval Ordnance Test Unit

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

PAFB Patrick Air Force Base

PE Professional Engineer

PEA Programmatic Environmental Assessment

PM Particulate Matter

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

SFWMD South Florida Water Management District

SGS Space Gateway Support

Page v October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office

SI Site Investigation

SJRWMD Saint John’s River Water Management District

SLC Space Launch Complex

SOx Sulfur Oxides

45 SW 45th Space Wing

T&E Threatened and Endangered

USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers

USAF United States Air Force

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USN United States Navy

Page vi October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

1.0 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION

This Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations, Title 32 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 989, Environmental Impact Analysis Process, and Department of Defense (DoD) Directive 6050. The PEA evaluates the potential environmental consequences associated with the construction, maintenance, and demolition of communications, wind, water, and camera towers used by the 45th Space Wing (45 SW) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station (CCAFS), Patrick Air Force Base (PAFB), Malabar Transmitter Annex (MTA), and Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex (JDMTA), all of which are located along or near the eastern coast of Florida (Figure 1-1).

Chapter 1.0 of this PEA provides background information on CCAFS, PAFB, MTA, and JDMTA; describes the purpose of and need for the Proposed Action; provides the scope of the PEA; and presents a summary of potential regulatory requirements that apply to the Proposed Action. A description of the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative is provided in Chapter 2.0. Chapter 3.0 describes the existing conditions of specified environmental resources that could be affected by implementation of the Proposed Action. Chapter 4.0 addresses how those resources would be affected by implementation of the Proposed Action.

1.1 Background

For the purposes of this PEA, towers are defined as framework structures greater than twenty feet in height and made of metal lattice or of metal or concrete poles. The lattice/poles are used to support aerial equipment such as receivers, antennas, and lightning mitigation rods. Elevated water towers are considered towers while wooden poles are not considered towers. Examples of towers are identified in Figures 1-2 through 1-5.

Towers are grouped according to three types or classes: self-supporting scaffolding towers, guyed scaffolding towers, and monopole towers. Towers include antennas and/or sensors that are located on building rooftops.

• Self-supporting towers are free-standing towers requiring no guy wires or support structures aside from the tower itself. This type of tower usually tapers in toward the top from a larger base and heavier foundation. The base is generally either square or triangular in shape.

• Guyed towers are towers that receive their structural stability through the use of guy wires attached to ground anchors. If a guy wire is missing, broken, or has inaccurate tension, the tower may begin to lean and fall out of plumb.

• Monopoles are single member, self-supporting structures requiring no guy wires, which are usually of a tapered design. These towers are usually constructed of steel or concrete.

All three classes of towers are found throughout CCAFS, PAFB, MTA, and JDMTA.

Page 1-1 October 2005 spearsal Text Box Page 1-2 spearsal Text Box spearsal Text Box October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Figure 1-2: Example Water Tower

Figure 1-3: Example Camera Tower

Page 1-3 October 2005

Figure 1-4: Example Communication Tower

Figure 1-5: Example Wind Tower

Page 1-4 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

1.1.1 Cape Canaveral Air Force Station

Located on the easternmost coast of the Canaveral Peninsula approximately 20 miles north of PAFB, the Canaveral Peninsula is a barrier island located approximately 155 miles south of Jacksonville, 210 miles north of Miami, and approximately 60 miles east of Orlando. It is 4.5 miles wide at its widest point. The northern boundary of CCAFS abuts the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) boundary on the barrier island. The southern boundary abuts Port Canaveral. The Banana River separates CCAFS from KSC. The Atlantic Ocean borders CCAFS along its eastern margin. The only natural areas remaining in the vicinity are Federally owned lands (CCAFS, KSC, and Canaveral National Seashore) to the north. CCAFS occupies approximately 15,800 acres, most of which is undeveloped coastal strand/scrub habitat.

As one of the Eastern Range (ER) stations CCAFS’ primary mission is to provide launch and tracking facilities, safety procedures, and test data to a variety of users. Major users at CCAFS include the United States Air Force (USAF), the United States Navy (USN), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and commercial launch companies. The 45 SW of the USAF operates CCAFS. The primary mission of the 45 SW is to develop, maintain, operate, and manage the ER.

