Youngstown Air Reserve Station

1 Final Report Environmental Assessment Construct Munitions Maintenance Facility Building 543, Project ZQEL 05 - 0007 Youngstown Air Reserve Station Youngstown Warren Regional Airport Vienna, Ohio 44473 Submitted to: Youngstown Air Reserve Station 910TH Airlift Wing 910 MSG/CEV Contract No. F41624-03-D-8622 Task Order 0094 Prepared by: Weston Solutions, Inc. 2566 Kohnle Drive Dayton, OH 45342 June 2006 Report Documentation PageForm ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302.

2 Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE JUN 2006 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2006 to 00-00-2006 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Environmental Assessment: Construct Munitions Maintenance FacilityBuilding 543, Project ZQEL 05 - 0007 Youngstown Air Reserve Station 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Weston Solutions Inc,711 E. Monument Avenue,Dayton,OH,45402 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR S ACRONYM(S) 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR S REPORT NUMBER(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 13.

3 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT Same asReport (SAR) 18. NUMBEROF PAGES 76 19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON a. REPORT unclassified b. ABSTRACT unclassified c. THIS PAGE unclassified Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18 FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT/FINDING OF NO PRACTICABLE ALTERNATIVE (FONSI/FONP A) I NTRODUCTION: CONSTRUCT MUNITIONS MAINTENANCE FACILITY BUILDING 543, PROJECT ZQEL 05-0007 Youngstown AIR Reserve Station (Y ARS), OIDO The 91 O'" A irlift Wing (910'" A W) proposes to construct a munitions maintenance facility at a location adjoining the existing munitions fac ilities at Youngstown Air Reserve Station ( Y ARS), Trumbull County, Ohio. T he Proposed Action, two reasonable alternatives, and a No Action A lternative were evaluated in an e nvironmental assessment (EA). The purpose o f the proposed action is to provide fac ilities and space to enable the 91 O'" A W to accomplish its munit ions maintenance mission in accordance with AF12 1-20 I, Manage me nt and Maintenance of Non-Nuclear Munitions; AFMAN 91-20 I, Explosives Safety Standards; and AFRC H 32-l 00 I , Standard facility requirements.

4 Currently, the re is no facility at Y A RS that fully complies with all three of these requirements. Existing munitions buildings have nei th er the phys ical space nor proper facilities from operational and functional perspectives to fully meet the requirements of theY ARS munitions maintenance mission. PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES: Proposed Action: T he Proposed Action would inc lude construct ion o f an approximately 3,300 square-foot (SF) sing le-story building with provis ions for future additiona l rooms bringing th e total struc ture s ize to 4,680 SF. The facility would be concrete s lab o n grade with bric k masonry walls and a me tal roof. The lbcility would house oftice, administrative, personnel s upport, storage, and mechanical rooms as well as drive through maintenance bays. Supporting infrastructure would inc lude utilities, communications , driveway access and parking pave ment bringing the total developed area to approximately 25,000 SF.

5 Construction of th e facility is proposed for the approx imate ly acre parcel adjacent to and immediately cas l o f the existing munitions facilities. Siting require me nt:;, including ESQD (explosive safety qua11tity distance) and IL ( intra-line) distances as well as security setbacks and c lear zones must also be met, there by exte nding the project footprint. AL TERNATfVES: ln addition to the Proposed Action a nd the No Action Alte rnative, two alternate locations on YARS, Alternative A a nd Alternative B, were designated as reasonable for furthe r evaluation. Expans ion a nd re modeling of the existing munitio ns facilities is not practicable due to explosives operational restrictions and building separation requireme nts. Relocation and expansion of the existing munitions t~lCilities is also not practicable because of the lack of suitable sites, limited reuse potential of the existing buildings, and excessive costs a nd schedule de lays.

