[Federal Register: July 22, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 140)]
[Notices]
[Page 43830-43833]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22jy04-44]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
Finding of No Significant Impact for the Mobile Launch Platform
AGENCY: Missile Defense Agency, Department of Defense.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) prepared an Environmental
Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of
activities associated with using the Mobile Launch Platform (MLP) as a
platform for testing sensors, launching target missiles, and launching
interceptor missiles and the EA is hereby incorporated by reference.
The MLP is the former USS Tripoli (LPH 10), a converted U.S. Navy Iwo
Jima class Amphibious Assault Ship (Helicopter). The EA considers the
impacts of specific tests that propose to use the MLP. After reviewing
and analyzing currently available data and information on existing
conditions, project impacts, and measures to mitigate those impacts,
the MDA has determined that the proposed action is a Federal action
that would not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment within the meaning of the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969, as amended. Therefore the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required and MDA is issuing
a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The MDA made this
determination in accordance with all applicable environmental laws.
The EA was prepared in accordance with NEPA; the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations that implement NEPA (Code of Federal
Regulations [CFR], title 40, parts 1500-1508); Department of Defense
(DoD) Instruction 4715.9, Environmental Planning and Analysis; the
applicable service regulations that implement these laws and
regulations; and Executive Order (E.O.) 12114, Environmental Effects
Abroad of Major Federal Actions, which direct DoD lead agency officials
to consider potential environmental impacts and consequences when
authorizing or approving Federal actions. The Draft EA was released for
public comment on April 28, 2004. The Notice of Availability was
published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2004. All comments received
were considered in the preparation of the EA. An electronic copy of the
EA is available for download at the following Web site: http://www.acq.osd.mil/bmdo/bmdolink/html/bmdolink.html
.
ADDRESSES: Submit request for a copy of the MLP EA to MDA/TER, Attn:
Mr. Crate Spears, 7100 Defense Pentagon Washington, DC 20301-7100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Description of the Proposed Action: The purpose of the proposed
action is to provide a mobile sea-based platform from which to more
realistically test sensors (radars,
[[Page 43831]]
telemetry, and optical systems), ballistic missile targets, and
defensive missile interceptors in support of MDA's mission. MDA's
mission is to develop, test, deploy, and plan for decommissioning a
Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) to provide a defensive
capability for the United States (U.S.), its deployed forces, friends,
and allies from ballistic missile threats. The proposed action would
provide the MDA with the capability to conduct launches using multiple
realistic target and interceptor trajectories in existing test ranges
and the Broad Ocean Area (BOA). In addition, the proposed action would
allow MDA the capability to use sensors at test support positions in
remote areas of the ocean by locating these sensors onboard the MLP.
The sensors that would be tested from the MLP include radars,
telemetry, and optical systems. Examples of radars that could be used
include: TPS-X, Mk-74, and Coherent Signal Processor radars that
already exist, and the BMDS radar, being developed by the MDA.
Telemetry systems could include the Transportable Telemetry System and
mobile range safety systems. Mobile optical systems such as the
Stabilized High-Accuracy Optical Tracking System could also be placed
on the MLP. Additional sensor systems may be temporarily based on the
MLP as required. The targets that would be launched from the MLP
include pre-fueled and non-pre-fueled liquid and solid propellant
missiles. The interceptors that would be launched from the MLP include
solid propellant missiles. The MLP would be designed to operate from
one or all of the following locations, Western Range, Pacific Missile
Range Facility (PMRF)/Kauai Test Facility (KTF), U.S. Army Kwajalein
Atoll (USAKA)/Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site (RTS),
and the BOA.
The MLP has no engines for propulsion and would be towed from port
to the test event location. Either a government-owned contractor-
operated or commercial tug would tow the MLP for test events. The
sensors would be transported to and loaded on the MLP at the home port
(Mare Island, California) and target and interceptor missiles would be
transported to and loaded on the MLP at ordnance loading ports.
Tests would consist of the launch of a target missile; tracking by
land, sea-, air-, and space-based sensors; launch of an interceptor
missile; target intercept; and debris impacting in the ocean. For the
purpose of this EA, a test event was defined as a target missile
flight, an interceptor missile flight, an intercept of a target
missile, or use of a sensor to observe a missile flight test or
intercept. The EA addresses the impacts of conducting up to four test
events per year using the MLP as a platform for operating sensors,
launching target missiles, and launching interceptor missiles for a
total of up to 20 test events between 2004 and 2009.
B. Alternatives To the Proposed Action: Two alternatives to the
proposed action were considered in the EA. The first alternative would
include using the MLP for the launch of all missile types (pre-fueled
and non-pre-fueled liquid propellant target missiles, solid propellant
target missiles, and solid propellant interceptor missiles) but not for
testing sensors. The second alternative would include using the MLP to
test sensors and launch pre-fueled liquid propellant missiles and solid
propellant missiles but not non-pre-fueled liquid propellant missiles.