Approximately 417 towers currently exist at various locations throughout CCAFS.

1.1.2 Patrick Air Force Base

Located on a barrier island on the east-central coast of Florida, south of the City of Cocoa Beach, PAFB covers approximately 1,937 acres bounded by the Atlantic Ocean on the east and the Banana River on the west. There is little topographic relief across PAFB, with elevations from 0 to 6.1 meters above mean sea level (msl); the highest elevation corresponding to sand dunes along the Atlantic Ocean. From the dunes, the site gently slopes northwest toward the Banana River shoreline.

Patrick Air Force Base’s mission includes responsibility for safety, planning, engineering support services, scheduling, test operations, launch and range operations, directing or supporting operations, test results evaluation, and providing similar support to other DoD and non-DoD programs.

Patrick Air Force Base, Headquarters of the 45 SW, is the center of administrative activities that CCAFS, MTA, JDMTA, two additional downrange stations at Antigua and Ascension Island, and other tracking stations are located at PAFB.

Most of the Base is developed, except for the coastal areas, which have remained relatively undeveloped. Exceptions include the Officers’ Club, Non-Commissioned Officers’ Club, some Base housing, and a radar and launch-tracking site. The Archie Carr National Wildlife Refuge to the south, and federally owned lands (CCAFS, KSC, and Canaveral National Seashore) to the north are considered “natural” areas near

PAFB.

Approximately 25 towers/antenna equipment sites are located at PAFB. All towers are surrounded by either regularly maintained grasses or impervious surfaces. Reinspection of existing towers and an updated listing is anticipated to be completed in FY05.

Page 1-5 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

1.1.3 Malabar Transmitter Annex

Located in Palm Bay, Florida, approximately eight miles southwest of Melbourne and 35 miles southwest of CCAFS, MTA occupies a square mile section (640 acres) comprised of forest, grassy fields, abandoned runways, antenna fields, and numerous transmitter and support buildings. The Annex is one of five mainland Florida instrumentation sites, which are part of the 45 SW. The abandoned airfield site was selected because of its distance from CCAFS operations and remote location regarding public access.

Buildings, a paved airfield, and roads cover approximately 120 acres in the center of the site. Another 250 acres are regularly mowed around the antenna structures, in the cleared lines-of-sight, and along roads that run through woods. The remaining acreage consists of unimproved grounds, predominantly mesic flatwoods. The natural areas are mainly restricted to the periphery of MTA and all have been disturbed somewhat.

Currently, MTA is surrounded by residential subdivisions. However, the Malabar Scrub Sanctuary is approximately seven miles to the east on Malabar Road, and Turkey Creek Sanctuary (113 acres) is approximately four miles to the east.

The mission of MTA is to collect, process, and deliver test-related data to user agencies conducting tests or space launches from CCAFS, KSC, and submarine test launches conducted in offshore waters. The 5,000-square-foot transmitter building, with its associated antennas, was constructed in 1963 and has been in continuous operation since that date. In addition, a remote electro/optical-tracking site, operated by USAF Space System Division, headquartered in Los Angeles, California, is located in the northwest corner of the Annex. All activities at MTA are conducted in support of these two operations. Approximately 19 towers are located at MTA.

At MTA, semi-improved grounds surround the numerous antenna facilities, boresight towers, and cleared lines-of-site. Semi-improved grounds are maintained at a height between 4 and 15 inches. Fertilizer is applied on an as needed basis. There are currently approximately 250 acres of semi-improved grounds at MTA.

Today, the natural communities on MTA are not of high quality due to extensive development as a result of land disturbances over the years. Alterations include direct disturbances such as airfield pavement, mowed antenna fields, roads, structures, and military exercise areas, and indirect disturbances such as the suppression of the natural fire regime and the modification of the local hydrology. However, flatwood and prairie wetlands do exist in some areas of MTA.

1.1.4 Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex

Located 120 miles south of PAFB and 15 miles north of West Palm Beach, JDMTA occupies approximately 11 acres in the southern end of Jonathan Dickinson State Park in Martin County, on Florida’s east coast. Three parcels of land consisting of 8.49 acres,

2.12 acres, and 0.9 acres compose JDMTA within Jonathan Dickinson State Park

(JDSP).

