A.02.12 ISOWPP_TFTA All Season Rd Final.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT

ISOWPP for TFTA All Season Road EA XX March 2024 DRAFT

UNCLASSIFIED/FOUO/DRAFT/PRE-DECISIONAL pg i

Initial Scope of Work Planning Package (ISOWPP) 1 for 2

TFTA All Season Road EA 3

XX March 2024 5

Contents 7 Initial Scope of Work Planning Package (ISOWPP) ........................................................................ 1 8

a. Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................. 1 9

b. Purpose of and need for the proposed action ............................................................................ 1 10

c. Screening criteria ........................................................................................................................... 2 11

d. Proposed action and alternatives ................................................................................................ 2 12

e. Alternatives screened from further consideration ...................................................................... 3 13

f. Anticipated issues/concerns per resource area......................................................................... 3 14

g. Potential mitigations ....................................................................................................................... 9 15

h. Supporting studies required .......................................................................................................... 9 16

i. Agency consultations and coordination ...................................................................................... 9 17

j. Existing documents and records ................................................................................................ 10 18

k. Reviewers, approvers, and key POCs ...................................................................................... 11 19

l. Public participation plan information .......................................................................................... 15 20

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 1

Initial Scope of Work Planning Package (ISOWPP) 26

Project Title: Tanana Flats Training Area (TFTA) All Season Road 28 Anticipated Level of Analysis: Environmental Assessment 30 Garrison/Installation: Fort Wainwright 32 Proposed Action 34

The Army proposes to provide approximately 25 miles of year-round road access in the 35 Tanana Flats Training Area (TFTA) to key terrain, training area infrastructure and the 36 Blair Lakes Range Complex (BLRC). 37

a. Purpose of and need for the proposed action 38

The TFTA has no contiguous land access to the rest of Fort Wainwright. Currently one 40 bridge across the Tanana River connects the Richardson Highway to the TFTA in 41 Salcha, AK and dead ends less than 1 mile into the training lands. 42 Availability of training lands is currently limited to aircraft and low ground pressure 44 vehicles unless an ice road is installed to support highway vehicles. An all season road 45 would make the largest continuous acreage of training lands available to the 11th 46 Airborne for training year round to meet mission requirements and support the 47 implementation of the Army’s Arctic Strategy. 48 The BLRC is supported via weekly flights in and out for crew changes and dependent 50 on a biannual ice road to resupply fuel and other bulk items. The all season road would 51 reduce the amount of fuel storage needed on hand and provide for more cost effective 52 access to the BLRC. 53

The BLRC and surrounding training lands (Clear Creek Assault Strip, and the Blair 54 Lakes upland areas, Clear Creek and Salmon Loaf Buttes) is located within the 655,000 55 acres of the TFTA, which the USAG FWA exercises authority over, and provides 56 Soldiers an effective training environment that simulates realistic training scenarios. The 57 TFTA is located within a broad depression known and the Tanana-Kuskokwim Lowland 58 and is bordered to the south by the Alaska Range. Notable physiographic features in 59 the area include three terraces in the vicinity of Blair Lakes, and the Tanana River, 60 which forms the eastern and northern boundaries of the TFTA. The TFTA was 61 withdrawn from public lands on 8 August 1941 by President F.D. Roosevelt under 62 Executive Order 8847, for the use of the Department of Defense (then the War 63 Department). 64

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 2

This Environmental Assessment (EA) provides an analysis of the environmental and 66 socioeconomic effects associated with the construction of the TFTA road. This 67 Environmental Assessment (EA) is being undertaken in accordance with the National 68 Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 United States Code §4321 et seq.), the 69 Council on Environmental Quality (40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) §§1500-70 1508) with supplemental requirements provided under Army Regulations 32 CFR §651, 71 Environmental Analysis of Army Actions. In adherence with NEPA, 40 CFR §§1500-72 1508 and 32 CFR §651, the USAG FWA prepared an environmental assessment (EA) 73 to assess the potential environmental and socio-economic impacts from the 74 construction and operation of the TFTA Winter Road, and the secondary trail 75 construction and maintenance. 76

b. Screening criteria 78

1. Safe reliable access to the BLRC and training area assets. 80

2. Minimize wetland acres impacted. 81

3. Minimize permafrost soils impacted. 82

4. Minimize stream crossings. 83

5. Minimize change to current hydrology systems. 84

6. Minimize steep slopes along route. 85

7. Minimize impacts to cultural resources. 86

8. Maximize suitable soils for all season mechanized maneuver (allowing for 87 summer use of the area around Blair Lakes Hills and Clear Creek Assault Strip). 88

