Attachment 14 Completed AF Form 813 - Design-Build Car Wash.pdf

AF IMT 813 Review Checklist

Construct Auto Hobby Shop and Carwash Facilities

Mr. Gerald Laver, 12 August 2020 This checklist provides an overview for conducting a legal review of an AF IMT 813, Request For Environmental Impact Analysis (Form 813). The Air Force uses Form 813 to document the need for environmental analysis under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. Sec. 4321-4370f, or for certain

Categorical Exclusions (CATEX) determinations for proposed actions. Generally, the AF IMT 813 is the starting point that initiates the AF Environmental Impact

Analysis Process (EIAP). An attorney reviews the AF IMT 813 to ensure the proposed project meets the requirements of NEPA and the EIAP. If after completing the checklist, any one of blocks 1-19 are not checked or marked N/A, the AF Form 813 will be legally insufficient.

The AF EIAP regulation can be found at 32 CFR Part 989. AFI 32-7061, The Environmental Impact Analysis Process which adopts 32 CFR Part 989, is the controlling instruction for AF EIAP. CATEX determinations and descriptions identified by number are found in 32 CFR Pt 989 Appendix B.

If you have questions not addressed by the checklist, or you are uncertain about the sufficiency of the analysis in any portion of the AF Form 813, please contact your MAJCOM-ELO (Maj Milott). If you are coordinating with the Environmental Law Field Support Center Planning and Sustainment Branch, they may be contacted at 210-395-8998, DSN 969-8998 or by email at afloa.jaceps@us.af.mil.

Check if

Met

Comments

SECTION I - PROPONENT INFORMATION

1. Blocks 1-3, Blocks 6-6b have been completed

Blocks comprised of self-explanatory administrative data.

X

2. Block 4 - Proponent has included a purpose and need statement in block or in an attachment.

3. Purpose statement clearly describes what the proponent intends to accomplish with the action.

mailto:afloa.jaceps@us.af.mil

4. Need statement clearly identifies why the proposed action is necessary.

Examples could include mission requirements or legal/regulatory changes, etc.

5. Block 5- Description of Proposed Action and

Alternatives Proposed Action (DOPAA)

Block includes description of what action the proponent wants to take.

6. Description of proposed action is sufficiently detailed to ensure it meets the purpose and need as articulated in Block 4.

Block 5 may contain reasonable alternatives to the proposed action along with the no action alternative. Those items will be addressed at a later point in the checklist.

SECTION II – PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY

7. One of the columns under each Block 7-16

Checked.

8. Blocks 7-16 Assessment makes sense based upon the type of action

Use common sense, for instance, if the proposed action requires filling some portion of a wetland and block 12 no effect is checked there are likely questions that you need to ask the environmental planner.

9. Action assessed to have unknown environmental impacts

If NO then mark as N/A.

If the action has any unknown effects, the decision maker cannot determine that unknown effects are not significant. A CATEX cannot be applied at this time and an Environmental Assessment (EA) or

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be considered.

N/A

10. Action assessed to have potential adverse effects in blocks 7-16.

If NO, then mark as N/A.

If an action has any potential adverse effect it will probably result in an Environmental Assessment

(EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and will not qualify for a categorical exclusion

(CATEX)

If uncertain contact ELO or Planning and

Sustainment Branch of ELFSC.

SECTION III – ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

11. Block 17 indicates a CATEX is applicable.

If NO Mark Checklist Items 11-15 N/A and skip to

12. CATEX applied has been identified by number

CATEX descriptions identified by number are found in 32 CFR Pt 989 Appendix B

CATEX A2.3.11, “Action similar to other actions which have been determined to have an insignificant impact in a similar setting as established in an EA resulting in a FONSI.” The Environmental

Assessment for Hurricane Recovery and Installation Development at

Tyndall Air Force Base, April 2020, is the approved environmental document cited for CATEX.

13. CATEX applied is consistent with the description of the proposed action.

If NO, determine if another CATEX in Appendix B might apply. If one does discuss with environmental planner and have form accomplished again.

If uncertain about the proper application of a particular CATEX contact ELO or Planning and

Sustainment Branch of ELFSC.

14. Review 32 CFR 989, Appendix B, A2.2. Categories of Actions with “unique circumstances” described in subparagraphs have not been implicated.

If categories have been implicated, application of a

CATEX may be legally insufficient and additional analysis may be required.