6 Various s ite designs continue to be evaluated for lhe Proposed Action location; no s ite designs have been done for the alternate locations. No othe r s ign ificant actions or location alternatives were deemed as reasonable. Alte rnative A, an upland, wooded a rea is located along Perimeter Road approximately 800 to 900 feet south and east of th e existing muniti ons facility. Alternative A would potentially result in less impact to wetlands and would meet the Reserves' mission require ments for new s pace in an isolated area; however, / ; ..1 it dis perses the munitions complex and would result in less effic ient operatio ns. hs remote location and se paration from the highly secured existing munitions facilit ies would present a security concern. T ruc k transport to Alternative A would be hampered by the existing road configuration as tractor trailer semi-trucks are currently unable to navigate the 90 degree turns leading to the location.

7 Pe r ime ter Road would need expans ion and/or rerouting to accommodate these trucks. Alternative A would also resul t in greate r noise impac ts to adjoini ng properti es. Alternative A is not a practicable alte rnative to th e Proposed Action. Alte rnative B, a n existing open field, is located off Perimeter Road adjacent to the Fire T rai ning Facility to the east, a storm wate r retention a nd woodland/wetla nd area to the north, and various base fc1cilities to the west. Alternative B would not impact wetlands. However, this location is c urre ntly being used as a training and unit exercise area by the Reserves and by Base C ivil Engineering . Furthermore, this location has been programmed as the s ite for a new mission required EOD (explosive o rdnance disposal) facility. The facility, comprising approximately I I , 000 square feet with additional s pace require me nts for security and explosives s tandoff distances, would occupy most of the available land at this location and would not leave suffi cie nt area for t he munitions maintenance facility.

8 Alte rnative B is not a pract ica ble alternative to the Proposed Action. Unde r the No Action Alternative, no construction would occur. Existing condit ions would remain a nd operations would continue unde r c urre nt limitations and deticie ncics. T he Reserves' munitions mission require me nts would continue to be unmet. T he No Action Alte rnative is not a practicable alternative to the Proposed Action. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Bio logical Resources: T he P roposed Action and Altern ative A would result in minor, long-te rm impacts to vegetation and wildlife. Approximate ly one to two acres of woodland, de pending on s ite des ign and construction require me nts, would be cleared with the resul ting disturbance to wildlife and loss of habitat. T he woodla nd may contain s uitable habitat trees for the Indiana bat, a federal endangered species. The loss o f this vegetation woul d not impact the divers ity of the plant life or habitat in the greater vicinity.

9 Impacts would be mino r because this loss represents only a small percentage of the 32 acre woodland a t YARS and because the woodland type a nd habitat arc common throughout the reg ion. Additionally, Y ARS w ill complete a tree s urvey o f the prospective project locations to identify any candidate bat roost trees and will implement appropria te m itigation prior to any construction activities. No bio logical resources o f any s ignificance exist at the A lternative 13 location. Endange red Species: No threatened or e ndange red species are known to exist a nywhere ncar the Project Study Area. Coordination with the Fish & Wildlife Service (USF&WS) has identified the pote ntial for Indiana bat s ummer brood or nesting trees in the woodl and area of the Proposed Action a nd Alternative A locations. In response, a survey fo r the presence of any such trees will be completed before any tree clearing, th e re by allowing for development of appropriate mitigation ranging fro m avoidance to no c learance from April 15 to Septe mbe r 15.

10 No adverse impacts arc expected. Wetlands: The Proposed Action would potentially result in the loss of up to two acres of Army Corps of Engineers (lJSACE) jurisdictional wetlands with a lesser amount pote nt ially lost unde r A lte rnative A. According to O hio EPA's O h io Rapid Assessment Method (ORAM), the wetlands are Category I and Category 2, minimal a nd moderate ecological val ues, respectively. The loss o f t hese jurisdictional wetlands would represent a lo ng-term, adverse impact. Sections 40 l a nd 404 (Clean Water Act) permits would be required. This permitting process requires compensatory wetla nd mitigation. The mitigation would be accomplished at an o ff-base s ite(s) and in a ratio as negotiated with the USACE and the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA). With this mitigation, only a minor, long-term impact to the wetlands of the region would result. Construction at the Alternative A location could pote ntially avoid most jurisdictio nal wetlands because of the upland nature ofthe location.