9. Maximize route location near gravel material sites (winter trails have an 89 occasional need for fill). 90

c. Proposed action and alternatives 91

Alternatives: 92

• Alternative 1: No Action – Maintain the status quo. The current limited access 93 to the Training Area would remain. 94

• Alternative 2: Action – Construct approximately 25 miles of single or double 95 lane gravel road to connect the BLRC and training assets in TFTA to existing 96 winter access across the Tanana River via the Tanana River Bridge. This trail 97 would employ a low water crossing at Dry Creek. 98

• Alternative 3: Action – Construct approximately 25 miles of gravel road using 99 the existing winter trail route with an approximate 2–3-mile detour to the south 100 to facilitate the installation of a bridge over Dry Creek. 101

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 3

d. Alternatives screened from further consideration 102

• A 1-way road will not align with Army safety standards (needs confirmation 103 and reference). 104

• Other methods of Army access ie aircraft. 105

e. Anticipated issues/concerns per resource area 107

In addition to identifying anticipated issues, concerns, and risks for each resource area, 108 Table 2 provides the government’s pre-contract-award expectations as to whether the 109 proposed action would significantly impact the resource area (the driver for an EIS over 110 an EA), and the extent the government expects the resource area will need to be 111 discussed in the analysis. 112

• Level of analysis anticipated (definitions): 114 o Very Low: no impact anticipated; statement of conclusion does not 115 require an explanatory paragraph justifying this conclusion 116 o Low: no impact anticipated; explanatory paragraph justifying this 117 conclusion required 118 o Medium: analysis required; no disagreements on level of impact 119 conclusions by regulators or the public anticipated; level of impacts 120 anticipated are less than or equal to Moderate / Less than Significant 121 o High: rigorous analysis required 122

• Impact Level anticipated: None, Less than Significant, Significant but Mitigable, 123

Significant 124

Notes regarding the ‘Resource Area’ column, Table 2: 126

• Listing of a sub-category does not automatically mean that the topic needs 128 discussing in the EA. 129

• During or after the contract kick-off meeting, exact listing can be determined, to 130 include the extent of discussions in more than one resource area, for sub-131 categories that fit under multiple resource areas. 132

This information is provided to enable contractor planning. Other issue/concerns 134 may arise during contract execution. 135

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 4

Table 2 137 Appraising Level of Effort: Resource Area Issues, Concerns, and Risks 138

Resource Area Action Alternatives No Action Alternative

Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas

• Conformity

• NAAQS

• PSD

• New Source Review

• Minor Source

Preconstruction Permitting

• Dust

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

• Air emissions calculations need to be performed to meet NEPA requirements and General Conformity o Emissions from construction and construction transportation need to be calculated and reviewed

• Tactical equipment emissions from operation are exempt from the Clean Air Act reporting

• Applicable permitting would need to be completed in accordance regulations and laws.

• Future EPA non-attainment area border changes may impact TFTA in 2026 but unknown and would occur beyond the timeline of this project

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None Issues/concerns/risks:

• None

Airspace

• controlled airspace

• SUAs

Level of Analysis: Very low

Issues/concerns/risks:

• None

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None

Biological Resources

• vegetation

• wildlife

• threatened and endangered species

• invasive species

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Significant but mitigable Issues/concerns/risks:

• Any impact on the species/threatened and endangered species would be

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 5

• wetlands

• wildland fires addressed by following current practices outlined in the Installation Natural Resource Management Plan and/or the Installation Training Area Management Plan to ensure compliance with the Endangered Species Act and to limit impacts on affected species.