If uncertain whether A2.2 has been implicated or whether it precludes the application of a CATEX, contact ELO or Planning and Sustainment Branch of

ELFSC

Certain CATEX’s will require review of additional documents, you must be certain to review all necessary documentation that supports analysis. Two common instances are listed below. Review CATEX to determine if other documentation also needs review.

A2.3.7 requires proposal to have been originally evaluated in accordance with applicable regulations.

A2.3.11 requires proposal to be sufficiently similar to other project with EA/FONSI or EIS (an EBS is insufficient).

15. Use of CATEX is consistent with Preliminary

Environmental Survey

Checklist Item #9 MUST be marked N/A

Checklist Item #10 MUST be marked N/A OR you have consulted your environmental planner and/or

ELO and are satisfied that the application of a

CATEX is consistent with 32 CFR 989.13(b)

32 CFR 989.13 provides guidance regarding the applicability of a CATEX. Per 989.13(b) categories of actions that ordinarily do not require an EA or EIS include: “Minimal adverse environmental impacts.”

If adverse impacts are indicated further environmental study is then ordinarily done, however, if the action fits within CATEX and the adverse impacts are consistent with 32 CFR

989.13(b)(1) document may be considered legally sufficient.

16. Block 17 - indicates further environmental analysis required.

If NO mark as N/A then move to Checklist Item #17.

17. Block 17 – not completed

If Either box on Block 17 has been checked mark as

N/A.

There may be instances where the AF Form 813 is being used to record the fact that environmental issues were considered but that neither a CATEX nor further study was required. In this instance you should see some further information in Block 18 of the form. If you encounter this situation, contact your ELO or the ELFSC Planning and Sustainment

Branch to discuss prior to determining legal sufficiency.

18 Block 18 offers valid explanation how AF Form 813 is being used to create a record of environmental consideration when an action is not subject to a

CATEX and does not require further environmental analysis.

An example of a situation where this would apply is where an action that does not fit into a CATEX and there will clearly be NO environmental impacts arising from the action but a record is required

Circumstances where this would occur are likely to be rare, please contact ELO or Planning and

Sustainment Branch of ELFSC to discuss.

19. Block 18 includes a statement indicating that conformity requirements pursuant to Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act have been addressed. See 32

CFR 989.30

Possible examples of an appropriate statement could be:

“The proposed action will occur in an area that is in attainment for all criteria pollutants and no conformity determination under the Clean Air Act is required”; or

“The proposed action will occur in an area that is in nonattainment for [insert criteria pollutant]; however emissions from the action will be de minimus so no conformity determination under the Clean Air Act is required.”

Note: If Block 17 indicates that further environmental analysis must be completed, conformity requirements will be addressed in the

EA/EIS and this checklist Item may be checked.

If you have questions contact your ELO or the

Planning and Sustainment Branch of ELFSC to discuss.

Air conformity modeling was conducted for this project and determined a

Conformity Determination is not required for this action.

Action will occur within an attainment area, making the action exempt from

General Conformity (GC). See Air Quality EIAP Guide Volume I, Table 5-

2, List of GC Exemptions; EIAP Guide p. 49; 40 CFR 93.153.

In addition, if GC is otherwise required, conformity exemption based on

CATEX A2.3.11 is available if the prior FONSI action evaluated air quality and identified air quality impact as not significant using the 2014 (or newer) version of ACAM, and the new proposed action’s scope, activity, and size are equal to or less than the prior FONSI action.

The Final Environmental Assessment for Hurricane Recovery and

Installation Development at Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida meets these criteria, see vol. 1, pp. 4-1 to 4-5. Scope, activity and size of this action is less than that studied by referenced action which found for the actions studied that “Proposed Actions, all attainment criteria pollutants are below the significance indicators presented in Tables 4.1-1a through 4.1-1g.

Therefore, the potential air quality impact from all criteria pollutants is insignificant.”

20. Block 18: information in block does not impact the previously reviewed information.

If Block 18 does impact previous analysis, reconcile questions before determining legal sufficiency.

If you are uncertain about whether comments included in Block 18 call into question the other

Checklist Items previously reviewed, contact ELO or Planning and Sustainment Branch at ELFSC for assistance.

21. Return to Block 5 on Form 813

Block 5 Includes reasonable alternatives to the

Proposed Action (ONLY REQUIRED IF

FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYIS

REQURIED)

AF must analyze reasonable alternatives for all

EA’s and EIS’s. See 32 CFR 989.8(a). The Block 5

DOPAA will serve as the basis for the DOPAA in an EA/EIS if needed and should identify reasonable alternatives.

