Attachment A - 813_Map.pdf

REQUEST FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Report Control Symbol (RCS):

25-012

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. Reference appropriate item number(s).

SECTION I - PROPONENT INFORMATION

1. TO (Environmental Planning Function)

75 CEG/CEIE

2. FROM (Proponent organization and functional address symbol) Air Force - CEIE

2a. TELEPHONE NO.

DSN 777-2783

3. TITLE OF PROPOSED ACTION

Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park Enhanced Use Lease

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

1. State the purpose of this action.

An update to the 2016 EUL SEA is required do to some changes in the overall plan of the area. This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the impacts of the Air Force implementing an Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) agreement for redevelopment of specific properties at Hill Air Force Base (AFB). The purpose of the lease is to allow underutilized Base property for development; in exchange, the Air Force will be “paid” with new buildings. The process will leverage private financing to expedite the timeframe for replacing substandard facilities.

2. State the need for this action.

Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park Enhanced Use Lease (2016) has become outdated and needs to be refreshed to include newly planned construction in the area.

3. What do you intend to accomplish and why is the action necessary?

By accomplishing this SEA the base will be able to continue development of the EUL area without concern form overstepping any environmental requirements. This document will be relevant for up to 5 more years

4. Is the action identified in existing environmental management plans? If so please identify which one (e.g. INRMP, ICRMP, Wildland Fire, Other) and the status of that plan.

Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park Enhanced Use Lease (2016)

5. What is currently being done to meet the need?

Hill AFB is operating under the Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park Enhanced Use Lease (2016).

6. Provide any additional details related to the Purpose and Need for Action.

This project was started with the initial EA being done in 2008 and was last updated in 2016 - to avoid any legal actions that may arise this SEA must be accomplished.

Need Date: 04/07/2025

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

1. Describe the proposed action.

Update the 2016 SEA for the Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park Enhanced Use Lease

2. Describe alternatives to the proposed action.

Alternative 1# analyze each separate project within the EUL area with its own 813/EA/EIS No Action Alternative - Hill AFB would continue to work under the previous SEA and not be fully covered if any legal actions were to be brought up..

3. What alternatives were eliminated from consideration and why?

Altenative #1 - This alternative would put a great time strain on any future projects within the area. A purpose of an EA is to be able to take into consideration several projects in one document as long as each was looked at during the study. EUL would have to start the NEPA process 3 years before each project started to include securig funding for each document.

4. Describe what will happen if no action is taken.

If no acton is taken Hill AFB/EUL would contine to work under the outdated 2016 SEA. This could protential bring up legal concerns with any regulations that may have changed in 8 years or any possible concerns the public may have with the construction on base.

5. Please provide a description of the environmental management action and timing when it will occur.

April -July 2025

6. Describe the project location. Attach map(s)/diagram(s) – make sure to include an overview map of where your requested project area is on the installation.

Map attached

7. What external coordination has occurred with environmental management stakeholders and what coordination remains before the action can be implemented?

All coordinatio will take place durng the SEA rewrite process

8. Provide any additional details related to the Description of the Proposed Action and Alternatives (e.g., outline mitigation measures and other issues).

Map Attachments:

EUL Map.pdf

12/30/24, 12:46 PM AF FORM 813

about:blank 1/3 https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/EUL%20Map.pdf

6. PROPONENT APPROVAL (Name and Grade) Vlaming Stephen DOD - stephen.t.vlaming

6a. SIGNATURE //Vlaming Stephen DOD - stephen.t.vlaming i:0e.t|fedvis|stephen.t.vlaming//

6b. DATE 12/18/2024

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 LAND USE/ZONE USE (Noise, accident potential, encroachment, etc.) X

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

9. WATER RESOURCES (Drinking water, wastewater, quality, quantity, source, water features, etc.) X

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

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

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

13. CULTURAL RESOURCES (Burial sites, archaeological, historical, etc.) X

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

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

16. OTHER (Potential impacts not addressed above, such as Host Nation considerations/concerns for non-US locations.) X

SECTION III - ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS DETERMINATION