• Fish: State oversee sport fish;

Clear Creek 1 & 2 have anadromous.

• Moose are not a State concern for project

• Impact to fire management:

increased fire risk, benefit to access.

• Invasive species increase intro

Cultural Resources

• historic buildings and structures

• archaeological resources

• SHPO consultation

• Native American

Tribes consultation

• historic viewsheds

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Significant but mitigable Issues/concerns/risks:

Increased access Cutting at bench: at approximately mile 12.5 or mile 13 of the proposed road, trending east-west, there is a rise in elevation. The edge of this rise poses one of the highest chances for inadvertent archaeological discoveries.

Section 106 is almost complete but surveys pending could completely change picture

Programmatic Agreement is pending approval:

5yr monitoring plan/Site protection plan/Seibert stakes

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None

• Current

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 6

Electromagnetic Spectrum

• radio waves to gamma waves

• radio frequency

• spectrum use

• radar/satellite

Level of Analysis: Very Low

• Not Applicate

Geological and Soil Resources

• bedrock properties

• seismology

• economically viable minerals

• soil series and properties

• soil erosion potential

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Significant but

Mitigable Issues/concerns/risks:

• Sedimentation, erosion, and storm water quality may be impacted.

• For construction, requirements will erosion and sedimentation control plan, Storm water permitting, etc.

• Permafrost changes.

• Hydrology changes.

Hazardous and Toxic Materials and Waste

• hazardous material

• hazardous waste

• USTs/ASTs

• asbestos

• radon

• LBP

• PCBs

• UXOs

• POLs

• EPCRA

Level of Analysis: Low Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

• Installations will follow the provisions outlined in their Hazardous Material Management Plans.

• Increased spills

• Increased traffic

• Onsight storage volume decreased because of access.

• POL usage and spills will be handled in accordance with Standing Operating Procedures.

• SPCC edits?

Human Health and Safety

• health

Level of Analysis: Low Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 7

• safety

• safety danger zones

• All operational actions will be completed in accordance with Standing Operations Plans as well as practices taught to limit and prevent health and safety accidents.

• Increased traffic

Land Use

• land use

• real property management

• easements

• viewsheds not addressed under cultural resources

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Significant but mitigable.

Issues/concerns/risks:

Increased trainingthis is intended use.

Access to state land, 3rd party requests RR increased use, increased need for permitting from RR.

Noise

• noise zones

• noise impacts to community

• noise impacts to wildlife

• risks of noise complaints

Level of Analysis: Low Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

• All actions will occur in the correct noise zones; however, increased training can sometimes result in increased complaints from neighboring communities.

• Assume no live firing in training otherwise additional NEPA analysis would be required. No new weapons or training methods included here.

• Construction noise temporary & unlikely to impact communities.

Socioeconomics

Recreation

• demographics

• housing

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Less than

Significant (Beneficial) to recreation, not SE

Issues/concerns/risks:

Level of Analysis: Very Low Impact Level: None

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 8

• employment rate

• income levels

• economic development

• quality of life

• environmental justice in minority and low-income populations

• protection of children from environmental health risks and safety risks

• outdoor recreation

Public highway traffic prohibited;

OHV prohibited over 1500lbs.

will be increased foot & ATV traffic

Access to state land, 3rd party requests

• Same Sikes etc as current.

Transportation and Traffic

• traffic

• roadways

• rail transportation

• air transportation

• traffic volume

• level of congestion

Level of Analysis: Low Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

• Traffic volume would increase on Tom Bear Trail year round.

• An increase in traffic would result from construction.

• Movement of equipment would impact traffic and impact roads.

• Limited turning radius would require traffic control through intersections.

• Bridges?

Utilities

• potable water

• drinking water reservoirs

• wastewater

(blackwater, greywater)

• storm water

• NPDES permitting

• solid waste

• energy

• heating

• cooling,

• communications

Level of Analysis: Low Impact Level: Less than

Significant Issues/concerns/risks:

• 401 permit required for construction

• Power & fiber may follow, not planned but potential.