Sometimes proponent will include reasonable alternatives for projects subject to valid CATEX.

This is acceptable but not required.

No action alternative is the only alternative provided.

22. Block 5 identifies that No action alternative is included in DOPAA.

Unless otherwise excused by law the no action alternative must be analyzed. See 32 CFR 989.8(a).

(ONLY REQUIRED IF FURTHER

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYISS REQURIED)

Sometimes proponent will include no action alternative for projects subject to valid CATEX.

This is acceptable but not required.

REQUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

INSTRUCTIONS: Section I to be completed by Proponent; Sections II and III to be completed by Environmental Planning Function.

Continue on separate sheets as necessary and reference appropriate item number(s).

SECTION I - PROPONENT INFORMATION

1. TO (Environmental Planning Function)

325 CES/CEIEC

2. FROM (Proponent organization and functional address symbol)

325 CES/CENPD

2a. TELEPHONE NO.

(850) 283-3851

3. TITLE OF PROPOSED ACTION

Design-Build Car Wash

4. PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION (Identify decision to be made and need date)

The Purpose and Need For Action is attached. See Page 2.

5. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES (DOPAA) (Provide sufficient details for evaluation of the total action)

The Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives is attached. See Page 2

6. PROPONENT APPROVAL (Name and Grade)

Tanya Provencal, O-1

6a. SIGNATURE

PROVENCAL.TANYA.MARIE. Digitally signed by

1364466222

PROVENCAL.TANYA.MARIE.1364466222

Date: 2020.05.12 15:46:34 -05'00'

6b. DATE

24 June 2020

SECTION II - PRELIMINARY ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY (Check appropriate box and describe potential environmental effects including cumulative effects) (+=positive effect; 0=no effect; - = adverse effect; U=unknown effect)

+ 0 - U

7. AIR INSTALLATION COMPATIBLE USE ZONE/LAND USE (Noise, accident potential, encroachment, etc.)

8. AIR QUALITY (Emissions, attainment status, state implementation plan, etc.)

9. WATER RESOURCES (Quality, quantity, source, etc.)

10. SAFETY AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH (Asbestos/radiation/chemical exposure, explosives safety quantity distance, bird/wildlife aircraft hazard, etc.)

11. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/WASTE (Use/storage/generation, solid waste, etc.)

12. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES (Wetlands/floodplains, threatened or endangered species, etc.)

13. CULTURAL RESOURCES (Native American burial sites, archaeological, historical, etc.)

14. GEOLOGY AND SOILS (Topography, minerals, geothermal, Installation Restoration Program, seismicity, etc.)

15. SOCIOECONOMIC (Employment/population projections, school and local fiscal impacts, etc.)

16. OTHER (Potential impacts not addressed above.)

SECTION III - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

17. PROPOSED ACTION QUALIFIES FOR CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION (CATEX) # A2.3.11 ; OR

PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR A CATEX; FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS IS REQUIRED.

18. REMARKS

ACAM Modeling completed for the proposed action, conformity determination not required.

19. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FUNCTION CERTIFICATION

(Name and Grade)

Edwin Wallace, GS-12

19a. SIGNATURE

WALLACE.EDWIN.

Digitally signed by

WALLACE.EDWIN.BLAIR.1047698

BLAIR.1047698347 347

Date: 2020.07.31 08:31:43 -05'00'

19b. DATE

AF FORM 813, 19990901 (EF-V1) THIS FORM CONSOLIDATES AF FORMS 813 AND 814.

PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF BOTH FORMS ARE OBSOLETE.

Design-Build Car Wash, AF Form 813 continuation sheet

4.0 Purpose and Need for Action

The purpose of this proposed action is to construct a new Car Wash facility to replace the previous facilities that were demolished as part of the Tyndall Rebuild. The previous Auto

Hobby Shop and Car Wash will be demolished to enable construction of the new MILCON

Lodging facility.

The need for the action is to provide a means for base personnel to maintain clean and safe operations of vehicles. They contribute to increasing quality of life for base personnel improving morale.

5.0 Description of Proposed Action and Alternatives (DOPAA)

Proposed Action: Construct a new approximately 3,400 SF car wash facility with an approximate max depth of 5 FT to include oil water separator. The facility will be surrounded by approximately 31,500 SF of concrete with an approximate max depth of 1 FT.

