DRAFT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT CAMP SMITH ACCESS CONTROL ALTERATION AND REHABILITATION MILCON: 361103 ACCESS CONTROL BUILDING August 2015 NEW YORK ARMY NATIONAL GUARD DIVISION OF MILITARY AND NAVAL AFFAIRS LATHAM, NEW YORK August 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ORGANIZATION This Environmental Assessment (EA) evaluates the potential environmental, socioeconomic, and cultural effects of the New York Army National Guard’s (NYARNG’s) proposed construction of a permanent access control point (ACP) with an approximately 1,680 square foot (sf) control building (without visitor center) and approximately 2,950 sf of overhead cover to meet current Army and National Guard regulations and design guidelines. The project is located at the entrance of the Camp Smith Training Site in the Town of Cortlandt, New York, to meet current Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow. As required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA; 42 USC 4321 et seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) Regulations Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 CFR 1500- 1508), and 32 CFR Part 651 (Environmental Analysis of Army Actions, Final Rule), the potential effects of the Proposed Action are analyzed. This EA will facilitate the decision-making process by the NYARNG and the National Guard Bureau (NGB) regarding the Proposed Action and its considered alternatives, and is organized as follows:  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Describes the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative; summarizes environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic consequences; and compares potential effects associated with the No Action Alternative.  SECTION 1 PURPOSE, NEED, AND SCOPE: Summarizes the purpose of and need for the Proposed Action, provides relevant background information, and describes the scope of the EA.  SECTION 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION & ALTERNATIVES: Describes the Proposed Action and presents screening alternatives for implementing the Proposed Action that were considered and eliminated from further evaluation, including applied screening criteria, as well as a brief explanation of the rationale for eliminating these alternatives.  SECTION 3 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT: Describes relevant components of the existing environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic setting (within the Region of Influence [ROI]) of the Proposed Action).  SECTION 4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES: Identifies individual and cumulative potential environmental, cultural, and socioeconomic effects of implementing the considered alternatives; and identifies proposed mitigation and management measures, as and where appropriate.  SECTION 5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES AND CONCLUSIONS: Compares the environmental effects of the Proposed Action and the No Action alternative and summarizes the significance of potential individual and cumulative effects from these alternatives.  SECTION 6 REFERENCES: Provides bibliographical information for cited sources.  SECTION 7 LIST OF PREPARERS: Identifies document preparers and their areas of expertise.  SECTION 8 AGENCIES AND INDIVIDUALS CONSULTED: Lists agencies and individuals consulted during preparation of this EA.  Funding Source: NGB  Proponent: NYARNG, Camp Smith Training Site  Fiscal Year 2015 Project Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 2 of 88 August 2015 Executive Summary Purpose of and Need for Proposed Action The purpose of the Proposed Action is to provide a permanent ACP at the Camp Smith Training Site in the Town of Cortlandt, New York, to meet current Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow, including UFC 4-010-01 DoD Minimum Antiterrorism Standards for Buildings and UFC 4-022-01 Security Engineering: Entry Control Facilities/Access Control Points. Camp Smith currently does not have a permanent ACP that meets Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow. The existing ACP consists of a single guard shack with temporary wood blockades. The location of the ACP is also in an area that frequently floods due to its elevation and proximity to the Hudson River. These conditions impact Camp Smith operations as follows:  Long delays for deliveries and personnel due to limited facilities including only a single inbound lane for inspections.  Lack of stacking area causing vehicles to back up into the travel lanes of Route 6.  Limited area for vehicle turn-arounds/rejections.  Lack of electricity, surveillance equipment, communications (other than hand-held radios)  Inability to operate during frequent flood events.  Increased risk for guards due to inadequate standoff distances and no facilities meeting current anti-terrorism and force protection standards. The deficiencies of the existing ACP adversely impact the ability of Camp Smith to operate as a mission critical facility in responding to State and federal emergencies. Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 3 of 88 August 2015 The proposed improvements will provide for a permanent ACP with a command and control building, overhead canopy with guard booths for checking identifications and an overwatch building. The command and control building will be designed as a fully conditioned structure, with fire protection, telecommunications, energy management control system, and energy efficient lighting. Description of the Proposed Action This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been prepared to comply with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended (42 United States Code [U.S.C.] Section 4321−4347); the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500–1508); and the Army National Guard Manual for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA Handbook, October 2011 edition). This EA analyzes the potential for significant environmental effects associated with the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative. The Army National Guard (ARNG) proposes the rehabilitation/improvement of the existing ACP at the entrance to the Camp Smith Training Site, located in the Town of Cortlandt, Westchester County, New York. The Proposed Action involves the construction of a permanent ACP with an approximately 1,680 square foot (sf) control building (without visitor center) and approximately 2,950 sf of overhead cover to meet current Army and National Guard regulations and design guidelines. The project also includes rehabilitation of the entrance road, drainage, parking, curbs, sidewalks, retaining wall, paving, site lighting, control fence and gate, traffic control and maintenance, signage and plantings. Utilities such as water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, electric, fiber, fire protection, IT systems, conduits for low voltage wires, and a design for backup power generation will also be provided. Construction of the ACP is proposed to begin in September 2015 and be completed by August 2016. Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 4 of 88 August 2015 The purpose of the Proposed Action is to modify the existing ACP to the entrance of Camp Smith Training Site to meet current Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow. Currently the single inbound lane does not allow adequate space for vehicle stacking, inspections, and rejections. The entrance does not meet current Anti-terrorism standards or minimum stand-off distances. Alternatives Considered Several alternative sites and layout options were considered, along with the No Action Alternative before identifying the Preferred Alternative. The evaluation process began with the establishment of screening criteria to determine which of the several options being considered could be advanced as true alternatives. Screening Analysis The NYARNG conducted a screening level of analysis for several alternatives to accomplish the intended goal (purpose) of the project, which is to establish a permanent ACP to meet current Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow. Screening criteria included the following:  Cost – With a limited budget for this project and the intent of focusing available funding on the ACP structures and required infrastructure to meet project goals, challenging site conditions that would significantly increase costs were avoided.  Substantially meets the purpose of the project – Provide a permanent ACP that meets current Army standards for safety, security, and traffic flow.  Land use compatibility – both the intensity of the use (traffic volumes, truck trips) and the character of the facility (military installation) and associated safety concerns limits the acceptable locations for the ACP.  Environmental Impact – the new ACP should avoid any significant environmental impacts to the greatest extent practicable.  Remove ACP from flood-prone areas – the existing ACP floods frequently and therefore cannot operate as intended during these periods. Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 5 of 88 August 2015 Alternative Sites Two options have been considered to access Camp Smith from U.S. Route 9. Both access alternatives are located in the northeastern portion of the Camp Smith property. Either alternative would require a crossing of a ravine with the potential for significant impacts to a perennial stream. The site costs and the potential for significant environmental impacts that are inconsistent with the screening criteria. In addition, both alternatives would add significant traffic volume, including truck traffic, to an adjacent residential area that could result in significant land use conflicts. Alternative Site Layout  Concept 1 Site Layout This concept would result in approximately 0.13 acre of wetland impact. The environmental impacts of this alternative are similar to those of the preferred alternative, however, wetland and floodplain impacts are slightly more and would require compensatory mitigation as part of the permitting process with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This alternative is not preferred due to the lack of a bypass road, additional permitting effort, and higher costs.  Concept 2 Site Layout This alternative involved a relocation of the access road further to the west on Route 6/202 resulting in a potential significant adverse effect on floodplain and wetlands due to the extent of fill within the tidal marsh and other areas of the floodplain. It is also anticipated that a significant amount of unsuitable soil would have to be removed from the wetland for this alternative, which is known to be contaminated by lead and may also be contaminated by PCBs. Therefore, this alternative was not considered feasible. The remaining alternatives carried through environmental impact evaluation included the Preferred Alternative (Proposed Action) and the No Action Alternative (continued use of existing ACP). Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 6 of 88 August 2015 Refer to Section 2 of the EA for further details on each of the alternatives identified above. The impacts of the Proposed Action and the No Action Alternative were evaluated for each resource topic as part of this Focused EA. Preferred Alternative The Preferred Alternative is the redevelopment of the existing entrance to Camp Smith, as discussed in Section 2.2 of this EA. This alternative can be constructed in a manner that all necessary program requirements can be provided, substantially meeting the Army standards identified in Section 1.2, with minimal impact to the environment. This alternative would utilize existing pavement and would be almost entirely contained within previously developed lands. Since there are no significant existing structures, demolition costs will be minimal. Therefore, the costs associated with this alternative would be substantially less than that for the other alternatives considered. Additionally, by maintaining the ACP at the existing entrance, there will be no conflicts with other land uses in the vicinity. No Action Alternative The No Action alternative would result in the continued operation of the existing ACP at Camp Smith. The NYARNG has determined that this is an unacceptable condition. The existing single inbound lane does not allow adequate space for vehicle stacking, inspections, and rejections. Furthermore, the entrance does not meet current Anti-terrorism and force protection standards or minimum stand-off distances. As a result, this alternative does not meet the project purpose criteria. In addition, the ACP would remain in its current location and would therefore be subject to frequent flooding. As there would be no change in current operation, no construction costs and no additional environmental impacts, the screening criteria for cost, land use compatibility, and environmental impact would all be met. Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 7 of 88 August 2015 Affected Environment As agreed upon with NYARNG and National Guard Bureau (NGB), this document only focuses on environmental disciplines and respective conditions that would be potentially affected by the implementation of the Proposed Action. Therefore, it was determined that a “focused EA” will be prepared pursuant to NEPA for the Proposed Action. The focused EA (with only one 30-day comment period) will concentrate on the following disciplines: 1. Location Description 2. Land Use 3. Visual Resources 4. Geology and Soils 5. Water Resources 6. Biological Resources 7. Cultural Resources 8. Infrastructure 9. Hazardous and Toxic Materials/Wastes Baseline conditions for the affected environment are outlined in Section 3 of this EA. Environmental Consequences and Comparison of Alternatives A comparative matrix of potential environmental impacts of the No Action Alternative and the Preferred Action Alternative is presented in Table ES-1. Camp Smith ACP - Draft EA Page 8 of 88