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

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

18. REMARKS

This action will require an EA (Supplement to the 2016 document)

‘The DAF is aware of the November 12, 2024 decision in Marin Audubon Society v. Federal Aviation Administration, No. 23-1067 (D.C. Cir. Nov. 12, 2024). To the extent that a court may conclude that the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations implementing NEPA are not judicially enforceable or binding on this agency action, the DAF has nonetheless elected to follow those regulations at 40 C.F.R. Parts 1500– 1508, in addition to the DAF’s procedures/regulations implementing NEPA at 32 CFR 989, to meet the agency’s obligations under NEPA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq.’

19. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FUNCTION

CERTIFICATION (Name and Grade) Vlaming, Steve Civ

19a. SIGNATURE //Vlaming Stephen DOD - stephen.t.vlaming i:0e.t|fedvis|stephen.t.vlaming//

19b. DATE 12/30/2024

AF IMT 813, 199990901, V1 THIS FORM CONSOLIDATES AF FORMS 813 AND 814.

PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF BOTH FORMS ARE OBSOLETE.

12/30/24, 12:46 PM AF FORM 813

about:blank 2/3

CONTINUATION SHEET

Review Comments:

Natural Resources (12/18/2024 - Brown Nicholas DOD - nicholas.r.brown7) Natural Resources concerns to be considered would be the listing of the Monarch Butterfly, mitigation requirements are still being worked through and developed by the USFWS. The standard requirement of tree mitigation as applicable, and resseding disurbed ground. MBTA for nesting birds depending on the season.

Cultural Resources (12/18/2024 - Kitterman Anya DOD CIV - anya.d.kitterman) Cultural Resources will need to be considered during the review/redrafting process of the SEA to ensure that there are no additional impacts to new or known historic properties and that no additional Section 106 or NEPA consultation is required.

Air Quality (12/18/2024 - York Michelle DOD - michelle.s.york) Conformity analysis attached. No conformity concerns.

AICUZ/Land Use (12/19/2024 - Flores Judy M DOD - judy.m.flores) No impact on airfield ops; no adverse socioeconomic impact.

Water Resources (12/23/2024 - Judd Randall DOD - randall.e.judd) Please see attached stormwater guidance.

Tanks (12/23/2024 - Judd Randall DOD - randall.e.judd) Please see attached "New Tank" document for any new or replaced fuel tank.

AFCEC Restoration (12/26/2024 - Burt Lindsay DOD - lindsay.r.burt) See attached for IRP comments on this preliminary step for a SEA. There are CERCLA actions in progress for some areas of the HAFB EUL. Others may be necessary depending on proposed changes to use.

Air Quality (12/27/2024 - Kaschmitter Mark DOD - mark.a.kaschmitter) Please see attached Air Quality comment applicable to proposed actions that occur inside of the Hill AFB fenceline.

Actions that occur outside of the Hill AFB fenceline subject to air quality permitting are the responsibility of Falcon Hill.

Attachments:

Air Quality Comment Attachment.pdf 25-012 Conformity Analysis.pdf New Tank 170809.docx

1. stormwater_wq_envcomp_info_rev4_15march2022.pdf 25.012_IRP Comments_EUL EA.pdf

12/30/24, 12:46 PM AF FORM 813

about:blank 3/3 https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/Air%20Quality%20Comment%20Attachment.pdf https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/25-012%20Conformity%20Analysis.pdf https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/New%20Tank%20170809.docx https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/1.%20stormwater_wq_envcomp_info_rev4_15march2022.pdf https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/USAFNEPA/Attachments/1734535131924/25.012_IRP%20Comments_EUL%20EA.pdf