• Include some mention of design, backset from road centerline.

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 9

Water Resources

• surface water

• groundwater

• floodplains

• 404 permits

Level of Analysis: Medium Impact Level: Significant but

Mitigable Issues/concerns/risks:

• Tanana Flood plain and Dry

Creek Flood plain would be impacted.

• Wetland (section 404) permitting would be required.

35.7 (50’ road base wide) assuming no impacts from gravel pits (Army)

• Mitigation

• WQ Certificate from ADEC required (Army)

• Floodplain FNSB permit (Army)

• Fish Habitat permit (Army)

• Temporary water use?

Construction contractor?

Issues/concerns/risks:

• None

f. Potential mitigations Encl-5-HELP 140

• Existing Standing Operating Procedures, Technical Manuals, Best 141 Management Practices, etc. 142

• Adhering to Management Practices – Integrated Training Area Management 143 Plans, Installation Natural Resources Management, and Integrated Cultural 144 Resource Management Plans. 145

• Adhering to permits or applying for applicable permits. 146

g. Supporting studies required Encl-5-HELP 148

• AQ/emissions modeling. 149

• The expectation is that no supporting studies are required due to the status of 150 surveys in existence for the site affected. 151

• Natural resource or cultural resource studies have been collected or will be 152 collected along the preferred and alternative routes. Army is providing the CR 153 surveys & related. 154

• Wetland delineations for the preferred and alternative routes are current. 155

h. Agency consultations and coordination Encl-5-HELP 157

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 10

• Coordination with US Army Corps of Engineers will be done by Fort 158 Wainwright ENV staff for permitting. 159

• Consultation with ADFG for fish habitat permitting will be done by Fort 160 Wainwright staff. 161

• Floodplain permitting will be done by Fort Wainwright staff. 162

• Consultation with SHPO for Section 106 review to be provided by Fort 163

Wainwright.. 164

i. Existing documents and records Encl-5-HELP 166

Include those that will help the contractor develop a description of the proposed 167 action and alternatives, as well as those that will help in the environmental analysis. 168 These documents would be to assist the contractor in developing the EA. Ensure the 169 contract includes language that appropriately controls and limits contractor use of 170 provided documents, especially documents that are not publicly available. 171

• BLM resource management plan for TFTA 173

• Final Legislative Environmental Impact Statement for the Public Law 106-65 174

Land Withdrawal Extension, 2023 175

• Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment Programmatic EA and FNSI, April 176

2013 177

• USAG Alaska, Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan (INRMP), 178

June 2020 (+/- associated EA) 179

• USAG Alaska, Integrated Cultural Resource Management Plan (ICRMP), 180

March 2020 (+/- associated EA) 181

• Programmatic Agreement Between the United States Department of the Army 182 and The Alaska State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding the Operation, 183 Maintenance, and Development of the Army Installation at Fort Wainwright and 184 Associated Training Areas, 2016. 185

• USAG Alaska Wildlife Aircraft Strike Hazard Plan, January 2019 186

• USAG Alaska Army Compatible Use Buffer Zone Plan, June 2019 187

• USAG Alaska Installation Compatible Use Zone Study, December 2017 188

• USAG Alaska Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, Fort Wainwright, 189

February 2015 190

• USAG Alaska Hazardous Material and Waste Management Plan, December 191

2013 192

• USAG Alaska Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan, January 193

2018 194

• USAG Alaska, Directorate of Public Works Environmental Division, 195

Environmental Requirements for Construction, Demolition, and Renovation 196 Projects, March 2023 197

• USAG Alaska Range Complex and Training Land Upgrades, Programmatic EA 198 and Final FNSI, March 2007 199

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 11

• US Air Force F-35A Operational Beddown – Pacific, Final Environmental 200 Impact Statement & Supplemental, February 2016 201

• US Air Force F-22A Beddown Environmental Assessment, Elmendorf Air Force 202 Base, Alaska, April 2006 203

• Use of the M1117 Armored Security Vehicle at Army Installations in the US, 204 Programmatic EA and FNSI, February 2008 205