The site houses four telemetry units, which provide in-flight monitoring of launch vehicle performance, electronics, and associated subsystems. The site also provides radar, flight test support systems, a microwave relay to CCAFS, and a command destruct system remotely activated from CCAFS to protect life and property should a launch vehicle veer off course. Most of JDMTA is surrounded by the natural sand

Page 1-6 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida pine/oak/rosemary scrub of JDSP. Only the west side and some of the south areas adjacent to JDMTA are residential developments. Approximately 22 towers are located at JDMTA.

1.2 Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose of the Proposed Action is to construct, maintain, and decommission various types of towers located on 45 SW properties. Repairs and modifications are required for a variety of towers in order to maintain proper working condition. The construction of new towers is occasionally required to support the 45 SW mission, and the existing towers are normally demolished if they are considered outdated or no longer useful.

1.3 Scope of Programmatic Environmental Assessment

This PEA evaluates the environmental consequences associated with general construction, maintenance, and demolition activities associated with communications, wind, water, and camera towers at CCAFS, PAFB, MTA, and JDMTA and the No Action Alternative. The potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed activities are considered on a programmatic level.

Tiering of environmental documents refers to the process of addressing a broad, general program, policy, or proposal in an initial environmental document, and analyzing a narrower site-specific proposal, related to the initial program, plan, or policy in a subsequent, abbreviated environmental document. The concept of tiering was promulgated in the 1978 CEQ regulations; the preceding CEQ guidelines had not addressed the concept. The Council's intent in formalizing the tiering concept was to encourage agencies "to eliminate repetitive discussions and to focus on the actual issues ripe for decisions at each level of environmental review" (Federal Register, 1978).

Much of the information presented in this PEA will be tiered from existing documentation, including the Programmatic Environmental Assessment of Land Clearing Activities for Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Patrick Air Force Base, Malabar Transmitter Annex, and Jonathan Dickinson Missile Tracking Annex (2005). Information tiered from this EA includes background information and impacts from land clearing activities for new tower construction sites.

Future tower related construction, maintenance, and demolition activities that have the potential to significantly impact the environment and are part of the Proposed Action, as defined in this PEA, would be reviewed in separate EAs. Such analyses would tier off of this PEA to eliminate repetitive discussions of issues already addressed and focus on newly identified issues, such as the potential effects to an endangered species that is discovered to utilize the proposed action areas.

Page 1-7 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

2.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives

This section describes the Proposed Action and Alternatives to the Proposed Action.

2.1 Description of Proposed Action

The Proposed Action is to construct, maintain, and demolish, as needed, communications, wind, water, and camera towers located on 45 SW properties. The maintenance of the towers would include a range of procedures from corrosion control to lightning protection. An Operations and Maintenance Instruction is currently being developed that details maintenance guidelines for self-supporting, guyed, and monopole towers. New masts air terminals, down conductors, bonding clamps, and grounding rods may be installed on some of the towers. Typical tower maintenance may require the replacement of guy grounding systems and foundations that may require excavation, backfill, and welding. Repair/maintenance or replacement of aircraft warning light systems may also be performed. Additionally, stripping, washing, priming, and repainting are maintenance activities that may be required. This periodic maintenance would assure safety and extend the service life of the towers.

All USAF-owned towers would be evaluated for maintenance and ranked based upon several criteria, including:

• Previously identified maintenance concerns or safety issues

• Mission criticality

• Last known date of preventive maintenance

• Tower size

Major inspections would be performed at least every three years for guyed towers, every five years for self-supporting towers, and after hurricane-force winds.

Construction and/or demolition of towers would occur periodically and may include the installation of grounding and lightning protection, aviation warning light systems, 120 VAC general lighting systems and power receptacles, and cable tray systems. Also, additional sensors and/or equipment may be required to be installed on existing towers.

New guy wire foundations may be installed and small associated facilities could be required to house electrical equipment used to support the tower.

2.2 Alternatives Eliminated from Further Consideration

Other alternatives considered to the Proposed Action include the alternative that no new towers would be constructed, current maintenance procedures would not be performed;

and obsolete towers would not be removed. The lack of repairs would impede the 45SW mission. The ability to retrieve data from these assorted towers, that include the support of security, safety, and environmental monitoring, would be negatively impacted.