HILL AIR FORCE BASE

HILL AFB

WEST GATE

Roy Riverdale

South Ogden

Uintah

Ogden City

Washington Terrace

Layton

Clearfield

Clinton

Syracuse

South Weber

Sunset

West Point

Layton

WEST SIDE DEVELOPMENT

HILL AIR FORCE BASE, UTAH

LOCATION MAP

FIGURE 1-1

EUL WEST SIDE DEVELOPMENT

MAP EXTENT

Provo

Saint George

Salt Lake City

U T A H

SLC \\SLC31030285\PROJECTS\SUNSETRIDGE\MAPFILES\LOCATION_MAP.MXD MNITE 4/25/2008 10:01:45

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000

Feet 1 inch equals 4,000 feet

AIR QUALITY (75 CEG/CEIEA)

AF Form 332 / 813 Review

Proponent shall pre-coordinate the project with the Organization's Environmental Representative and ensure a complete new source sheet (NSS) is provided to 75 CEG/CEIEA for full evaluation of air quality permitting and regulatory requirements prior to purchasing equipment. Construction or installation of equipment / process is not allowed until approval has been received in writing from 75 CEG/CEIEA. It is the proponent’s responsibility to ensure all processes / equipment, regardless of air quality permit requirement, comply with applicable local, state and federal regulatory compliance requirements. Installation / operation of processes / equipment out of compliance with any applicable state or federal requirements may result in a self-reportable deviation submitted to the Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) as well as the potential for significant fines from UDAQ which will be the proponent’s responsibility to pay.

This applies to Hill Air Force Base (AFB) Main Base (MB) (including Little Mountain) and the Utah Test and Training Range (UTTR) for (1) any process / equipment which will or might reasonably be expected to become a source or an indirect source of air pollution, (2) any modification to existing process / equipment which will or might reasonably be expected to increase the amount of, or change the effect of, or the characteristic of, air pollutants discharged so that such process / equipment may be expected to become a source or indirect source of air pollution and (3) installation or modification of any air pollution control device.

Air Quality Permitting

Proponent Organization’s Environmental Representative shall notify 75 CEG/CEIEA of all stationary sources for evaluation prior to purchase / installation / operation to determine if air quality permitting is required. 75 CEG/CEIEA will prepare and submit all permit applications to UDAQ upon receipt of a complete NSS.

Permit must be in place prior to start of construction / installation.

Permitting determination is required for new sources and modifications to existing sources.

Although Hill AFB has some fast-track permitting in place, the timeline for a permit application is approx. 7 – 9 months for the permit to be issued after the application has been submitted to the state. Generally, complete process / equipment information and NSS must be submitted to the Air Quality Program at least 11 months prior to the start of installation / construction.

Please contact an Air Quality permitting POC, listed below, for permitting requirements and timelines specific to the project / process / equipment.

Air quality permitting POCs:

Kathy Garrett, Air Quality Permit Writer, 801-430-0541 Dr. Erik Dettenmaier, Air Quality Program Manager, 801-777-0888

Air Quality Regulatory Compliance

Proponent Organization’s Environmental Representative shall notify 75 CEG/CEIEA of all stationary sources for evaluation prior to purchase / installation / operation to determine applicable state and federal requirements. It is the proponent’s responsibility to ensure all processes / equipment comply with applicable state and federal regulatory compliance requirements.

Many state and federal regulatory requirements are contained in the Hill AFB MB and UTTR

Title V Operating Permits.

Information contained below is based on local, state and federal Air Quality rules and regulations and is subject to change.

Due to the complex nature of local, state and federal regulations, the table below is intended as general guidance and is not a comprehensive list. Please contact an Air Quality compliance POC, listed below, for regulatory compliance requirements specific to the project / process / equipment.

