NSA Orlando, LEFAC/Bugg Spring Facility 1 For Information Contact: 2 Tania Irizarry 3 Program Manager 4 Naval Support Activity Orlando 5 12350 Research Parkway 6 Orlando, Florida 32826 7 470-380-4477 8 [email protected] 9 10 PRE-FINAL 11 Environmental Assessment for the Implementation of 12 the Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 13 for Naval Support Activity Orlando, LEFAC/Bugg 14 Spring Facility, Lake County, Florida 15 December 2014 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Abstract: 23 This Environmental Assessment examines the potential impacts, both positive and negative, on 24 the human and natural environments regarding the implementation of the Integrated Natural 25 Resources Management Plan at the Naval Support Activity Orlando, LEFAC/Bugg Spring 26 facility. Specific potential impacts on the physical, biological, and socioeconomic environments 27 were considered for multiple alternatives, including a “no action alternative.” Alternative 1 has 28 been identified as the Preferred Alternative, and involves the implementation of six projects, four 29 mandatory projects, and two stewardship projects to fulfill the Navy’s obligations under the 30 Sikes Act Improvement Act and other guidance on planning and managing natural resources on 31 Navy installations. 1 Executive Summary 2 Environmental Assessment for the Implementation of the 3 Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan for Naval 4 Support Activity Orlando, LEFAC/Bugg Spring Facility, Lake 5 County, Florida 6 Introduction 7 In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the U.S. Navy 8 (Navy) and Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Southeast (NAVFAC Southeast) have 9 prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) for the implementation of the Integrated Natural 10 Resources Management Plan (INRMP) at the Tactical Towed Array Calibration Facility at 11 Leesburg (LEFAC), also referred to as Bugg Spring, located in Lake County, Florida. This EA 12 discusses the potential environmental effects of the proposed management activities outlined in 13 the INRMP and implementation of an ecosystem-based conservation program that provides for 14 conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources in a manner that is consistent with the 15 military mission; integrates and coordinates all natural resources management activities; provides 16 for sustainable multipurpose uses of natural resources; and provides for public access for use of 17 natural resources, subject to safety and military security considerations. 18 This EA also identifies any applicable management actions, mitigation measures, and best 19 management practices (BMPs) that would avoid or minimize environmental impacts relevant to 20 the implementation of the Proposed Action and Alternatives. 21 Alternatives Considered 22 Alternative 1 (medium-intensity management) would comply with all the mandatory 23 requirements described in the INRMP (invasive plant species removal, sensitive species surveys, 24 bird surveys, and annual INRMP updates) and would also incorporate the stewardship initiatives 25 considered reasonable and achievable for the LEFAC/Bugg Spring facility (revegetation of 26 abandoned citrus orchard and control of invasive fish species). Revegetation of the abandoned 27 citrus orchard would involve removing old citrus trees using chainsaws and periodically mowing 28 the field to encourage the growth of native forbs. Control of invasive fish would be 29 accomplished by netting, trapping, or line fishing and would not involve poisons or draining of 30 waterbodies. This is the Preferred Alternative. 31 Alternative 2 (low-intensity management) would involve meeting all the mandatory requirements 32 (invasive plant species removal, sensitive species surveys, bird surveys, and annual INRMP 33 updates) for compliance with laws, regulations, permits, executive orders, and Department of 34 Defense (DoD) policy. No stewardship initiatives (revegetation of abandoned citrus orchard and ii 1 control of invasive fish species) would be considered for low-intensity management. Long-term 2 ecosystem sustainability might not be achievable under this alternative. 3 Alternative 3 (No Action Alternative) would result in failure to implement the INRMP at 4 LEFAC/Bugg Spring, and the natural resources at the facility would not be accordingly 5 managed. However, since the preparation and implementation of an INRMP has been mandated 6 by the U.S. Congress through the Sikes Act Improvement Act (SAIA), the No Action Alternative 7 is not a viable alternative. It will serve as a baseline against which the impacts of the Proposed 8 Action and alternatives will be evaluated. 9 Environmental Consequences: Implementation of the Proposed Action would likely result in 10 no direct negative impacts on Federal or state-listed endangered plants or animals. The Preferred 11 Alternative would likely result in improved conditions and natural habitats on the LEFAC/Bugg 12 Spring property that would improve conditions for listed species that utilize the property. In 13 addition, the actions within the Preferred Alternative would minimize the presence of exotic, 14 invasive, and nuisance plant and fish species currently found on the property. Execution of the 15 INRMP activities would have no effect on wetlands, floodplains, socioeconomics, or 16 environmental justice. iii EA for Implementation of INRMP NSA Orlando LEFAC/Bugg Spring Facility Table of Contents 1 Table of Contents 2 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ ii 3 Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iv 4 List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................ vii 5 List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... vii 6 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ vii 7 List of Photographs ...................................................................................................................... viii 8 Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ ix 9 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1-1 10 1.1 Proposed Action ........................................................................................................... 1-5 11 1.2 Purpose and Need for Action ....................................................................................... 1-5 12 1.3 Scoping, Agency Coordination, and Public Involvement ............................................ 1-5 13 2.0 Proposed Action Alternatives ........................................................................................... 2-1 14 2.1 Description of Proposed Action ................................................................................... 2-1 15 2.2 Description of Alternatives .......................................................................................... 2-2 16 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis ................................. 2-2 17 2.4 Selection of the Preferred Alternative ......................................................................... 2-3 18 3.0 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences ............................................... 3-1 19 3.1 Physical Environment and Consequences ................................................................... 3-2 20 3.1.1 Soils ........................................................................................................................ 3-2 21 3.1.1.1 Affected Environment ..................................................................................... 3-2 22 3.1.1.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................... 3-4 23 3.1.1.2.1 Alternative 1: Medium-Intensity Management ......................................... 3-4 24 3.1.1.2.2 Alternative 2: Low-Intensity Management ............................................... 3-4 25 3.1.1.2.3 Alternative 3: No Action Alternative ........................................................ 3-4 26 3.1.2 Water Resources ..................................................................................................... 3-5 27 3.1.2.1 Affected Environment ..................................................................................... 3-5 28 3.1.2.1.1 Surface Waters ........................................................................................... 3-5 29 3.1.2.2 Environmental Consequences ......................................................................... 3-7 30 3.1.2.2.1 Alternative 1: Medium-Intensity Management ......................................... 3-7 31 3.1.2.2.2 Alternative 2: Low-Intensity Management ............................................... 3-7 iv EA for Implementation of INRMP NSA Orlando LEFAC/Bugg Spring Facility Table of Contents 1 3.1.2.2.3 Alternative 3: No Action Alternative ........................................................ 3-7 2 3.1.3 Cultural Resources .................................................................................................. 3-7 3 3.1.3.1