Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment Chapter 4 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences Section 4.16 Fort Polk, Louisiana Section 4.17 Fort Riley, Kansas Section 4.18 Schofield Barracks and U.S. Army Garrison Hawai’i Section 4.19 Fort Sill, Oklahoma Section 4.20 Fort Stewart, Georgia Section 4.21 Fort Wainwright, Alaska Section 4.22 Summary of Potential Environmental Impacts Section 4.23 Conclusion Section 4.24 Cumulative Effects January 2013 Assisted by: Potomac-Hudson Engineering, Inc. Gaithersburg, MD 20878 This page intentionally left blank. Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment Programmatic Environmental Assessment January 2013 1 Table of Contents 2 4.16 FORT POLK, LOUISIANA ...................................................................... 4.16-1 3 4.16.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 4.16-1 4 4.16.1.1 Valued Environmental Components ............................................................ 4.16-3 5 4.16.1.2 Valued Environmental Components Dismissed from Detailed Analysis ...... 4.16-3 6 4.16.2 Air Quality ........................................................................................................ 4.16-8 7 4.16.2.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................. 4.16-8 8 4.16.2.2 Environmental Consequences ..................................................................... 4.16-8 9 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................... 4.16-8 10 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) .................. 4.16-8 11 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 12 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments ............................ 4.16-9 13 4.16.3 Soil Erosion ..................................................................................................... 4.16-9 14 4.16.3.1 Affected Environment .................................................................................. 4.16-9 15 4.16.3.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-10 16 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-10 17 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-10 18 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 19 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-10 20 4.16.4 Wetlands ....................................................................................................... 4.16-11 21 4.16.4.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-11 22 4.16.4.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-11 23 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-11 24 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-11 25 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 26 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-11 27 4.16.5 Water Resources ........................................................................................... 4.16-11 28 4.16.5.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-11 29 4.16.5.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-13 30 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-13 31 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-13 32 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 33 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-13 34 4.16.6 Facilities ........................................................................................................ 4.16-13 35 4.16.6.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-13 36 4.16.6.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-14 37 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-14 38 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-14 39 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 40 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-14 41 4.16.7 Socioeconomics ............................................................................................ 4.16-14 42 4.16.7.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-14 43 4.16.7.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-19 44 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-19 45 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-19 46 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 47 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-22 48 4.16.8 Land Use Conflicts and Compatibility ............................................................ 4.16-24 49 4.16.8.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-24 50 4.16.8.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-25 Table of Contents i Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment Programmatic Environmental Assessment January 2013 1 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-25 2 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ............... 4.16-25 3 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 4 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-25 5 4.16.9 Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste ................................................. 4.16-26 6 4.16.9.1 Affected Environment ................................................................................ 4.16-26 7 4.16.9.2 Environmental Consequences ................................................................... 4.16-26 8 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-26 9 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-26 10 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 11 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-26 12 4.16.10 Traffic and Transportation ............................................................................. 4.16-27 13 4.16.10.1 Affected Environment ............................................................................. 4.16-27 14 4.16.10.2 Environmental Consequences ............................................................... 4.16-27 15 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-27 16 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-27 17 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support Soldiers resulting 18 from Brigade Combat Team Restructuring and Unit Realignments .......................... 4.16-27 19 4.16.11 Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................ 4.16-27 20 Region of Influence .................................................................................................... 4.16-27 21 Fort Polk Projects (Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable) ............................ 4.16-28 22 Past Projects ............................................................................................................. 4.16-28 23 Present Projects ........................................................................................................ 4.16-28 24 Future Projects .......................................................................................................... 4.16-28 25 Other Agency (DoD and non-DoD) and Other Public/Private Actions (Past, Present, and 26 Reasonably Foreseeable) ......................................................................................... 4.16-28 27 No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. 4.16-29 28 Alternative 1: Force Reduction (up to 5,300 Soldiers and Army Civilians) ................ 4.16-29 29 Alternative 2: Installation gain of up to 1,000 Combat/Combat Support