Process Description 1, 2 Air Quality Regulatory Requirement

Abrasive blast equipment MB: requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC Air handlers / make up air units: natural gas < 5 MMBtu/hr Low NOx technology, MB: additional requirements in TVOP for units > 5 MMBtu, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC

Air handlers / make up air units: natural gas >= 5 MMBtu/hr <=20 MMBtu/hr Air handlers / make up air units: natural gas > 20 MMBtu/hr Boilers: natural gas < 2 MMBtu/hr Low NOx technology

Boilers: natural gas >= 2 MMBtu/hr

NOx emission rate of 9 ppmv or less at 3% O2, MB: additional requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC

Degreasers MB: requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC Fuel storage tanks < 500 gallons Submerged fill for gasoline tanks >= 250 gallons

Fuel storage tanks >= 500 gallons <19,812 gallons

Submerged fill, White, beige/sandstone or aluminum in color for uninsulated exterior surfaces exposed to the sun

Fuel storage tanks >=19,812 gallons

Submerged fill, White, beige/sandstone or aluminum in color for uninsulated exterior surfaces exposed to the sun, Contact air quality permitting POC for additional requirements Generators: emergency <= 600 hp Federal New Source Performance Standards emission Tier standards, MB and UTTR: additional requirements in TVOP for most units, Contact an Air Quality compliance POC for units not included in TVOPs

Generators: emergency > 600 hp <= 1,700 kW Generators: non-emergency <= 600 hp

Generators: non-emergency > 600 hp

Hazardous material usage (paints, solvents, lab chemicals, etc.) VOC content limits based on material type

Process Description 1, 2

Air Quality Regulatory Requirement

Liquid calibration systems MB: requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC Ovens: natural gas and electric Low NOx technology for fossil fuel-fired units Paint booths, chemical stripping operations and / or any other piece of equipment associated with painting or chemical stripping

MB: requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC

Refrigeration and air-conditioning appliances and reclamation / servicing equipment

Compliance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) 82

Waste solvent reclamation units MB: requirements in TVOP, UTTR: contact an Air Quality compliance POC

Natural gas hot water heaters Ultra-low NOx technology

Any process / equipment not listed above which will or might reasonably be expected to become a source or an indirect source of air pollution 1

Contact air quality compliance POC for requirements specific to process / equipment

1 Contact an Air Quality compliance POC, listed below, for any process / equipment not specifically listed in the table as there may be applicable local, state or federal regulatory requirements.

2 The MB and UTTR TVOPs contain regulatory requirements for additional specific processes (e.g.

aircraft engine test facilities, hydrazine thermal oxidizer, metal flame spray operations, metal plating).

These processes are not included in the table due to infrequent addition of new processes and infrequent modification of existing processes. Contact an Air Quality compliance POC, listed below, for questions regarding local, state or federal regulatory requirements contained in the TVOPs.

Fugitive Dust

All construction projects at Hill AFB MB and UTTR shall minimize fugitive dust and comply with the current Hill AFB Fugitive Dust MB and UTTR Control Plans, located on the Hill AFB Air Quality SharePoint site.

Hazardous Materials All hazardous materials (e.g. paints, solvents, adhesives, sealants, etc.) used at Hill AFB MB and UTTR (including during construction/renovation of a building) must be preauthorized for use and tracked in the Air Force hazardous material tracking database (per AFI 32-7086_HILLAFBSUP). Materials are reviewed and approved / disapproved for use within a few days after complete authorization request has been submitted.

Air quality compliance and fugitive dust POCs:

Marilyn Touchard, Air Quality Compliance, 801-430-1593

Air quality hazardous materials POCs:

Sarah Reddinger, Air Quality Hazardous Materials Review, 801-775-6989 Michelle York, Air Quality Hazardous Materials Review, 360-931-8672

Reviewed on: 12/26/2024

ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (AFCEC/CZOM)

AF Form 813 Review Requestor: Steve Vlaming, (777- 2783) 75 CEG/CEIE

813 ID: 25-012

Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Comments:

There are multiple Installation Restoration Program (IRP) Sites that overlap the areas designated as part of the Enhanced Use Lease (EUL) project on Hill AFB (HAFB).