Construct a new approximately 9,000 SF auto hobby shop facility with an approximate max depth of 5 FT to include oil water separator. The facility will be surrounded by approximately

63,000 SF of asphalt with an approximate max depth of 1 FT. The facility will be surrounded by approximately 680 LF of fence with an approximate max depth of 3 FT.

Construct an asphalt parking lot to accommodate approximately 27 parking spaces, approximately 9,000 SF with an approximate max depth of 1 FT.

Storm Water will be addressed by retentions ponds near each facility.

No Action Alternative: Status Quo – Under the no-action alternative, there will be no usable car wash or auto hobby shop on base, will reduce airmen morale.

5.1 Anticipated Environmental Issues

Use of hazardous materials

Generation of solid waste

Short term air emissions during construction

Short-term increases in sediment to storm water during construction

5.2

ACUIZ/ Noise:

The proposed actions would result in a localized and temporary increase in noise levels due to operation of heavy equipment; this noise is not expected to be significant. The proposed action would not significantly contribute to the noise levels of the area.

The proposed action would be compatible with existing land use in the vicinity of the project.

The Air Force site selection and design planning process assures compliance with Air Force regulations pertaining to compatible land use, AICUZ, and prevention of obstructions to air navigation.

Air Quality:

Tyndall AFB is in an attainment area for National Ambient Air Quality Standard. The Federally

Enforceable State Operating Permit (FESOP) for Tyndall will not be violated by the implementation of the proposed project. Temporary minor exhaust emissions would occur in the immediate vicinity of the construction. Fugitive dust would be controlled at the sites using best management practices (BMP’s), such as periodic watering of cleared areas and stockpiled materials and mulching or groundcover for the cleared areas. The air quality will not be significantly impacted by the proposed action. ACAM modeling has been conducted for this project and determined a Conformity Determination is not required for this action.

Water Resources:

Minor environmental impact permits may be needed due to potential impacts to jurisdictional waters. The adjacent ditches may be considered jurisdictional to the FDEP and USACE.

Stormwater permits will be required through the FDEP.

Would recommend reversing the location of the hobby shop and Stormwater ponds. Ponds should be located on the lower gradient of the site.

Federal Requirements: Engineering Technical Letter (ETL) 14-1: Construction and Operation and Maintenance Guidance for Storm Water Systems - This ETL provides procedures and practices for minimizing storm water pollution from Air Force construction activities, guidance for construction inspectors regarding temporary sediment and erosion controls, operations and maintenance (O&M) guidance for storm water infrastructure (i.e., separate storm sewers, associated appurtenances, and drainage areas), and permanent storm water best management practices (BMP’s).

Best management practices for erosion control shall be implemented prior to construction activities and maintained at all times during construction to prevent siltation and turbid discharges. Install erosion control measures along the perimeter of all work areas to prevent the displacement of fill material outside the work area into waters of the United States. Immediately after completion of the final grading of the land surface, all slopes, land surfaces, and filled areas shall be stabilized using appropriate vegetation, degradable mats, barriers, or a combination of similar stabilizing materials to prevent erosion. Methods could also include, but are not limited to the use of staked hay bales, staked filter cloth, sodding, seeding, and mulching; staged construction; and the installation of turbidity screens around the immediate project site. Identify and cover Stormwater structures using protection devices before performing any work. Devices must remain in place until all work is complete and the area has been cleaned and free of construction potential discharges. The erosion control measures shall remain in place and be maintained until all work is completed and the work areas are stabilized.

All stormwater conveyance structures shall remain in operable condition and shall not be allowed to deteriorate or otherwise contribute to a water quality violation. There shall be no work, storage, or stockpiling of tools, materials (i.e. lumber, pilings, debris) within wetlands, ditches, swales, or elsewhere within waters of the state. No surface waters which includes wetlands are authorized to be impacted without prior authorization from the 325 CES, FDEP, and USACE.

Construction activities shall be conducted in a manner that does not cause or contribute to violations of state water quality standards. An FDEP permit may be required for the installation, maintenance, repair, and removal of underground utility lines, cable, conduit, or pipeline transmitting electricity, communication signals, potable water, raw water, reclaimed water, domestic wastewater, propane gas or natural gas. 62-330.453 within the Florida Administrative

Code dictates that a General Permit is needed for Installation, Maintenance, Repair, and Removal of Utility Lines that cross a regulated surface of the state. In this case the ditches/swales maybe considered a regulated surface water.

All material used as fill shall be clean sand/fill dirt/shell material and shall not be contaminated with vegetation, garbage, trash, tires, hazardous waste, or other materials that are not suitable for construction.