Furthermore, new towers are required to support various new mission requirements.

This alternative is not considered viable, and was eliminated from further consideration.

Page 2-1 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

2.3 No Action Alternative

The only alternative identified to the Proposed Action is the No Action Alternative. Under the No Action Alternative, new towers would continue to be constructed, current maintenance procedures would still be performed; and obsolete towers would be removed. However, each activity would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

There would be a requirement to conduct site-specific NEPA documentation for each of the activities covered in this PEA. This inefficiency would result in delays and increase the time, effort, and cost for the 45SW to accomplish these tasks.

2.4 Potential Environmental Issues

Eleven broad environmental components were initially considered to provide a context for understanding the potential effects of the Proposed Action and as a basis for assessing the significance of potential impacts. The areas of environmental consideration were air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, hazardous materials and waste, health and safety, infrastructure and transportation, land use, noise, geology, soil and water resources, and socioeconomics.

Potential, though non-significant, impacts from the implementation of the Proposed Action have been identified for biological resources, geology, and soil and water resources, hazardous materials and waste, health and safety, and land use/zoning/air compatability. A more detailed analysis of impacts to the identified resources is presented in Chapter 4.0.

A comparison matrix of the potential impacts resulting from the Proposed Action is provided in Table 2-1.

Three levels of impact are defined as follows:

• No Impact - No impact is predicted.

• Not Significant Impact - An impact is predicted, but the impact does not meet the intensity/context significance criteria for the specific resource.

• Significant Impact - An impact is predicted that meets the intensity/context significance criteria for the specific resource.

Page 2-2 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Table 2-1: Environmental Impact Matrix Environmental Components

Proposed Action No Action Alternative

Air Quality No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Biological Resources No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Cultural Resources No Impact No Impact

Geology, Soils, and Water Resources No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Hazardous Materials and Waste No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Health and Safety No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Infrastructure and Transportation No Significant Impact No Impact

Land Use and Zoning Potential Beneficial Impact No Impact

Noise No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

Socioeconomics No Significant Impact No Significant Impact

2.4.1 Issues Eliminated from Detailed Analysis

Following a preliminary analysis, the USAF determined that no impacts or less than significant impacts would be anticipated to air quality, cultural resources, infrastructure and transportation, noise, and socioeconomics. The following is a summary of the minor impacts that might be anticipated for these categories.

2.4.1.1 Air Quality

Short-term impacts associated with construction-related emissions would be expected.

Most construction-related emissions are exempt from regulatory review provided that National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) would not be exceeded. Except for dust, emission of criteria pollutants by project-related vehicles and equipment during the construction period would be minor. During installation, ground surface disturbance would occur. Dust suppression techniques would be used as necessary to mitigate wind and water erosion and reduce airborne emissions. Decommissioned towers would be dismantled and removed creating minor, short-term emissions. Changes in local air quality resulting from these sources would not be significant. Due to the relatively small footprint of the towers and the short time necessary for the construction and/or demolition of towers, cumulative impacts would also not be significant. The following regulations should be reviewed to ensure compliance.

Page 2-3 October 2005

Law or Rule Permit/Action(s) Requirement Agency or Organization

Clean Air Act

(CAA)

Title V Air Operating Permit

Comply with existing Title V Air Operating Permit.

US

Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA), Florida Department of Environmental

Protection

(FDEP)

National Ambient Air

Quality Standards

(NAAQS) and Florida

Ambient Air Quality

Standards

(FAAQS)

Ambient air quality maintenance

Implement measures to protect health and safety, property, and minimize nuisances such as impaired visibility.

USEPA; FDEP

Air Force Instruction

(AFI) 32-7040

Estimate air emissions

Track vehicle use and estimate air emissions for PAFB and

CCAFS for inclusion in the Air Emissions Inventory (AEI).

United States Air Force (USAF)

2.4.1.2 Cultural Resources

Cultural resources include prehistoric-archaeological, historic, architectural, and Native American resources. Areas of potential impact include properties, structures, landscapes, or traditional cultural sites that qualify for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (as amended) requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties. Documented NRHP structures or sites may occur at some of the current locations under the Proposed Action; however, new towers would not be constructed in NRHP-eligible locations, if possible. All tower activities would be coordinated with the 45 SW CEV to assure Section 106 compliance. No significant, unavoidable impacts are anticipated to cultural resources from the implementation of the Proposed Action. No cumulative impacts to cultural resources would be anticipated.