Environmental Restoration distributes a memo and map each year to indicate locations of known contamination on HAFB. 75 CEG/CEIE is aware of these IRP Sites, but the Environmental Restoration map is attached below. The 2024 map includes areas of potential vapor intrusion from contaminated groundwater (not included in 2023 map). In addition, there is an extensive network of groundwater monitoring wells that can be seen in the Environmental Management layer of GeoBase. Please include Environmental Restoration in future development planning and any necessary reviews for this Supplemental Environmental Assessment for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park EUL. Contact the Restoration POC, Mr. Lindsay Burt (775-3301), with any questions or requests for detailed maps and/or data related to these IRP Sites.

Environmental Restoration funds cannot be used to address contamination discovered during a construction project (MILCON or non-MILCON) per Section 6.4 of AFI 32-7020 (7 Nov 2014). If a construction project generates actions that result in the need to address contamination, or a need to change Environmental Restoration Program timelines to address contamination, the costs of such actions are not eligible for the use of Environmental Restoration funds and shall be funded as part of the construction project. This includes the handling, mitigation, and disposal or other disposition of contamination discovered before or during the construction activity. Excavations that result in the need for soil disposal will either dispose of clean soil at the on-base Construction and Debris landfill or use as fill for another on-base project.

Contaminated soil will be disposed of at a permitted landfill.

Environmental Restoration Reviewer: Lindsay Burt, 775-3301

Groundwater Extraction System

(OU6)

PCB Contamination

Low-Permeability Cap With Fence

(OU4)

Horizontal Drain

(OU4)

Upgradient Collection System (OU2)

Slurry Wall

(OU2)

Source Recovery System (OU2)

Trench Dewatering System (OU1)

Low-Permeability Cap with Fence (OU1)

Slurry Wall

(OU1)

Industrial Wastewater Collection System

(OU1)

Sodium-Hydroxide Spill Low-Permeability

Asphalt Cap

(OU3)

Low-Permeability Asphalt Cap

(OU3)

Base Boundary Hydraulic Containment

System (OU8)

Asbestos Contamination

SVE System (OU11)

Building 225 Low-Permeability

Concrete Cap

(OU7)

Fuel Spill Site

Soil Management System

Hydraulic Containment

System

(OU12)

Asbestos Contamination and Construction Debris (OU12)

PCB Contamination

(OU17)

Asbestos Contamination

(OU16)

Groundwater Extraction System

(OU11)

Bioreactor

(OU9)

Former MMRP Site

(OU14) Munitions and Explosives of Concern

(OU14)

Former MMRP Site

(OU14)

PCB

Contamination

(OU13)

Day Tank Fuel Release Building 843

Former Building 2214 (demolished)

Lead Contamination

(OU17)

Building 2406

(OU17)

Building 2405

(OU17)

Building 1

(OU17)

Building 265

(OU18)

PL010

Landfill 2

(OU4)

Arsenic Contamination

(OU5)

Corrective Action Management Unit (OU1)

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1

Miles

Environmental Restoration Regulated Areas Hill Air Force Base

Version Date: April 2024

Treatment System: No construction or other activity that will interfere with remedial action equipment or facilities, shall occur without the approval of Environmental Restoration and Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center.

Hill AFB Boundary

Surface Water Body

Low-Permeability Cap: No construction or other activity that will interfere with remedial action shall occur without the approval of Environmental Restoration and the Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center.

Area of Regulated Water Well Drilling and Use of Shallow Groundwater.

Regulated Area: Area of significant soil contamination. No construction or other activities that will disturb the soil or groundwater or that will change the land use (i.e., industrial use to residential use) shall occur without the written approval of the Environmental Restoration and Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center.

Industrial Land Use Only: Area of soil contamination, but at levels that allow for industrial use. No change in land use from industrial to residential shall occur without the written approval of the Environmental Restoration and Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center.