If dewatering is needed to complete the task, a state and/or federal permit may be required. All dewatering must be coordinated with CEIEC and AFCEC to verify dewatering and discharge locations. Additional drawings may be requested. All permit applications must be reviewed by

CEIEC and signed by the 325th CES Commander prior to submittal. All costs associated with permits will be paid for by the contractor

Soil Impact:

Under the Proposed Action, construction activities, such as removal, grading, excavating, and contouring of the soil, would result in soil disturbances. The soils in the vicinity of the proposed construction area has been altered over time, and the project areas have been disturbed by existing facilities and paved areas.

Any excess excavated soil must be spread-out on land adjacent to the excavation site or must be tested for disposal at a RCRA Facility. If reuse is desired, soil must be certified clean.

Biological Resources:

The proposed action would occur in a developed area. The nature of the location results in poor habitat for threatened and endangered species. Therefore, proposed action would not adversely affect any federally protected species. Proposed action is not sited in the 100 year floodplain or wetlands.

Cultural Resources:

The proposed undertaking was coordinated with the State Historical Preservation Office and

Native American Tribes. The proposed undertaking will have no effect on historical properties.

All work should cease and the Cultural Resources Manager should be contacted if archaeological deposits or human remains are encountered.

Hazardous Material/ Waste:

The use of hazardous materials during the implementation of the Proposed Action is expected to be limited to construction vehicle maintenance (fuel, oils, and lubricants) activities and construction materials (adhesives, sealants, etc.). These materials would be required to be properly contained, manifested, and managed in accordance with all federal, state, and local regulations, AFIs, and DoD Directives. Authorization from the Tyndall AFB Hazardous

Materials Office would need to be acquired prior to use of hazardous materials. Contractor and all sub-contractors must submit TAFB Forms 81/82 and Safety Data Sheets. The chemicals listed on the Form 82 must be approved by the 325 CES/CEIEC Hazardous Materials Office prior to bringing the materials onto the installation. The contractor must submit TAFB Form 83 at the completion of the project. If the project duration is longer than 30 days, the contractor must submit the TAFB Form 83 on a monthly basis until the project is complete.

The proposed action may generate small quantities of hazardous materials/wastes. Disposal of hazardous waste must be completed in accordance with Tyndall AFB Hazardous Waste

Management Plan. Additionally, management of hazardous waste must be completed in accordance with 40 CFR 260-279. Hazardous waste transportation and disposal shall be coordinated through 325 CES/CEIE. The transportation and disposal facilities shall be approved by 325 CES/CEIE prior to their use. Manifests shall be signed only by 325 CES/CEIE. Drums shall be disposed of within 90 days of placing the first material in the container. Any excess excavated soil must be spread-out on land adjacent to the excavation site or must be tested for disposal at a RCRA Facility. If reuse is desired, soil must be certified clean. A Hazardous Waste

Determination must be conducted/recorded for any Solid Wastes Generated.

Solid Waste:

Construction activities associated with the Proposed Action would result in a short-term increase in solid waste generated at Tyndall AFB. The contractor will be responsible for disposing of solid waste in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws. Recyclables generated from the construction and demolition shall be recycled and proceeds returned to the U.S Treasury.

Cumulative Impacts:

There will be no accumulative effects for this proposed project. However, this action will be included to evaluate long term cumulative impacts of construction and demolition projects as part of the Tyndall AFB reconstruction activities.

5.3 Environmental Requirements

Digging/Excavation

Prior to any digging, an Excavation permit will be required. An Air Force Form 103, BCE Work

Clearance Request, will be required.

5.4 List of Required Permits

Permits may be required for the proposed action. Contractor is responsible to ensure all permits are submitted to the 325 Civil Engineer Squadron for review.

5.5 CATEX Statement

The proposed project will not adversely impact Tyndall AFB environmental attributes; therefore, qualifies for Categorical Exclusions (CATEX) A2.3.11. Actions similar to other actions which have been determined to have an insignificant impact in a similar setting as established in an EIS or an EA resulting in a FONSI. The EPF must document application of this CATEX on AF Form 813, specifically identifying the previous Air Force approved environmental document which provides the basis for this determination.

The Environmental Assessment Hurricane Recovery and Installation Development, dated

April 2020, is the Air Force approve document which form the basis for using this CATEX.