Under the no action alternative, existing activities to be conducted
from the MLP would continue and additional activities using the MLP
would be considered on a case-by-case basis. Sensor testing and missile
launches would continue from existing locations and facilities but the
MDA would not have the flexibility of using the MLP as a platform to
conduct testing of sensors or launches of missiles from the MLP. The
potential benefits to the testing program from implementing realistic
flight-test scenarios and the greater flexibility afforded with a
mobile platform would not be realized.
C. Environmental Effects:
1. Methodology
To assess the significance of any impact, a list of activities
necessary to accomplish the proposed action was developed. The affected
environment at all applicable locations was then described. Next, those
activities with the potential for environmental consequences were
identified. The degree of analysis of proposed activities if
proportionate to their potential to cause environmental impacts.
Nine resource areas were considered to provide a context for
understanding the potential effects of the proposed action and to
provide a basis for assessing the severity of potential impacts. These
areas included air quality, airspace, biological resources, geology and
soils, hazardous materials and waste, health and safety, noise,
transportation and infrastructure, and water resources. The areas were
analyzed as applicable for each proposed location or activity. Because
the proposed action involves the use of the MLP as a mobile sea-based
platform for testing sensors and launching target and interceptor
missiles, the majority of potential impacts would occur in the ocean.
Therefore, other resource areas, including land use, environmental
justice and socioeconomic resources, visual and aesthetic resources,
and cultural and historic resources were not considered in the
analysis. Conclusions of the analyses were made for each of the areas
of environmental consideration based on the application of the
described methodology. The amount of detail presented in each resource
area is proportional to the potential for environmental impacts.
2. Impact From Missile Test Events
No significant impacts to geology and soils, health and safety,
transportation and infrastructure, or water resources would occur from
missile test events in the Western Range, PMRF, USAKA/RTS, or the BOA.
No significant impacts would result from hazardous materials or
hazardous waste used or produced as a result of the proposed action.
Applicable regulations and operating procedures would be followed when
handling hazardous materials and waste. Fueling procedures for non-pre-
fueled liquid propellant missiles could impact air quality if an
accidental release were to occur during fueling operations. The low
likelihood of such a release and the implementation of approved
emergency response plans would limit the potential for impact to air
quality. Analyses indicated that launch emissions would not exceed
Federal annual air quality (de minimis) limits. Launches of missiles
would not add any new stationary emissions sources to the ranges;
therefore, new permits or changes to existing air permits would not be
required. In addition, dispersion in the ocean is considered good due
to prevailing trade winds and lack of topographic features that inhibit
dispersion. Launch preparations would follow standard evacuation
procedures within the active warning area, which would marginally
reduce the amount of navigable airspace. Missile launch firing areas
would be selected so that trajectories would be clear of established
oceanic air routes or areas of known surface or air activity. Missile
launches would take place in existing restricted airspace or warning
areas. Airspace would be evacuated within the launch hazard areas and
commercial flights would be rerouted to avoid the cleared airspace.
Missile launches occurring in the ocean would be located far enough off
land that they would not be expected to interfere with existing
airfield or airport arrival and departure traffic flows. Test
[[Page 43832]]
event sponsors would ensure coordination with the appropriate
organizations, such as the International Civil Aviation Organization
through the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), to issue
International Notices to Airmen, locate ships with radar capable of
monitoring the airspace, contact all commercial airlines and civil and
private airports, and monitor appropriate radio frequencies to minimize
potential safety impact.
Noise resulting from the launch of missiles is most likely to cause
startle responses in wildlife. Potential non-acoustic effects to
biological resources include physical impact by falling debris,
entanglement in debris, and contact with or ingestion of debris or
hazardous materials. The impact of a missile with the ocean surface
could impart injuries to marine mammals at close range. However injury
to marine mammals by direct impact or shock wave would be extremely
remote (less than 0.0006 marine mammals exposed per year).
Personnel would be located under the hardened deck of the MLP where
they would be protected from noise generated during launches. Personnel
on the tow vessel would be moved to a safe distance and would be
protected from noise generated during launch. Personnel exposed to loud
noises would be required to wear hearing protection. Missiles could
generate a sonic boom however they would not affect the immediate area
around the launch site.
3. Impacts From Sensor Test Events
Impacts to air quality would be limited to exhaust emissions
produced by generators on the MLP and would not be significant. No
significant impacts to airspace, geology and soils, hazardous materials
and hazardous waste, noise, transportation and infrastructure, or water
resources would occur from sensor test events in the Western Range,
PMRF, USAKA/RTS, or the BOA.