Area of Potential Vapor Intrusion: Area with the potential for vapor intrusion from contaminated groundwater or soil. New construction of habitable buildings must incorporate vapor intrusion mitigation measures into the building design.

Areas of Known Historical AFFF Releases: The regulatory status and Air Force policies for the management of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in various media are emerging.

All activities involving intrusive work in these areas shall be coordinated with the Environmental Restoration and Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center.

Former Military Munitions Response Program Site: In the event that suspected explosives of ordnance contamination is encountered please contact Environmental Restoration and the - Explosives Ordnance Division at (801)777-5502.

Authority for construction regulations found in Chapter 15 of DAFI32-7020_DAFGM2023-01 (02 February 2023)

NOTE: Data contained on this map are based on existing investigations performed at Hill Air Force Base. Other areas of contamination may exist at Hill Air Force Base that are not shown on this map. Due to the nature of past activities, contaminated soils may be found throughout the base and may be encountered in any investigation.

Proper precautions should be taken for all excavation work.

LEGEND

Environmental Restoration (AFCEC/CZOM Hill ISS) can be contacted at (801)777-6916 and will coordinate with the

Air Force Environmental Law Field Support Center as needed.

PROJECT CONFORMITY ANALYSIS DOCUMENTATION

Project Title: Supplemental EA for Falcon Hill National Aerospace Research Park EUL Project Number: 25-012 DOPAA: This request is the first step in updating the 2016 Supplemental EA for the EUL area. All further coordination will be done at the time of the rewrite.

Level I - Exempt Action Screening The project is exempt if one of the following exemptions applies;

☐Action does not take place in a maintenance or nonattainment area (applies to UTTR).

☐Action specifically excluded in 40 CFR 93 Subpart B, exemptions applicable to Hill AFB are listed below.

☐ Routine maintenance and repair activities, including repair and maintenance of administrative sites, road, trails, and facilities

☐ Routine movement of mobile assets, such as ships and aircraft, in home port reassignments and stations (when no new support facilities or personnel are required) to perform as operation groups and/or for repair or overhaul.

☐ Actions, such as the following, with respect to existing structures, properties, facilities and lands where future activities conducted will be similar in scope and operation to activities currently being conducted at the existing structures, properties, and facilities, and lands; for example, relocation of personnel, disposition of federally-own existing structures, properties, facilities, and land, rent subsidies, operation and maintenance cost subsidies, the exercise of receivership or conservatorship authority, assistance in purchasing structures, and the production of coins and currency.

☐ Routine operation of facilities, mobile assets, and equipment.

☐Action does not result in any air emissions of NAAQS, HAPS or GHG as defined by 40 CFR 93 Subpart B, 32 CFR 989, AFI 32-7040 and R307-101.

☐Action is part of the New Source Review process and will require permitting.

☐Action has already been evaluated on a previous environmental assessment. Please list title of environmental assessment.

Title: _____________________________________________________________

Level II - Quantitative Assessment Information necessary to complete formal quantitative analysis;

☐ACAM model results below federal indicators defined in 40 CFR 93 Subpart B

Level III - Quantitative Assessment

☐ACAM model result above federal indicators- ADDITIONAL ANALYSIS REQUIRED

☒The need for an EA has already been determined, and further review will take place during the EA process.

Reviewed by: Michelle York

APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS

♦ National Historic Preservation Act ♦ National Environmental Policy Act ♦ Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act ♦ AFI 32–7065 (June 2004), Cultural Resources Management Program

OVERVIEW

All undertakings that disturb the ground surface have the potential to discover buried and previously unknown archaeological deposits. The accidental discoveries of archaeological deposits during an undertaking can include but are not limited to:

♦ Undiscovered/undocumented structural and engineering features; and ♦ Undiscovered/undocumented archaeological resources such as foundation remains, burials, artifacts, or other evidence of human occupation.

POLICY

When cultural resources are discovered during the construction of any undertaking or ground-disturbing activities, Hill AFB shall:

♦ Evaluate such deposits for NRHP eligibility.