The construction project is in the same general area and is smaller in scope than the projects area evaluated in the EA. 325 CES/CEIE has conducted an evaluation of subject

EA to ensure the document is still valid in accordance with 32 CFR 989.20 (c). As part of the re-evaluation, CEIE personnel conducted an on-site survey and found that the affected environment and environmental consequences:

1. The methodology/analytical approach previously used is appropriate for the proposed action.

2. The direct and indirect impacts of the proposed action are not significantly different than those identified in the existing document.

3. The proposed action would not change the previous analysis of cumulative impacts.

4. Public involvement in the referenced analysis provides appropriate coverage for the proposed action.

5. There has been no significant change in circumstances or significant new information relevant to the proposed action.

PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SHEET

Project Title: Design-Build Car Wash

Project Description:

Project Number:

1. Natural Resources

Reviewed By: ewallace

Does project affect flora? YES _ NO _X

Does project affect fauna? YES NO X_

Does project affect BASH? YES NO X

Does project affect wildlife management area? YES NO _X

Does project affect forestry management area? YES NO _X

Does project affect erosion? YES NO _X

2. Threatened and Endangered Species

_X_ Project has no potential for affecting threatened or endangered species or critical habitats.

Based on advice from USFWS or host nation liaison , threatened or endangered species in the vicinity of the project will not be affected.

Consultation with USFWS underway in accordance with the Endangered Species Act.

Formal Consultation with the Regional Director, USFWS completed on .

Biological Assessment is required. Estimated completion date completion date is .

Biological opinion issued by USFWS on .

3. Cultural Resources

Properties affected by project are addresses in a programmatic Agreement that was fully executed with the State Historic Preservation Officer and the ACHP on .

Project area has not been surveyed for historic properties. Survey requirements are identified in the A-

106 system and the estimated completion date is _ .

_ _ Project area has been surveyed and no historic properties were identified; the State Historic

Preservation Officer was notified by letter dated _

Survey identified historic properties but the project will have no effect on them; written concurrence by the State Historic Preservation Officer is dated .

After consultation, State Historical Preservation Officer concurred that the project will have no adverse effect on historic properties. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation concurred in writing with this determination on .

_ X_ Project will have no adverse effect on historic properties or archeological material.

Estimated sate to execute the MOA is or no MOA was developed and the formal comments of the Council are being sought.

Archeological Monitor must be present during any ground disturbance.

Appropriate Native American Tribe or Group contacted on .

1. Wetlands

_X_ Project is not sited in a wetland

Requirements of EO11990 in progress. Estimated completion date is

Requirements of EO 11990 completed on .

Other

2. Flood Plain

_X_ Project is not sited in a 100-year flood plain.

Requirements of EO 11990 in progress. Estimated completion date is

_ _ Project is sited in a 100-year flood plain. Requirements of EO 11990 completed on

Finding of "No Practicable Alternative signed 18 April 2001

3. Potentially Regulated Substances

a. Water:

Construction permit required for extension of water system per 62.555, FAC.

_X_ No permit required because less than 2 in. diameter pipe and less than 100 if extension.

Backflow preventer(s) required. Must be field tested by licensed inspector upon installation.

Sprinkler system must have rain sensor device per FS 373.62.

Well drilling/mod/abandonment must be conducted by a licensed contractor. Permit required per 4OC-3, FAC.

Other: Permits may be required for this project.

b. Wastewater:

Construction permit required to connect to collection system per 62-600, FAC.

_X_ No permit required per 62-604.1 10 (single facility, gravity service connection, no pretreatment, compatible discharge)

Other: No Wastewater required for this project.

c. Stormwater:

X Environmental Resource Permit required from:

a. Creates more than 4,000 s.f. impervious surface subject to vehicular traffic;

b. Creates more than 5,000 s.f impervious surface; or

c. Project affects 5 acres or more (includes recreation areas, golf course, ball fields, etc.)

Site included in station stormwater master plan; permit required but may access existing stormwater treatment system. (Basin no. pond no. ; approx s.f.)

NPDES 1-acre site; construction contractor must obtain permit and implement Stormwater Pollution

Prevention Plan.

No permitting required. BMP’s must be installed during demolition/construction.

Upon completion site will be included in Base Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.

_ _ Other:

d. Asbestos:

_X_ Not present: survey underway.

Survey required, If present must be abated prior to demolition

e. Lead Based Paint:

_X Not present: survey underway.

Present

f. Ozone Depicting Substances:

_X_ Not present: survey underway.

Present (describe mitigation, or state why mitigation is not necessary).

g. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs):

X Not present: survey underway.