2.4.1.3 Infrastructure and Transportation

Traffic would only be temporarily delayed to allow construction vehicles to safely enter and exit work areas and to slow the flow of traffic adjacent to active work zones.

Modifications to the existing infrastructure and transportation system would not be anticipated. However, if access points are changed, the Florida Department of Transportation will be consulted. Less than significant impacts are anticipated to

Page 2-4 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida infrastructure and transportation from the Proposed Action. No cumulative impacts to infrastructure and transportation would be anticipated.

2.4.1.4 Noise

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers the Noise Control Act of 1972, and has identified 65 dB (A-scale) as a desirable noise level for compatible land uses.

This level is not regarded as a noise standard, but simply a basis to set appropriate standards that should also factor in local considerations and issues.

Short-term noise impacts associated with the site clearing and preparation, installation, maintenance activities, and demolition activities are anticipated. Except for the use of specific equipment during brief periods, average project-related noise is expected to be well below the recommended levels for human exposures.

The use of hearing protection devices during the operation of equipment would mitigate potential impacts to personnel. Noise abatement devices on equipment and vehicles would further minimize the potential for adverse noise effects to personnel and wildlife.

The moderate level of noise generated from Proposed Action activities would act as a warning mechanism for wildlife in the area, allowing them time to temporarily vacate the area.

Vehicles associated with the Proposed Action typically have a dBA between 65 and 100, at a distance of 50 feet (USEPA, 1971). Less than significant impacts would be anticipated because all work activities of the Proposed Action would be confined to daylight hours to avoid nuisance noise in the evenings. No cumulative impacts would be anticipated.

2.4.1.5 Socioeconomics

Socioeconomics comprise such interrelated resources as population, employment, income, temporary living quarters (during construction), and public finance. It is not likely that the Proposed Action will affect employment patterns on a permanent basis or induce substantial growth or growth-related impacts. The towers will be unmanned, and no increase in population levels would results. No significant impact is anticipated from the Proposed Action and no cumulative impacts to socioeconomics would be anticipated.

2.4.2 Regulatory Requirements

Permits that may need to be acquired and other requirements that may need to be satisfied prior to or during tower construction, maintenance, or demolition activities are addressed in the appropriate resource section. Activities on 45 SW-managed lands must comply with Federal regulations applicable to USAF installations as well as 45 SW instructions. In addition, Chapter 3 of AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management, requires compliance with State and local wetland protection laws; Chapter 5 requires all USAF activities conducted within U.S. coastal waters to comply with the coastal zone protection laws and guidelines; Chapter 7 requires the USAF to protect State-listed endangered, threatened, or rare species, when possible.

Page 2-5 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Maintenance and construction activities involving any elevated potable water storage tanks are regulated through the FDEP Drinking Water Section. Specific requirements include, but are not limited to, the necessity to have modification and/or maintenance activities of water storage tanks supervised by a Florida registered Professional Engineer.

Florida has a comprehensive State regulatory program that regulates most (upland, wetland, and other surface water) alterations. An Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) serves as multi-purpose permit that covers mangrove impacts, alteration of uplands, Florida Coastal Zone Management and water quality certification requirements (if a Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permit is required for dredge and fill activities). The ERP Program is implemented jointly by U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, FDEP and local water districts (SJRWMD and SFWMD in this case).

Page 2-6 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

3.0 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

In compliance with NEPA and CEQ guidelines, this Chapter describes the existing environment within the Proposed Action areas at CCAFS, PAFB, MTA, and JDMTA.

This information serves as a baseline from which to identify and evaluate potential environmental changes resulting from implementation of the Proposed Action. These resources and conditions include the following areas: biological resources, geology, soil and water resources, hazardous materials and waste, health and safety, and land use, zoning and air compatibility.

3.1 Biological Resources

The USAF is committed to the long-term management of all natural areas on its installations, as directed by AFI 32-7064, Integrated Natural Resources Management.