♦ Treat the site as potentially eligible and avoid the site insofar as possible until an NRHP eligibility determination is made.

♦ Make reasonable efforts to minimize harm to the property until the Section 106 process is completed.

♦ The BHPO will ensure that the provisions of NAGPRA are implemented first if any unanticipated discovery includes human remains, funerary objects, or American Indian sacred objects (see SOP #6).

PROCEDURE

Step 1: Work shall cease in the area of the discovery (Figure 5-5). Work may continue in other areas.

♦ The property is to be treated as eligible and avoided until an eligibility determination is made. Hill AFB will continue to make reasonable efforts to avoid or minimize harm to

Standard Operating Procedure

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS

Further construction activities in the vicinity of the site will be suspended until an agreed-upon testing strategy has been carried out and sufficient data have been gathered to allow a determination of eligibility. The size of the area in which work should be stopped shall be determined in consultation with the BHPO.

the property until the Section 106 process is completed.

Step 2: Immediately following the discovery, the Project Manager shall notify the installation

BHPO.

Step 3: The BHPO or a professional archaeologist shall make a field evaluation of the context of the deposit and its probable age and significance, record the findings in writing, and document with appropriate photographs and drawings.

♦ If disturbance of the deposits is minimal and the excavation can be relocated to avoid the site, the BHPO will file appropriate site forms in a routine manner.

♦ If the excavation cannot be relocated, the BHPO shall notify the office of the SHPO to report the discovery and to initiate an expedited consultation.

The Section 106 review process is initiated at this point.

♦ If the deposits are determined to be ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP, then Hill AFB

BHPO will prepare a memorandum for record and the construction may proceed.

♦ If the existing information is inadequate for an NRHP eligibility determination, Hill AFB

BHPO shall develop an emergency testing plan in coordination with the SHPO.

Step 4: Hill AFB shall have qualified personnel conduct test excavations of the deposits to determine NRHP eligibility.

♦ Hill AFB BHPO, in consultation with the SHPO, will determine appropriate methodology for NRHP eligibility determination.

♦ If the SHPO and Hill AFB agree that the deposits are ineligible for inclusion in the NRHP, then work on the undertaking may proceed.

♦ If the deposits appear to be eligible, or Hill AFB and the SHPO cannot agree on the question of eligibility, then Hill AFB shall implement alternative actions, depending on the urgency of the proposed action.

• Hill AFB may relocate the project to avoid the adverse effect.

• Hill AFB may request the Keeper of the National Register to provide a determination.

• Hill AFB may proceed with a data recovery plan under a MOA developed in coordination with the SHPO and possibly the ACHP and interested parties.

• Hill AFB may request comments from the ACHP and may develop and implement actions that take into account the effects of the undertaking on the property to the extent feasible and the comments of the SHPO, ACHP, and interested parties.

Interim comments must be provided to Hill AFB within 48 hours; final comments must be provided within 30 days.

Notify BHPO

Are remains cultural?

Implement

SOP #6

Memo to file

Are human remains, funerary objects, or Native American sacred objects present?

Can undertaking be relocated?

Is site NRHP eligible?

PROCEEDImplement

MOA

NO

BHPO or archaeologist inspect site

YES

YES

NO

NO

BHPO telephones SHPO

NO

Is site eligible?

Test site

UNKNOWN

Prepare documentation

NO

YES

Can undertaking be relocated?

YES

Prepare documentation

YES

Work ceases in area of discovery

BHPO prepares site form

NO

YES

Develop MOA

Adverse effect decision

NO

Consult with

SHPO

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF

ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS

UNANTICIPATED DISCOVERY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS

ACRONYMS

ACHP – Advisory Council on Historic Preservation

BHPO – Base Historic Preservation Officer

MOA – Memorandum of Agreement

NAGPRA – Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

NRHP – National Register of Historic Places

SHPO – State Historic Preservation Office