• Transformation of US Army Alaska, Final EIS, 2004 206

• Stationing and Training of Increased Aviation Assets within US Army Alaska, 207

Final EIS, August 2009 208

• Army Growth and Force Structure Realignment to Support Operations in the 209

Pacific Theater, Final Supplemental EIS, July 2008 210

• DoD Directive 1322.18, Military Training, effective 3 October 2019 211

• Modernization and Enhancement of Ranges, Airspace, and Training Areas in 212 the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex, Final EIS, June 2013 213

• USAG Alaska 2019 Natural Resource Management Report to the Bureau of 214

Land Management, February 2020 215

• USAG Alaska / USARAK / BLM / BLM Alaska Fire Service Annual Operating 216

Plan for Wildland Fire Management Services 217

• US Army Sustainable Range Program, Range Complex Master Plan, Fort 218

Wainwright, 2020 219

• Environmental Assessment for and Finding of No Significant Impact for the 220

Blair lakes Bombing Range Upgrades, February 2001 221

j. Reviewers, approvers, and key POCs Encl-5-HELP 224

• Not above Garrison level 225

• To sign analysis document: COL Cole 226

• To sign FONSI: COL Cole 227

Organizations to be involved in the development of this EA, listed alphabetically by 229 acronym, include: 230

• AF- Air Force 232

• BLM - Bureau of Land Management 233

Those to be involved in the development of this EA include: 235

• NEPA specialists 236

• Training range planners/managers 237

• Environmental resources subject matter experts 238

• Real property master planners 239

• Environmental lawyers 240

• Public affairs specialists 241

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 12

• OPSEC specialists 242

• NEPA contracting specialists 243

Table 3 (below) is not for inclusion in the contract SOW but would expect to be provided 245 to the contractor at the contract kick-off meeting so the contractor can understand who 246 is who. The lead Army POC, working with the respective organizations, will 247 identify the process for distribution of draft deliverables for government review, and 248 the list of POCs to be involved in EA re-occurring meetings, for routine 249 communications, and IPRs, to resolve/address government comments on draft 250 deliverables. 251

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 13

Table 3 253 List of Key POCs to be Involved in the NEPA Process 254

Row Name [* org’s lead]

Organization & office symbol Title or Role Email

1 Josh Buzby 11th ABN ITAM joshua.v.buzby.civ@army.mil

2 Melanie Roed DPW-E NEPA PM melanie.s.roed.civ@army.mil

3 Matt Sprau DPW-E ENV Planning Chief matthew.h.sprau.civ@army.mil

4 Heidi Long USACE PM heidi.l.long@usace.army.mil

5 Lindsey Sutherland DPW-E UAF NEPA Coordinator rebecca.l.sutherland3.ctr@army.mil

6 Dan Rees DPW-E Natural Resource Program Manager daniel.c.rees.civ@army.mil

7 Elizabeth Cook DPW-E Cultural Resource Program Manager elizabeth.a.cook80.civ@army.mil

UNCLASSIFIED/CUI/DRAFT pg 15

For contracting office: The EA and anticipated FONSI are to be unclassified documents and releasable to the public.

k. Public participation plan information Encl-5-HELP

• Communication Plan: to be one of the NEPA contract deliverables

• Public meetings: none

• Agency meetings: none

• Newspapers (contractor responsibility for notices to be published in applicable local newspapers, with publications aligning with Federal Register publications):

o Fairbanks News Miner o +/-Delta Wind +/-North Pole

• Libraries: Noel Wein

• Web site for publicly available NEPA document: USAG AK/IMCOM

• Hard copies and CD or DVD copies: Contractor to provide and deliver, as appropriate o First few chapters of the NEPA analysis document (e.g.,DOPAA):

electronic o Preliminary drafts: electronic o Check-copy drafts: electronic o Final EA/Draft FONSI: 2 hard copies o Administrative Record: Disc

• Direct mail announcements:

o Section 106 contacts o Others pending/TBD:

FNSB

BLM

AK RR

City of Delta?