Long-term management objectives are identified in the 45 SW’s Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) with specific land-management objectives identified in the Scrub Jay and Sea Turtle Management Plans located in the appendices of the INRMP. The following information was derived from several sources, including the 2001 INRMP, which is currently being updated. Towers could potentially be constructed throughout the 45 SW, which would include many impacted vegetation communities and wildlife. All of these communities and wildlife are documented in detail in the 2005 Programmatic Environmental Assessment (PEA) for Land Clearing Activities, and this document will tier information from the existing EA when relevant.

Biological resources covered in this section include native and naturalized vegetation communities and special-status species. Vegetation communities include both upland and wetland habitats. Special-status species include Federal and State species of special concern, threatened and endangered species, rare species, and migratory birds.

3.1.1 CCAFS

3.1.1.1 Invasive Species

Most of the areas on CCAFS that are disturbed, including roads, utility corridors, and launch complexes, have a healthy invasive species component. Brazilian pepper predominates the invasive flora at CCAFS with six other invasive weeds present in lower densities. The most widespread of these is Australian pine. Australian pine trees grow singly or as small, dense groves scattered across the base. In addition, cogon grass, melaleuca, mistletoe (Phoradendron serotinum), and small populations of thistles (Cirsium spp.) and nettles (Urtica spp.) are present. (Invasive Plant Species Control Plan for CCAFS, 2004) The presence of these and other invasive species is discussed below by habitat type.

3.1.1.2 Native Vegetation Communities and Wildlife

The topographic position of natural communities on CCAFS reflects the various erosional and depositional processes of coastal land formation. Generally, older communities are found on the western margin of the Canaveral Peninsula, along the Banana River; newer and successional communities are forming along the eastern

Page 3-1 spearsal Line

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida coast. The current vegetative communities found on CCAFS are described below in the general order of the zones they occupy, east to west. Wildlife species, including sensitive and special-status species, are discussed by vegetation community. Refer to the 2005 Land Clearing PEA for detailed information on these vegetative communities and the wildlife that inhabits them.

Beach Dunes

Of all the community types on CCAFS, beach dunes receive the most direct influence from the coastal processes of erosion and deposition. Dunes are highly unstable and dynamic communities. Two beaches on CCAFS are prograding (growing): since 1847 False Cape at the north end of the station has had a net increase of approximately 0.1 mile; Cape Canaveral is also prograding as demonstrated by several parallel lines of dunes and by conspicuous offshore sand bars. Other beach areas are eroding, with sands being deposited offshore or downshore.

The Atlantic Ocean borders the beach dune community on the east, and grades inland to coastal grassland or coastal strand communities. Where the dunes are low or dissected, and storm overwash is frequent, coastal grassland has developed in flat areas directly behind the dunes. In higher or more stable areas, beach dunes may grade directly into shrub dominated coastal strand.

State-listed plant species found on dunes at CCAFS are coastal vervain (Glandularia maritima), beach star (Remirea maritima), and sea lavender (Tournefortia gnaphalodes).

Several rare animal species are documented on CCAFS beach dunes. The southeastern beach mouse inhabits beach dunes and adjacent communities. A colony of least terns has been documented to nest on CCAFS beaches. Black skimmers have also been documented nesting on the beach. Beaches on CCAFS are also very important nesting habitat for two species of sea turtles, the Atlantic green sea turtle and loggerhead turtle. There have been documented nestings by the endangered leatherback turtle as well.

Coastal Grasslands

This flat, open community lies directly landward of the beach dunes on CCAFS. It occurs in two types of situations: on relatively young deposits of sand on prograding beaches, and in low areas where saltwater overwash has killed woody strand vegetation. Inland, coastal grassland is bordered by coastal strand or coastal oak scrub, both of which develop on older sand deposits protected from frequent disturbance. In the absence of storm overwash or other disturbance, grassland will probably be colonized by woody species and eventually succeed into scrub or strand.

Coastal grasslands are densely vegetated areas, and the CCAFS grasslands are home to two State-listed plant species: coastal vervain and Florida lantana (Lantana depressa var. floridana).

Gopher tortoises, southeastern beach mice, deer, and raccoons are just a few of the wildlife species that inhabit coastal grasslands. Least terns and black skimmers may nest in the transition zone between the beach dunes and coastal grassland if the vegetation is sparse.