Present (describe mitigation, or state why mitigation is not necessary).

h. Other known hazardous or toxic substances and pollutants (e.g. contaminated soils):

X_ Not present: survey underway.

Present (guidelines attached).

4. Hazardous Materials

_X Will chemicals (such as, but not limited to, compressed gases, adhesives, aerosol cans, sealants, paints, lubricants, solvents, oils, cleaners, degreasers and pesticides) be used

Submit TAFB Form 81 (Contractor Questionnaire) and TAFB Form

82 (Chemical Inventory) 7-10 days upon issuance of the notice to proceed and prior commencement of work on site.

Submit copies of manufacturer-specific Material Safety Data Sheets

Submit TAFB Form 83 (Reporting Entry Form) at the end of the project or as indicated by CEV.

Notify CEV if anything changes from the original submittal (i.e. new chemical is added, size of container or unit of issue changes or if the manufacturer changes).

_ _ Will not use chemicals

5. Air Pollutants

Reviewed By:

Will not be generated by the operation or construction of this facility.

Will be generated by the operation or construction of this facility. Describe type and amount of substance expected to be generated, existing control systems, and the need for additional controls.

X Conformity determination not required.

Conformity determination required.

6. Solid and Hazardous Wastes

X _Facility will not be used for generating/managing solid and/or hazardous wastes.

Facility will be for generating/managing solid and/or hazardous waste.

_Yes Will the work being performed on the project generate any wastes?

7. Storage Tanks (Check all that apply)

_X_ No storage tanks are involved.

New storage tanks will be installed.

Material to be stored, quantity .

Existing tanks on the project will be relocated. Ensure regulatory agency has been notified.

Contamination exists.

Contamination unknown.

Existing tanks on projects it will be retained.

1. Environmental Impact Analysis Process

_X_ Categorical exclusion number _A2.3.11 applies.

Environmental Assessment under preparation. Expected completion date is .

Finding of No Significant Environmental Impact signed on .

Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under preparation. Expected completion date is

. Draft EIS filed on .

Final EIS filed on .

Record of Decision signed on .

Foreign nation or protected global resource exemption number applies.

Environmental study (or review underway) under preparation. Expected completion date is

Environmental study (or review) completed on .

2. Interagency and Intergovernmental Coordination for Environmental Planning

X Coordination of proposed project with the state Single Point of Contact or other agencies is not required.

Coordination with the state Single Point of Contact is in progress. Expected date of completion is

Proposed project was coordinated with the state Single Point of Contact or other agencies on _

3. Environmental Permits

_ No permits are required unless dewatering is needed.

No permits required but regulatory agency notification required prior to construction (e.g.

underground storage tank removals).

X_ Permits may be required for this project.

1. Environmental Restoration Program (ERP)/Petroleum Contamination (PCA)

_X_ Facility is not sited on or near an ERP/PCA site.

Facility is sited near an ERP/PCA site.

Facility is within the boundary of an IRP/PCA site ERP Guidelines must be followed.

The following activities must be coordinated with the IRP Manager:

excavation, sampling, and 40 hour H&S training.

The site is projected to be remediated and/or closed out on

, prior to commencement of construction activities.

The nature of the site contamination does not preclude the type of construction activity proposed.

There is a Compliance Agreement associated with this site.

A Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study was completed on to accurately delineate the aerial extent of the contamination.

14. Comments

Sincerely, RON DESANTIS

Governor

LAUREL M. LEE

Secretary of State

Mr. José J. Cintron July 31, 2020 Chief, Environmental Element 325th Civil Engineer Squadron 540 Mississippi Avenue, Mail Stop 42 Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida 32403-5014

Re: DHR Project No.: 2020-4434 – Received by DHR: July 28, 2020 Design-Build Car Wash, Tyndall Air Force Base, Bay County

Dear Mr. Cintron:

This office reviewed the referenced project for possible impact to historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National Register of Historic Places. The review was conducted in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended and 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties.

Based on the information provided and the conditions outlined in your letter concerning fortuitous finds or unexpected archaeological discoveries, it is the opinion of this office that the proposed undertaking will have no effect on historic properties.

If you have any questions concerning our comments, please contact Scott Edwards, Historic Preservationist, by electronic mail scott.edwards@dos.myflorida.com, or at 850.245.6333 or 800.847.7278.

Timothy A. Parsons, Ph.D.