Potential impacts to wildlife in the near shore environment of the
ranges would include seabirds and shorebirds, including migratory
species, striking the antennas, telescopes and shelters or becoming
disoriented due to high intensity lighting at night. Action would be
taken to increase visibility of antennas, telescopes, and other
structures to birds. High intensity lighting would be used only during
test events and low intensity lighting would be used whenever possible
to reduce the likelihood that birds would become disoriented. Use of
sensors onboard the MLP would not impact marine mammals and pelagic
fish. Operational actitivies taking place in the open ocean would occur
several hundred kilometers from any landmass, therefore there would be
no impacts on near shore vegetation due to use of sensors on the MLP.
No electromagnetic radiation (EMR) impacts to wildlife would be
expected. The main beam produced by the sensor would be in motion,
making it extremely unlikely that a bird would remain within the most
intense area of the beam for any considerable length of time.
Operation of mobile sensor systems on board the MLP would not
present a significant health and safety hazard. EMR hazard zones would
be established within radar tracking space and near emitter equipment.
A visual survey of the area would be conducted to verify that all
personnel are outside the hazard zone prior to setup. There would be no
exposure hazard expected from the operation of telemetry and optical
systems equipment.
4. Mare Island
There would be no changes required to Mare Island to support
docking, servicing, or maintaining the MLP. In addition, any impacts
resulting from generator use onboard the MLP would not be different
than vessels currently using the port, thus no significant impacts are
expected from the use of the MLP at Mare Island. Radars on the MLP
would radiate at the home port for system testing, calibration, and
tracking of satellites. With the implementation of software controls
and other operating parameters, there would be no radiation hazard area
on the shore at the home port. Thus, no impacts are expected to the
home port from using radars on the MLP.
5. Cumulative Impacts
Because the proposed activities would take place in the ocean, no
major differences are expected to the cumulative impacts between
ranges. There are no other known activities in the near shore
environment or BOA that would contribute to cumulative impacts in the
ocean, therefore this cumulative impact analysis focuses on the
cumulative impacts of up to four test events per year. Proposed test
events from the MLP in conjunction with other existing or planned
activities would not be expected to produce cumulative impacts.
a. Cumulative Impacts From Missile Test Events
Missile launches are short-term, discrete events, allowing time
between launches for emissions to be dispersed. Thus, no cumulative
impacts would be expected for air quality. Because the volume of air
traffic using the ocean environment is within structured airspace with
scheduling procedures in place for jet routes and warning and control
areas, there would be no cumulative impacts to airspace. Use of spill
prevention, containment, and control measures would prevent or minimize
impacts to biological resources from spills of propellants. Noise
impacts may elicit behavioral disturbance responses in wildlife;
however, the addition of at most four missile launches per year would
have no cumulative effects on biological resources. No cumulative
impacts to geology and soils, hazardous materials and hazardous waste,
health and safety, transportation and infrastructure, or water
resources would result from the proposed action.
b. Cumulative Impacts From Sensor Test Events
In instances where two radars are used together, for example if the
Mk-74 is given a vector to track a target by another radar, such as the
TPS-X, no additional impacts would be expected since Mk-74 support
equipment would be powered by the generators on the MLP and would not
require the addition of supplemental generators. The EA considered the
impacts of operating sensors singularly or in groups from the MLP.
Power requirements for each sensor are discussed in the EA and may be
modified by the test event sponsor based on the specific mission
proposed. Therefore, the impacts from using two sensors on the MLP
would be similar to those outlined below.
Sensor operating areas would be restricted to minimize impacts to
aircraft operations. Standards developed by the FAA and DoD, which
limit EMR interference to aircraft, would preclude the potential for
cumulative impacts to airspace. EMR hazard zones and safety procedures
would be established to provide safety to personnel aboard the MLP, and
therefore there would be no cumulative impacts to health and safety.
No cumulative impacts to air quality, biological resources, geology
and soils, noise, transportation and infrastructure or water resources
would result from the proposed action. No cumulative impacts would
result from hazardous materials or hazardous waste used or produced as
a result of the proposed action. Operational noises would be limited to
the generator used on the MLP and would not be different from current
marine vessels; no cumulative noise impacts would be expected.
D. Conclusion: After analyzing the proposed action, the MDA has
[[Page 43833]]
concluded that there are no significant short-term or long-term effects
to the environment or surrounding populations. After careful and
thorough consideration of the facts herein, the MDA finds that the
proposed Federal action is consistent with existing national
environmental policies and objectives set forth in section 101(a) of
NEPA and that it will not significantly affect the quality of the human
environment or otherwise include any condition requiring consultation
pursuant to section 102(2)(c) of NEPA. Therefore, an EIS for the
proposed action is not required.
Dated: July 15, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 04-16635 Filed 7-21-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M