Page 3-2 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

Coastal Strand

This community develops in the absence of natural disturbance on somewhat older deposits of sand, inland of beach or coastal grassland. It is a dense, shrub-dominated community that grades landward into scrub or maritime hammock. The most distinctive feature of coastal strand is the wedge-shaped profile of its low canopy, which is constantly pruned and shaped by windborne salt spray.

Two State-listed plant species have been documented from disturbed areas and natural openings in coastal strand on CCAFS: beach star and coastal vervain.

Florida scrub jay, Florida mouse, and southeastern beach mouse have been observed in coastal strand at CCAFS. Gopher tortoise burrows are common in clearings in the strand. Burrows provide important refugia for Eastern indigo snakes, eastern diamondback rattlesnakes, and Florida pine snakes.

Coastal Interdunal Swales

Receding shorelines dating from the Pleistocene era have left behind a series of old dune ridges alternating with swales on CCAFS. These relict sand deposits form long ridges that are usually oriented in a northeast to southwest direction. The ridges and swales are conspicuous on topographic maps and aerial photographs of CCAFS.

Swales are seasonally saturated or inundated from groundwater part of the year and support distinctive wetland plant communities.

One State-listed plant species that requires open, sunny conditions has been observed in dry swales, coastal vervain.

Gopher tortoises have been observed in these coastal interdunal swales; however, their burrows are more common in drier swales. Wading birds, such as the great egret and great blue heron, forage in the wetter swales. Bobcats have also been observed in the swales.

Scrub

Three phases of the scrub community occur on CCAFS: coastal oak scrub, oak scrub, and rosemary scrub.

Coastal Oak Scrub

Coastal oak scrub occurs directly landward of beach dunes or, if they are present, coastal strand or grassland. Scrub may occupy the same landscape position as coastal strand, but its low species diversity and oak dominance distinguish it. Although mapped by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) as occurring on similar soils as coastal stand, the lack of calciphilic plant species suggests that coastal oak scrub occurs on older, more weathered, and more acidic soils.

Oak Scrub

Oak scrub occurs inland of coastal scrub, out of the salt-spray zone, primarily occupying the oldest, most weathered sand deposits on the Canaveral Peninsula. Oak scrub on

Page 3-3 October 2005

Communications, Wind, Water, and Camera Towers th45 Space Wing, Florida

CCAFS occupies the highest, driest habitats. It grades westward into maritime and hydric hammock along the Banana River and eastward into maritime hammock, coastal strand, or coastal oak scrub.

Rosemary Scrub

Rosemary scrub occurs in only one location on CCAFS, at the north end bordering the Banana River. The rosemary scrub is relatively open, with scattered clumps of rosemary interspersed with dense thickets of myrtle oak and sand live oak. Openings among the shrubs are either bare or vegetated with gopher apple, hog plum, and shiny blueberry.

Gopher tortoises and scrub jays are often seen in the rosemary scrub.

Xeric Hammock

This community consists of scrubby, dense, low canopy forest with little understory other than saw palmetto (FNAI and FDNR, 1990). Large portions of the interior of CCAFS meet this description. Xeric hammock occupies many of the broad, old dune ridges that angle across CCAFS, interspersed with coastal interdunal swales.

Xeric hammock is species depauperate: the canopy is composed of live oak and the shrub layer of saw palmetto. Woody vines are the most conspicuous and diverse component of xeric hammocks. Muscadine grape, Calusa grape, catbrier, pepper vine (Ampelopsis arborea) and Virginia creeper are found in most xeric hammock. Large expanses of grapevines, commonly draped across the canopy of scrub and xeric hammock on CCAFS, are evidence of fire suppression.

Maritime Hammocks

Maritime hammock is found on CCAFS in two locations: on the east side of the Installation, just landward of coastal strand, referred to here as Atlantic maritime hammock; and on the west side of the Canaveral Peninsula, bordering the Banana River, referred to as Banana River maritime hammock. The distinction between the types of maritime hammock blends toward the north end of CCAFS where the peninsula narrows to less than half a mile. Atlantic maritime hammock would not be impacted by the proposed action.

Banana River Maritime Hammock

Banana River maritime hammocks largely occupy a ridge of shell midden along the west side of CCAFS. Banana River maritime hammocks differ from the Atlantic maritime hammocks in several respects.