Director, Division of Historical Resources and State Historic Preservation Officer

Division of Historical Resources

R.A. Gray Building • 500 South Bronough Street• Tallahassee, Florida 32399

850.245.6300 • 850.245.6436 (Fax) • FLHeritage.com mailto:scott.edwards@dos.myflorida.com

New Facilities Footprint;

approx. 12,400 SF

Concrete area;

approx. 31,500 SF

Potential Retention Pond Locations

Install fence line;

approx. 680 LF Pavement area;

Pavement area; approx.

63,000 SF

approx. 9,000 SF

Construct Car Wash Facility

AIR CONFORMITY APPLICABILITY MODEL REPORT

RECORD OF AIR ANALYSIS (ROAA)

1. General Information: The Air Force’s Air Conformity Applicability Model (ACAM) was used to perform an analysis to assess the potential air quality impact/s associated with the action in accordance with the Air Force

Instruction 32-7040, Air Quality Compliance And Resource Management; the Environmental Impact Analysis

Process (EIAP, 32 CFR 989); and the General Conformity Rule (GCR, 40 CFR 93 Subpart B). This report provides a summary of the ACAM analysis.

a. Action Location:

Base: TYNDALL AFB

State: Florida

County(s): Bay

Regulatory Area(s): NOT IN A REGULATORY AREA

b. Action Title: Design-Build Car Wash

c. Project Number/s (if applicable):

d. Projected Action Start Date: 3 / 2021

e. Action Description:

Construct a new approximately 3,400 SF car wash facility with an approximate max depth of 5 FT to include oil water separator. The facility will be surrounded by approximately 31,500 SF of concrete with an approximate max depth of 1 FT.

Construct an asphalt parking lot to accommodate approximately 27 parking spaces, approximately 9,000 SF with an approximate max depth of 1 FT.

Storm Water will be addressed by retentions ponds near each facility.

f. Point of Contact:

Name: Edwin Wallace

Title: GS-12

Organization: 325 CES/CEIEC

Email: edwin.wallace.1@us.af.mil

Phone Number: 850-283-4346

2. Air Impact Analysis: Based on the attainment status at the action location, the requirements of the General

Conformity Rule are:

applicable

X not applicable

Total combined direct and indirect emissions associated with the action were estimated through ACAM on a calendar-year basis for the “worst-case” and “steady state” (net gain/loss upon action fully implemented) emissions.

“Air Quality Indicators” were used to provide an indication of the significance of potential impacts to air quality.

These air quality indicators are EPA General Conformity Rule (GCR) thresholds (de minimis levels) that are applied out of context to their intended use. Therefore, these indicators do not trigger a regulatory requirement; however, they provide a warning that the action is potentially significant. It is important to note that these indicators only provide a clue to the potential impacts to air quality.

mailto:edwin.wallace.1@us.af.mil

AIR CONFORMITY APPLICABILITY MODEL REPORT

RECORD OF AIR ANALYSIS (ROAA)

Given the GCR de minimis threshold values are the maximum net change an action can acceptably emit in non-attainment and maintenance areas, these threshold values would also conservatively indicate an actions emissions within an attainment would also be acceptable. An air quality indicator value of 100 tons/yr is used based on the

GCR de minimis threshold for the least severe non-attainment classification for all criteria pollutants (see 40 CFR

93.153). Therefore, the worst-case year emissions were compared against the GCR Indicator and are summarized below.

Analysis Summary:

Pollutant Action Emissions (ton/yr) AIR QUALITY INDICATOR

Threshold (ton/yr) Exceedance (Yes or No)

NOT IN A REGULATORY AREA

VOC 0.187 100 No

NOx 1.086 100 No

CO 1.181 100 No

SOx 0.003 100 No

PM 10 1.703 100 No

PM 2.5 0.052 100 No

Pb 0.000 25 No

NH3 0.001 100 No

CO2e 254.0

2022 - (Steady State) Pollutant Action Emissions (ton/yr) AIR QUALITY INDICATOR

Threshold (ton/yr) Exceedance (Yes or No)

NOT IN A REGULATORY AREA

VOC 0.000 100 No

NOx 0.000 100 No

CO 0.000 100 No

SOx 0.000 100 No

PM 10 0.000 100 No

PM 2.5 0.000 100 No

Pb 0.000 25 No

NH3 0.000 100 No

CO2e 0.0

None of estimated emissions associated with this action are above the GCR indicators, indicating no significant impact to air quality; therefore, no further air assessment is needed.

Edwin Wallace

_7/31/2020

Edwin Wallace, GS-12 DATE